This page is an archive and its contents should be preserved in their current form;
any comments regarding this page should be directed to Template talk:In the news. Thanks.
Automotive industry crisis of 2008–2009. Surely not as big a bankruptcy as it seems to be but a historic low in an already struggling auto industry across the globe. News is of tremendous political as well administrative importance, no doubt on economic one. --GPPande 20:04, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Another car?! Whatever is with all these attempts to have brand new or bankrupt vehicles advertised on ITN? Is this the biggest one ever? Support if it is, politely decline if it's not. --candle•wicke 21:16, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
British troops end combat operations in Iraq
How about this story? It is pretty big news in the UK and effectively means that only the US now has combat troops in Iraq (I don't think that many of the 145 Australian and 350 Romanian troops are combat troops). Articles at Operation Telic and Multinational force in Iraq - Dumelow (talk)
Is it as historic as it claims to be? I mean I imagine anything concerning a country's military would be big in its home country or a country it affects... I would support if they are the first country to withdraw from Iraq.--candle•wicke 21:21, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You may be right, but they will (hopefully) be the penultimate combat troops to leave Iraq - Dumelow (talk) 23:02, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, but you reveal the problem in your choice of words. The best we can say is that they just might possibly be the second last. They might not of course. And yet I query when precisely the penultimate became so important... perhaps if it is continually in the news in the next few days... beyond their arrival on home soil of course... which one would expect to be in the news... but I imagine the likelihood of continual coverage is very slim unless something unthinkable befalls them all on the plane home... --candle•wicke 00:23, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's not everyday we see an occupying force leave so I'd support this.
Gun attack at Azerbaijan State Oil Academy
At least 13 people have been killed, and according to earlier news, hostages have been taken. I don't exactly know what they teach at the academy (petroleum industry management?), but the BBC report says it is one of the "most prestigious of the country's institutions." [1] --BorgQueen (talk) 09:58, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The article says that it used to teach in many fields but apparently now focuses on the petroleum/chemical industries. Article on the shootings is at: Azerbaijan State Oil Academy shootings - Dumelow (talk) 10:13, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The article could use some cleanup. 70.239.8.78 (talk) 22:11, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'll get to it soon. --candle•wicke 22:58, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ah darn! Too soon, I was working on it then my computer froze. Does this mean I don't get spammed for updating? But it's not showing on the Main Page... --candle•wicke 02:04, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Anyway, if it ever does show, "shot to death"? Shot dead surely? --candle•wicke 02:07, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You will get the spam; it does not have any monetary value. As for MP, did you purge your cache? --BorgQueen (talk) 02:08, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I did numerous times, although it is showing now so it's OK. What do you think of these revolutionary new findings on traumatic insemination? We might as well go all out on Main Page sex now that we've started; I already have visions of them all on WT:MP gasping and moaning about the morality of same-sex marriage and that underwire brapicture at DYK... --candle•wicke 02:18, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(unindent) I think I read about it somewhere long ago... Spiders' sadomasochistic mating methods have been well-known. It seems that the new discovery is just about some technical detail, which isn't quite sufficient for ITN. --BorgQueen (talk) 02:25, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Dutch deaths
I'm really surprised that nobody has gotten round to nominating that one yet... --candle•wicke 21:18, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm also really surprised that nobody has gotten round to replying yet. Where are all our Dutch editors? Oh... --candle•wicke 02:46, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A Chennai Suburban train was hijacked by an unidentified man, killing 4 people near Vyasarpadi Jeeva Railway Station
ITN candidates for April 29
The Arlen Specter story has made it into the Spanish press. If we need a new item, I think this one seems the most obvious. Physchim62(talk) 14:33, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Does this gives the Dems the filibuster power (with the Minnesota recount of the recount still unresolved, and will probably play a factor)? –HowardtheDuck 15:13, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
According to the press reports I've read, the Democrats still need to win in Minnesota to get a filibuster-proof majority. Physchim62(talk) 16:06, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'd suggest waiting for Minnesota recount to be resolved. This is a change in how a legislature of a country (for lack of a better term) works so this is important. It's like a mini-dissolving of parliament in parliamentary democracies. –HowardtheDuck 18:35, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Much too local... the person is not even the leader of their country... there are two more suitable items under yesterday if there is that much of an emergency... --candle•wicke 17:38, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I added this yesterday (see below). Article might be a bit short, but I don't think that even the scientists know much more about it - Dumelow (talk) 21:12, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I tried to improve the article quickly tonight, but it could still use some work. This strikes me as an important, overlooked story. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission, which was created to reconcile ethnic violence in the Solomons between 1997/98 and 2003 is based on the TRC in South Africa. Scanlan (talk) 02:13, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I like this yet I see it as even more trivial than the Moscow shooting from yesterday where people actually died and were wounded... --candle•wicke 14:49, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
So what? People die everyday. But the puppy is the first transgenic dog, according to the article. --BorgQueen (talk) 14:53, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Has it been widely covered or is there just one source? --candle•wicke 14:57, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
According to Google, it seems wide enough. The announcement was on 23 April so is getting a bit old though. --BorgQueen (talk) 15:02, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Is this one being posted? --candle•wicke 13:40, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Gamma Ray Burst
How about this? The most remote Gamma-ray burst ever detected and also the most distant object ever discovered? - Dumelow (talk) 17:17, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Full support. Are you doing the updating? --candle•wicke 21:08, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry I don't have enough time at the moment (things are a bit busy for me until the weekend). Both articles have been updated with the date of discovery but hopefully someone will be around to flesh them out a bit - Dumelow (talk) 21:14, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Just realised the event occurred on 23 April (the BBC didn't put an article up until today) but it would still fit onto the template and we do need a new story - Dumelow (talk) 21:16, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, this has the same date range as the fluorescent puppy nominated above so logic would declare both as suitable as the other when it comes to numbers... and I did say somewhere before something along the lines that it would be better that the story is confirmed as true (or verifiable at least) five days late than to be posting what could be lies or speculation five minutes early... --candle•wicke 22:49, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
When the Pontiac brand is phased out, this item might qualify. --BorgQueen (talk) 13:54, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Is the phase out of a vehicle even notable enough for ITN? --candle•wicke 15:40, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think it will be the day pontiac shuts down just cause its been there for like 80+ years. They had firebird and trans am... i mean people would wanna know that pontiac is no more. But thats like in 2010 so it will be notable then. Ashishg55 (talk) 01:24, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think Pontiac is an individual vehicle... but this seems dodgy. –HowardtheDuck 14:08, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's the removal of a brand though, so I wouldn't say it's advertising. The end of a major brand sold in three countries for 80 years I think is notable, when it actually happens. Galatee (talk) 04:35, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think Pontiac is too minor of a brand, though. Chrysler going bankrupt maybe a better item. –HowardtheDuck 05:15, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Policeman
How about the crazypoliceman? It's not every day an off-duty officer goes on a fatal rampage and kills off his own career... --candle•wicke 03:28, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
But it wasn't in the trivia section... it was near the headlines on both sites... did too few die? I know it wasn't exactly the Binghamton shootings... --candle•wicke 14:47, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I sort of understand but couldn't the same be argued for any shooting incident, including the one I mentioned above? --candle•wicke 04:03, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe it had international interest, which means that it was reported significantly elsewhere? –HowardtheDuck 13:45, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've provided sources from two countries on the complete opposite side of the continent. I found neither in the trivia sections of their sites. --candle•wicke 17:41, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Is this featured prominently on their homepages? I remember invoking this "pseudo-requirement" a few months back in assessing ITN items. –HowardtheDuck 17:48, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well the event is over now but when it happened I didn't have too far to look. And yes, the RTÉ source I remember being in a prominent position in the "world news" section... --candle•wicke 01:11, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes perhaps it may had a prominent place in the "world news" section but did it have prominent news at their homepage? The UEFA Cup semifinal may have been placed prominently in sports pages of news website but I don't think that'll cut. I think an occupying army leaving occupied territory is bigger news than this. –HowardtheDuck 05:18, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No picture? :( Oh well. --candle•wicke 13:34, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The influenza outbreak, which has become a truly global news since, is going to stay at the top for now. --BorgQueen (talk) 13:46, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Besides, the picture may be copyvio. Click on it. --BorgQueen (talk) 13:48, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's vanished! :-O ;) --candle•wicke 22:51, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I thought the picture was too good to be true as well, but what better way to get it checked out ;) Physchim62(talk) 23:09, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A change of government is fairly unlikely. More probable is that the current minority coalition will obtain a majority of seats (between them) in the Althing. Might be best to wait until this is confirmed before announcing the results. Physchim62(talk) 14:27, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am posting soon but not going to use her picture. We already used her image on ITN when she became PM, and it stayed there for quite a few days as I recall. --BorgQueen (talk) 11:45, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And actually the article needs update. The very first sentence: "Early parliamentary elections in Iceland will be held on 25 April 2009"? Wrong tense. --BorgQueen (talk) 11:49, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oops! Two people trying to update the article at the same time – that one got lost in the edit conflicts. Physchim62(talk) 14:18, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There appears to be just the heading "biodyl". If this is a reference to the ponies, I would have a thought this stood a better chance before it was revealed that a "reputable pharmacy" had been responsible. Now it just looks like an accident. --candle•wicke 14:37, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There was a blurb, but someone keeps deleting it from the current news subpage. The 21 dead polo ponies now look like a serious mistake in a pharmacy, but that actually makes the story even bigger, because now it is a cautionary tale about the possible dangers of compounding and putative greed of compounding pharmacies that border on being manufacturers and distributors (not that the pharmacy in this case is one of them). --Una Smith (talk) 20:10, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I will leave this up to a second opinion. --candle•wicke 03:06, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
