Template talk:Spoiler

We should standardise the "OMG SPOILER" warning message. --Talrath Stormcrush 15:04, 6 Aug 2005 (EST)

This needs some serious work, it isn't much of a warning, infact it's easy to miss.. Skuld &Dagger; 07:58, 30 Sep 2005 (EST)


 * How's that? I think that should work for people being able to see it.  The code probably isn't pretty, but I think it works.  --Rainith 08:26, 30 Sep 2005 (EST)


 * I like the idea of a color, eye-catching. But the red was just dreadful. I made it a lighter shade so it is still eye catching, but also readable. --Karlos 09:19, 30 Sep 2005 (EST)


 * I just wanted to make sure people would see it. :P  It got your attention didn't it.  --Rainith 12:16, 30 Sep 2005 (EST)


 * Yeah, but I didn't want to read it. I wanted to close the window! :P --Karlos 12:29, 30 Sep 2005 (EST)

Spoiler Prophecies/Factions
I propose two spoiler templates: one for each campaign. Those who have completed the first chapter and not the second, and to a lesser extent vice-versa, need a more specific warning than 'read at your own risk'. -- Dashface
 * I don't really feel that this is necessary, but a really simple way to do it would be to add right before "PvE" in the template then just change all the uses of the template to be either  or  .  --Rainith 23:52, 3 May 2006 (CDT)

"more general"
What would be an example of a spoiler that wasn't about the plot of a campaign? Arrowsmith 22:29, 19 June 2006 (CDT)
 * I would also like to know the reason for the revert, even though it was indeed me who added that if-then-else statement. If you would like the article in question to not be related to a campaign, wasn't the point not to specify one like; ? My edit still allowed the tag to be used in this way to have a more "general" approach. The edit only changed includes specified as campaign related such as;  (or any other campaign) to have a link to the related campaign. No other part of the template was changed. As such, I fail to realize how the reverted revision have the possibility to be more general, considering they both include the same possibilities/information. &mdash; Galil   23:39, 19 June 2006 (CDT)

Please use it sparingly!
Recently I noticed this template being used a lot. Far too often, for my taste. In 95% of those cases it makes very little sense. GuildWiki is one big spoiler! There are spoilers all over the place. Every single walkthrough, every guide, every description is a spoiler of some kind. IMHO people who don't want to see spoilers shouldn't be visiting GWiki at all. If you don't wanna get wet, don't walk in the rain. ;) Seriously, please spare the template for the major spoilers only. Thanks! -- 03:56, 4 December 2006 (CST)


 * The point of using this is that, for PvE, when you encounter something in the storyline and look it up, you expect the article to not reveal more than can be known to you at this point. Of course you know you'll be spoiled when you follow links to stuff you haven't seen yet, but if you look up things you think you know, spoilers should be marked. --◄mendel► 13:18, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Proposal
I'd like to change the current template to this. Any objections? (T/C) 22:27, 29 October 2008 (UTC)