Talk:Online puzzle

Delete

How come this list got deleted without even having a discussion about it? in my opinion this is not advertising, since all these riddles are free to use. so what's the point in deleting this nice list?

I was about to ask the same question. If there was a discussion about it, point me to it, but otherwise I'm returning the list to what it previously was. --flatluigi(^talk/_contrib) 18:10, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Or at least I would if I could. It's a bit out of my depth at the moment to do it. --flatluigi(^talk/_contrib) 18:14, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

I think that the riddle list at least ought to be somewhere. Deleting it entirely doesn't seem to make sense. It's simply a list of examples, and the page seems to be mostly worthless without it.

How about moving the list to List of online puzzles?

Excellent idea. Who wants to be bold?

To be honest I'm a bit put out, the only discussions that were had were about whether this was an article about online riddles and how the examples should be presented. So I added the section at the start describing online puzzles in general, and then spent hours editting what was already there into a nice table, just for it to be deleted without a word. Not impressed. (Hatfielder 20:35, 2 May 2006 (UTC))

and even worse, the one who did it (user happy dog as far as i can remember) removed his statement from the discussion. that is not nice and i suggest to put this list back on!

As I'm a creator of one of the "advertised" riddles I guess I'm not authorized to complain but I agree that this site without a list of riddles is kind of useless. I think I know what will happen now - for every riddle a new article is created and as far as I remember this articel was (last but not least) created to avoid this. .(Soulmanager 12:23, 5 May 2006 (CET))

I've returned the table to the page. No time at the moment to set up the list of online puzzles, but if it's not done later when I have the time, I'll do it. --flatluigi(^talk/_contrib) 12:06, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi - I'm the person who deleted the list of puzzles. Perhaps I should have discussed it first, but I was 'being bold' as the saying goes. As it has caused such a stir, I guess I'd better explain my reasoning! :)

In short, there is no encyclpedic merit that I can see for this list to be included in the article. As Kntrabssi points out below, this article should contain general information about puzzle sites (what they have in common, what the main differences are, etc.). Including a list of sites serves no other purpose than advertising - it is too long and random a list to be a useful reference.

My recommendation is to create new articles for any puzzle sites that are notable enough to warrant it, and to put them all into a category, e.g. Category:Online puzzle sites. We can then link to the category in the 'see also' section for people who are interested in more information. We already have some external links to lists of puzzle sites, which should give more exhaustive lists for people who want that. If a site is not noteworthy enough for it's own article, then it is not noteworthy enough for inclusion on this page either.

In direct response to some of the above points:

• (flatluigi): "in my opinion this is not advertising, since all these riddles are free to use"

Advertising something free is still advertising.

• (Hatfielder): "[I] spent hours editting what was already there into a nice table, just for it to be deleted without a word"

I'm sorry about that - I know annoying it is to have your hard work removed (I have experienced this myself), but unfortunately spending time on something is not a valid argument for it's inclusion in Wikipedia.

• (217.162.162.136): "and even worse, the one who did it (user happy dog as far as i can remember) removed his statement from the discussion."

I am not sure what you are referring to here... I have not (as far as I'm aware) removed any of my comments. Please be more specific.

• (Soulmanager): "for every riddle a new article is created and as far as I remember this articel was (last but not least) created to avoid this"

The notability requirement should apply equally to riddle-sites as to any other website. Any non-notable website that has an article created about it will be an immediate candidate for speedy deletion, so why should we give these non-notable sites a home here?