However, the article needs a bit of cleanup. --BorgQueen (talk) 00:59, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support - the Swine influenza article does need a tiny bit of cleaning up, but apart form that this is a major viral outbreak in Mexico with some limited spread to the US. The relevance of this story is also going to be seen worldwide in the news soon enough once the tabloids decide to strt telling us that the Swine flu is coming and we're all going to die; essentially what they did with Bird Flu for a few months a few years back. Ixistant (talk) 04:51, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Is that final "of them" helpful? I would suggest that it is not only superfluous (those killed by a disease are inevitably a subset of those infected by it), but could imply an attitude of that population being thought of at arm's length. Kevin McE (talk) 08:45, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The virus is apparently spreading. There are now eight suspected cases in New York, ten in New Zealand and possibly two in France and one in Israel (BBC). We should keep an eye on this one - Dumelow (talk) 14:03, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Already nominated in the April 20 section. --BorgQueen (talk) 07:51, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
South African general election, 2009
It seems certain that Jacob Zuma will become the new president of South Africa. As soon as the final result becomes available, let's not forget to update South African general election, 2009 accordingly, and feature on ITN. (I wonder if both of his two current wives will get to become the "first ladies".) --BorgQueen (talk) 09:07, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
ANC has now won, votes from some areas are still being counted and the final result will be announced on saturday (BBC) - Dumelow (talk) 08:21, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Rydberg molecule is discovered, having been theorised since 1934. From the BBC, notable? - Dumelow (talk) 13:11, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I support, but the article needs a complete makeover. I am quite puzzled by the first sentence... "Rydberg molecules are electronically excited species"? --BorgQueen (talk) 13:18, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I see. Yes, a good wikification will do the job. --BorgQueen (talk) 13:24, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I like this one but the article is written in a very technical language... Non-experts will not get what it is about, I think... --Tone 20:11, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Was it discovered or made? --candle•wicke 03:56, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Iraq suicide bombs
I know we're all probably immune to the words "Iraq" and "suicide attack" but this looks major. How often do seventy-six die in one set of attacks? When I began to follow this story earlier there were only thirty reported dead so the death toll may even rise further. It's usually been around twenty... the dead include Iranian pilgrims. The attacks took place in two locations. If this were London or New York it would be massive. So maybe time Iraq was posted? --candle•wicke 17:00, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support. It is interesting that the main target was Iranians visiting Shia Muslim sites, rather than Westerners/soldiers/police. That's something new. --BorgQueen (talk) 17:07, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support also. This one stands out due to its unusually high toll. __meco (talk) 18:33, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The update to the article should be longer. 70.239.8.78 (talk) 22:10, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
87,000 Iraqis dead since 2005
AP's exposé claims that the total for the entire war exceeds 110,000 Iraqi people. I wondered if this info could be integrated into one of our articles. --BorgQueen (talk) 19:39, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Argentina has claimed those territories for ages. What exactly is the news story here? Algebraist 15:30, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The same agenda, yes, but have they formally made the claim to the UN, with a scientific proof which they claim to be the culmination of a decade of research before? According to the BBC article, "This is significant, as under current international legislation, a state's ownership of the continental shelf can exceed 200 nautical miles until its natural extension ends." [5] --BorgQueen (talk) 15:42, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah when I first read it it struck me as old news but then I saw how much they had claimed and added it to the portal. I will try to get around to updating a relevant article tonight (probably at Foreign relations of Argentina with a mention on Argentina–United Kingdom relations) - Dumelow (talk) 18:15, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have added a paragraph on the claim to the "Issues" section of Foreign relations of Argentina. That whole section is in the form of bullet points at the moment though, us that acceptable or does it need changing to prose? - Dumelow (talk) 19:17, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Prose is (almost) always better, if you are willing to work on it. --BorgQueen (talk) 19:19, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
OK I will take a look at it, cheers - Dumelow (talk) 19:23, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is now in prose (I also split the section into two sub-sections). I want to fins a source for the latter part of the second section but the bit about the claim is fully reffed - Dumelow (talk) 20:06, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Some nice wording that won't make it look like the old news? --BorgQueen (talk) 20:21, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hey y'all... just a suggestion that instead of saying continental shelf rights we could include a reference to United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea possibly by way of taking the word rights and piping the link... e.g., "contenental shelf rights" ... MPS (talk) 16:56, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This event could be on ITN. TouLouse (talk) 16:12, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am leaning toward support. The article is a bit too short though. --BorgQueen (talk) 17:24, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say it is long enough. The best way for it to grow is on the Main Page where it will attract the attention of other editors. --candle•wicke 18:44, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Big support from me if their tombs are discovered. :) --candle•wicke 14:59, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Any word on a major discovery? --candle•wicke 20:29, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not yet, will probably take awhile to excavate to the chambers as they are a few feet down, and archaeology is slow and detailed.SriMesh | talk 01:15, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't really have an opinion about this. I'd like to hear what Spencer or Tone thinks, before the item gets too old. --BorgQueen (talk) 18:49, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This one is actually too old, the bottom ITN item is from April 19. However, I presume there is going to be a trial and the verdict may be ITN worthy. --Tone 20:33, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
We're all about to die!
Quick! The Sun is going out! Post this on ITN before the end comes! --candle•wicke 18:53, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
We have 8 minutes after the Sun goes down, this is approx how long it takes the last light to reach Earth. So, no need to hurry. Besides, I find the proposed blurb US centric. Probably because of blockbusters. :P --Tone 20:31, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Pulitzers
I know the Pulitzers are listed amongst WP:ITNR (and that's obviously why they were posted) but why is this exactly? Can non-Americans win one? If not it doesn't seem to fit alongside the awards arguments previously presented for Oscars/Grammys and against national music awards such as the Brits... in other words I can't see anything international about them... --candle•wicke 19:10, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It appears to be an exclusively American-only award, with all the famous winners being American citizens, and "only published reports and photographs by United States-based newspapers or daily news organizations are eligible for the journalism prize", according to this. That is questionable. --BorgQueen (talk) 19:42, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I do see it as a threat to neutrality and the carefully crafted consensus on awards such as the Grammys and Oscars. Someone is liable to use this as an example of American propaganda (The current wording is even cringeworthy and patriotic – The New York Times wins five Pulitzer Prizes, including for international reporting on "America’s deepening military and political challenges in Afghanistan and Pakistan.") It would be interesting to hear what a reader from either of those countries has to say about that. I would support this item's immediate removal from the Main Page and its immediate withdrawal from WP:ITNR. --candle•wicke 20:23, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
After a consideration, I support removal of Pulitzer prize from ITN/R. The rationale is relevant, Oscars and Grammys can have international winners while Pulitzer is exclusively for one country. --Tone 20:44, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. It therefore should not really be on the Main Page, should it, as it hasn't been nominated and there has been considerable disagreement amongst the three of us about its previously privileged position? Perhaps the bottom ITN can be returned and it will date prior to April 19th, no? ;) --candle•wicke 20:48, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Would anyone mind if I removed all the sports championships that are limited to teams from one country from ITNR? Using the consensus rationale established here, of course. - BanyanTree 23:19, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't mind at all. --BorgQueen (talk) 04:00, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't want the job of handling the complaints when you take the NBA finals, the Super Bowl and the Aussie rules finals off the list - Dumelow (talk) 07:22, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I presume the AFL Grand Final is there because it is the "best attended domestic club championship event in the world". So that's probably fine. I can't think of any reason for the other two though, especially the NBA finals. At least American football is a distinct sport. However, so too is Gaelic football which is conspicuous by its absence, so since we're operating on the basis that one is somehow superior to the other, I wouldn't really mind at all either. And, unless someone fills me in on the unique sport of American basketball, I don't see what is special about the NBA finals. It seems to be the equivalent of the Premier League in association football/England, i.e. a domestic event thought highly of in its own sport, but one of many possibilities we could have at WP:ITNR. There have and will forever be complaints... so I don't see how the NBA finals and the Super Bowl should be kept because there might be a few complaints. When has a complaint ever been a valid reason unless it offers something useful besides personal preference? --candle•wicke 16:38, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
So that's two supports for a proposal to remove the Pulitzers and two supports for a proposal to remove the NBA finals and the Super Bowl at the very least, with the only (although I'm uncertain whether it is a support or oppose) argument for keeping them being that we will have to deal with too many complaints. It is clear that there is not currently much of a consensus for their inclusion. --candle•wicke 16:43, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose on the NBA one. What's left for indoor sports? Ice hockey? Or maybe it hasn't been targeted yet? Or maybe it has Canadians? What, we're having outdoor sport bias now? FYI, FIBA considers the NBA as an intercontinental tournament; if rugby union has the Heineken Cup, the North American basketball equivalent is the NBA. Yeah, talk about domesticity and what-have-you, if you can prove to me you have better credentials than FIBA on these matters it'll be worthless. Oppose AFL, support removal of the Super Bowl.
