Talk:The New York Times Strands

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The New York Times Strands article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find video game sources: "The New York Times Strands" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · TWL · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk

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.

A request for a screenshot has been made to help better illustrate the article. (VG images department)

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

Requested move 5 April 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved to The New York Times Strands. There's a definite consensus that this article's topic is not the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for "Strands". However, there was also meaningful opposition to the choice of "video game" as the disambiguator, as several participants found it to be an inaccurate description of the subject here. The New York Times Strands was suggested as an alternative DAB that would be WP:CONSISTENT with other topics (e.g. The New York Times Crossword and The New York Times Connections), and was also described as WP:NATURAL disambiguation. This title achieved significant (though not universal) support after it was initially proposed, and had the most robust policy argument presented in its favor, leading me to find that The New York Times Strands had reached consensus. (closed by non-admin page mover) ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 14:32, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Strands → Strands (video game) – The second strand-type game? All joking aside, I do not think this is the primary topic for "strands" because there is also the type of beach/shoreline, swamp, and DNA strands, which can be referred to in the plural and aren't just proper names. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 06:47, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per WP:DIFFPLURAL which makes it clear that such titles are valid, e.g. Snickers and Windows. There's a hat note to handle disambiguation issues. Also, this is a word game, not a video game. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:30, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
An online word game is, essentially, a form of video game. And I am not sure that a word browser game is as prominent as Windows and Snickers to be a WP:PLURALPT. It is not typical for something to be a plural primary topic. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:49, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just read the defining sentence of the article: "Strands is an online word game...". It involves a letter grid just like Boggle, Scrabble and other crossword variations. Newspapers have been publishing things like this on paper for a long time. The online versions are just a form factor and are not defining. Andrew🐉(talk) 20:39, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support This is clearly a video game and there are plenty of entries at Strand that could be pluralized. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:12, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom—blindlynx 17:09, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'm not opposed to a move per se, even though I'm inclined to agree with Andrew Davidson's WP:DIFFPLURAL argument, but I don't think "video game" is the proper disambiguation. I think either "Strands (word game)" (per Andrew), "The New York Times Strands" (per consistency with The New York Times Connections), or "Strands (The New York Times)" (per the same rationale) would be better targets if disambiguation is needed. DecafPotato (talk) 17:25, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Coding strand has 1,518 views, Strand swamp has 83 compared with only 46[[1]] for the video game. While "Strands" may not be common for these uses it seems unlikely at least in terms of long-term significance that the video game is primary and there is also a hamlet in Cumbria. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:45, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Views in the past twenty days seems like a poor metric to use when talking about an article created yesterday. DecafPotato (talk) 21:13, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Crouch, Swale: For reference, in the three full days that this article on the game has existed, it has received 299 pageviews, compared to Coding strand's 144 and Strand swamp's 18. DecafPotato (talk) 07:05, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK that kind of removed the pageviews argument but given this is a new article its probably getting views from being new and from this discussion but anyway I'd argue this is unlikely to be primary at least by long-term significance though this is weak due to there being no countable article titled "Strand(s)". Crouch, Swale (talk) 12:44, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support': From WP:DIFFPLURAL: Because readers and editors are used to seeing titles at the singular form, and can be expected to search for them/link to them in the singular form, the intentional use of a plural form by a reader or editor can be evidence that a separate primary topic exists at the plural form. (And strands is not the primary topic). The article is more of a game since there are many other singular that can be plural. Note: I also do not support the "video game". It should be "Word game". Move to Strands (word game). Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 20:44, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment (oppose and propose alternative for the sake of consistency): In my view, the article should be named "The New York Times Strands" per The New York Times Crossword, The New York Times Spelling Bee, and The New York Times Connections (see related discussion here). [NB: If we want "Word game" too, I prefer to see this information in the short description rather than in the title (and do not support "video game" either).] Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 18:03, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Move to The New York Times Strands per DecafPotato and Cl3phact0 for consistency with the other NYTimes games and thus a WP:NATURAL dab. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 00:13, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Definitely not primary topic. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:49, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support moving to Strands (word game) and skeptical but won't complain about The New York Times Strands (I don't agree that "The New York Times Crossword" is an applicable comparison here since crosswords are a very popular puzzle genre and the NYT is far from their only creator, and while Strands isn't the only word search puzzle, its name doesn't yet have the universal presence that Crossword and Spelling Bee do). Opposed to Strands (video game) since "video game" is too broad of a descriptor - "browser game" or "online game" are more specific, though I don't think I'd vote in favor of those either vs. "word game". Andrew11374265 (talk) 04:46, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support The New York Times Strands. Oppose video game. Anarchyte (talk) 07:33, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Cfls (talk) 18:17, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.