Wikipedia:how To Write A Plot Summary Mini Forum, Tips, Tricks & Codes

Home / Wikipedia:how To Write A Plot Summary

Wikipedia:how To Write A Plot Summary Tips Guides Promotional Codes Deals and Reviews.
Wikipedia:how To Write A Plot Summary Hack Cheats
Overall rating:


Name: Wikipedia:how To Write A Plot Summary Added: 6 października 2021 Rating: 0 Reviews: 0 Questions: 5 Check tutorials, tricks and hints, discounts, promo coupons, user ideas, questions & answers.


Wikipedia:how To Write A Plot Summary Hints

Please wait 10 seconds



What needs improvement?ANSWER

Can you share a short guide?ANSWER

How to get discount or bonus?ANSWER

Could you mention the pros and cons?ANSWER

What is your top advice?ANSWER


Related Videos

Watch related videos - teasers, video guides and funny clips.



This siteis not considered a Wikipedia guideline on Wikipedia, but MOS:PLOT and MOS:FAIR USE are. Whenever possible, the guidelines canbe followed. But most importantly, the point is that plot summaries can't swamp an article. This is policy.

As explained in Wikipedia:Plot-only description of fictional works, an encyclopedia article about a work of fiction frequently contain a concise summary of the plot. The description canbe thorough enough for the reader to receivea sense of what happens and to fully understand the impact of the work and the context of the commentary about it. On the other hand, however, the plot summary must be concise because Wikipedia's coverage of works of fiction canbe about more than just the plot. Plot summaries that are too long and too detailed shouldalso be hard to read and are just as unhelpful as those that are too short. Finding the right balance requires careful editorial discretion and discussion.

The objective of a plot summary

The objective point of a plot summary is to condense a hugeamount of infointo a short, availableformat. It is not to reproduce the experience of reading or watching the story, nor to cover every detail. For those who have not read or seen the story, it canserve as a general overview that fills in on the major points. For those who have, it canbe detailed enough to refresh their memory, no more.

What plot summaries are not

A plot summary is not a recap. It cannot cover every scene and every moment of a story. A domainlike Television Without Pity was a amazingresource, but we're not doing the same thing that it was, and we can't follow its lead on summaries. However, we canbe sure to utilizethe best source accessiblefor summaries. This is a case where secondary summaries may not be appropriate—a summary of a summary is less likely to be useful.

Not only cana plot summary avoid a scene-by-scene recap, but there's also no reason that a plot summary has to cover the happening of the story in the order in which they appear (though it is often useful). The point of a summary is not to reproduce the experience—it's to explain the story. If the original is nonlinear or experimental in its structure, then the article canstate that fact in prose, not through regurgitation of the plot. In fact, for a confusing story, we canassume that some of our readers will look the story up because they didn't understand it. Just repeating what they have already seen is unlikely to assistthem.

Do not attempt to re-create the emotional impact of the work through the plot summary. Wikipedia is not a substitute for the original.

How are plot summaries utilize on Wikipedia?

A plot summary is generally utilize to provide a concise description of the work in question, to letthe reader to understand the discussion associatedto that plot, and to illustrate points within an article. Where a specific plot point has been commented upon by academics or the media, it is essentialto describe that plot point.

Method of organizing a plot summary

The most common companyof a plot section is generally a self-contained section (designated by == Plot == or sometimes == Synopsis ==). By convention, story plots are written in the narrative present—that is, in the showtense, matching the methodthat the story is experienced. Provide a comprehensive plot summary. For articles that do not have a dedicated cast section, as key hero are introduced in the plot of a movieor play with a known cast, list the actors' names in parentheses after them, Character (Actor), where applicable. If it makes the plot much easier to explain, happening shouldbe reordered; for instance, a backstory revealed later in a novel shouldbe put first, or an in medias res opening scene of a movieshouldbe described where it would occur later. A nonchronological narrative structure shouldbe angry chronological; for some works of this nature, the original nonchronological structure of the plot is of interest to commentators, such as for Pulp Fiction or Memento. In these cases, it shouldbe useful to containa brief out-of-universe summary to explain how the nonchronological narrative is presented in the work before presenting the chronological summary. Plot summaries canbe written from the real globeperspective by referring to specific works or parts of works ("In the first book", "In Act II") or describing things from the author or creator's perspective ("The author introduces", "The story describes"). This gives the summary a more grounded tone and makes it more availableto those unfamiliar with the source material.

