This page is an archive and its contents should be preserved in their current form;
any comments regarding this page should be directed to Wikipedia talk:In the news. Thanks.
900 ships are stranded in south China's Guangxi Zhuang autonomous region amid falling water level caused by severe drought. The waterway traffic jam started on Wuzhou City section of Xijiang River. (China Daily)
At least 50 fatalities in Western Europe. One of the worst since 1999. JollyΩJanner 14:50, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Bad indeed. Ready to post when the article is a bit longer. --Tone 15:24, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Already news in Australia, India, China. 1 million + homes without power and all of Spain is on "under red alert". It is heading for Denmark. --candle•wicke 15:31, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I see. The China Daily link above said "Spain has placed all of the country's five regions under red alert". --candle•wicke 16:09, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support, by number of deaths, I make it the worst European windstorm for 20 years, since the Burns' Day storm of 1990. JollyΩJanner 17:52, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support in principle, but I'd like to see the article improved first. Modest Geniustalk 18:23, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support, and how about this fun moving GIF? That'd be fun on the front page. BobAmnertiopsis∴ChatMe! 21:37, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Make sure it's the low resolution one, Because the high res is over 3MB!
This image is not really the best idea because on a thumb size, it is not really informative - too small. Otherwise, the article looks more or less stable now, shall we post? Blurb? --Tone 23:00, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Significant windstorm, still ongoing, but the image is attribution-copyrighted which is OK but not as good as GFDL or public domain, although the size is good, as it is animated (not sure if we've had that before), and it's suitable as a main page thumnail, but I'm not familiar with the fancy false colour. The article, however needs to be expanded. As for the blurb, how about "Xynthia, a North AtlanticwinterEuropean windstorm, kills at least 55 people in Western Europe and brings winds of 228 km/h (142 mph) to Orduña, Spain" (update as needed)? ~AH1(TCU) 23:46, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I prefer "A storm(path animated) brings strong winds and flooding across Europe, leaving at least 50 dead."
Would advise not to use the image for the moment. Copyright problems. Not sure if EUMETSAT imagery can be used on Wikipedia following a request on my Commons talk page. JollyΩJanner 00:33, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Posted without image for now. -- tariqabjotu 11:39, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Moved to 28 Feb - Dumelow (talk) 11:19, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support when result is known. --candle•wicke 21:38, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Wikipedia needs to stop posting election results from insignificant countries, especially when these elections are more or less a formality. No one cares that some "People's Democratic Party" formed a majority in the Tajikstan lower house. And the article is terrible. Colipon+(Talk) 05:51, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Obvious Support when updated - For 'insignificant countries' should we read countries Colipon doesn't like. There are 7m people in Tajikistan, so maybe you don't care but many others will. Plus what entirely objective method do you use to decide what is a notable country. Let me guess, its the standard, 'I haven't heard of it and have no interest in it so it's not important' --Daviessimo (talk) 09:29, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support By the rules, this is going up since it's a major national legislative election. HonouraryMix (talk) 20:40, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I'm all for including Tajikistan when it's appropriate, but the article is only two sentences long! This is why hard-and-fast "rules" for ITN are a bad idea, in my opinion. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 23:46, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Except the number one 'hard and fast rule' for all items is a... a fully referenced update. All others rules follow and have no position to override the update rule. Thus, even though a political election should be listed per ITNR, without an update, it will not. Not having hard and fast rules makes it more likely that articles lacking an update or with POV or cite tags are more likely to end up on the main page --Daviessimo (talk) 09:13, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Even if it is a 'hard and fast rule' I think it can be spared in this situation. If this was a game-changing election in the Marshall Islands where they decided to establish constitutional reforms or something, I would be more than supportive of posting it. But this is just a regular parliamentary election, not to mention merely one for show to consolidate that power of its current leader. It is just not notable. Colipon+(Talk) 18:47, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm praying for either or both North American teams to lose in the semifinals so this will have a better chance. LOL –HowardtheDuck 13:22, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There's no reason both can't be featured together (hockey gold medal and closing ceremony) no matter which country wins. Grsz11 14:12, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There's a trend that North American teams win in Winter Games that are hosted by North American cities except Calgary. However, no team has dominated this tournament in recent years so this can have a fair chance unlike say, basketball in 2008. –HowardtheDuck 14:36, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Let's start this conversation now before it inevitably comes up tomorrow.
Canada and the U.S. play tomorrow for the gold medal in the men's ice hockey tournament in Vancouver.
We have not included any individual Olympic event on ITN yet. We did not include the women's ice hockey gold medal game.
However, the men's ice hockey gold medal game is something uniquely huge. It is hard to exaggerate just how big this game is in Canada. Hockey is like a religion there -- kids are put in ice skates before they can walk and Wayne Gretzky's dad is an instantly recognizable national celebrity based solely on being Wayne Gretzky's dad. The preliminary round game with the U.S. got TV ratings 50% higher than those of the Super Bowl (usually the biggest TV event of the year in Canada) and comparable with those of the Super Bowl in the U.S. This is not only the biggest sporting event of the year to Canadians, it's probably the biggest event, period, for Canada in 2010 -- even if they have an election this year. If we are to have any item of Canadian interest, or any hockey item, on ITN this year, this should be it. The game will also be quite a big deal in the U.S. and to hockey fans all over the world.
ITN strives to include entries from the entire world and does an admirable job of doing so, including many items that are absent from most English-language media. However, we should take into account that this is the English-language Wikipedia and that sometimes, we can and do include things that are of greater interest to our readership than to the general world population. It's not a zero-sum thing, and there's plent of room for both "world" events and "English-speaking country" events.
I hope Canada wins so it'll be "international" but the Olympics was held in Canada so the U.S. winning may be more international... but it is the U.S. so it's not international so what the hell...
P.S. I bet the discussion for this blurb will reach Haig (but not Kennedy) proportions. If I win I should have a barnstar of betting or something. –HowardtheDuck 03:59, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't give a shit about ice hockey but I'll be watching this match. I think the rarity and the acrimony of this merits posting on ITN and if ever there were an individual event to post, this would be it. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 04:13, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If Canada regards this as important (and I believed it did even before reading that) I think it should be posted when they win. --candle•wicke 05:04, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What if the team from the big bad country whose name must not be named wins? If that team won, if would be considered as an upset. –HowardtheDuck 05:48, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
this should be posted doesnt matter who wins (although fingers crossed for Canada!). and as a separate blurb since it has nothing to do with the closing ceremony -- Ashish-g55 06:26, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with posting no matter who wins the match, but also agree with combining the blurb so the Olympics don't dominate the template. (And despite the fact that I've not watched an entire hockey match in years, don't expect to see me online during this one. This is a big one.) Bradjamesbrown (talk) 11:32, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support posting the closing ceremony and ice hockey in one blurb. Also note the hockey is on WP:ITNR, and there's no need to try to explain this as being 'English-language speaking' news - it's bone fide world news. Modest Geniustalk 12:41, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I oppose posting only the men's hockey gold medal winner out of the 86 total that have been awarded during the Games, especially if it based on an unverified claim that it is "the single most popular or important sport in the Olympics". It may be the "most popular or important" Olympic sport in your country, but not necessarily in every country that has participants. IMO, it also looks extremely bias when only one of the 86 gold medalist are featured directly on ITN when we also have, for example, figure skater Kim Yu-Na breaking world records or speed skater Wang Meng winning three in a row. Zzyzx11 (talk) 16:33, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support including the hockey final. We can't include all 86 medal winners and the fact that we can't shouldn't prevent us from including one of them. The hockey event is international in scope and very high profile. And just as importantly, the articles are in good shape. There's no bias here, men's hockey in the Olympics is significantly more notible than speed skating or a single record breaking event in figure skating. Not every country has speed skating and figure skating participants, that standard doesn't work either. RxS (talk) 16:51, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Again, you're repeating the unverified claim that "men's hockey in the Olympics is significantly more notable" than the other Olympic sports. And also, not every country competing in the Olympics has ice hockey participants either. Prime example: Kim Yu-Na's home country South Korea. Zzyzx11 (talk) 17:27, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. It is not necessarily true that not every country is competing in the Olympic Ice Hockey tourney. All countries are eligible to take part in qualifying. Many countries have teams but are eliminated in pre-Olympic qualifying. The 12 teams that make the Olympics are the 'finalists'. (just like the FIFA World Cup, for which nearly all countries in the world participate at the qualifying stage and 32 make the finals). I'm sure that many countries don't have an ice hockey program, but all are eligible.--Johnsemlak (talk) 18:25, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No they don't, you're right. And that just shows what a poor standard it is to use for inclusion. So your objection seems to revolve around the fact that Olympic Hockey might not be more notable than speed skating or a single world record in figure skating. I'll let others make a judgement about that but to me it's pretty thin soup. One thing is undisputable, and that is Olympic hockey is international in scope and a very high profile event. That by itself is enough for inclusion. RxS (talk) 17:53, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure i understand what is so unverifiable about it... There is a reason Men's hockey final is held on the last day of olympics separated from all events. We post basketball during summer olympics and there is no "verification" of it being one of the most notable sport. It is just known by common sense... -- Ashish-g55 17:56, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
After looking at the page history of ITN when the 2008 Beijing Olympics were going on, Michael Phelps and Usain Bolt's records were posted[1] as well as the closing ceremonies.[2] But I don't currently see a diff that shows that basketball was in fact posted. Zzyzx11 (talk) 18:13, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, Olympic basketball, the highest level of the sport, was laughingly not posted because the U.S. won, which is not... news. –HowardtheDuck 22:21, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I'd just like to point out that the ice hockey is on WP:ITNRnot because it is the biggest sport in the Winter Olympics (which it is, but that's irrelevant) but because it's the biggest international competition in ice hockey, and the only one with full involvement from all NHL players. This is an ITN-worthy ice hockey tournament, which just happens to be held as part of the Winter Olympics. Modest Geniustalk 18:26, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support as per ITNR.--Johnsemlak (talk) 18:48, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. I'll concede, as per the current footnote on WP:ITNR#Ice Hockey, if the primary reason is that it will replace the posting of 2010 IIHF World Championship in May, not because of the claim that "it is the most significant or important Winter Olympic sport". Zzyzx11 (talk) 19:03, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I believe that if Canada wins gold today that they break the all time record for gold medals by one country at the winter Olympics. Would this not be more newsworthy than a single event? Even if they lose, they have also won the most gold medals by a hosting country at the winter games and tie the record for number of golds. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲτ¢ 20:58, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, Canada. I suggest we post this only when the closing ceremony is over so that there's no need to modify the blurb. It's going to be in a couple of hours anyway. --Tone 22:59, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As a basis, might I suggest "The 2010 Winter Olympics host country, Canada, is awarded the highest number of gold medals in the history of the winter events"?