Note: when you add the populations of the four countries of the Heineken Cup (190.3 million), that's still less than the U.S.' (300 million). (And I assume a great majority among these five countries' population has access to the internet.) This is similar to the funny argument some years back that a football match between Liechtenstein and Andorra is more international than the NBA Finals.
P.S., I suggest bring this first to ITN/R, then once something already happened there, bring it up at [{Template talk:In the news]]. As an aside, I found it funny that Candlewicke supported the inclusion of the IPL, which has also been argued extensively on its domesticity while supporting the removal of U.S. and Aussie sporting events.
P.P.S. As far as I know there has been only one non U.S. citizen recipient of the Pulitzer Prize. –HowardtheDuck 12:36, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
For the record: I intended my contribution to merely be a neutral comment and not a support or oppose "vote". I have no real opinions on the matter - Dumelow (talk) 12:49, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The NBA Finals and the AFL Grand Final were added there due to a past discussion. Since they're there already, consensus must be remove them; ergo, no consensus means they'll stay. Plus, at this point, I think we should be adding, instead of removing items to the list. Such as the IPL. –HowardtheDuck 12:59, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't believe in this population business. It is unhelpful when states like California are used against entire countries (or groups of countries) that have less people. The same could be said for many Asian countries which have bigger populations than the US. Why precisely does the US have a special privilege? Nobody is trying to remove it entirely from ITN but it is one country, there are numerous others. Also you must be mistaken, I neither supported the removal of the Aussie sporting event nor supported the inclusion of the IPL (I'm not even sure what that is?). Consensus seems to be very much against the Pulitzers, Super Bowl and NBA from what I've read here. Nobody has offered anything reasonably coherent so how can they be kept here. There has been a proposal to remove them and it has been agreed to by at least two users. That's more consensus than what would usually be the case at ITN. --candle•wicke 14:20, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I may have just seen the talk page comment you meant about the IPL. I think that was made in the context that all the national events like the Super Bowl were included and it didn't make sense to leave such events out simply because they took place in other countries. If the Super Bowl and NBA were to be removed that would make things much simpler as nobody would be able to validly argue that these events should be included (unless there are one or two exceptions). At the time there appeared to be no proposal to remove these events but BanyanTree has since begun one and BorgQueen has offered some agreement. I too think this would be the simplest route. --candle•wicke 14:45, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not really giving the U.S. a "special privilege" if that's what you call it; the thing is, there has to be another indoor sport aside from ice hockey that should be at ITN/R. Ice hockey is not terribly popular in places with warm weather, such as India. And you said it yourself: "It does seem unfair to generalise each sport if perhaps cricket is operated in a different way than some other more popular sports." Guess what, basketball (along with ice hockey, baseball and "American" football) is operated in a different way too.
One country? Ok, two. Does that make that international? Not quite. What are the ITN criteria anyway? International importance orinterest. The NBA has been broadcast internationally, and there were some reports that the TV ratings for a Milwaukee Bucks-Houston Rockets regular season game several years ago scored big in... China. Yep, they drank beer 9 in the morning. International enough? Maybe. In the Philippines, the only two times journalists go to a remote location outside the country annually is 1) when the sitting president goes to a state visit, and at the NBA Finals. Not international enough? I dunno.
So OK, remove the NBA Finals, but it has to be replaced by an indoor sport, not necessarily basketball. Otherwise, the perceived U.S. bias turns into outdoor sport bias and that's not good either.
Or we can add the IPL, the Premier League, keep the NBA and the AFL, and ditch the NFL and we can all be happy. –HowardtheDuck 16:12, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
But I have no real desire to add the IPL or the Premier League anymore (if I ever did at all)... what you are quoting is based upon the idea that the Super Bowl was included... it would seem fair to omit items like this, basketball and English football if their only claim to being international is having one team from another country. It seems the best thing to do in the circumstances. I find having one team from elsewhere a very strange rationale for inclusion especially considering the highest level of Gaelic football (the All-Ireland Senior Football Championship) features teams from London and New York, giving a grand total of four competing countries or twice the amount of two. --candle•wicke 17:04, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
One thing that separates the NBA (and possibly the NHL and Major League Baseball) from other "domestic" leagues is that one or both or all of them are recognized by their respective sports as "intercontinental" leagues. In other words, if there is a world club championship for any of these sports (basketball has none, baseball has none that I know of, and hockey has quite a few tournaments), these "national champions" qualify for a world championship berth, much like the winners of the UEFA Champions League. IMHO, by that quality alone makes them having "international interest".
The IPL and NFL are even "grander": their champions can legitimately claim the world "club" championship, considering a great majority of the world's top players of that sport play in those leagues, same for the MLB. The NBA used to, and currently informally does this, considering a great majority of the world's top basketball players play there. I can't argue that for any other domestic league, even the Premier League can't claim that "a great majority" of the world's best football players play for their league, considering other leagues such as the La Liga can claim their share of the top players. Dunno for the NHL.
As for the GAA, heck, as I've found out earlier, the Rep. of Ireland has 4 million people. If we'd include that, we might as well add the one of the two Philippine Basketball Association championships considering its championship game is highest ranked professional event among List of sports attendance figures#indoor sports. (Since we don't include amateur championships.) –HowardtheDuck 17:25, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You've picked out two things that seem slightly ignorant of the GAA. It is amateur through choice, that does not take away from the fact that it maintains consistent popularity and is able to run numerous large stadia including the fourth largest in Europe which it built itself without going close to bankruptcy (particularly in the present climate). The Republic of Ireland alone has more than four million people. You also seem to have forgotten Northern Ireland. And two rather large cities. --candle•wicke 17:44, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't really care about GAA's amateurness, since it's "big" as you put it. The only reason I added the word "amateur" is to exclude the American NCAA, not to exclude/include the GAA. Adding NI's population doesn't really affect if you consider the whole island of Ireland vis-a-vis with the Philippines, give or take diehards from the two large cities, especially from New York. The Philippine Basketball Association's championship series is also played at the fourth largest indoor arena in Asia, so if we'd include the fourth largest stadium in Europe, why should we exclude the fourth largest arena in Asia?