This section may includecommentary on the work, as in Candide, though this is not neededand amazingvehicle must be taken to avoid original research. For example, to describe an alleged deficiency in a plot as a "gaping plot hole" expresses an opinion that cannot be contain in Wikipedia as if it were an established fact; it requires attribution to a source. In general, commentary is better suited to a Themes or Reception section.

What to cut

Michelangelo is said to have created David by "taking a block of marble and cutting away everything that was not David". Writing a plot summary is a similar process—you take a long work, and you cut out as much as possible. The question is, what do you cut?

The primarystructure of many narrative plots contain a lengthy middle section during which hero repeatedly receivein and out of trouble on their methodto the climactic encounter. Most episodes of Doctor Who, for instance, involve the main hero getting captured and escaping repeatedly in the middle portion of the adventure. Although such happening are exciting to watch, they often clutter a plot summary with excessive and repetitive detail. Cutting less necessaryones shouldmake the plot summary tighter and easier to understand.

Necessary detail, however, must be maintained. A summary of Odyssey as "Odysseus, returning home from the Trojan War, has many journey which he utilize his wits to escape until he reunites with his wife and slay the men who were trying to take over his kingdom" would omit almost all of the necessarypassages and confuse the readers. Even though they may know how the Odyssey ends, it's hard to say that they understand the work well enough to appreciate its context and impact.

However, the Odyssey include various scenes where people recount myths to each other, and other such scenes of little importance to the main plot. If most of these receiveleft out, or mainly consist of a sentence or two, that is not a problem, and assist holdthe focus on the main story. In works less vital to the foundations of academia and the founding of the Western literary tradition, even more detail could safely be left out as unimportant, including entire lengthy subplots.

The three primaryelements of a story are plot, heroand theme. Anything that is not essentialfor a reader's understanding of these three elements, or is not widely recognized as an integral or iconic part of the work's notability, cannot be contain in the story.


There is no universal set length for a plot summary, though it cannot be excessively long. Well-written plot summaries describe the major happening in the work, linking them together with fairly brief descriptions of the less-necessaryscenes or paraphrase dialog.

While it is difficult to quantify a strict word limit since no two articles are equal, however, the Wikipedia Manual of style offers some general suggestion to editors. The Moviestyle guideline recommend that "plot summaries for feature movie canbe between 400 and 700 words". The TV style guideline suggest "no more than 200 words" for television episodes in episode lists, or "no more than 400 words" in standalone episode articles. The Novels style guideline says that "400 to 700 words are usually sufficient for a full-length work". The Video game style guideline states "no more than approximately 700 words to retain focus". However, particularly complex plots may need a more lengthy summary than the general guidance.

While longer descriptions may appear to provide more data to the reader, a more concise summary may in fact be more informative as it highlights the most necessaryelements. By focusing the reader's attention on the huge structures of a plot, without drowning it in trivial detail, a shorter summary shouldoften assistthe reader to understand a work much better than an overlong one.

Some editors also feel that overlong plot summaries shouldpose a issuein rulesof neutrality. Wikipedia must not give undue weight to one perspective at the expense of others. A long and overly detailed plot summary of a fictional work relies on a single basicsource and may lack the balance of coverage that shouldonly be gained from secondary sources.

Excessively detailed plot summaries may also infringe on copyright and fair-utilizeconcerns. See Wikipedia:Plot-only description of fictional works#Copyright for more.

As a rule, testto expand other sections of the article providing a real globeperspective before adding to the plot summary. Our best fiction articles tend to have more real-globeinfothan plot summary, not the other methodaround. If no more real-globeinfoshouldbe found then consider omitting some details of the plot. Similarly, if you searcha summary that already overshadows the real-globeinfoin the article, consider trimming it down to size.

Maintenance over time

Having written a concise plot summary, authors must be wary of excessive attachment to their golden prose. At the same time, "plot bloat" is a serious problem. Plot bloat is the gradual expansion of a plot summary over time by well-meaning editors who do not have the advantage of the prior discussion about the preferred level of detail for this particular work. Periodic reviews and reassessments by fresheditors are necessaryto maintaining Wikipedia articles and to maintaining plot summary sections in particular.

Hero, area, etc.

For especially hugeor complex fictional works, certain elements may be split off into sub-articles per WP:SS. Such associatedarticles canbe clearly cross-linked so that readers shouldmaintain their understanding of the full context and impact of the work.

