This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the
project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the
Internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InternetWikipedia:WikiProject InternetTemplate:WikiProject InternetInternet articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
internet culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
journalism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles
Is the amount of coverage (and frankly, unnecessarily negative coverage) of the game's similarity to a game from OnlyConnect
really necessary? A significant part of the article is just childish accusations.
Lucs100 (
talk)
02:55, 22 September 2023 (UTC)reply
I’m inclined to create a subcategory within “Reception” called “Only Connect Controversy (or Dispute, or if I’d be allowed, Kerfuffle) into which everything related to that issue could be consigned (or quarantined.)
The facial resemblances are notable, but it may be that some of them arose in honing the details, perhaps from other NYT staffers who were had seen the show.
Major Danby (
talk)
21:42, 5 January 2024 (UTC)reply
In particular, the assertion that Liu’s word game and the timed video version that allows points for each achievement are “identical in every detail” is sheer rubbish.
Major Danby (
talk)
21:45, 5 January 2024 (UTC)reply
"NYT" should be "Times".
Other articles refer to the NYT as "The Times", Including the one for
Wordle. I think that all instances of "the NYT" should be replaced with "The Times" as it is a much more common term used to refer to the company outside of headlines.
LeviEdits (
talk)
22:49, 25 October 2023 (UTC)reply
"It was the second most played game behind Wordle, another word game produced by the Times."
I'm not a native speaker, but the word "produced" without additional context gives me impression that the Times conceived of and developed Wordle, which is not the case. What do you think about "published" or "published online" or something else? I know that the Times has a staff person titled Producer who takes care of the game, but I feel that a layperson gets the wrong impression.
Marcos [Tupungato] (
talk)
11:56, 18 December 2023 (UTC)reply
Good point. The wikilink to
Wordle does add context (the game's creator is clearly credited in the first sentence of the lead), though "published" would be fine if you think more clarity is needed. Perhaps better still and more accurate would be "edited"? I'm fine with either. Do you have a preference? Cheers,
Cl3phact0 (
talk)
17:19, 18 December 2023 (UTC)reply
"Kotaku says the claim is 'facially false'." Huh? This is indeed accurately quoted from the source, but I wasn't aware that faces were renowned for their falsity. Or is this some bit of street slang I'm unfamiliar with? I think it's more likely to be a typo for "farcially", or even "factually", but in that case we shouldn't be quoting it.
GrindtXX (
talk)
00:39, 4 January 2024 (UTC)reply
The usage of “facially” would be similar to “on its face”: “false on its face.” That said, I disagree with this assertion and find it inclusion to be needlessly inflammatory.
Major Danby (
talk)
21:33, 5 January 2024 (UTC)reply
@
BanjoZebra: Agree that the title could be more clear. I would also say that "video game" isn't particularly helpful (or accurate in this case). Before making a change, perhaps wise to consider homogenising Connections, Spelling Bee, and
Wordle (and possibly the granddaddy:
New York Times crossword puzzle–which uses the same NYT in italics format as Spelling Bee). The short descriptions (and Wikidata) should be taken into consideration too, and in my view the same logic should apply to all. (These are easily changed.)
This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the
project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the
Internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InternetWikipedia:WikiProject InternetTemplate:WikiProject InternetInternet articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
internet culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
journalism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles
Is the amount of coverage (and frankly, unnecessarily negative coverage) of the game's similarity to a game from OnlyConnect
really necessary? A significant part of the article is just childish accusations.
Lucs100 (
talk)
02:55, 22 September 2023 (UTC)reply
I’m inclined to create a subcategory within “Reception” called “Only Connect Controversy (or Dispute, or if I’d be allowed, Kerfuffle) into which everything related to that issue could be consigned (or quarantined.)
The facial resemblances are notable, but it may be that some of them arose in honing the details, perhaps from other NYT staffers who were had seen the show.
Major Danby (
talk)
21:42, 5 January 2024 (UTC)reply
In particular, the assertion that Liu’s word game and the timed video version that allows points for each achievement are “identical in every detail” is sheer rubbish.
Major Danby (
talk)
21:45, 5 January 2024 (UTC)reply
"NYT" should be "Times".
Other articles refer to the NYT as "The Times", Including the one for
Wordle. I think that all instances of "the NYT" should be replaced with "The Times" as it is a much more common term used to refer to the company outside of headlines.
LeviEdits (
talk)
22:49, 25 October 2023 (UTC)reply
"It was the second most played game behind Wordle, another word game produced by the Times."
I'm not a native speaker, but the word "produced" without additional context gives me impression that the Times conceived of and developed Wordle, which is not the case. What do you think about "published" or "published online" or something else? I know that the Times has a staff person titled Producer who takes care of the game, but I feel that a layperson gets the wrong impression.
Marcos [Tupungato] (
talk)
11:56, 18 December 2023 (UTC)reply
Good point. The wikilink to
Wordle does add context (the game's creator is clearly credited in the first sentence of the lead), though "published" would be fine if you think more clarity is needed. Perhaps better still and more accurate would be "edited"? I'm fine with either. Do you have a preference? Cheers,
Cl3phact0 (
talk)
17:19, 18 December 2023 (UTC)reply
"Kotaku says the claim is 'facially false'." Huh? This is indeed accurately quoted from the source, but I wasn't aware that faces were renowned for their falsity. Or is this some bit of street slang I'm unfamiliar with? I think it's more likely to be a typo for "farcially", or even "factually", but in that case we shouldn't be quoting it.
GrindtXX (
talk)
00:39, 4 January 2024 (UTC)reply
The usage of “facially” would be similar to “on its face”: “false on its face.” That said, I disagree with this assertion and find it inclusion to be needlessly inflammatory.
Major Danby (
talk)
21:33, 5 January 2024 (UTC)reply
@
BanjoZebra: Agree that the title could be more clear. I would also say that "video game" isn't particularly helpful (or accurate in this case). Before making a change, perhaps wise to consider homogenising Connections, Spelling Bee, and
Wordle (and possibly the granddaddy:
New York Times crossword puzzle–which uses the same NYT in italics format as Spelling Bee). The short descriptions (and Wikidata) should be taken into consideration too, and in my view the same logic should apply to all. (These are easily changed.)