Ah why not? We could have them all. I'm not even sure what I'm debating any more. The point about stadium size was to counter negativities perceived by the term "amateur" which may be see it dismissed by those with less knowledge, not a reason for including it at ITN. I've never had a problem with the Philippines. My point was that Australian and Gaelic football are their own sports, and that I'm not aware of a sport called American basketball or the variety that is played in the Philippines. As far as I'm aware there is currently no consensus to include something like the NBA final, if that is so then the case for Gaelic football does look a little shaky. This was an argument which made more sense before the removal of sports such as the NBA and Super Bowl was proposed. The logic was that Gaelic football seemed no different to me than the Australian variety; indeed players of GAA often disappear to Australia to pursue careers there, e.g. Gaelic footballer Tadhg Kennelly who has also won medals in the Australian game. I hope this clarifies my point – I am not trying to disrupt WP:ITNR, I just didn't see the logic of including one variety of football and excluding the other. --candle•wicke 20:55, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This discussion has veered from the intended topic already, which is how the NBA Finals and the AFL Grand Final are deemed to be not international. I've already demonstrated that NBA is equated to the UEFA Champions League, which is listed at ITN/R. Removal of the NBA has to be replaced with another indoor sport, since there'll be only one annual indoor sporting event at ITN/R. So what would be replacing the NBA? The Euroleague? LOL, the horrors! –HowardtheDuck 18:28, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Could you clarify how many teams from outside the US compete in the NBA please? --candle•wicke 20:57, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
They can buy a franchise. How does that anything to do with anything? –HowardtheDuck 03:24, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: Does anyone agree of removing the big 4 American leagues? I wanna see if it can survive the test of being debated here first than being automatically added due to ITN/R. The NHL and NBA playoffs end in June so it'll be a good way to see its "internationalness". –HowardtheDuck 18:46, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. Of course, although they are removed from ITN/R, they can still be considered here on a case by case basis. --BorgQueen (talk) 03:18, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Let my objections not be a hindrance to their removal. –HowardtheDuck 03:24, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. BorgQueen's proposal makes sense. I still don't understand what you mean by "They can buy a franchise. How does that anything to do with anything?". It seemed such a simple question... --candle•wicke 03:31, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I still don't understand how having teams from two or more countries is the sole determinant of "international importance or interest," either. If no consensus comes up, I suggest they'd be reinstated. –HowardtheDuck 04:28, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I will also object. Looking at the NHL alone, its games are broadcast all over the world via ESPN America, historically on many other channels. The NHL has played regular season games in Japan, England, the Czech Republic, Finland, Sweden, participates in the Victoria Cup, etc. Certainly a world wide reach. I would expect similar arguments could be made for the NBA, NFL and MLB. But hell, if we're going to start tossing events that are primarily hosted in one country, lets remove the Tour de France as well on the same principle. The Ashes are competed by only two nations, lets remove that too. Golf and Tennis' four majors are each competed for in a single nation, remove them as well. Oh, but they are competed for by athletes from many nations? So are hockey, basketball and baseball. Truth is, we could poke holes in the majority of the sports based events at ITNR if we wanted to. One thing I notice, if the North American big four should be removed, as well as the AFL Grand Final, is that you are nearly eliminating two continents from coverage of major sporting events. What you would be left with is a significant pro-European bias. Resolute 16:05, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I would judge each sport individually. They are all at different levels, for instance we could have numerous association football events because so many are being presented, yet not all sports (like cycling or tennis) would be able to match this. The GAA too have played games historically in San Francisco, [7] London (according to this, Galway have a game there before July 4th) New York's Gaelic Park, (one very soon on May 10 – note further down that this article mentions Gaelic games in the same breath as soccer and rugby union which may be a useful comparative point – in fact it is common that GAA gets its own section on sports sites instead of being lumped in with "other sports"). Incidentally, Setanta Sports, which broadcasts in 24 countries also mentions the New York game. In a list of "events of major importance to society", the Irish government themselves include the football and hurling finals alongside the Olympics and FIFA World Cup. For anyone familiar with rugby union and the Heineken Cup, here is a report from a journalist which compares Leinster v Munster to an All Ireland Final between Kerry and Dublin. I read something about Gaelic games in France the other day (which even surprised me by the way) but I'm still trying to locate an online source for it. So it is evident that Gaelic games are given some degree of international coverage on an ongoing basis, has played top level games outside Ireland, has had players move to Australia to compete in their version of football, competes internationally with a team representing the Australian game, has had games broadcast by channels known internationally and has been considered as important, politically and culturally, by a government as the Olympics (in a nutshell). What then is the case for American and Australian football but not Gaelic football, I ask (and have done so on each occasion that these debates have been taking place)? I understand that if the Super Bowl and AFL Grand Final were removed that perhaps all this would fall through. But if these are still included why are Gaelic games not included in any way? I have mentioned at least three different continents in the above, I'm sure the worldwide spread of the Irish diaspora (a lot more than 4 milion people) means there are many more international connections. As for the "two or more teams" argument, I have still not received an answer as to how many countries feature in the NBA. The event I refer to not only features games and teams from different countries, but also different continents. Please consider this when sculpting arguments about internationalness. Ignorance or misunderstanding of a game is no reason to question possible notability. --candle•wicke 17:25, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Heck if we're about diaspora, the Filipino diaspora has 11 million people, and probably more; and (this made it to DYK), the UAAPcollege league, yes, an amateur college league, requirement to bid on the next season for TV rights includes international broadcasting. WTF? UAAP? I never heard of that! Exactly. If the GAA has international coverage, is amateur, has significant following elsewhere, well, this is it. And the whole island of Ireland has 5 million max, the whole island of Luzon where the UAAP following is the strongest has 39.5 million. If the GAA is even considered, why can Filipino leagues? These leagues can't build stadiums by themselves though, there are for more important things to spend money about in countries such as the Philippines.
Which brings me, we shouldn't be bringing on the GAA, the UAAP and other leagues not being questioned. As I've said before, despite being played in 2 countries and in a closed system, FIBA recognizes the NBA as an intercontinental league, the equivalent of the Heineken Cup for North American basketball. The NHL, a league HQed in New York, USA, has more Canadian players than Americans. As for the NFL we can all agree to ditch that. Heh.
Final question: Why are we limiting "internationalness" of sports on the countries where the sport is played? Is there any other measure? Are we not going to consider populations? Or at least people who can access the internet, Wikipedia's primary audience? –HowardtheDuck 18:07, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, this missing link stuff is so pro-evolutionist biase... But since it was published in Nature... Do we have an article? (This is then support, of course, I am always for good science stories.) --Tone 20:49, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not mentioned on the Current events portal, which I thought was meant to be a pre-requisite.
Reading the article suggests that there is nothing new except the article: there is no recent event, the discovery was in 2007.
Those facts would suggest that it is more suitable to DYK than ITN. If there is, despite this, an ITN headline, perhaps it should make clear what has been discovered: living examples? Genetic evidence? Fossil record? Fossil fragments? Kevin McE (talk) 08:40, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Probably a good point to take to WP:ERRORS now. I updated this when I was going through the backlog of nominations which I thought stood a chance and were slipping away. Tone likes scientific discoveries and I personally do not object to either scientific or historic items being placed on the front page of an encylopedia. We have too few. --candle•wicke 17:33, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Now the blurb mentions that it is a fossil, not a living specimen. Thanks. --BorgQueen (talk) 17:56, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Also worth mentioning that discoveries can take months or years to be properly announced. Since we can't put it on ITN until we have confirmation we would therefore not have very many of these stories at all. --candle•wicke 18:19, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The World Digital Library is due to launch. It has much in common with Wikipedia, in terms of promising to massively increase access to information from around the world and in many languages. As significant a launch as that of an important new rocket or spaceship, I would argue. BrainyBabe (talk) 13:50, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support. This launch will most likely even have a substantial impact on Wikipedia, as most/all of the newly digitalized literature will satisfy WP:RS. — C M B J 17:29, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support because it most likely will affect Wikipedia? It sounds great but I see a number of things which are inappropriate for ITN here so I would oppose. --candle•wicke 19:46, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know..."It has much in common with Wikipedia, in terms of promising to massively increase access to information from around the world and in many languages." "Promising"? I don't know...Wikipedia-similar stories tend to be frowned upon as non-notable. SpencerT♦Nominate! 23:20, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The nominator's rationale wasn't exactly brilliant but the library does appear to be notable, as CMBJ tried to explain above. --BorgQueen (talk) 02:28, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The World Digital Library has launched today. Can anyone help in updating the article? --BorgQueen (talk) 14:44, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sadly, I am not in a position to improve the article, but I don't understand the ITN process. I submitted the WDL as a suggestion 12 days ago. Many editors agree it is significant. So why does the mainpage not include it? (Not a complaint, really, but a confused query.) BrainyBabe (talk) 15:53, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Total three editors agreed: you, CMBJ, and me. (I don't think Candlewicke's "Oh" response can be counted as an agreement.) Anyway, without some further objections from others, WDL will be put on ITN but it needs to be updated on the launch and still lacks some vital info last time I checked. You are not going to update yourself, that's fine, I see others are already working on it. --BorgQueen (talk) 16:08, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I believe that the article is editorially sufficient for ITN inclusion at this point. Much work does remain, but the article is informative and will presumably see significant improvements from the new inflow of front page editors. — C M B J 21:01, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My Shining Path nomination above is not only about the number of fatalities but its political significance. But of course, I see the Kenyan violence is notable as well. Nowadays I am not really interested in measuring the magnitude of an event soley by the number of deaths. (My work at ITN has been a greatly desensitizing process for me, if you know what I mean.) --BorgQueen (talk) 19:16, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it is amazing how a couple of deaths appears so insignificant nowadays. But I suppose I might bat an eyelid at twenty-four in one incident. --candle•wicke 20:26, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The article needs to be expanded a bit. --BorgQueen (talk) 05:03, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Should we cover elections in a state which is not recognised by almost the entire the international community (Turkey being the exception) or the UN? Do we cover elections of Abkhazia or South Ossetia (recognised only by Russia and Nicaragua) or do we draw the line at Transnistria which is only recognised by Abkhazia and South Ossetia, maybe the line is at Somaliland which nobody recognises? I am not POV pushing but I think we need some sort of policy on this to avoid any arguments in the future - Dumelow (talk) 08:21, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well it would be a bit POV to leave one out just because some or most countries don't recognise it. If somebody does recognise it why not? --candle•wicke 14:32, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
