‘NYT Mini' Hints For Wednesday, June 25: Extra Clues And Answers For Today's Game
Answers for today's NYT Mini Crossword are just ahead.
Before we get to today's NYT Mini crossword hints, clues and answers, here are Tuesday's:
Wondering what tktkt? Not sure what tktkt? Don't worry, because I'm here to help you with extra hints and the answers for today's NYT Mini crossword.
The NYT Mini is a quick and dirty version of the newspaper's larger and long-running crossword. Most days, there are between three and five clues in each direction on a five by five grid, but the puzzles are sometimes larger, especially on Saturdays.
Unlike its larger sibling, the NYT Mini crossword is free to play on the New York Times website or NYT Games app. However, you'll need an NYT Games subscription to access previous puzzles in the archives.
Here are extra hints and the official NYT Mini Crossword clues and answers for Wednesday, June 25:
Spoilers lie ahead, so remember to scroll slowly:
NYT Mini Crossword Hints
1 Across: A Northern Ontario town and Gilda Radner S.N.L. character Baba _____
5 Across: A movie star or popular music artist
6 Across: On-set improvisation
7 Across: Save something for later
8 Across: Cowboy's greeting
1 Down: Joined in marriage
2 Down: Give consent
3 Down: Odd
4 Down: Downton _____
5 Down: _____ App, a Venmo rival
NYT Mini Crossword Clues And Answers
1 Across: Guitar effect that mimics a voice – WAWA
5 Across: Red carpet figure, informally – CELEB
6 Across: Robert De Niro's "You talkin' to me?' line was one – AD LIB
7 Across: JCPenney or Family Dollar – STORE
8 Across: "Hey there!" – HOWDY
1 Down: Dead set on, as an idea – WED TO
2 Down: Permit – ALLOW
3 Down: A little bit off – WEIRD
4 Down: Home for monks – ABBEY
5 Down: Successfully win, in sports betting lingo – CASH
Completed New York Times Mini crossword for Wednesday, June 25.
It took me 1:06 to complete today's NYT Mini.
This was a tough one! I didn't get anything on the Across side until I got to STORE and I thought HOWDY was 'hello.' Things were tough on the Downs as well. I only got ALLOW, ABBEY and CASH there. Thatnkfully, that was enough to help me start filling in the blanks.
I've been playing guitar off and on since I was a teenager. Not once have I ever seen wah-wah spelled as WAWA. So that's what tripped me up there.
I'll see you tomorrow for more NYT Mini fun!
Make sure to follow my blog for more coverage of the NYT Mini and other word games, as well as video game news, insights and analysis. It helps me out a lot! Want to chat about the Mini, Connections and other NYT games? Join my Discord community! And be sure to sign up for my newsletter!
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fox News
an hour ago
- Fox News
Prince William's royal plan leaves no room for Prince Harry's 'American children': expert
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's two young children won't have royal roles once Prince William becomes king. The claim is being made by several royal experts who noted that the Prince of Wales has been preparing for his future role as monarch while supporting his father, King Charles, who has cancer. "It's utterly absurd for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle to believe their children might one day choose to become working royals," Kinsey Schofield, host of the To Di for Daily podcast, told Fox News Digital. "That kind of entitlement isn't just wishful thinking — it borders on delusion," she claimed. "These are American children who've been raised oceans away from the monarchy, with no exposure to the customs, culture, or continuity that define royal life." "Harry closed that door himself the moment he boarded Tyler Perry's private jet and handed over his life story to a ghostwriter for 'Spare,'" Schofield added. Schofield's statements came shortly after it was suggested in recent reports that Harry, 40, wanted to keep HRH titles for his children – or His and Her Royal Highness – so that they can decide for themselves whether they want to be working royals when they grow up. However, The Times U.K. reported that "under the next reign, roles for Archie and Lili as working royals are unlikely." Harry and Meghan, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, are raising their children, Prince Archie, 6, and Princess Lilibet, 4, in California. Fox News Digital reached out to Kensington Palace and Archewell, which handles the offices for the duke and duchess, for comment. WATCH: PRINCE HARRY, PRINCE WILLIAM NEED AN INTERVENTION TO END FEUD: EXPERT "Prince William will not be thinking of giving the Sussex children formal future royal roles - ludicrous!" British broadcaster and photographer Helena Chard told Fox News Digital. "The children are being raised in America and, as I understand, do not have any understanding of the British royal family," she explained. "They will not have received the guidance to fit into royal life and royal expectations should not even be a thought… And why would Harry and Meghan want this for their children anyway? They stepped down as working royals, painted the British royal family in the most aberrant light, and ran as far away from them as possible!" Royal experts previously told Fox News Digital that Harry and William are not on speaking terms. Their relationship deteriorated following the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's decision to step back as senior royals in 2020 and move to California. Since their