I dont think this should be mixed with closing ceremony. Hockey blurb should have highest number of gold comment and later on post another for closing ceremony. This will be long and awkward blurb just to avoid posting 2. Both things have nothing to do with each other. -- Ashish-g55 23:35, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't believe the hockey item is newsworthy. What makes it any more important than the other 70 odd events? The closing ceremony, and the new gold medal record (both overall and as a hosting country) are more universal. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲτ¢ 01:07, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Proposal: Winning gold in Men's Ice Hockey, bring their total to 14, Canada earns the record number of gold medals at an Olympic winter games by any country.
Much better, thanks. RxS (talk) 01:09, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You need the word "tournament" after "hockey," and it would be good to say "Winter Olympics" before "record." -- Mwalcoff (talk) 01:18, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Both are good ideas. RxS (talk) 01:25, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support, though as I mentioned, I don't feel the hockey needs to be mentioned. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲτ¢ 01:41, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Shouldn't the US winning the most medals ever at a Winter Olympics be added too? Free As A Byrd (talk) 02:02, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Do you mean the most for the US or the most for the Olympics because the altter is impossible since Canada topped the medal table. If it's just a one-country record, i'd say no, because there were several other similar feats, including those by Canada, China et al. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:10, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The latter. Canada broke the record for Gold medals, the US broke the record for total medals. Free As A Byrd (talk) 02:15, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Just post "The 2010 Winter Olympics closes in Vancouver, with Canada winning the final in Ice Hockey against the United States." No need really to post the records. It's not really news as much as it is stats. This is why I also oppose that cricket record breaking. Colipon+(Talk) 05:47, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Posted Both the closing ceremony and the hockey result. -- tariqabjotu 11:27, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Libya's leader calls for Jihad (holy war) against Switzerland
Support. Not every day war is declared. Not every century Switzerland goes to war. --candle•wicke 01:55, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Let's decide whether or not to post it on the basis of a weakening of relations between Switzerland and Libya (probably not a very active diplomatic link anyway) and not get drawn into hyperbole about what would happen if Switzerland were not where Switzerland is. Kevin McE (talk) 18:44, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose unless something actually happens. At the moment this is just a vitriolic speech by a dictator. Modest Geniustalk 18:50, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, like I said, not every day a war is declared and declarations of war are not handed out for fun either. --candle•wicke 21:35, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
More discussion and specific article required. ~AH1(TCU) 23:47, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Only a bunch of fiddle-faddle and malarky from the leader of the country about how there needs to be a holy war against Switzerland and that if Switzerland bordered Libya, he would invade. But, like Candlewicke said, not every day that a holy war is called for against Switzerland, of all countries. Ks0stm(T•C•G) 05:35, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Technically a war hasn't been officially declared although I'm not even sure you can have a true declaration with a holy war. Given that jihad is the only form of war allowed under Islamic law, I'd say this is as close to a true declaration as I think you can get. However on the flip-side, its not like this is that big in the broader scheme of things. I'm fairly certain most extremist Muslims are more pissed off about Iraq and Afghanistan than Switzerland. And anyway, history tells us its not likely that Switzerland are going to start preparing the troops --Daviessimo (talk) 11:49, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Nauru holds a referendum on changes to its national constitution. The most significant are the introduction of directly elected presidents (instead of being appointed by parliament) and the strengthening of human rights legislation - Dumelow (talk) 13:49, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support if it succeeds; along the lines of Angola in January. Grsz11 14:16, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The Hindu in particular seems to indicate this is not a routine visit. Manmohan Singh is only the third PM to visit following Nehru (1955) and Gandhi (1982). He is to get a formal reception tomorrow. The entire Cabinet — including Riyadh Governor Prince Abdul Aziz bin Mohammad bin Ayaf and Prince Naif bin Abdul Aziz — greeted him at the airport, "a rare gesture" and "in a departure from normal protocol norms" they "rolled out the red carpet". "Dr. Singh’s three-day visit puts an end to the lull in India-Saudi Arabia ties". (The Times of India)(The Hindu) --candle•wicke 22:22, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Two good, well rounded articles, support. Not a super engaging topic but should draw readers. RxS (talk) 00:39, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I find it quite engaging. I must be unusual. :-) --candle•wicke 01:57, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Support I know I'm not a registered Wikipedia user, but I would still like to express my opinion on this. This the first visit by an Indian PM to Saudi Arabia in 28 years [3]. This is a very major event in South Asia and Middle East especially because of the fact that 1.2 million Indians live in Saudi Arabia and Saudi Arabia supplies 20% of crude oil to India. Manmohan Singh will be one of the only few to have addressed the Saudi Shura Council [4]. There are also major strategic implications - An extradition treaty is to be signed and there can be some effects on the talks between India and Pakistan.