gets messy. In this case however the fact it is likely to blow a hole in the UN peace plan is something of an issue.Geni 17:17, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think that it's the result that counts here, not the dispute about being a country. The result will likely have influence on future events on Cyprus. --Tone 18:47, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have updated the article...if someone would like to add more about the controversy in the reactions section, feel free.SpencerT♦Nominate! 19:13, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Generally, we don't say "Voters...give...", so I'll post 199.71.174.100's wording for now, but if someone thinks that Physchim's is better, feel free to change it. Posting. SpencerT♦Nominate! 00:58, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies for using plurality when it should have been majority, I misread the article. Luckily someone saw it and changed it - Dumelow (talk) 09:37, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Mexico train crash
There is a train crash in Mexico that injured like 100+. Ashishg55 (talk) 02:42, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Any deaths? Sources? --candle•wicke 14:21, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The BBC gives 70+ injuries, no mention of deaths - Dumelow (talk) 18:37, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sure it would be unusual if there were hundreds or even thousands of injuries... --candle•wicke 18:43, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
UN conference on racism in Geneva
UN conference on racism opens in Geneva amid controversy, boycotted by eight countries. [9] Do we have an article on this yet? --BorgQueen (talk) 06:42, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Inconvenient and inflammatory. We need to be extra careful when dealing with this degree of controversy. Iran's president opens the summit with his speech? Whoa. --BorgQueen (talk) 14:31, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand what you mean? --candle•wicke 14:35, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Did you read the news article I've linked? --BorgQueen (talk) 14:39, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ah yes, now it makes sense. I thought initially you were saying the suggested wording was "inconvenient and inflammatory". The Iranian President/Whoa coming from nowhere threw me further. Shows how easily something can be misunderstood. :) I suppose they have to fit Iran in somewhere. --candle•wicke 14:45, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Do you think we should use Ahmadinejad's picture, so Peter Sunde can have a break? I am still trying to find the right wording. --BorgQueen (talk) 15:23, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah. There will probably be complaints but there should be no non-POV reason to leave him out. And it's a good photo too. --candle•wicke 16:08, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Currently on ITN, but the article needs to be updated on Ahmadinejad's opening speech which has caused some diplomats to walk out before mentioning him in the blurb. Some helping hands, anyone? --BorgQueen (talk) 16:24, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Mind-boggling. A "two-year government mapping study" locates 3,850km more of "the world's largest man-made structure"... --candle•wicke 18:19, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is the "first detailed survey to establish the length of the ancient barricade". --candle•wicke 18:22, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support, this seems pretty notable (and I do like stories about history). The article is in good nick and someone has added the bit about the new length - Dumelow (talk) 09:53, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A nice wording, please? --BorgQueen (talk) 14:14, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Something like: "A Chinese government study discovers that the Great Wall of China is 3,850 km (2,400 miles) longer than previously thought?"? - Dumelow (talk) 17:34, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Our article states a different previous length to the BBC though (6,700 km instead of 5,000 km). That might need looking into first - Dumelow (talk) 17:43, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A Chinese government study locates an extra 3,850 km (2,400 miles) of the Great Wall of China(pictured). Just in case someone knew about it, then we're covered. --candle•wicke 17:46, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I cannot find the number "3,850" in the article. --BorgQueen (talk) 23:02, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's simple mathematics. Addition and subtraction. The old figure versus the new. Or is that considered OR? --candle•wicke 18:24, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't go so far as to call it OR but I think it is best to mention the number somewhere in the article. Without it, I am fairly certain that some questions will be raised at Talk:Main Page or WP:ERRORS. --BorgQueen (talk) 18:35, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I haven't posted before for something happening currently, but I don't get it. Why does nothing appear for today? (I created April 19 section.) Is it just a "slow news day" or am I missing something? If the former, may I suggest the overnight sensation of singer Susan Boyle? She does appear to have set new records already, and those who study internet memes are saying this a textbok example that has gone beyond previous textbooks. Also, covered in many many mainstream news sources around the world. Also, nice occasionally to have a feel-good story. BrainyBabe (talk) 01:13, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Feel good stories do make it onto ITN, especially since the recent militant crackdown on doom and gloom. The birth of Injaz is positive unless you hate cloning camels. The rescue of Richard Phillips from the MV Maersk Alabamahijacking is positive unless you're a Somali pirate. Ireland winning the Six NationsGrand Slam in rugby union for the first time since 1948 is positive unless you were one of the losing countries. Ángel Cabrera winning the 2009 Masters Tournament in golf is positive unless you are allergic to Argentinian underdogs. And so on. I don't think Susan will make it though. It's quite enough she has an article, that is a victory in itself. Perhaps it's not too late to nominate her at DYK if this hasn't already been carried out? Nothing happens for today because it a long and complicated process whereby the article must be created or substantially updated and endure various obstacles such as the present lack of activity or editors lurking around to review and post on the Main Page. Thank you for your nomination. Come again. Please. :) --candle•wicke 03:19, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for explaining! Many of the stories you list are not wholy positive: many people oppose cloning (& esp GM); following the deaths of Somali pirates by US forces, there has been an upsurge in hostage-takings and pirates will be more willing to kill their captives; more countries/teams lose any sporting event than win. Anyway, thanks for the welcome; I may well come back. BrainyBabe (talk) 16:46, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That is true. Certainly people do oppose cloning but if we count sporting triumphs as negative I'm not sure what we have left. Perhaps you enjoyed Mycocepurus smithii? It does involve cloning but it is carried out naturally so I do wonder how that case could be considered against nature... but it is probably pretty negative and depressing for male readers actually... another example of their place in the world being questioned... how to please everyone, it is a rather tedious impossibility... :) --candle•wicke 13:22, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's right. And I don't think everyone feels good about Susan Boyle's story either, considering some negative comments about her on the net. (Not that I agree with them.) --BorgQueen (talk) 13:31, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And if you wanted to be really negative about Susan's story there is bound to be someone in her town who is fed up being obstructed by Americans wandering around with camera equipment and asking questions about where she lives. They might come to Wikipedia to escape all this and then lo and behold she stares ominously back at them from the Main Page and some poor reader's day is upset... --candle•wicke 14:19, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I hope you aren't suggesting that I mind people's feelings being hurt, or want to please everyone! Otherwise there could be no disasters or battles on ITN. All I said is that feel-good stories have their place, and that few stories are unambiguously so. (Male readers may be thinking: "Lesbian ants! How cool is that!" for all I know.) BrainyBabe (talk) 16:00, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Are they lesbian? I thought they were asexual... a redirect is in store I think. I cannot now even recall their name without looking since they've gone from the Main Page. --candle•wicke 17:55, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I like the Roxana Saberi story, it has a pretty decent update, lots of refs, and is making headlines around the world. Random89 21:05, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
We should link to file sharing and not torrent tracking since the former is more generic. This calls for some rewording. __meco (talk) 10:23, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And I don't think the generic link is particularly required here. Please feel free to give your rationale. --BorgQueen (talk) 12:39, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No response at all? And this being a weekend too... Researchers discover Mycocepurus smithii, the first ant species determined to consist exclusively of females and to reproduce through cloning. --candle•wicke 18:15, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I generally support science stories but I don't believe this one is of ITN scale... --Tone 21:06, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Two first-time discoveries in one not good enough? --candle•wicke 22:30, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well somebody has to do something soon and this looks the most ready... this place is suffering from a severe lack of activity considering it's a weekend... --candle•wicke 00:28, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I've been kept quite busy by work-related matters. Request for clarification: is the the first species found to do this, or the first ant species found to do this? SpencerT♦Nominate! 00:59, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
To quote the BBC, "This species - the first ever to be shown to reproduce entirely without sex - cultivates a garden of fungus, which also reproduces asexually." It is more important in that there are two firsts and also is rather unusual so I would think this is good enough for ITN. Besides, isn't this the type of story one expects to read about in an encyclopedia? --candle•wicke 03:02, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't get it. Why is this not relevant? It is two new discoveries in one, it is not particularly controversial, it is updated, it is a science story (of which we both lack and like) and if I were reading an encyclopedia it would be what I would expect to see. So why is there so much difficulty in having it posted? Injaz was the world's first cloned camel, not the world's first cloned animal but that was posted with no difficulty whatsover thereby countering any argument that it ought to be the world's first animal. So what is the difference here exactly? It doesn't make very much logical sense. --candle•wicke 12:34, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(unindent) Well, if there are no further objections, I'm going to post it soon. --BorgQueen (talk) 13:31, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I was just about to nominate this... --candle•wicke 20:54, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Why not. It happens only every couple of years and it is very international. Even better, if there are some results. --Tone 21:06, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Would it be better to wait until the end then maybe? --candle•wicke 22:31, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say until something crazy happens. –HowardtheDuck 17:33, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I tend to agree with the Duck. I don't think we should list every single international summit unless some significant decision is made as a result, or something "crazy" happens, such as cancellation, violent protest or another "¿Por qué no te callas?". --BorgQueen (talk) 05:50, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I wonder if this discovery is ITN-worthy. They've found microbes living without oxygen, drawing energy from sulfur and iron instead. The microbe hasn't been named yet but we have Blood Falls. --BorgQueen (talk) 12:43, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Subglacial" should get into the blurb again IMO, as that's what makes it interesting (iron or sulfur metabolism aren't that uncommon). Narayanese (talk) 08:56, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
North Korea nuclear news will no doubt have international effect. Fairly big since they had an agreement, i think this news item qualifies for ITN. Ashishg55 (talk) 22:41, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
or something similar to agreement... Ashishg55 (talk) 22:45, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Injaz, the world's first cloned camel
I wonder if this is ITN-worthy? It's the first time scientists cloned a camel. --BorgQueen (talk) 02:50, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I was passing over this but as it's in my news (and I'm nowhere near Poland) and there are a lot of deaths and injuries... surprisingly it seems to have been a while since we had a right old proper blaze... we're getting too soft now, there's practically no doom and gloom... --candle•wicke 01:26, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am leaning toward support... More than 20 deaths is a fairly large number for a single-building fire. --BorgQueen (talk) 01:59, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have added a bit about the state of emergency, hopefully I will be able to expand it a bit more later - Dumelow (talk) 13:46, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Good work, I am posting it soon. --BorgQueen (talk) 14:03, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I have just about run out of free time so hopefully someone will pick it up from the main page and keep it updated - Dumelow (talk) 14:04, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The situation in Fiji is certainly worthy of an ITN entry, but we have no significantly updated article so far, apart from some minimal edits to 2006 Fijian coup d'état and Josefa Iloilo. The events appear to be:
The military commander, Frank Bainimarama, steps down but retains control of the military, leaving no government in Fiji
The president, Josefa Iloilo, who was installed by the military govt, announces that the Court of Appeal judges are sacked, that the constitution is abolished, and he is assuming all governing power.