royal exit, the couple has aired their grievances in interviews and documentaries. Harry's explosive 2023 memoir "Spare," featuring embarrassing details about the House of Windsor, only made things worse. In May, Harry told the BBC that he wanted to reconcile with his family but his father, 76, wouldn't speak to him. According to The Times, Harry's pleas "did little to thaw the family freeze." Sources told the outlet that William's attitude towards his brother had shifted significantly – to "indifference." "Where he once raged at his brother's outbursts — after the publication of 'Spare,' a friend told me that though he was determined not to publicly respond even though 'inside he's burning' — the anger has subsided to indifference," wrote royal editor Roya Nikkhah. "A friend tells me: 'What has struck me the most recently is that he just doesn't mention it at all. It used to be that the family stuff was taking up a lot of space in his head, it was a very close relationship and he was very upset. But he's not letting it get to him at all anymore. It is a change. It's sad, but it's a much healthier space for him to be at,'" she shared. Royal expert Richard Fitzwilliams pointed out to Fox News Digital that the deep rift between the royals hasn't been caused by Archie and Lili – it stems from the battling brothers. "It may or may not resolve itself," Fitzwilliams warned. "It would be simple for the HRH to be removed by the sovereign. However, they were entitled to it automatically as children of the sons of the monarch, because of the 1917 letters patent of George V, contrary to what the Sussexes claimed in their infamous Oprah interview. It is unclear what William will do when he becomes king, but he will be well aware of the probable effect and vast, often adverse publicity if he did this." British royals expert Hilary Fordwich claimed to Fox News Digital that Harry and William's relationship – or lack of it – reached a point of no return following the publication of "Spare." "Prince Harry has consistently exacerbated the rift he created after he departed from royal life with his tell-all whingefest 'Spare,'" which was unbefitting as a member of the family," Fordwich explained. "Growing up together, both Prince William and Prince Harry knew how treasured trust is - they trusted each other. But Prince Harry has deliberately destroyed that trust, which can never be regained." "Therefore, it would be beyond hypocritical for the Sussexes, who have rejected royal duties, to expect their children who have zero knowledge of royal responsibilities to ever even be able to assume any roles," Fordwich continued. "They declared royal life 'unbearable' and their undignified conduct has confirmed how ill-fitted either of them would be back in any royal roles." While Harry continues to look back, William is said to be moving forward. The heir to the British throne, 43, is said to have "international ambitions" where he can connect with world leaders, as well as "supercharge" his philanthropy alongside his wife Kate Middleton. "Prince William is taking a healthy approach by not even addressing nor wasting time considering his wayward brother," Fordwich claimed. "He is dedicated to his lovely, loyal family and royal duties. He doesn't see any point in even discussing his brother as he isn't in control of his despicable actions. He sees his time better focused on where he can make a difference for his family, his people and his role in his nation's history." And William continues to prioritize his family. "He's always been fiercely protective of them and will be fiercely protective of them in the future," a friend told the outlet. And regardless of "criticism from some quarters," William and Kate are sticking to their guns. The Princess of Wales, 43, has slowly returned to public duties after announcing she was cancer-free this year. "I don't think he's ever doubted [public support], but they don't take it for granted and always want to make sure they express gratitude whenever they have the opportunity," the pal claimed. Schofield said that William's reported decision not to include Archie and Lilibet isn't just about putting his foot down as he thinks about the monarchy's future. "Any attempt to bring Harry and Meghan's children into the royal fold would raise eyebrows across the palace — not just among senior royals, but among seasoned courtiers," Schofield explained. "People who understand that royal service isn't a vibe — it's a vocation, built on discipline, education, and loyalty." "The idea that proximity to the children could somehow smooth the way for Harry and Meghan to re-enter the royal scene? Preposterous," she claimed. "Royal protocol isn't a revolving door." "To imagine that children with no connection to the institution — culturally, geographically, or personally — could just pop in for a royal procession is pure fantasy," Schofield claimed. "It's a glimpse into how wildly out of touch Harry and Meghan have become. They don't respect the institution, its legacy, or the responsibility it requires — but they still want access. It's not just ludicrous. It's laughable." Chard agreed. "The Sussex children will always be family. However, the likelihood that they will ever carve out a formal British Royal role is unthinkable," she said. "Prince William has moved on from the Sussex family tribulations to protect his family's sanity. Sadly, at this point, the Sussexes are irrelevant to Prince William."