This is indeed a very important event, especially in South Asian and Middle Eastern context. Thanks --128.210.90.30 (talk) 08:18, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Wang (centre) at the medal presentation for the 500 metres
Here is an event from the Olympics and an achievement by women in sport too: Wang Meng has become China's first winter Olympian to win three gold medals at one single Games and meant China had had a clean sweep of the women's events in Vancouver. (Shanghai Daily)(China Daily) --candle•wicke 22:01, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, or we'd end up with a flood of gold medal stories every time there was an olympics. Modest Geniustalk 22:53, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I second that. Actually, Marit Bjørgen won 3 gold as well and one silver and one bronze, making it 5 altogether. --Tone 22:57, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thirded; someone wins three golds at every Olympics, that this is the PRC's first time in a Winter Games doesn't merit posting this. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 23:39, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Fourthed?? I very slightly prefer this to the ice hockey/figure skating story in that there is a story but there are much better stories coming out of Vancouver atm. For example, the impressiveness of Norway's medal record despite the country having (as one of the American papers put it) the population of Detroit. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:45, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This is despite Norway already having the mostmedals ever? They consider that news in America? :- Which paper? --candle•wicke 04:04, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Norway does have plenty of snow so... –HowardtheDuck 04:45, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. What should be compared is not the total population of each country, but the population which engages in winter sports. I'd be way more surprised to see a Brazilian gold than a Norwegian one, despite Brazil having a far higher population. Modest Geniustalk 18:34, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Another big snow storm in North America, strength of a category two hurricane, up to 135 cm of snow reported in the storm. How about "A major winter storm strikes the eastern United States and Canada, bringing up to 53 inches (135 cm) of snow to central New York"? Here's an image to the right if we want to use it. ~AH1(TCU) 16:32, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support only if are deaths. - TouLouse (talk) 16:59, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. A third one this year and it's only February? The last time I opposed this (it must have been the first one) because it was happening just every year. Since a perfectly good earthquake was rejected due to lack of destruction yesterday and a perfectly good earthquake was posted due to lots of destruction today I am not sure it makes sense to post a blizzard which has caused such little damage. --candle•wicke 18:48, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
8.3 earthquake in Chile. - TouLouse (talk) 07:37, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Big Support. I don't think I've ever seen anything like it in the last five years. Two large earthquakes in less than 12 hours, I'm scared. — Cargoking talk 08:26, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Support - 8+ magnitude earthquakes are pretty rare --Daviessimo (talk) 08:56, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Support so hurry up. --Sakitalk 09:16, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Now, this one is an earthquake story; tentatively the seventh strongest ever'. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 09:31, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Adding my support here as well, especially as the article is taking shape nicely. A good mix of geological history and we can rely on people to add more information as it becomes available. Carcharoth (talk) 10:20, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know if you want this image. — Cargoking talk 14:04, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The end could be soon, before December 21, 2012 :(. - 2 catastrophic earthquakes in just 2 months, horrible... - TouLouse (talk) 14:49, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
We should mention that the quake is the strongest worldwide since 2004, and the strongest in Chile since the 1960 Valdivia earthquake. ~AH1(TCU) 16:18, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Kim Yuna, Korean figure skater,won the gold medal with new world record in both short programme and free skate with the total of 228.56, which is another world record in the total score, becoming the first South Korean skater to medal in any discipline of figure skating at the Olympic Games. Kim's gold medal was South Korea's first medal at the Winter Olympics.(BBC)
A girls' boarding school dormitory in KwaZulu-Natal is shut down due to widespread lesbian activity. (BBC)
Wang Meng wins her third gold medal in the 1,000 meters short track at Vancouver to become China's first winter Olympian to win three gold medals at one Games and give China all the women's titles. (Shanghai Daily)(China Daily)
Brazilian police investigate after a newborn baby dies while two doctors argue during the mother's labour in an Ivinhema hospital. (The Irish Times)
Politiken apologises for its reprint of a cartoon depicting the Prophet Muhammad with a bomb-shaped turban in 2008 but is criticised by other Danish newspapers. (BBC)
wait for more info. if there is no damage then i oppose since then its some random earthquake off coast. japan gets many of these (maybe not a 7.3 but still...) -- Ashish-g55 22:27, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No damage means I oppose; these aren't that uncommon in the Pacific. If there's damage, I'd support it, but an earthwuake that doesn't cause damage is a non-story, IMO. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 23:29, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose looks like no casualties. tsunami warning has been lifted.Wikireader41 (talk) 01:58, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose little or no damage, and not all that big for the Pacific rim. -- Avenue (talk) 03:16, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose if there is nothing significant about it (tsunami, casualties, build destruction) Metallurgist (talk) 06:42, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like a bigger one has struck in Chile. 8.5 magnitude. I agree that the ones which go on ITN have to be the ones that get most coverage. So you have to wait and see what reports emerge, both for this one and the Japan one. Carcharoth (talk) 07:21, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose If there are no destructive effects. I don't think 7 is that big in the broader scheme of things (i.e. on average there are a dozen or so 7+ earthquakes per year), especially when there has been an 8+ earthquake in Chile --Daviessimo (talk) 08:53, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
— notable for being one of the few attacks in central Kabul and also for the high number of foreign casualties. --Nosedown (talk) 20:12, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral. Events like this are sadly not uncommon in Afghanistan and the death toll for this doesn't seem particularly high, though attacks in the centre of Kabul are less common, so I'm on the fence on this one. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:59, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral, leaning oppose as HJ Mitchell says, these are entirely too common in Afghanistan, this one only distinguished by location. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 00:16, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
But how else do you distinguish events like this if not by location? Surely being in an unusual location adds to the notability? I am confused as there is an admission that people do not die this way in these numbers in central Kabul very often but at the same time it is said to be very common. This appears to me to be somewhat contradictory. --candle•wicke 01:58, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It is amazing to see how misinformed, ignorant people come here and shower their opinions. Sorry to be rude, but what do you mean by attacks in Kabul are "not uncommon" and this attack is "only distinguished by location"? How many attacks in Kabul result in the killings of 11 foreign nationals? How many attacks in Kabul have the potential of derailing peace talks between two nuclear-armed rivals? I would like to know and please list them and then bring up the issue of attacks being "not uncommon". Please, if you are unaware of the issue, then do not comment rather than displaying your ignorance. --Nosedown (talk) 02:32, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. I apologize for my outburst. But people should at least read though the article before commenting here. --Nosedown (talk) 02:37, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I would be far more inclined to support and fight for this if there were any of that in the article. The article currently has about half a dozen lines of prose (excluding background and lead). What's there is a good start, but I'd like to see at least a little substance before this is properly considered for ITN. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 05:30, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, agree with HJMitchell, the article is a little thin. RxS (talk) 05:42, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Major attack, significant death toll. ~AH1(TCU) 16:25, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Glacier struck
An iceberg about the size of Luxembourg that struck a glacier off Antarctica and dislodged another massive block of ice could lower the levels of oxygen in the world's oceans, Australian and French scientists said Friday. [5] - TouLouse (talk) 18:52, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That's a "could" so unless there is something unusual about the iceberg/block of ice right now... --candle•wicke 22:00, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support. Even without the possible disruptive effects on ocean currents and oxygen content and salinity, this iceberg has been floating off coast of East Antarctica for several years before striking the glacier tongue[6], and the dislocation of the tongue could mean faster glacier melt into the ocean, and this occurd in an area where above-normal temperatures have seeped into the area. We also have an article on it, and since we featured the Wilkins Sound ice sheet partial collapse then we should include this as well. How about "An iceberg the size of Luxembourg strikes the 78 km long Mertz Glacier Tongue in East Antarctica, calving it away from the glacier, causing both chunks of ice to float into the Indian Ocean with possible effects on ocean oxygen content." ~AH1(TCU) 04:04, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. A "once in a century" event according to glaciologists. --bender235 (talk) 19:43, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
We have a blurb, we have support. Are there any objections? By the way, the iceberg has been migrating out of the Ross Ice Shelf since 1987, so it's not a very common event. ~AH1(TCU) 02:16, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Belated support, article Mertz Glacier is in decent shape and it's a topic not often covered in ITN so it's a good gatway to a different set of articles. RxS (talk) 04:34, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
NASA chief Charles Bolden says Mars is too difficult
comment this is just fallout of the budget proposal by obama. ofcourse if there is no money to spend it becomes a lot more difficult. when constellation program is officially canceled thats when we should post it. -- Ashish-g55 19:48, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting, but the article is tagged for neutrality and rewrite. It can't go on ITN while those issues remain and I'd be surprised if they could be resolved in time for this to still be "news" unfortunately. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:09, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, that's not going to happen any time soon :) I wasn't aware that ITN articles had to be "clean", and there are no clean Venezuelan articles for that text, so them's the breaks I guess! (I had cleaned up at least that one section, hoping that would do it.) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:33, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A court has ruled that over half of the former Thai PM's assets are to be seized, a figure amounting to greater than $1bn. Relevant section of article is Thaksin_Sinawatra#Frozen_asset_seizure --Daviessimo (talk) 18:03, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Very well updated! --BorgQueen (talk) 18:05, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, it wasn't me who updated the page. I came across the BBC article and went to make an update and saw that it had already been done. If there is enough support for this to go up, I think the credit for the update belongs to User:Patiwat --Daviessimo (talk) 18:14, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice update, and hopefully this will finally end the Sinawatra affair. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 00:18, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A well-worded blurb please? --BorgQueen (talk) 03:44, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I removed two neutrality tags that were added by an IP w/o any talk page discussion. RxS (talk) 05:52, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
