There is debate about allowing the use of crossword puzzles to be published by Wikinews. Currently, some users have taken responsibility for maintaining regular publishing of crossword puzzles.
Those supporting the publishing of crossword puzzles say that crosswords are a common feature of newspapers and are often associated with news, and that they help increase people's visits to Wikinews.
Those against the publishing of crossword puzzles say that the puzzles are games, and don't fit the mission of Wikinews to provide only news.
Those neutral think that the crosswords are not hurting anyone.
- This is a consensus based poll. If no clear consensus emerges, the results will not hold.
- Must be logged onto Wikinews
- One vote per person
- Votes must be signed
- Anything beyond a short statement next to a vote should be on the talk page.
- Closing date of 00:00, Sunday February 20th, 2005, UTC.
Voting ended February 20, 2005 at 00:00 UTC.
Question: Should we allow crossword puzzles to be published in the main namespace?
- However, if someone held a gun to my head and forced me to vote up or down, I would admit that I find the crossword puzzle to be a pleasant, and brief diversion from the deadly serious stories of the day. In case anyone is worried, this feature has not caused me to lose focus and become addicted to crossword puzzles. — DV 00:52, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- --Munchkinguy 06:07, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Dan100 (Talk) 13:15, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Dysprosia 14:33, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Might I suggest that the crossword be a link from the main page, perhaps a very small graphic, but not actually featured in whole on the main page? - McCart42 17:17, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- IlyaHaykinson 07:35, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC) Changed vote from Neutral to Yes, after amending the Mission statement.
- -- Davodd | Talk 09:55, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC) Although, I hope this can be used as a launching pad for a future wikipuzzles.org site since in the long run, this may not be the best venue for this type of content.
- It only improves the sites attractiveness and stickiness; and besides it adds some fun to the site - as people know, the majority of news articles then to be negative; thats one of the reasons newspapers publish comic strips and crosswords. CGorman 21:22, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Samaritan 00:08, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- cdnjay 04:40, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Yes, I like them :D --Mac Davis 10:20, 17 Feb 2005
- Yep, nothing wrong with 'em The bellman 11:14, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Den fjättrade ankan 12:26, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Seems to make sense. 198 17:22, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Let the website blossom into a major news outlet, like the BBC News, CNN or The Guardian 159753 20:58, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)
-- Davodd | Talk -- [But I will change my vote to yes if someone can justify how non-news games fit under our mission statement] -- Davodd | Talk 20:02, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- No, not on Wikinews. Maybe the idea can be saved for a kind of Wikientertainment project. Andrea Tassi 23:56, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Xcjm 22:21, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- This is not a great moral crisis. :) — DV 00:48, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
IlyaHaykinson 01:11, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC) - I would prefer not to have these in the main namespace. But I also wouldn't revert away from them if they're in place.Changed to a Yes vote. IlyaHaykinson 07:35, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Simeon 10:10, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC) It doesn't seem a good idea as such, but if people actually want to do it, then I won't stop them. My main concerns are
- a) that this could set a precedent for inclusion of other things and the site loses focus (thin edge of the wedge)
- b) that it could clutter up the front page, which I think already still has too much - the large version of the weather map reportedly is still too large, and I think duplicates the small version so why have it? It is hard to resolve these things collaboratively, so less is better.
- However, I vote neutral because in principle, to the crossword itself only, I have no strong objection. Crosswords help people build vocabulary etc - useful in news writing/editing, and as has been mentioned, it provides welcome diversion to some and may bring traffic. I suspect there are good reasons they exist in every newspaper I know of.
- But I do expect the two conditions being met: focus of the site is strongly on news, and front page has minimal clutter. Portals failed in 1997, and for good reason.
- Not all portals failed. Ahem... -> http://www.yahoo.com/ (looks pretty cluttered, too)
- Although Yahoo's stock was hit in the dot com crash, if I had bought it in '96 or even '97 and held it until now, I would have a respectable return on my investment. (Sorry for the offtopic post.) — DV 18:04, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)