Talk:Karen/spoilers: Difference between revisions - Grand Theft Wiki, the GTA wiki

Line 51:

:I agree that we need to be sensitive to readers, but at the moment it is IMPOSSIBLE to link Michelle to Karen - anyone that wants to know the link can only do so if they know Michelle's name and go directly to that. Imagine doing research on girlfriends in GTA IV, and not being able to find out that Michelle exists, never mind any information about her. We definitely need a link to [[Karen]] from the [[Michelle Stone]] page, but it must be carefully worded. A couple of days ago I added: ''Later in the game, you are introduced to [[Karen]] (page contains spoilers)'' - that is quite a sensitive link, and it doesn't reveal what the link between the two is. But if you know the secret, then it is obvious that that is where to read more about it. And if you want to know the secret, you can click on that to find it out. And if you don't want to know the secret, it doesn't give anything away - it hints at a connection to someone called Karen, nothing more. I don't think you should go round undoing these edits without discussing it, especially on (evidently) such a sensitive topic. Can we make a decision on this? [[w:c:gta:User:Gboyers|Gboyers]] [[:w:c:gta:User_talk:Gboyers|talk]] 03:46, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

::Hi, Gerard. I understand your concerns, and apologize if you feel I have been autonomously dealing with this, but I was simply trying to do ''something'', since the discussion had apparently completely stalled (I made the last comment, which was posted July 3rd). I'm happy to discuss ''all'' of this with any- and everybody, but it seemed like no one else was interested in resolving the matter, which is why I took the initiative. Besides, there still remained obvious confusion as to whether we needed a separate page for [[Michelle Stone]] (see edit history on both pages).

::Also, I removed the line you inserted because I felt it to be too much of an obvious "trap" to a naive reader (sorry, I should have been more clear in the edit summary). Personally, I think we should ''not'' link to this article from the Michelle Stone article, as it offers too much of a propensity for people to have plot details spolied, as happened to [[User:KalypsoSig|KalypsoSig]]. As I see it, people are ''going'' to figure it out, one way or the other, either by clicking the link out of simple curiosity, or (more likely) by surmising why that line was even inserted into the article at all. Perhaps we can say, "Michelle has a secret revealed later in the game", or something indirect and deliberately cryptic like that. I'm just concerned that adding a link to here is far too obvious. Besides, anyone reading about Michelle most likely has ''not'' discovered her "alter-ego", or else they would be reading ''this'' article instead, since they would know by then that Karen and Michelle are one and the same. That having been said, I think the Michelle Stone article should ''only'' focus on that ''persona'', whereas this article should allude to both. What do you think? '''[[User:Eganio|Eganio]]''[[User talk:Eganio|Talk]]''''' 06:32, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

@@ Line 51: / Line 51: @@
 :I agree that we need to be sensitive to readers, but at the moment it is IMPOSSIBLE to link Michelle to Karen - anyone that wants to know the link can only do so if they know Michelle's name and go directly to that. Imagine doing research on girlfriends in GTA IV, and not being able to find out that Michelle exists, never mind any information about her. We definitely need a link to [[Karen]] from the [[Michelle Stone]] page, but it must be carefully worded.<br>A couple of days ago I added: ''Later in the game, you are introduced to [[Karen]] (page contains spoilers)'' - that is quite a sensitive link, and it doesn't reveal what the link between the two is. But if you know the secret, then it is obvious that that is where to read more about it. And if you want to know the secret, you can click on that to find it out. And if you don't want to know the secret, it doesn't give anything away - it hints at a connection to someone called Karen, nothing more.<br>I don't think you should go round undoing these edits without discussing it, especially on (evidently) such a sensitive topic. Can we make a decision on this? [[w:c:gta:User:Gboyers|Gboyers]] <sup>[[:w:c:gta:User_talk:Gboyers|talk]]</sup> 03:46, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
+::Hi, Gerard.  I understand your concerns, and apologize if you feel I have been autonomously dealing with this, but I was simply trying to do ''something'', since the discussion had apparently completely stalled (I made the last comment, which was posted July 3rd).  I'm happy to discuss ''all'' of this with any- and everybody, but it seemed like no one else was interested in resolving the matter, which is why I took the initiative.  Besides, there still remained obvious confusion as to whether we needed a separate page for [[Michelle Stone]] (see edit history on both pages).
+::Also, I removed the line you inserted because I felt it to be too much of an obvious "trap" to a naive reader (sorry, I should have been more clear in the edit summary).  Personally, I think we should ''not'' link to this article from the Michelle Stone article, as it offers too much of a propensity for people to have plot details spolied, as happened to [[User:KalypsoSig|KalypsoSig]].  As I see it, people are ''going'' to figure it out, one way or the other, either by clicking the link out of simple curiosity, or (more likely) by surmising why that line was even inserted into the article at all.  Perhaps we can say, "Michelle has a secret revealed later in the game", or something indirect and deliberately cryptic like that.  I'm just concerned that adding a link to here is far too obvious.  Besides, anyone reading about Michelle most likely has ''not'' discovered her "alter-ego", or else they would be reading ''this'' article instead, since they would know by then that Karen and Michelle are one and the same.  That having been said, I think the Michelle Stone article should ''only'' focus on that ''persona'', whereas this article should allude to both.  What do you think? '''[[User:Eganio|Eganio]]<sup>''[[User talk:Eganio|Talk]]''</sup>''' 06:32, 20 July 2008 (UTC)