If the linked articles can be updated, and perhaps also Politics of Fiji, an ITN should be worded.-gadfium 06:33, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support when we have sufficient updates. --Tone 08:04, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Breaking news: UK terrorist plot arrests. Seems pretty big, someone on TV just said it was one of the biggest plots in the country. At the moment there's not a lot of info. The arrests were a bit last-minute. Might be a good idea to keep an eye on this story. Not sure if it's notable yet. JollyΩJanner 18:30, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The more interesting story here is how the most senior counter-terrorism officer in the country carried the "secret" documents around openly whilst being photographed and so was forced to launch the raids a day early. Although he has now resigned over the matter (BBC) - Dumelow (talk) 11:13, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, doesn't really look notable for Main Page news. JollyΩJanner 11:31, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Death of Ian Tomlinson
A criminal inquiry, from which the police has been removed, has began on the Death of Ian Tomlinson, after footage from the guardian shows him being attacked from behind by police
I would be inclined to wait for the verdict as ITN typically does in such cases. --candle•wicke 15:26, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Police violence is far too common for this to go up as is. If there were giant protests (like the Greek protests), then I would support. SpencerT♦Nominate! 19:42, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I would be of that opinion too. It is one to watch and perhaps the verdict may be significant or lead to something significant but at present there is too little there for ITN. --candle•wicke 19:58, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
How often does the crew itself actually regain control of a hijacked ship? If not often, this would seem notable. Grsz11 16:53, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Apparantly this was the fist hostage-taking of American sailors in 200+ years. Grsz11 17:15, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Wait for the cruise missile ships to get there. im sure they are not going to just let pirates keep the captain. then it might be more noteworthy. we already posted many pirate stories just few months back Ashishg55 (talk) 23:43, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Multiple reliable sources state that this particular attack was the first in 200 years to involve pirates taking American sailors hostage, and that the unarmed crew regained control of the ship. These facts establish that it was an atypical and unique event — irregardless of whether or not the captain is released. Personally, I'd appreciate seeing it listed in ITN. — C M B J 00:52, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
World reaction to Budget. I haven't gotten round to creating this yet but does anyone think it would be suitable for ITN? --candle•wicke 19:53, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorta going to weak oppose...The US state of California, I believe, had to do this too, and that has a much larger population than Ireland. This is more of a "local"-type story, I think. I feel this may be a bit more DYK worthy, however. SpencerT♦Nominate! 00:13, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I doubt an entire country could be dismissed as "local"? National surely? Is it being dismissed for population reasons alone? I'm afraid I disagree with the idea of it being local, especially since there's enough information for an international reaction type section... and on the US state of California doing it – did it have to do it twice in quick succession because it messed up the first one? I would like some further explanation as to what this is being compared to? --candle•wicke 12:28, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry if that comes across in a bad way but I can't understand the "local" idea or the idea of a US state which is not a country. If each US state were the equivalent of a country we would have about 20% more countries than there are already. And why would US states be considered more important than, say, their Australian or Indian counterparts? --candle•wicke 18:16, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
IMHO, Japan granting the biggest bailout in their history was bigger than this and even that didn't make it. Now if the FTSE, Xetra Dax, CAC and AEX all posted gains (solely or primarily) because of this, this could be considered. –HowardtheDuck 05:00, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That seems a more plausible comparison. Thanks. --candle•wicke 17:15, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The shooting appears of too small scale in comparison with other recent shootings on ITN. Riots in Moldova have way too short article at the moment but can be improved. Also, if the article about election is expanded a bit, it can go up. Maybe the best thing to combine the two. --Tone 11:43, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Sacking parliament and the presidential office makes it newsworthy :). Thue | talk 22:04, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Both articles are fine now. Just give me a good wording. Following the communist party victory at the Moldovan parliamentary election, massive protests begin in Chişinău? --Tone 07:23, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Roughly 10,000 young persons protested in the Great National Assembly Square in Chisinau on Monday evening, disputing the results of the legislative elections won by the Communist Party the third consecutive time, Info-Prim Neo reports. [1][2] --Dima1 (talk) 18:41, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Why is this under future events? --candle•wicke 20:38, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I put it under future events as the Moldovan parliament must select a new president within 30 days of the election or it will be dissolved. As we normally cover changes in heads of state it was an almost guaranteed future event. However the parliamentary elections (which I don't think we usually cover) have now become newsworthy and the change in president will probably become associated with this. Suggested tagline: "Rioters in Chişinău, Moldovabreak into the parliament building and the presidential office during a protest against the results of the recent election". The article mentions deaths of police and civilians which would obviously be a bigger story but doesn't provide any reliable source for this (and it seems to have gone unnoticed by the world's media), I will remove it from the article - Dumelow (talk) 09:52, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, putting this up for now. --Tone 18:26, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This should probably be included? If it weren't in Indonesia it would most likely be and Indonesia is the world's fourth most populous country and the world's most populous Muslim-majority nation, according to Wikipedia. --candle•wicke 19:57, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am leaning toward support... The article needs to be substantially expanded, of course. --BorgQueen (talk) 20:01, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
To be honest where it happened should not be a deciding factor. The recent North Sea helicopter crash killed 16 but was deemed notable enough and I fail to see what makes this any more significant (asides from the slightly larger death toll). That being said I'm not opposed to it I just think it might be an idea if we had some rough guidelines for the future. In my opinion this going up set a 'dodgy' precedent for what constitutes a notable air disaster. --Daviessimo (talk) 20:22, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Scotland/Indonesia. I do see some major differences... a few which I've pointed out above. --candle•wicke 20:30, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And, in reference to the above, it is not every day we have a plane crash/cemetery/skiing combination. We do, however, seem to be having quite a lot of ditchings (if that is the correct word) and Scottish helicopter crashes. --candle•wicke 20:36, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes there are differences between the countries, but in the interests of neutrality the only thing that should be judged is the event itself. If we based decisions on population then every other item would be for either India of China which combined account for a third of the world's population.I was saying there are no major differences between the two events. i.e both killed a moderate number, neither appears to have been the result of malicious action, neither involved a commerical carrier or flight etc --Daviessimo (talk) 20:41, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
How does where the passengers are going have any bearing on the significance of the event? It is purely trivial information --Daviessimo (talk) 20:43, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I was only putting it out there to see what was thought of it. It seems to be at stalemate at present. In some cases the destination may very well be a deciding factor; it simply depends on the situation. It also depends on how often the event occurs in a particular area and, as I've demonstrated, Scotland (and Europe in general) has had too many of these incidents recently. When the United Kingdom was posted for having strange weather several months ago this was thought unusual in areas where such weather is common. Yet it made perfect sense because it was unusual for that area. There is no bias against the United Kingdom in that regard. --candle•wicke 19:39, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(back indent) When was the last time there was an air disaster that killed 10+ in Scotland exactly?? If you're refering to the recent ditch by a helicopter, then all survived, so quite frankly I can't see the logical comparison. Also what does the 'bad weather' in London have to do with anything? I presume the logic was that it had brought one of only four global cities to a standstill. (London being one of the four along with New York, Tokyo and Paris). This incident in Java has nothing to do with UK and I'm puzzled to why that is being mentioned. I am stating that any event has to be compared with similar events that have gone before. In this instance there was nothing that made this stand out so I questioned what made it significant. With no deaths on the ground and no repecussions I fail to see how where it occured was important. --Daviessimo (talk) 22:57, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Vermont approves same-sex marriage.