EU: Goods made at Jewish settlements are not Israeli
The European Court of Justice has ruled that Israeli goods made in Jewish settlements in the occupied West Bank cannot be considered Israeli. This means goods made by Israelis or Jews in the West Bank cannot benefit from a trade deal giving Israel preferential access to EU markets. EU import duties on Israeli goods from the settlements may now be imposed, making them less competitive. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/8538251.stm—Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.132.9.137 (talk) 11:14, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for now; of all the regular events around Israel/West Bank/Lebanon/Syria, this verdict by the ECJ doesn't seem to have the necessary importance to post. Some small part of what Israel was now getting covered by this deal will no longer be. The problem is that if this marks a shift in the EU's attitude towards the State of Israel, it'll be revealed too late to post this item on ITN. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 17:55, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Come on Ashishg, let's be welcoming! For a film, we normally only post it if there is something highly unusual or notable about it. For example, we posted Avatar when that broke the box office record, though that was also the most expensive film ever made I believe. We also post the winners of certain highly notable award ceremonies/ film festivals. Thank you for nominating, anyway and feel free to renominate or nominate another if it wins awards or breaks records. Otherwise, you could nominate it for the Did You Know section if it's been heavily expanded recently. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:32, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This nom makes me want to cut my arm off. --PlasmaTwa2 19:10, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, no can do. Things like this aren't really of any notability. If we were to list every single film première we would run out of space for anything else. Thanks for the nom anyway. — Cargoking talk 19:29, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
lol i thought i was welcoming :) pointed Rock drum to right direction -- Ashish-g55 19:44, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Defeated Sri Lanka presidential candidate General Sarath Fonseka is charged with additional counts in addition to treason in the aftermath of his failed election bid. (The Hindu)
Algeria's police chief shot dead by colleague in police HQ
The article is Ali Tounsi, though it is a little short at the moment but it might be possible to expand if anyone finds it interesting enough. According to Press TV, Tounsi headed the National police for 15 years and the commander-in-chief of the airborne police force is said to have killed him. It seems he shot himself after his "attack of madness". --candle•wicke 21:35, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not quite sure about this one. I'm don't believe its quite notable enough for the Main Page. SpencerT♦Nominate! 03:33, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
But how often is a country's police chief shot dead by the commander-in-chief of its airborne police force? --candle•wicke 02:02, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I am not so much into art. After reading the news it surely seems significant considering the history of the painting and its owners/claimers. Also, the stuff is "official" now and on the main pages of many news website. I Support. --GPPande 17:09, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Any supports? It is a unique discovery because: "Complete skulls have been recovered for only eight of more than 120 known varieties of sauropod. [7]", and according to our article, it is "the first described complete skull for a Cretaceous sauropod from the Americas." --BorgQueen (talk) 14:06, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I'll go with that! Support. The article is in reasonable shape, although it only has a single reference for the moment. I won't let that stop me supporting, as the reference is to the original research paper, i.e. it is the best Reliable Source available, but some more background would be nice. Physchim62(talk) 14:35, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Count my Support. Unique discovery. --GPPande 15:52, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support as well; this doesn't happen every day. As much as I don't buy the death/Afghanistan criticism of ITN, this is a nice change of pace. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 15:56, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Posting. --Tone 16:30, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Giant Shark
What about this. The fossils of a giant 10m long prehistoric shark have been discovered. The relevant article is Ptychodus mortoni. --Daviessimo (talk) 09:34, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I thought about this one but reading the article the main advance here is that the learned fair a bit more about a species they already knew existed. If a new type was discovered, I'd support.--Johnsemlak (talk) 10:50, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Is this an WP:ITNR event? If so then discussion is perhaps best held there but it seems to me the women's event is far from justifiable on its own merits in ITN. I'm all for striving for more coverage of women's events, but I suggest featuring figure skating rather than women's hockey. That's a much bigger sport as a women's event.--Johnsemlak (talk) 13:00, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It will be big if (gasp!) USA and Canada brawl at each other during the gold medal game. –HowardtheDuck 05:41, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You have some insider's knowledge on who's in the final? Let me call my bookie ;). Anyway, I don't think we normally havie a consisitant pattern of posting both men's and women's events of parallel events unless both are notable on their own. (e.g. grand slam tennis). We don't feature both the NBA champ and the WBA champion. We don't post the European Foothall Championship for both men and women. Why should we do so with Olympic hockey?--Johnsemlak (talk) 20:01, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
USA and Canadian teams had always contested the top two spots since they had women's ice hockey since 1998 except in 2006 when Sweden was 2nd and USA was 3rd. The USA and Canada have the fierecest rivalry in women's ice hockey I'd only support if the GMG goes into OT and the girls have a brawl.
Also, I do think the guys here added the women's UEFA championship final. I'm not sure on that, though. –HowardtheDuck 06:48, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The only woman's football event on ITNR is FIFA Women's World Cup, though the most recent women's European championship may well have been posted.--Johnsemlak (talk) 15:21, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Lemme repost me conditional support for this entry. I'd only support if both events happen:
The two teams brawl, and
The game goes into overtime or even better, shootout. –HowardtheDuck 11:29, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
support as we will post mens. wba is a totally different league than nba so its not really the same thing. we have mens and womens ice hockey in same olympics. it would look odd to have just mens. for figure skating below i oppose since we did not post mens... and in figure skating ice dancing is considered one of the biggest event too and we did not post that either. -- Ashish-g55 19:37, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I see no need to post both. There is a drastic difference in notability. As I've tried to explain below there are far more notable women's events in the Olympics. --Johnsemlak (talk) 04:55, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. We already have a link on the bottom to the Olympic summary. I'm opposed to the idea that we should post, directly on ITN, only a few selective gold medalists based on the flawed presumption that they competed in one of the "most popular or important" events during the Games. It may be the "most popular or important" Olympic sport in your country, but not necessarily in every country that has participants. Zzyzx11 (talk) 05:31, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Figure Skating--Ladies singles
The medal will be decided tonight. Currently, we are due today, per ITNR, to post the winner of the Women's Olympic Ice Hockey tournament. I strongly support that we replace this with the Ladies' singles figure skating event, which is a much more widely followed women's sporting event. The women's hockey is on ITNR simply because the men's is, but they are drastically different events in terms of notability. I think it makes much more sense to post women's figure skating in terms of trying to promote some women's sports. Figure skating has produced many famous household names such as Peggy Fleming and Katarina Witt who are well known outside their home countries. The current leader and likely winner, Kim Yu-Na has set a new world record in the opening round so that's also quite notable. It can be argued that its inappropriate to post only the Ladies' single and leave out the mens' and the pairs but I think we can link to the main figure skating in Vancouver article where all the results are listed; plus the ladies' singles is the premier event, as seen by the fact that it is the final event. Several articles will need to be improved but I think they all have decent starts.--Johnsemlak (talk) 05:54, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I oppose both women's hockey and figure skating. The tournament this year has done nothing but show all the problems with women's hockey in the Olympics; I used to support it, but now I think it should be taken off. However, I don't see how women's figure skating is any more popular than women's skiing or speed skating any other women's sport in the Olympics, especially this year, given all the hype about Vonn in skiing. In fact, I think if there was an event to put up on ITN, it would have been the controvery yesterday when the coach cost the speed skater the gold medal. The women's figure skating can be found in the Olympic highlights link; if you are going to argue that ladies' figure skating is the premier event, I'm going to counter by saying that the men's hockey is the premier event of the entire Olympics and the only event that is worthy of ITN on its own, given all the professional players and the huge status it has in Canada, Russia, etc. --PlasmaTwa2 06:27, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I don't even want to imagine the complaints we'd get if we were to post women's figure skating and men's ice hockey!! We'd be better off posting nothing at all – ie, not even the men's ice hockey – than such blatant gender stereotyping! Physchim62(talk) 09:11, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Gender stereotyping? Well, our current policy is to more or less never post women's sports events at all--does that contribute to stereotyping any less? It's a real-world fact that many popular women's spectator sports like gymnastics or figure skating involve aesthetics. That doesn't make them less notable. I'll let consensus decide whether women's figure skating is notable enough for ITN, but there is absolutely no comparison between that of women's figure skating and women's ice hockey, stereotypes aside.--Johnsemlak (talk) 09:58, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
oppose figure skating but support ice hockey. -- Ashish-g55 19:34, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose to both. There are far better stories from the olympics than these two. I'd like to see something from there on ITN but why figure skating and ice hockey and not Ski Cross/bobsleigh/curling/slalom? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:42, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - tend to agree with HJMitchell. I was always under the impression that the men's and women's downhill were the showpiece events in the same way that the 100m is the showpiece for the summer Olympics. The only reason we are listing the hockey is because it is apparently the highest level of international ice hockey, but you could argue that this is the case for many events in the winter olympics --Daviessimo (talk) 20:05, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
olympics hockey is the biggest event. for comparison 10.6 mil canadians (thats 1/3rd of entire country) saw the US vs Canada game which made it the most watched television event in canadian history. i suspect Canada vs Russia already broke that record and it will be broken again if Canada is in finals. so posting mens hockey is essential. womens should be posted only to make it fair. (and i dont mean post it if canada is there... it should be posted either way.) -- Ashish-g55 20:39, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That may be the case for North America, but I'm talking about for the world as a whole. Viewing figures in Canada or the US aren't representative of the whole world. I mean, certainly here in the UK, skiing has always been the 'big' winter sport, so much so that the BBC's winter sports coverage is called Ski Sunday, even though it covers other sports.