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
New from the Boss: Seven albums lost in Springsteen's desk drawer
During his 50-year music career, Bruce Springsteen brought out 21 studio albums, both with and without his E Street Band. But he actually recorded a few more in that time, and now the man whom his fans call "Boss" is issuing seven albums in one go. The box set "Tracks II: The Lost Albums" contains 83 songs which Springsteen recorded between 1983 and 2018, the vast majority of which will be entirely new to Springsteen fans. "The Lost Albums' were full records, some of them even to the point of being mixed and not released," Springsteen said on the release of the box set. "I've played this music to myself and often close friends for years now." With boxsets and other album releases of this kind there is always a suspicion that an artist is trying to make money from leftovers, so to speak – records which at the time for some reason did not become albums and were put on the shelf. So the question is: How good are "The Lost Tracks"? Eighteen songs between 'Nebraska' and 'Born In The U.S.A.' The new release kicks of with the "LA Garage Sessions 83" which took place between the albums "Nebraska" and "Born In The U.S.A." Springsteen told the music entertainment industry magazine Rolling Stone . "At the time I wasn't sure where I was going with 'Born in the U.S.A.' I had half the record, but I didn't have the other half. And so it was just a record that happened in between those two records." "My Hometown" which we hear as a less polished version here, at the time ended up on Springsteen's most commercially successful album. The rest of the songs did not. But a genuine jewel is the hard-driving "One Love" which recalls Fleetwood Mac. There are other great tunes like "Sugarland" and "County Fair." With the exception of the Oscar-winning title song for the film "Philadelphia," the 1990s - which Rolling Stone called "his infamous wilderness years" - were a period when Springsteen was less successful but also controversial for his fans. Without his E Street Band, which he broke up with in 1989, the "Boss" seemed to have lost his way. "I often read about myself in the 90s as some lost period or something," the 75-year-old told Rolling Stone. "Not really. Really, I was working the whole time." The boxset, he said, is proof. Five of the seven albums were from that period. On the album "Streets Of Philadelphia Sessions" are ten melancholic pop songs with drum loops and synthesizers. "The combination of the synthesizers and the loops made for a sort of dark, dreamy sound," Springsteen said. "And there's quite a bit of that on the record." Asked why such great tracks such as "Waiting On The End Of The World" were not released at the time, he answers: "I didn't think the timing was right." A film soundtrack, a country album, and mariachi vibes With "Faithless," the artist composed what was a soundtrack for a Western film – which however was never produced. It is an atmospheric mixture of country, folk and rock, along with two atmospheric instrumental pieces. The foot-stomping "All God's Children" with its gospel influences and crude singing style is reminiscent of Tom Waits. Springsteen said it was his wife Patti Scialfa who pushed him to release the album. "Somewhere North Of Nashville" is a moody country album with pedal-steel guitar sounds. And it's fascinating to see how easily Springsteen adopted the country music style and made it his own. It was initially planned as a double-album with the comparatively sombre "The Ghost Of Tom Joad" but it just didn't work out. Some listening tips here: "Repo Man" and "Blue Highway." "Inyo" on the other hand is a portrait of the California desert badlands of border towns, dusty roads and dried-out aqueducts, with songs containing such titles as "Adelita," "The Lost Charro," and "The Aztec Dance." Alongside Springsteen's voice and acoustic guitar are elements of Mexican mariachi music of trumpets and violins. Those who like the album "Western Stars" will be happy to hear that the "Twilight Hours" recorded in the same period is a further work of the same style. But whereas the songs on "Western Stars" were almost completely covers, all the "Twilight Hours" tracks are Springsteen's own compositions. If you did not know better, they sound like classics of the 1950s and 1960s by such artists as Andy Williams and Glen Campbell. Then there's "Perfect World' which is a lost treasure that is not a cohesive work but rather a collection of individual rock songs. "That was the one record that I didn't conceive of as a record," he said. "I wanted just a little fun, noise and rock & roll to finish the package." A genuine highlight in this is the fabulous "Cutting Knife." An overpowering work pulled from the desk drawer Can this man ever really write a bad song? Doubts about this are justified. Without question, many artists would be thrilled if they had written only one or two of these songs or at least recorded them. Springsteen could permit himself to simply set them aside. So it's all the more great news that he has changed his mind. "Tracks II: The Lost Albums" is an overwhelming work, an exciting musical discovery tour covering till now scarcely known Springsteen territory, a work which once again underscores his musical genius and integrity.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Steelers QB Aaron Rodgers blasts entitlement of media and fans over wedding
Over the course of his NFL career, Pittsburgh Steelers quarterback Aaron Rodgers has become more and more private as time went on. Rodgers is the antithesis of the modern NFL player who feeds off attention, good or bad, and never saw a camera or microphone they didn't love. Rodgers delayed his signing with the Steelers this offseason, presumably because he got married. This became instant news, and the media really dug in on it, especially since no one was sure as to who his new bride was after Rodgers confirmed he was wearing a wedding ring. Advertisement But on Tuesday, when Rodgers appeared on the Pat McAfee Show, he put the media and fans on blast, referring to them as a "sick society" for their sense of entitlement to information. Married or not, all most fans want to know if if Rodgers can finally get the Steelers over the playoff hump before he rides off into the sunset. Rodgers signed a one-year contract with Pittsburgh and the team is hoping it is more than just a simple stopgap measure and the team can make a deep playoff run. This article originally appeared on Steelers Wire: Steelers QB Aaron Rodgers blasts entitlement of media and fans over his wedding
