Wikinews talk:Crosswords

editprotected

And please note that correcting Crosswords/2005 first would help the proposed "All Crosswords" link from being similarly misleading. -- Jokes Free4Me (talk) 09:26, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
 * ✅ &mdash; Ah, man, you again! Your requests are so bloody hard;). Ok, let's get down to it. Technically this is an archived page from many years ago when we briefly experimented with producing a daily crossword, in article format. As such, it cannot be substantially altered from its original form. However, while this was originally published as an article, it clearly isn't a news article. It probably isn't even in the right namespace. It's more like a project page or something. Ok, here's what I'm going to do: I'm going to use a modified version of your middle suggestion, and I'm going to move this into the Wikinews namespace. That's where we keep project pages. It's not an exact match to that namespace, but it's better off there than it is here. I'll also get rid of the date at the top of the page. I am, however, going to leave it archived. Not so that no one can edit it, but so that no one thinks this is a current, ongoing project.


 * As for the future, even if such newspaper style games are revived, they won't be in this odd, hybrid article format, so don't worry about this type of thing happening again. Recent discussion brought up the fact that newspaper games like this might be out-of-scope. I tend to think they're in-scope, but I'm not the only one who decides things like that.


 * Also, you might be happy to know it's against our latest set of stylist rules to use words like "today" or "yesterday", for the reasons you implied. It makes things difficult when "today" is referring to a date from 10 years ago:P. This "article" (really, project page) would never have been published today. &mdash; Gopher65talk 03:02, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Ok, I feel a little more confident about this now. I'd say that the individual crosswords are closer to articles, while this page is definitely a project-ish page. &mdash; Gopher65talk 03:07, 9 August 2014 (UTC)