I'm not arguing against the inclusion of the men's hockey, because, as people have previously pointed out, it is the top level of international ice hockey. However, I am saying that I don't think we should start adding other events just for the sake of it, unless there is a rationale behind it. The vast majority of individual sporting pursuits do not have a listing on ITN (e.g diving, athletics, skiing, swimming) unless there is a world record. Why change that now? I say, leave it at mens hockey and then just post the closing ceremony --Daviessimo (talk) 21:25, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
well i dont disagree with you about that. but women's we may wanna add for neutrality purposes. and edit the blurb on sunday to add men's. -- Ashish-g55 21:35, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The Men's Ice Hockey is certainly the biggest event not only in North America. Hockey is a national sport in much of northern Europe, and obviously Russia. It's not popular in the UK but globally it's at least as popular as a sport like Rugby Union.--Johnsemlak (talk) 04:45, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Heh. Like seriously, any of these Winter Olympics blurbs are certainly more international and has bigger coverage than some of the current ITN items... –HowardtheDuck 12:11, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. We already have a link on the bottom to the Olympic summary. I'm opposed to the idea that we should post, directly on ITN, only a few selective gold medalists based on the flawed presumption that they competed in one of the "most popular or important" events during the Games. It may be the "most popular or important" Olympic sport in your country, but not necessarily in every country that has participants. Zzyzx11 (talk) 05:31, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It is not flawed in any respect to think men's ice hockey is the single most popular sport in the Olympics. The men's tournment surpasses the World Championship and Stanley Cup in both popularity and importance worldwide; it is the only event where there is true best-on-best competition between the top hockey nations, as in the World Championship the best players are usually competing in the Stanley Cup playoffs instead. Above I said I oppose both women's hockey and figure skating, but I strongly support a blurb on the final of the men's hockey tournament. --PlasmaTwa2 06:33, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
IMO, it will be extremely bias to single out only one gold medal winner out of the 86 total that will be awarded during the Games, especially if it based on an unverified claim that it is "the single most popular sport in the Olympics". Zzyzx11 (talk) 07:15, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I'm gonna make one more attempt at arguing this, though it this story isn't getting much traction here. Now that we know the winner, Kim Yu-na, and the other medalists, particularly Canada's Joanie Rochette, there are some notable facts about this event: It is the first ever medal in figure skating by a South Korean skater, it is the highest score ever in the event, and it also features the drama of bronze medalist Rochette medaling despite her mother dying. In terms of global news coverage, this event is on the front page, photo and all, of nearly every Canadian and American news site, with Canada having greater emphasis on the Canadian medalist. In other parts of the world, it is not covered so prominently but it is certainly reported very widely: Sydney Morning Herald, L'Equipe, Le Parisien, The Hindu, RAI Novisti (figure skating is certainly a big sport in Russia), Eurosport, etc. I think this is pretty extensive coverage from countries that the medalists did not come from--one clear trend in global reporting on the Olympics is that the media focus on their own country's participants. And finally, let's not forget the obvious, that this is huge in Korea and Japan, which along with the above make this a pretty large global story.--Johnsemlak (talk) 12:29, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'd have to agree with you. We certainly can't report on every Winter Games event, nor can we report on every film festival, hence we pick those which have been traditionally been big. The traditional biggest draws in the Winter Olympics have been men's ice hockey and women's figure skating. And probably the sport where they slide rocks and sweep the ice and I dunno how it became an Olympic sport... –HowardtheDuck 12:36, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I looked in the commons for Kim Yu-Na and there are all kinds of photos. -SusanLesch (talk) 08:04, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This 1836 painting, a masterpiece by French artist Delaroche of Charles I of England just before his execution in 1649, was damaged in 1941 during The Blitz. After being rolled up and forgotten about, believed destroyed or damaged beyond repair, nealy 70 years later it was rediscovered, in a much better condition than previously thought. After a basic patch up, it is to go on display for the first time, on February 24, in the National Gallery of London. According to the gallery director, art historiain Nicholas Penny, this is "huge", with Delaroche being one of "the greatest painters of the 19th century". MickMacNee (talk) 03:19, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Before accident it was the sixth largest hydroplant in the world and even restarting the one unit of ten is significant event. Beagel (talk) 17:10, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good article, big power plant. Made me click on it. RxS (talk) 05:44, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: Accident news was posted on ITN, I guess. Moreover, not the entire plant has come up. Not significant. --GPPande 07:24, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe not the top news but still significant event. The Train 7 is also the world biggest train by production capacity (together with three more trains with the same capacity), but I don't think that this is suitable to add to the hook. Beagel (talk) 15:21, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not sure how engaging the subject is and the article is a little thin. RxS (talk) 06:01, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Rather late for an official apology, isn't it? In any case, I don't see what makes it inherently notable.--WaltCip (talk) 16:22, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It was an apology for mass child abuse in orphanages more or less. The Australian side already did so a few weeks or months ago, and it was teh second story on BBC World Service last evening, after the Nigerian president coming back YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 01:07, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support how often do governments apologize for this kind of a thing ? Wikireader41 (talk) 01:59, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Two occurrences which may help decide this: A nomination from February 22 "German child abuse archbishop's formal apology" may be similar but received no comments. On the other hand, the apology by UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown for the "inhumane" treatment of World War IIcode-breakerAlan Turing, who was sentenced to chemical castration, was posted last September. --candle•wicke 19:55, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
He has become the first cricketer in history to hit double century in one day international match and broken the previous record of 194 runs. I think world records are welcome nominations on ITN. --GPPande 12:56, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - I'm not a fan of records of this type because its significance is subjective. I mean, why is it more notable than a run record in test cricket or 20/20? Why is a run record more notable than a wicket record? etc etc. --Daviessimo (talk) 13:10, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You are comparing apples to oranges. Test match, 20/20 and ODI are three different recognized forms of the game. Cannot compare Test match 200 with ODI 200. If it was to be so simple - then lot many people would have scored 200 in ODI earlier. This is first time in HISTORY. --GPPande 13:43, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Support: First time a double century has been scored in the entire 39 years of ODI cricket, and not likely to happen again any time soon either. A record of this kind (regarding wickets/batting/fielding and in whatever form of the sport) is quite significant IMO ≈ Chamaltalk¤ 13:16, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It sounds like a significant record, though I and not intimately familiar with the sport. I think there would also be support for a significant record being set in US sports (was it posted, when, say, Barry Bonds broke Hank Aaron's lifetime home run record?) However, I do fear that if we posted this, we would get some complaints--since cricket is not followed in many parts of the world.--Johnsemlak (talk) 13:40, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Bonds' record was posted. I dunno if it had an WP:FAC's worth of discussion as typical to U.S.-related items. –HowardtheDuck 13:42, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What was Bond's record? My concern is that there are numerous records higher than this in cricket (many of which Tendulkar also possesses). I don't mind records when they are outright for their sport, but this record only applies to one form of cricket. --Daviessimo (talk) 13:48, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Probably irrelevant after the news item has gone up, but I felt I should clear this up - no official records apply to all three forms of cricket together. It's like comparing records in the marathon and the 100m dash because they're both running events. Records for Tests, ODIs and T20 games are maintained separately and there are even players who play only one or two of the three forms. Same basic game but different strategies and different skill-sets, even many different rules. You wouldn't deny a marathoner a sub-2 hour record because Usain Bolt's finished a race in nine point something seconds, would you?(talk)raghuvansh(contribs) 00:28, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Bonds' record is the record of records of baseball (at least in batting, pitchers today won't reach the current career pitching records): the career home run record at the MLB. Yeah, one league, and a Taiwanese player in the NPB had more on that league, but the MLB's level of competition is the highest in baseball. –HowardtheDuck 13:58, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It is simpler to score 200 in test because it is played for 5 days with unlimited overs. ODI is one day game of limited 50 overs and totally different strategy. You cannot compare scores in between different forms of games. Can you compare marathon with a 100 meter run? Will oppose 100 meter running world record of just 9 seconds to a marathon world record? Just because it is in one form of game? How do you compare man? --GPPande 13:53, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
i never go for strong but this ill give strong support. there maybe many records in cricket but this particular one is quite possibly the most prestigious and Anwar has had it for a very long time. and first double century in ODI is a very big thing. -- Ashish-g55 14:06, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The page is fast getting multiple updates. Lets post this news before it gets late & stale. I think this a clean pass nomination based on set ITN rules followed numerous times earlier for other articles/news. --GPPande 14:13, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