--HappyDog 18:55, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Just a quick notice, that statement about advertising is not mine. I feel the same way that you do, that there should be a category or a list, but just deleting the table was, if there is such a thing, too bold. I'll move the table to List of Online Puzzles, and, once pages are set up for notable puzzles, that can be removed in favor for . --flatluigi(^talk/_contrib) 20:47, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Re-Write

This seems to be more of a list of riddles, as opposed to an article ABOUT online riddles. I'm proposing at least a partial re-write of this article. Perhaps we could seperate these links into a list and link that to an article which is actually about the riddles, the history of the riddles, some common elements in these riddles, etc. Kntrabssi 02:23, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

I've added a section at the top that discusses the various formats and techniques of online puzzles. Feel free to remove it or edit whatever you like - it's not easy to write a summary as many of thes sites are quite different to each other. Sites such as Puzzledonkey, Puzzletome, Hadtoplayon, ThePuzzlefiles, Qwyzzle and theriddlecontest are quite divorced from the notpron style sites. I've now reorganised the huge list of sites into a table, stripping away most of the information that is a standard feature of all online puzzle sites while trying to retain most of the information on the page.(Hatfielder 15:36, 9 April 2006 (UTC))

Closed deletion listing

This article was listed for deletion on 18 May, 2005. The discussion was closed with the result of no consensus. This article will not be deleted. You can view the discussion, which is no longer live: Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Not pron. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 20:52, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Being bold and moving to Online puzzles for merge

I'm being bold and moving this from Not pron to Online puzzles. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 20:57, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

IMHO, Notpron is (or soon will be) important enough to have its own article. -- Obradović Goran (ta^lk 17:11, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Merging from Frvade

Frvade's article would fit better here IMHO, being a small article and so strongly related to the puzzles covered here, specially Notpron. CharlesDexterWard 17:13, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

I've not seen this particular site, but from a brief look it appears similar to other online puzzles. Definately should be merged.

Since this is more or less a straightforward decision, I will be bold as well and merge these now. CharlesDexterWard 23:33, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

How to organize these riddles?

It occurs that there's no ryhme or reason to the organization of the riddles under "Other Riddles." Should we organize them alphabetically, by date created, or some other means? I'm refraining from making any sweeping edits until I get a sense of what others would like to see.Energythief 16:03, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Probably the better way to make it would be to organize them alphabetically. It will make it easier for someone looking for a specifical puzzle to find it quicker. Also, IMHO the information provided in some of the subsections is not NPOV, and should be "normalized" somehow, e.g. <<In the forums, people not only give and receive hints about riddles when they get stuck, but they can also give feedback and talk amongst themselves about whatever they wish, making a nice and friendly community.>>; <<GWOT is ideal for beginners and experts alike>>; <<Had to play on is a friendly community>>; and many more. Seems like if someone was trying to get visitors more than offer objective information. Charles Dexter Ward 16:33, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

What do those abbreviations mean? I can't understand what your saying.--24.190.140.116 20:01, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

<<GWOT>> is an abbreviation of one of the puzzles in the article. "NPOV" means "Neutral point of View", one of the key tenets of Wikipedia articles. This whole article, on the other hand, is quickly becoming an advertisement, and I think I'll make the edits suggested by CDW (above) as soon as I have time. I think a simple listing of information in a list should do it... riddle name, link, current number of levels, etc.Energythief 02:24, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I've alphabetized the list. Next, I'll run through them and try to eliminate NPOV. Energythief 05:08, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Can I ask why whoever edited this article on [Revision as of 02:34, 30 March 2006] randomly decided to remove the information about 4 different sites? I can see no difference between these sites and many others listed on this page, and wondered why those particular ones were removed.

Clarification on "The First" Online Puzzle

I believe the website given the title of "the first" online puzzle/riddle game needs to be double-checked. The earliest such site I remember was The Stone (www.thestone.com), circa 2000. That would make it earlier than Cybertrek, which the article claims to be the first.

This has obviously been edited since your post, but nonetheless the two sites currently listed in the 'origins' section both seem to have dates that are _later_ than some of the others in this list. I have removed this section and merged the sites into the list. For this article an origins section will need to have it's sources clearly cited as there will be many competing claims, which without verification these are pointless to include. --HappyDog 17:15, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Notpron?

What is the meaning and origin of the term "Notpron"? --Lambiam^Talk 16:31, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Notpron is the corruption of "not porn," which is in itself referencing the online puzzle "this is not porn." --flatluigi(^talk/_contrib) 00:52, 23 May 2006 (UTC)