Vermont is a small state, but it's noteworthy as the first place in North America to institute same-sex marriage through the legislature rather than through a court decision. -- 99.236.2.244 (talk) 04:03, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
16 dead now. I was working on this a few hours ago but got cut off. Italian erthquakes an extreme rarity too it seems. --candle•wicke 07:28, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support, the BBC are now reporting up to 50 deaths, I will try to take a look at the article later today - Dumelow (talk) 10:18, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Because the number of casualties varies, we can either put a temporary headline Earthquake strikes Italy or wait a couple of hours and have a blurb with numbers. Either is ok and the article is progressing well. --Tone 11:14, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Curiously, at the moment, there are no catastrophes on ITN, more or less just politics. Of course, this one will change it. --Tone 11:15, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have expanded the article and have reffed the death toll (which currently stands at 50) - Dumelow (talk) 12:00, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The article is updated now, posting. --Tone 11:07, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Just added it to the list above also added Moldova and a Pakistan bombing b/c the former was not on the main page (see discussion below) as any countries' election result does get on the main apge and the latter was deleted for some reason by an IP. Lihaas (talk) 11:16, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I say keep an eye on it...not quite suitable yet. SpencerT♦Nominate! 23:13, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Another one of those really, really long and tiring debates on sports; this one features a healthy mixture of basketball, baseball, association football, its American counterpart, rugby union, Gaelic football, horse racing, Aussie Rules, rowing, ice hockey... and The Da Vinci Code
Just throwing it out there: The 2009 NCAA Men's Division I Basketball Tournament finals are April 6. We usually run the NBA Finals in June, and I'm not saying we shouldn't, but the college championship gets higher TV ratings and is probably the fourth-biggest annual sporting event in the U.S. in terms of cultural impact behind the NFL, BCS and MLB championships. Actually, last year, the NCAA finals had more U.S. viewers than any non-football sporting event save the Olympics -- the basketball game even outdrew the average World Series game. (See [17]) So if we have the NBA finals, perhaps we should have the NCAA final as well. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 05:58, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
But the thing is its audience is so concentrated on one country so it doesn't fit "international interest". It doesn't fit either international importance criterion so it probably can't shouldn't go up, same with the BCS "Championship Game". Actually if we include this we might as well include the English Premier League as well considering it is the most followed league in most of the world. Plus the format has something to do with it, the knockout style; probably more individuals watched the World Series, even in the U.S. alone, when you add the unique individuals who watched different games.
With that said it has a ton of more views than the Six Nations Championship that got added so it doesn't need that an appearance on the Main Page to be noticed. And, I'd favor adding this if the championship game ends in 6 overtimes or more. –HowardtheDuck 14:24, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'd favour adding it if it was the highest level of a specific sport. But it doesn't appear to be. I think this would lead to pandemonium... --candle•wicke 18:23, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's the highest level in amateur basketball anywhere. But once you add modifiers that'll open a whole can of worms... –HowardtheDuck 05:16, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Candlewicke on this one, if we start including amateur, college level sports we will leave ourselves open to serious questions on why this is an exception to covering only top level sport. Why, for example, should we include only American college basketball, why not American college football or the British BUSA championships (which covers all sports and no one outside of universities cares about) or even the professional national championships such as the FA cup (which has a big following in England). It seems strange to me that amateur national sports should be placed on the same level as major international side competitions (such as the Six Nations) - Dumelow (talk) 11:37, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I forgot to add examples of modifiers: American football, amateur basketball, Northern Hemisphere rugby, etc. I think the level of basketball in NCAA Division I is higher than the Universiade. And isn't the Premier League the professional national championship? The FA Cup champion is like held in lesser regard. –HowardtheDuck 11:57, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I may have come across badly there. I am against any sort of single country competition being on ITN. I agree that Rugby is a hard one to judge as well (as it has both the Six Nations and the Tri Nations which both include top class teams). I used the FA Cup as I was looking for an example of a knock-out style competition, the Premier League is indeed generally more regarded. American collegiate sports do seem to be played to a much higher standard (and attract a much higher following) than anywhere else in the world but I still don't think we should include them - Dumelow (talk) 12:32, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The "mechanics" of the FA Cup is different from the NCAA basketball (every club in England can play(?), while teams qualify/are selected to compete in the NCAA tourney). Though I'd have to say the FA Cup is more followed, by far, globally. And, I favor adding it (FA Cup) iff the top 2 teams in the Premier League face off in the Final. I'm still holding out in the NCAA Tournament if the championship game ends after 7 or more overtimes (7 is the most overtime periods played in NCAA game). –HowardtheDuck 13:36, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't believe it makes sense to include individual amateur, college level sports competitions as there are cases of actual sports with a popular following where their highest level of competition do not even feature currently on ITN. The idea that an amateur competition in a sport which is largely played at a professional level should feature on ITN seems absurd from my knowledge of the popularity of Gaelic football (a game played at amateur level right through the ranks by virtue of that being the individual choice of the promoting organisation). When the highest level of sports like that do not yet feature, a college level competition seems a step too far indeed. If this were to be posted it would simply be impossible to argue against including any existing professional or amateur sports league, cup or competition. Hence the pandemonium I was referring to... I imagine that, unless we can find a few hundred more editors and administrators to nominate/update/post and keep ITN going, those of us who are here could do without such chaos... --candle•wicke 13:58, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's interesting to note that the NBA doesn't play a single game during the night of the final for several years already; and the NBA at least has one game everyday except for like 4 days per season, one of them is this, the other is New Year's Day, and the other two are randomly selected.
Anyway, this should had been added at WP:ITNR first to ensure we'd be adding or omitting this regularly. –HowardtheDuck 19:04, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sure this is not the only competition which doesn't take place when another is on. There must be countless other examples of such competitions in other sports, especially association soccerball. So, an interesting note but not a notable interest. --candle•wicke 20:07, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
if we add college then people will complain about not having the most popular high school competition lol. so just let it be and only put nba stuff. Ashishg55 (talk) 21:42, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I might just add that the April 4 discussion about the 2009 Grand National makes a complete mockery of a proposal to include an amateur college competition. The Grand National – and indeed The Boat Race of last week – are evidently more notable than this competition and I'm not overly familiar with either of them. Saying that it is the fourth ranked game in the US in terms of television figures and cultural impact? I know of countries which I'm sure would love to have their highest ranked game included... which reminds me – The Boat Race is primarily a college competition with a popular following too... and a much older history than this basketball tournament... --candle•wicke 01:42, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
19.5 million people watched the NCAA basketball championship last year. The boat race had 7.2 million viewers. Unless you're familiar with a country's sporting culture, you shouldn't try to make judgments about it. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 02:12, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In fairness to the boat race, I think it is more well known abroad, it was even referenced in The Da Vinci Code. But I'm guessing the NCAA tournament is broadcast in more countries than the Boat Race.
P.S.: I'm surprised there is consensus to include the NBA Finals considering someone will question the "domesticity" of the event, probably in June, and if Paul Pierce gets to be the thumbnailed picture. –HowardtheDuck 04:33, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Mwalcoff - comparing by viewing factor is useless if u r not going to take country's population in consideration too. otherwise i can probably name many competitions in india which will easily beat NCAA. Ashishg55 (talk) 04:47, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Reindent: At least this tournament is the largest indoor championship event in terms of total attendance. However, the thing is it is frequently held on a domed stadium used primarily for football matches which increases the capacity, if you'll place this as an "outdoor" event it'll rank below the baseball's Japan Series and above the aussie rules' NAB Cup. You'll be surprised that "amateur" sports comprise three out of five largest indoor championship events in terms of total attendance, and none of them are held at Europe (pending addition of those events which are probably small since indoor events aren't that big in Europe). –HowardtheDuck 05:53, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Are the NBA Finals you refer to the highest level in basketball? I'm fairly sure I could guess a number of outdoor amateur matches which would rank at similar or higher level of attendance. I don't think it is possible to dismiss a sport because it is amateur – there are special cases. --candle•wicke 07:57, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think the point being missed about items like the Boat Race is that their sports are more ignored at ITN than the likes of basketball. We could have any number of items for basketball or football but since there are so many available we don't. There are not as many Boat Race type events occurring on an ongoing basis across the world, i.e. no leagues with matches taking place every week. So the Boat Race has more significance to me. I'm not into the sport but it has more value for its originality. --candle•wicke 08:05, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Indoor-based sports (such as basketball and ice hockey) are at a disadvantage since they are mostly played in indoor arenas which are smaller than stadiums, whether open-air or domed or roofed. As for basketball, the NBA Finals is the highest competition in club basketball; the highest competition among national teams, the Olympics, ironically didn't make it to the ITN (the second-most important, the FIBA World Championship, made it on 2006. It remains to be seen if it'll be added again pending the result: if U.S. wins, it most likely won't go up since it is not really "news."). –HowardtheDuck 08:47, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, but basketball, etc. at its highest level still makes it though? Regardless of attendance figures. Attendance figures form a very slim part of the criteria or else just about anything would be posted. --candle•wicke 10:08, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Other sports, like other events can still make it if something really remarkable happens, such as in this case if it ends with multiple overtimes (3 is the most number of overtime periods in the championship game). If some kind of a remarkable record is tied/broken I think the NCAA should be given a mention. –HowardtheDuck 10:19, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
i'll say if a 6 overtime ncaa final happens then we should post it in all caps lol. otherwise no Ashishg55 (talk) 12:43, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think I'll lower it to four. Overtime periods of more than 2 are rare anyway.