we posted a perfect game thrown for baseball which isnt even a record (imo not even remotely significant compared to this)... this is the first time in history someone made a double century in cricket ODI. there is a reason why this doesnt happen everyday and that anwar held his 194 record for almost 13 years. -- Ashish-g55 14:55, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I love how US bias comes up like its a big bad bug waiting to splatted across the floor. :p –HowardtheDuck 15:04, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
i only mentioned baseball since above barry bond was being compared for whatever reason. -- Ashish-g55 15:19, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The first 24hr strike in Greece wasn't listed on ITN, but how often do 100,000's people go on strike in a developed economy - twice. An update could be made at Economy of Greece#The 2010 Debt Crisis. --Daviessimo (talk) 08:40, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
He has been arrested, so why not put his photo on ITN ? :) --yousaf465 08:43, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Because it's not a free photo? ;) Physchim62(talk) 12:32, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, why not post the story only :P --yousaf465 17:36, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Turkey arrests 50, including former military officers
(The Times) Turkey has arrested 50 people including the former air force and navy chiefs, five fromer generals and seven serving officers over a 2002-3 coup plan against the Islamist leaning government. The plan was known as the Sledgehammer plot. I couldn't find an article relating to it - Dumelow (talk) 12:07, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I believe this is linked to Ergenekon (organization), though the article doesn't seem to be updated. If someone built a new subsection I'd support. It's not everyday a major country arrests its top brass. Joshdboz (talk) 20:09, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support after update. agree with above. Wikireader41 (talk) 03:40, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
How about a science story to calm everyone down a bit?? From the BBC: "Scientists are breeding a genetically altered strain of mosquito in an effort to curb the spread of dengue fever." The original paper was published online yesterday in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, and it's full-text open access, which is nice. The article to update might be Aedes aegypti (which needs work doing on it anyway) or dengue fever (which is in a much better state): I'll start with dengue fever (not done yet). What do people think? Physchim62(talk) 11:53, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support when updated. --BorgQueen (talk) 12:07, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Great story but should be wait till experiments are successful? Lot of mosquitoes here in India and it would be easy to squash them on table instead of having them humming around. :-) --GPPande 13:57, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I am not excited by this news. I don't think we need to "freshen up" ITN with any "on a lighter note..." items that aren't intrinsically notable. __meco (talk) 16:44, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support After appropriate updates. Interesting topic that will highlight and draw readers to a couple well-formed articles. RxS (talk) 03:55, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In trials, the precedent is normally to post an item when a verdict is given, but in this case the defendant has pleaded guilty so the verdict is known now. He was charged with "conspiracy to use weapons of mass destruction", in a plan to blow up bombs on the New York subway, which is pretty notable, no? --Daviessimo (talk) 08:35, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose There isn't even an article on this plot, and his biography is hardly informative. 'he planned to blow up a truck but got caught beforehand' is, in this era, unremarkable news, certainly not worthy of the front page. MickMacNee (talk) 10:37, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There may not be an article on the plot itself, but there is an article on the Al Qaeda cell (2009 U.S. Al Qaeda group), that was behind it. I nominated this on the basis that convictions linked to previous terror plots have been listed on ITN --Daviessimo (talk) 10:50, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Doesn't do it for me. There have been several other such thwarted attempts at terrorist attacks in large cities in various countries – one, for example, in Barcelona, just down the road from where I live – we'd have to ask ourselves why we're posting this one, and I can't see any good reasons. Physchim62(talk) 11:09, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
An American pediatrician from Delaware state is indicted by video evidence on 471 felony counts in the alleged rape and sexual abuse of 103 children. (CNN)(ABC)
China throws a surprise 86th birthday party for President Robert Mugabe in its Zimbabwe embassy in Harare, the first time Mugabe visited a foreign embassy in the country since Zimbabwe won independence in 1980. (Reuters)
Afghanistan's government condemns a NATO air strike on a convoy of vehicles in Uruzgan province, in the south of the country, which killed at least 27 civilians. (BBC)
The European Union and Germany deny a report of a 20-25 billion euro (£22 billion) aid plan for Greece, and Athens pledge again to take new steps if needed to keep tough deficit-cutting plans on target. (Reuters)
A strike by thousands of pilots at Lufthansa, one of the world's largest airlines, is suspended with negotiations expected to resume. (BBC)
BBC. Yet another transport accident. 38 dead, 50 wounded so far. It's the 3rd bus accident in Peru in the past year, but this one has the highest death toll for some time. Article will need work.--Johnsemlak (talk) 07:48, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Expanded. ... (talk) 19:05, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Article is reasonable and the death toll seems unusually high for such events. HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 19:47, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - another random bus accident? These are not notable enough IMHO. —Ed(talk • majestic titan) 20:11, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support as I can't think of any reason why a bus accident with a high death toll in Peru is any less important than one in the United States, Europe or Papua New Guinea. --candle•wicke 21:50, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I know that they have been posted before, but I don't think that any of them, whether they are in the U.S., Europe or New Guinea, are notable enough to be featured on the main page. A major diplomatic row isn't on the main page, but a bus accident will be? I'm confused. —Ed(talk • majestic titan) 02:51, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Candlewicke took the words out of my mouth; plenty notable enough. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 02:11, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
support. same reason as above. -- Ashish-g55 02:40, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, These things happen with regularity and the article isn't much to speak of (which is why ITN exists). These transportation accidents happen too often to really draw much interest. RxS (talk) 02:52, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
According to this it's the world's worst road accident since August 2008 in terms of number of deaths. I doubt the article can be expanded much more--I agree the article is very short. I suppose this one comes down to a subjective issue of whether 38 people dying is in of itself notable enough even if it happens in a relatively unremarkable way.--Johnsemlak (talk) 03:51, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The list is inaccurate: this not even Peru's worst road accident in the last three months (41 dead last Christmas Eve)! Note that I'm not opposing for that reason, as I think two buses colliding head-on in Peru is just as noteworthy as two train colliding head-on in Belgium, but I thought I'd point it out all the same. Physchim62(talk) 13:50, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The point though is to draw attention to our articles, this article isn't ever going to be worth much attention, so why bother? I know everyone knows this but it bears repeating, ITN isn't a news service. Shouldn't we try and guide users to the better articles that are in the news and not stubby articles like this one? RxS (talk) 04:01, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose because the article simply isn't up to scratch. I agree that we need to treat traffic accidents fairly, and the three road accidents we put up in 2009 were all from Europe... but all three had decent articles, as did the recent Papua New Guinea story. We are not trying to make ITN perfectly free of all possible systematic bias at the expense of all other considerations: that would be pretending that the Process is more important than the result! I'm perfectly willing to reconsider my opposition if the article is expanded, but I doubt that it will be in time. Physchim62(talk) 13:46, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The British to begin oil drilling today in the Falkland Islands while Argentina sabre-rattles about their sovereignty claims over the islands. channel 4 news86.158.125.189 (talk) 21:41, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose there is no article covering the news. If there were an article I would support it. Not just for the oil drilling, but more so because of the political actions. Certainly goes beyond Argentine-British relations as Argentina are seeking support from Latin countries (Venezuela already supporting), thus giving a wider international perspective. Shame there isn't an article though. JollyΩJanner 16:29, 22 February 2010 (UTC) Now support as article is updated. JollyΩJanner 01:22, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think this is a clear candidate to go up. It's an unusual type of conflict that could lead to another war between the two countries. The rhetoric is harsh and military escalation is being effected. __meco (talk) 18:10, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't read too much into the Chavez comments, as this is a man who has throughout his political career done nothing but criticise the 'imperial, capitalist west'. Maybe something like "British firm Desire Petroleum, begins drilling for oil off the coast of the Falkland Islands, days after Argentina imposes new restrictions on vessels travelling to the islands, through their territorial waters" --Daviessimo (talk) 21:16, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose unless something (other than drilling) actually happens. Minor shipping restrictions and sensationalist stories in the tabloids are not ITN-worthy. And again, why do we have multiple nominations for the same item on different days? Modest Geniustalk 22:43, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There are mutliple nominations because it is an obvious candidate. Quite where you got the idea that this is just a tabloid story is beyond me. MickMacNee (talk) 00:54, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