In the cases where we have articles on hero, area, and other parts of a fictional work, we often have a section that amounts to a fictional biography. These sections are, essentially, just a different typeof plot summary. For instance, an article on Hamlet the character as opposed to Hamlet the play would just summarize Prince Hamlet's individual plot arc through the play. This works just like any other summary – again, you come up with a thesis statement, and defend it with evidence from the play. Perhaps you might launchthe section with something like, "The play charts Hamlet's tragic downfall as he pursues revenge versushis uncle Claudius", and then you'd summarize the happening that contribute to that tragic downfall, using all the same guidelines you would in general.


By the nature of being an encyclopedia covering works of fiction, Wikipedia include spoilers. It is traditional for Wikipedia articles on fiction (including featured articles) to summarize the work's plot in the section fairly early on (often immediately following the lead, though in other cases after a background section or list of hero and the actors who play them). Infocannot be intentionally omitted from summaries in an effort to avoid "spoilers" within the encyclopedia article. (Spoiler warnings were utilize early in the project, but the consensus of editors was that this practice was unencyclopedic so their utilizehas been discontinued.)

However, when summarizing a plot and choosing what details to include, editors canutilizediscretion. The advantages of exhaustive coverage of the work are in dynamic tension with the desire to preserve the artistic qualities of the work for readers. Wikipedia canincludepotentially "spoiling" detail where it substantially enhances the reader's understanding of the work and its impact, but be omitted when it merely ruins the experience of the work of fiction for our readers.


Citations about the work of fiction generally (that is, cites addressing the commentary, impact or other real-globerelevance of the work) are secondary sources no different from citations of non-fictional subject. All interpretation, synthesis or analysis of the plot must be based upon some secondary source.

Citations about the plot summary itself, however, may refer to the basicsource—the work of fiction itself. For example, basicsource citations are appropriate when including notable quotes from the work, citing the act/chapter/siteverse/etc. of the quote within the work. For consolidated articles discussing a work published or broadcast in a serial form, a citation to the individual problemor episode is appropriate and canbe contain to assistreaders to confirmthe summary. Plot summaries written purely from other summaries risk excessive loss of context and detail. While consulting other summaries may be helpful in narrowing down on what the major plot elements are, be sure to consult the basicsource contentto make sure you receiveit right.

Case study: Little Red Riding Hood

Allows go through an example: Little Red Riding Hood.

How to launchspan data-mw-comment-end="h-How_to_begin-Case_study:_Little_Red_Riding_Hood">

The first thing we canask is "What is Little Red Riding Hood about?" If you had one sentence to describe what it's about—not summarize it, just describe it—what would you say? Probably something like "Little Red Riding Hood is the story of a young girl's encounter with a riskywolf in the woods." This short summary would generally go in the lead of the article. Now that we have that, the next step is to figure out what the parts of that claim are that we're going to have to explain. There are three major ones—there's a young girl, a riskywolf, and an encounter. We're going to have to explain what all of those are.

Establishing the premise

We canstart, probably, with the young girl—she does, after all, come first in our description and in the story. What is there to know about the young girl? Well, we'll wishto know her name, what she's like, and what she's doing. So perhaps we'd continue "The girl, Little Red Riding Hood, is described as 'a dear little girl who was loved by everyone who looked at her.' She launch the story by trying to take some mealto her ailing grandmother in the woods." This is awesomefor a couple of reasons—the brief quote from the text serves to provide awesomeevidence that the summary is being honest, and gives a awesomesense of her character. The primarypremise of the story is described.

The only issueis that the name of the girl might be a bit confusing—"Little Red Riding Hood" is an odd name. We don't wishto have things in the summary that will make the reader feel that they don't know what's going on. So perhaps we canrephrase: "The girl, called Little Red Riding Hood because of the clothes she wears, is described ..." These few words quickly clear up a source of confusion.

Allows move on. We've already got the girl. Now we need the wolf. What shouldbe said about him? Well, he's another main character, so we'll wishto receivethe same primaryinfowhat do we call him, what's he like, and what does he want? Again, this shouldbe done quickly: "She is noticed by a wolf in the forest, who wishes to eat her." Again, everything is there—we've got a wolf, and we know what he wish—he wish to eat Little Red Riding Hood (which happens to be a cuteawesomedescription of what he's like, too).

Getting to the awesomeitemsspan data-mw-comment-end="h-Getting_to_the_good_stuff-Case_study:_Little_Red_Riding_Hood">

Now all we need is a description of the encounter. Since, here we'll wishto figure out what the major parts of the encounter are. Obviously the highlight is the "My, what giganticteeth you have" sequence in the grandmother's house. But as with Red Riding Hood's name, if we just drop the conflict in the house in without context it will just confuse people. So we're going to have to unpack it a bit. On the other hand, we don't need everything in the story—we just need to receiveenough that the gigantichappening make sense.