If anything, the women's tournament is more remarkable since UConn defeated all opponents all season long with double-digit margins for a 39-0 record. But that's still not covered anywhere so that'll probably won't cut it either. –HowardtheDuck 16:37, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
We should keep an eye on the impending North Korean satellite/missile launch. It implicates several countries including South Korea, Japan, and the U.S. --BorgQueen (talk) 04:07, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
i wonder if north koreans know about wikipedia Ashishg55 (talk) 12:44, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think so. Wikipedia is not even terribly well-known in South Korea. (Sorry, my OR.) --BorgQueen (talk) 14:52, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I doubt that many of them have access to it, but apparently Kim Jong-il is an internet lover so maybe he reads it! (see Internet in North Korea and here) Back on topic I support ITN covering the launch and international reaction to it - Dumelow (talk) 15:20, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What about this to [18]. Pretty noteworthy I'd say. The relevant article Wilkins Ice Shelf should be easy to update --Daviessimo (talk) 07:38, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Because I like it. We can never have enough firsts from Antarctica. --candle•wicke 07:59, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Global election results are always posted ont he main page no matter the size of the country. If not this post, then at least when the results are posted should be put on the main page.
Just make sure that the appropriate articles are updated and then this can go up when the results are known. --Tone 14:45, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Danish PM
Just came across this one. After Anders Fogh Rasmussen has been chosen to become the new NATO Secretary General, Lars Løkke Rasmussen takes his position as the PM of Denmark. Both articles are updated. (Are they related maybe?) --Tone 14:45, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
According to Rasmussen's article they are and Rasmussen (oh wait, they're both Rasmussen... ) assumed his new role today... oh that's what you meant by related... --candle•wicke 15:00, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My goodness, this seems to be the third Rasmussen PM of Denmark in a row... it must be a really popular name in political circles or else nepotism is alive and well in the country... --candle•wicke 15:04, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Gašparovič won, this is now pretty clear. The updates are a bit short but when this is fixed, we can put in on. --Tone 19:50, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. Good to see you back. ;) --candle•wicke 00:43, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It was quite a nice and relaxing holiday; I could've gone another week...but I've got to get back to work. Posting this. SpencerT♦Nominate! 01:37, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hm...just looking at the story is eliciting an oppose, perhaps a bit weakly, from me...I don't find this rather internationally notable enough. SpencerT♦Nominate! 00:00, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Shocking mosque revelations
This is a most alarming occurrence I'm sure, perhaps? No? Maybe not. --candle•wicke 00:50, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Now this is definitely pretty rare and historic. ITN was barely walking when it last occurred. I fear we do not do enough stories like these, ones which combine music, culture, and one or two iconic international figures. --candle•wicke 00:56, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What about the blacklisted tax havens? Quite significant because it ties in with France and Germany's calls at the G20 summit for tighter financial control --Daviessimo (talk) 11:09, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Normally it doesn't get on the main page but this was the longest priced winner since 1967 (BBC), the first French horse to win it and only the second ever to win that was trained by a woman. Perhaps: "Mon Mome wins the 2009 British Grand National at 100-1 odds, the longest priced winner for more than 40 years" - Dumelow (talk) 16:46, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'd support on the grounds of what has been presented. It seems fairly exceptional. --candle•wicke 18:50, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'd oppose on basis that this is a statistically interesting feature and nothing more... --Tone 18:54, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'd revise my above statement in that I've just realised the article is not up to scratch. More prose would be required anyway. --candle•wicke 18:56, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I dunno it's one of the oldest sporting events in the world dating back to the 1830s. But as Candlewicke says the article is not up to scratch. At the moment no horse racing events go up and in my opinion things such as the Grand National, Kentucky Derby, Prix de l'Arc de Triomphe and Epsom Derby are all major events in this sport. I think we should consider adding some of these to ITN for the future --Daviessimo (talk) 23:13, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Methinks the only American race that'll be included in the Belmont Stakes, and that's when a horse wins the Triple Crown which hasn't happened since 1978. There's also a British equivalent which was last won in 1970. I think we should limit ITN mentions to these two Triple Crowns. –HowardtheDuck 04:40, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's got my support for notability. Now to find a hook... JollyΩJanner 20:42, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: Badawi is the head of government, the King is the head of state. I'd still support this, I thought it already got in. –HowardtheDuck 05:17, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Probably. But, as it hasn't happened yet, there remains the possibility that a bigger story may emerge. --candle•wicke 03:17, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. I don't really understand the layout of the summit. Did it start today or were they just getting aquaitented with each other and thus the "big day" is tomorrow. JollyΩJanner 21:21, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In a word yes. Today was the posing bit where they all pretend to do stuff but really do nothing. The hard work (and I use the term loosely) begins tomorrow --Daviessimo (talk) 21:53, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support the trillion dollar hook, although maybe we can mention that most of it ($750bn) will be going to the IMF? Also the BBC includes a $100 bn deal for developing countries which takes it to $1.1 trillion - Dumelow (talk) 16:46, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
We can probably stick this picture up as well, it has all the leaders and the conference logo in it and doesn't look too bad at 100 px - Dumelow (talk) 16:54, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What about mentioning tax havens blacklisting? This is pretty big as well, I suppose. --Tone 07:16, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Surely we can get something on the main page by now? It is huge news which has dominated the headlines (at least here in the UK) and someone has already brought it up at main page discussion - Dumelow (talk) 10:17, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'll put the short version up until we agree on the final wording. --Tone 11:21, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Great Ex-President (a argentinian hero) death is a news an event of 31 March, not just a little recent death
That is what i wrote of that day and somebody just take that out; Lady Di death, Reagan death, and Alfonsin death Are News (I think), president of all South America are talking about that right now, Capital city of the nation have many people screaming her name, is a popular manifestation of love. Sorry i not logged in this languaje of wikipedia and sorry for my english. Please somebody add that again--201.255.42.83 (talk) 17:51, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The "first president to be democratically elected after the "Dirty War" military dictatorship", "won international admiration for putting on trial and jailing former military officials who had tortured and killed thousands of suspected leftists" and the talk of South America and three days of national mourning, you say? Support from me. His death seems to be geographically disadvantaged in the eyes of most of Wikipedia in the same way that almost saw the deletion of Susan Tsvangirai. --candle•wicke 19:06, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
>>>Moved here from 31 March. Not a sitting world leader, not an assassination, but I've read up on it and if, as 201.255.42.83 says, three days of national mourning have been declared and it is the talk of South America, I imagine this would be quite enough for any President or monarch in Europe or Asia, e.g. Suharto (who doesn't appear to have been given one of those ITN tags but features in the archive). --candle•wicke 18:07, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A Computer virus called Conficker was spread through millions of computers, getting onto their computers and destroying files, and sharing information. This was supposed to be an April Fools' Day Joke.
Brilliant. This one can replace the Turkish missiles if you guys agree. --Tone 07:04, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
On the other hand, this may be a bit too hard. I'll post the question at Main page talk because it has more people monitoring. --Tone 07:44, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's even been updated. --candle•wicke 19:09, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
North Sea Helicopter Crash
I think it might be an idea to keep an eye on this. I know we trying to move away from doom and gloom but there are eight confirmed fatalities and I think the expectation is that this will rise to 16 --Daviessimo (talk) 21:50, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The BBC now says eight bodies have been found and there is "no hope" of finding any survivors - Dumelow (talk) 09:41, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. This is primarily doom and gloom that is insignificant beyond those affected. Helicopter crashes are not uncommon in this region. Indeed, there has just been another fatal incident in the neighbouring country today. I question the significance because, if the BBC and Sky themselves cannot cover the story properly (as is evident from the controversy erupting in the comments section here), how is it to be considered a big enough deal for Wikipedia's Main Page? It's a tragic situation but Wikipedia isn't given to losing control over emotional agendas. I personally would consider it to be a geographical abomination if this went to ITN over the Argentinean President's dead body. The victims of this can this can at least rest assured they are receiving a higher amount of media coverage than him. --candle•wicke 18:18, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
To be fair, this is the largest loss of life in a single incident in two decades in the UK. GARDEN 21:15, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Really? I was actually just about to say I was unaware of this but then the 7 July 2005 London bombings came to mind. You must be misinformed as four years is not very close to two decades? --candle•wicke 08:17, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