:Oppose Let's get a clear perspective on this. Argentina likes to do some sabre-rattling, especially now that the unpopular incumbent president faces re-election. Talk of a new war is like the talk last August of a new Russo-Georgian war. It didn't happen. With that in mind, this incident really isn't that worldly significant. More than likely everyone will forget about this in two weeks' time. HonouraryMix (talk) 01:12, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Just read up on the 'Latin American front' that's been formed in support of Argentina. Looks like this incident is now out of the ordinary, though any talk of a new war is still on hollow ground. Support a blurb about how Britain has started drilling whilst Argentina has gained regional support in its resistance. Oh, and Chavez does indeed like to talk like this all the time. Think he threatened war with Columbia a few weeks ago over US bases there. HonouraryMix (talk) 01:24, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think we can drop the whole idea that 'there has to be a war' for it to get on ITN. We are talking about two supposed modern powers here, not some everyday event like an African coup. The Chavez comment is as you say, total irrelevant chuff, but as ever, what some would think would be irrelevant is oddly somehow considered 'relevant' to tip it into ITN territory, yet the long and the short of this event is still no different from the one that got bombed a few days ago. MickMacNee (talk) 01:36, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Oppose I don't think this is any bigger than eg, PRC not letting a US aircraft carrier refuel, or maybe a Middle East country not letting them have a military base anymore, which would be weak support I guess YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 02:34, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, as per YellowMonkey--Johnsemlak (talk) 05:17, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well I wouldn't say it was quite the same as your suggestion YellowMonkey, because the China does not claim sovereignty over, say, Guam and China and the US most certainly haven't not been to war over the issue. I suppose the question is, for those who oppose, would Argentina have to invade the islands again for you to support --Daviessimo (talk) 08:19, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed with Davie. It isn't every day that an entire group of Latin American countries get together to condemn a nation, and I highly doubt that we "will forget about this in two weeks' time"; Argentina seems to really want that oil. 08:24, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
Oppose: This is just like China protesting any small work done by India in Arunachal Pradesh. Such protests and counter measures by claimant country is usual in today's era. --GPPande 11:11, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, this has been blown up out of all proportion by the British media. There are plenty of steps that Argentina or other Latin American countries could take to go further than the current measures but still falling far short of actual military hostilities. As I said before, this is actually far more restrained than most Spanish comments and actions over Gibraltar! Argentina has reasserted its claim to sovereignty over the islands, as it does periodically, and used the occasion of a Latin American summit meeting to drum up support for its position. And, erm, that's it! Move along please, there's nothing to see here. Physchim62(talk) 11:17, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose essentially per Physchim. This happens every few years- one side or the other decides to give the shit a good stir and the other immediately reacts with another threat of a new Falklands War but nothing ever comes of it. This is an age-old political (and football) rivalry. It's notable, but it's nothing new (so far at least). HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 11:22, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
So when did Argentina threaten a war over this drilling activity? MickMacNee (talk) 11:34, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. This nomination pretty much sums up what's wrong with ITN, and why nobody bothers with it. This is a no-brainer of an item, it is a major international incident in a long running conflict, but why would anybody bother to take the time to update an article and bring it here, only to have it trashed with irrelevant comparisons, pure POV opinions, and rather oddly, dismissal of the media's ability to tell what is and isn't significant (yet, this is the standard for anything else usually, that and the death toll). The item was a no-brainer three days ago, and other countries supporting Argentina is hardly a new development either. Anybody who seriously thinks this could ever end in a war in today's climate are dreaming, but that is besides the point for judging whether this is an internationally significant event. MickMacNee (talk) 11:27, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The only disfunction here is that we've had to waste time discussing this story for a second time when there was obviously no census to post on the first nomination nor any significant development in the story. However, the second nomination was made in good faith, unlike Mick's repeated rabid drivellings. Physchim62(talk) 11:41, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Whatever. It is as usual quite telling that even though something comes up twice in good faith, which any normal person would see is a sign, you are loathe to have to keep opposing it. Of course there are no new developments, because unlike bus crashes and bus electrocutions and other bus emergencies, some important events take place over weeks, not hours. It's all so tiresome for you I guess, dolling out the POV. You must be the only person who wants nobody to participate in ITN. Still, it's all good, 35 hours and counting, the only recent posting being an 'important american' who, at 80+, shock horror, died. MickMacNee (talk) 11:50, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Question. What's Argentina's response to the drilling? ... (talk) 19:05, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support "this has been blown up out of all proportion by the British media" - the horror, the news makes the news. But seriously, this is a major bilateral dispute, recently made international when Argentina brought the rest of South America into the mix b/c of the drilling (see Chavez comments above). Joshdboz (talk) 20:02, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Why focus on the reaction of the British media alone? I think the reaction of South America says a lot more. --candle•wicke 22:12, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well we usually ask for international media coverage before considering this type of story, so lets look at how the Spanish press treated the Rio Group summit in today's editions.
El País: A short (less than one full column) piece on the summit, but the Falklands issue? nada. A little bit more in the online edition [8] – about one-third of a sentence, albeit it quite a long sentence!
El Periódico de Catalunya: a good length piece on the summit [9] (about 500 words), but precisely two sentences [10] on the unanimous declaration in support of Argentina.
La Vanguardia: Ah, here we go, an entire page devoted to the summit, and about a quarter of that as a separate article on the Argentine declaration concerning the Falklands! But hold on, this isn't the declaration that ships going to Argentina to the Falklands will need a permit... this is the declaration by Cristina Fernández de Kirchner that Argentina "will not impose any kind of naval blockade to impede the oil exploration," nor "any means which are not within international law". [11] (only the first half of the article is available for free, but I've read the entire article in the print version)
El Mundo: I haven't seen the print version of this extremely right-wing little rag (I refuse to dirty my hands with it), but I noticed that their online edition [12] has picked up the stories from The Times about a British submarine being sent to the South Atlantic [13] and the interview with Falklands legislator Jan Cheek [14] It's worth quoting a paragraph from that interview (in the original English) that El Mundo picked up on:
"She [Cheek] did not believe that the Rio Group’s support for Argentina would have much impact and said that Latin American forums had made similar declarations in the past. 'We’ve seen this happen so many times before.' "
So, in short, the Spanish press consider this (at most) a minor spat. Nothing like the row between the presidents of Colombia and Venezuela on the last day of the summit!
Uribe to Chávez: "Be a man! You're a coward when you speak face to face!"
Chávez to Uribe: "Go fuck yourself!" [loose translation, but a very vulgar phrase that is usually the immediate precursor to a bar-room brawl]
Now there's a real (un)diplomatic dispute for you all! Physchim62(talk) 14:39, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Apart from the rather loose link that they speak the same language with (half) the continent, exactly why would the Spanish press give that much of a toss about the Falklands dispute or the Rio summit at all? I would have thought South American countries all had their own newspapers you could have 'analysed' in this way to try and show the same phenomenon. Would the daily press in England give the same amount of a toss you seem to think the Spanish should have about a spat/conference between North American states, just because they share the Anglosphere? Who cares anyway, in a way its quite funny to see ITN slither along at its usual snails pace, with some willing to work harder to derail nominations into the tar pit than actually advance them onto the main page, which is as ever approaching another 30 hours without apparently nothing in the world happening worth putting on the front page. MickMacNee (talk) 16:37, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Mick, if you are really incapable of making a constructive argument, then maybe you should desist from posting on this page. If not, I shall ask that you be banned from here, as all you are currently doing is wasting people's time. Physchim62(talk) 17:12, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You waste everybody's time every single day with your pure POV opposes. Are you still totally clueless as to why there is nobody here? Really? Or is it something more deliberate? You seemingly go to amazing lengths to assert your thumbprint all over this process, on every single candidate, no matter what the subject and no matter what your knowledge of it. Maybe there is some mileage in proposing that you be removed from it, to see if there is any change in the quality or frequency of suggestions and updates. MickMacNee (talk) 17:42, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Physchim62, how did you do your searching ? If you search for "Islas Malvinas" in Google News then you get thousands of results. 86.132.127.83 (talk) 16:59, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I just took a survey of the press I read this morning, plus one more for political balance. If this were a major international story (not directly involving Spain), I would expect it to appear in the newspapers I read in the morning, but no, it was considered completely insignificant. Don't forget that Spain has a similar territorial argument with the UK over Gibraltar, and that four Spanish policemen who landed on Gibraltar recently were promptly arrested by the Gibraltarian Police – along with the two suspected drugs smugglers they were pursuing – and only released after an apology from Spain. Not everything to do with international law is interesting, just like not everything to do with sex is interesting! Possibly a rather higher propotion in the case of international law, despite the cries from many editors on this page! Physchim62(talk) 17:12, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Another unintentional massacre of civilians by NATO forces in Afghanistan
