Talk:The New York Times Connections

	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 was accepted from this draft on 4 September 2023 by reviewer Ca (talk · contribs).

Internet Low‑importance

	Internet portal 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Internet culture Low‑importance

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

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Internet culture To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : View all requested internet culture articles
Expand : Pick an article from here or here
Photo : Category:Internet culture articles needing images
Stubs : All stubs are located here
Other : Category:Internet self-classification codes (!?); Try to get YouTube to FA; Tag all articles you find with {{WikiProject Internet culture}}
- See also Category:Internet culture articles needing attention

Journalism Low‑importance

	Journalism portal 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Video games Low‑importance

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

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Purple Francis (6 participants)
Gilman Louie (2 participants)
Yoshimitsu (2 participants)
Dr. Wily (8 participants)
First Internet Backgammon Server (3 participants)
Emote (2 participants)
Stardew Valley Guidebook (2 participants)
Preston Arsement (6 participants; relisted)
Jackpot World (3 participants; relisted)
Melee (game terminology) (7 participants; relisted)

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

Undue weight on ties to OnlyConnect

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]

Agreed. The Reception section says nothing about how the game was recieved outside of the comparison to a single game show. LeviEdits (talk) 22:57, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

At the time of writing this article, that was the only reception I could find about the game. I could remove it, but...

Okay, I see your point. I'll remove it. Tarantula^TM (speak with me) (my legacy) 06:59, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I added Only Connect link to "See also" section (and tweaked that article for NPOV). Hope this achieves a fair balance. Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 18:57, 6 November 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]

Moved claim from the lead to Development section per WP:WEIGHT -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 10:50, 22 November 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]

Any of the two would give more clarity on the subject compared to "produced". Marcos [Tupungato] (talk) 09:32, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done Edited to "published". TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 03:51, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"facially false"

"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]

Yeahhh when I wrote this article I was quite a rookie and had no idea what "undue weight" meant. Sorry :( TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 03:45, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Removed quote TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 03:52, 9 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguator feels wrong

Sure, the game was launched in 2023, but new boards are still released daily, so it feels wrong to disambiguate the article as (2023 video game). How about a move to The New York Times Connections à la The New York Times Spelling Bee? BanjoZebra (talk) 20:14, 26 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.)

[NB: In the same context, it occurs to me that another article that might actually be worth creating is: The New York Times Mini (see New York Times crossword puzzle#Variety puzzles for reference).]

Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 09:22, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]