So what do we need to know? We'll need to know how the wolf receive into the house and in the grandmother's bed, mainly. But here we have a choice—do we wishto relate the story chronologically, or not? In this case, since the story has such an iconic scene, it might be best to start with that and work backwards. So we might write, "The wolf's plans come to a head when he encounters Red Riding Hood in her grandmother's house, having tricked her into revealing her destination and into stopping to pick flowers, giving the wolf time to receivethere first and capture her grandmother." What we've done here is clearly flagged the encounter in the house as the climax of the story, then gone back and filled in how we got there.

Now all that remains is to play out the encounter. Here, since we're describing a cuteshort portion of the story, we canprobably just be chronological. "The wolf, dressed in the grandmother's clothing, lures Red Riding Hood closer. Red Riding Hood grows suspicious, noting that the wolf does not look like her grandmother, remarking "Oh, what giganticeyes you have" and "Oh, what hugeears you have." The wolf explains all of these things tenderly, noting that the eyes are so she shouldsee Red Riding Hood better, until Red Riding Hood remarks on the wolf's teeth, at which point the wolf springs forward to devour her." This is, of course, much more detail than we've gone into elsewhere, but in this case it's worth it—the "what giganticeyes you have" dialog is an iconic moment of the story, and this encounter is one of the major happening of the story. Simply put, this scene is a vital piece of infoabout the overall work. All the same, we have attempted to be concise—we've given only two examples of Red Riding Hood's questions, and only one of the Wolf's reply before jumping to the giganticone, the teeth.

Are we done? Well, no; we've still got a major part of our short summary unfulfilled—we've got some of the encounter, but the encounter isn't over, yet. Thankfully, the ending here is fastand, really, less necessarythan the scene before it. All we need is "She is saved when a woodcutter happens by the cottage and hears the wolf, charges in, and slay the wolf to rescue her and her grandmother." The woodcutter is really a bit of a deus ex machina to clear up the ending, and all we really need him for is to make the reader understand that we've come to the end of the encounter.

And at that point we've got it—we have all of the elements we laid out in our first sentence explained. The reader knows who the girl and the wolf are, and knows how their encounter plays out.

Putting it all together

So what does that give us?

Little Red Riding Hood is the story of a young girl's encounter with a riskywolf in the woods. The girl, named Little Red Riding Hood for the clothes she wears, is described as "a dear little girl who was loved by everyone who looked at her". She launch the story by trying to take some mealto her ailing grandmother in the woods. She is noticed by a wolf in the forest, who wishes to eat her. The wolf's plans come to a head when he encounters Red Riding Hood in her grandmother's house, having tricked her into revealing her destination and into stopping to pick flowers, giving the wolf time to receivethere first and capture her grandmother. The wolf, dressed in the grandmother's clothing, lures Red Riding Hood closer. Red Riding Hood grows suspicious, noting that the wolf does not look like her grandmother, remarking "Oh, what giganticeyes you have" and "Oh, what hugeears you have." The wolf explains all of these things tenderly, noting that the eyes are so she shouldsee Red Riding Hood better, until Red Riding Hood remarks on the wolf's teeth, at which point the wolf springs forward to devour her. She is saved when a woodcutter happens by the cottage and hears the wolf, charges in, and slay the wolf to rescue her and her grandmother.

Not half bad. Obviously when you're writing a plot summary, you probably won't go into as much careful detail in thinking about every decision—for the most part, some aspects, such as picking what is necessaryand what's not is intuitive, and doesn't require a lot of analysis. However, this example gives a sense of the logic that underlies a awesomesummary.

Some argument could be had here about what to include: Canwe have mentioned "The better to eat you with"? Is everything clear? Does only including two of the wolf's responses to the questions confuse the reader? Multiple versions of this story exist, and we've only described one of the many endings. Some sourced discussion and expansion of this part would assistgeneralize the plot summary. However, these sorts of things are where collaborative editing and discussion come into play.

See also


Wikipedia:how To Write A Plot Summary Hack Mod Tricks with Tons of Advices and Bonuses.



Wikipedia:how To Write A Plot Summary Cheats Unlimited Gifts Hacks Guides Secrets & Mods.


Tags: Wikipedia:how To Write A Plot Summary tricks tips, Wikipedia:how To Write A Plot Summary hack download, Wikipedia:how To Write A Plot Summary cheat engine, Wikipedia:how To Write A Plot Summary hack tool, Wikipedia:how To Write A Plot Summary cheats online



WRITE REVIEW Write an opinion or read user reviews below.

Recently Added