Although I am personally beginning to feel a bit exhausted by this seemingly unending series of atrocious friendly-fire incidents, and I'm sure others also are, this air-attack is yet another major blunder by the allied forces costing the lives of some 27 Afghan civilians and the commentators agree that this drives the population into supporting the Taliban. __meco (talk) 18:19, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Borderline international crisis.--WaltCip (talk) 20:19, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support as I did the last time (though not many did and it wasn't posted) and there are more people dead as a result of this one. --candle•wicke 20:31, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I'd be inclined to support if a major change in policy was a result.--Johnsemlak (talk) 05:22, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Civilians dying in a war zone is, unfortunately, not an uncommon occurrence. As Johnsemlak points out, there would have to be some other consequence of this mistake for it to become a suitable ITN piece. Physchim62(talk) 11:19, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
SupportA major incident, with a large number of deaths, we can't ignore them, just bcz it happened in a war zone.--yousaf465 08:40, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Concordia (ship) is the article, might require expansion. Nobody died but that's how unusual it is considering what the 64 went through, 16 hours on a rafts in rough seas, etc. It's a good news rescue which will please anyone who doesn't like death. It is also very international, the ship was Canadian, the incident happened off Brazil, it was supposed to land in Uruguay, on board was at least one Australian, Japan and the Philippines were involved in the rescue effort. (The Sydney Morning Herald)(The Vancouver Sun)(The Montreal Gazette)(The Times) --candle•wicke 18:52, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The story isn't getting all that much play in Canada, where the ship and most of the students (from what I understand) were from. It's only the No. 5 story on the Globe and Mail website (guess what's number one). I'm all for having more Canadian news on ITN but if it's an item included for its newsiness (rather than its scientificness) I think it probably should be the top story nationwide. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 06:15, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, since in the end this is just a ship that capsized with no loss of life. Character-forming as 30 hours in a lifeboat must be, it's not all that notable either. Modest Geniustalk 22:47, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unusual and interesting, but not quite ITN material. SpencerT♦Nominate! 00:00, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Incident was caused by a microburst, which links it to El Nino. ~AH1(TCU) 16:40, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(Latin American Herald Tribune) says he was "one of the chief exponents of Argentine folk music". (The Washington Post) says he was composer of "Misa Criolla" which it describes as "widely regarded as a stunning artistic achievement, combined Spanish text with indigenous instruments and rhythms. Its effect is that of a reverent carnival, and it has sold millions of albums and been performed countless times across the world by artists including opera star José Carreras and Latin American folklore singer Mercedes Sosa. [...] Mr. Ramírez's career spanned seven decades and reportedly hundreds of compositions". Also: (Radio Netherlands Worldwide) notes that he composed one widely recognised piece of music in 1964 and another in 1981. (Momento24) calls him "the great world-renowned pianist and composer". (Buenos Aires Herald) says there will be a public viewing and singer Patricia Sosa said he was "the biggest folklore composer in History [...] The whole world cries the death of such a beautiful gentleman". --candle•wicke 11:10, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - He died at 88. This death isn't particularly untimely.--WaltCip (talk) 16:12, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Article only has 2 references. The article could use expansion as well--more of the info on his notability above needs to be in the article.--Johnsemlak (talk) 17:34, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support The "he was very old" argument doesn't apply here. The Misa Criolla is extremely well known in Argentina and the rest of Latin America, it doesn't matter how old he was. --FixmanPraise me 20:11, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've just improved him so hopefully no more objections due to poor state of article. Argentine composer and pianist Ariel Ramírez(pictured) dies in Monte Grande at the age of 88. --candle•wicke 21:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The article is looking better now, yes. Seems notable, and I've no serious objections to posting this, but it will look strange if we post this one while refusing Alexander Haig... "Misa Criolla" is referred to by several Wikipedia articles if anyone fancies a go at turning that redlink blue. Physchim62(talk) 21:42, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(I think) this person seems more important than Hag. --candle•wicke 22:06, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose not many english-speakers are likely to care about him. ~DCTalk To Me 01:37, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
support. Clearly old argument does not apply here since we already have one old person on ITN. and "not many english-speakers are likely to care about him" is not an ITN criteria (nor should it be). as said above the person was very important in their field of expertise and compared to haig i find him more notable for ITN inclusion (in my opinion... politics isnt the only notable thing in the world). -- Ashish-g55 03:28, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support If importance to English speakers becomes a criterion at ITN, that would be the end of coverage of South America, Asia, and most of Africa. Despite being old, Ramirez was important enough to go up. (Though whether we want his death right next to Haig's for stylistic reasons, I am not sure.) Bradjamesbrown (talk) 04:40, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Was just about to support, but doing some searching I noticed that he hasn't been covered at the Spanish Language Wikipedia page. He also gets only around 900 hits at Google News Spain and Google News Mexico. The same amount for Google News .com. I'd say leave this one to 'Recent Deaths.' I reject the argument that English speakers 'don't care about him' but I'd say the fact that the Spanish language media doesn't care about him (relatively speaking) is relevant.--Johnsemlak (talk) 06:02, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps we could simply add to the existing blurb: In response, the African Union have expelled Niger or something like that.--Definitely not Ks0stm(T•C•G) 09:43, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Wouldn't that be very long though, Ks0stm? --candle•wicke 09:47, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, that was my comment above, not KsOstm's (who appears to fixed my error).--Johnsemlak (talk) 09:54, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I see. I think one of my comments was hijacked too. But how do I know that you are Johnsemlak? :-O ;) --candle•wicke 10:20, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Come to think of it, how do you know that you are Johnsemlak? Does Johnsemlak have a nice car and a well-paying job? If so, I might become Johnsemlak... Physchim62(talk) 10:31, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I drive a 1984 (no, that's not a typing mistake) Peugeot 205 which isn't even mine. I used to be a schoolteacher, but I left the profession for a job that pays less! My standards are low, at least on such niceties! Physchim62(talk) 00:33, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have altered my signature above as it should be *insert evil laughter here* Who knows, is this the real Ks0stm(T•C•G) 11:22, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Which above where now is this and who are you when you're yourself? --candes•cent 11:28, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think this should be posted, its good to know the African Union has some teeth. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 22:44, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support this over that Haig posting, which should be deleted. U.S. editors don't seem to get it that these figures just aren't that important. Colipon+(Talk) 00:25, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Military coups don't happen that often, so there's no harm in keeping this up for a little longer. In response to the above, I supported (and support) the posting of Haig and I'm an Englishman, not an American. HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 00:33, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support important that any dictators who read WP see this ;-) Wikireader41 (talk) 01:19, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support including the wording; oppose bumping Niger back to the top based on this. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 06:16, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Tricky one this: the Golden Bear at the Berlin International Film Festival is an ITN/R event, so I have quickly updated the winner, which is Bal, a Turkish film whose title translates as "Honey", quite appropriate for a Golden Bear! The comment in the Spanish press (which ITN regulars will know that I take as gospel, for want of anything better) was that the films in competition this year were OK, but certainly not "masterpieces". Add to that the fact that the jury has decided to award the Best Director prize to Roman Polanski, a Silver Bear that will certainly eclipse the Golden Bear in press coverage, and you will understand why I can't back this nomination with as much gusto as I usually do. I leave it open to other comments, but I think we should run some story from Berlin on the grounds on NONBIAS etc etc. Physchim62(talk) 21:54, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support, I believe this was discussed before so something ought to feature. --candle•wicke 01:41, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I personally oppose the inclusion of this on ITNR though given that it is listed as an ITNR event currently then it should be posted if it meets the update requirement. (which article would that be--I could not find an adequately updated article?) I suggest that if we post it, we just list the award for top film as per standard policy despite the press generated by Polanski.--Johnsemlak (talk) 04:45, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The article Bal has only five sentences.Oppose for now article is now adequate.--Johnsemlak (talk) 05:27, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it is too short at the moment. Support when the article is expanded. --BorgQueen (talk) 05:28, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support For this one. Same as Cannes and Venice for film festival winners. Lugnuts (talk) 10:03, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Expanded. There isn't much more information anyway. --candle•wicke 10:16, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Good work, Candles! If it is on the front page, hopefully it'll attract more expansion ;-) Lugnuts (talk) 10:32, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(ec)Support also. @John Semlak, can I just ask what is the basis for you feeling that this should not be included on ITNR? It is after all, one of the most prestigious awards in film, so why should we not extend the same rules that we apply to the Oscars or Palme d'Or. Just because these two are more heavily covered by the media, doesn't mean that as an encyclopaedia we should fall in the same trap --Daviessimo (talk) 10:35, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Among other arguments, I would point to Physchim's point above, that according to certain portions of the press that the level of cinema at Berlin this year was disappointing. Coupled with relatively low profile coverage in the media, I suppose I ask, what evidence is there that this is one of the most notable events of the week?--Johnsemlak (talk) 11:51, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well it is for Turkey... --candle•wicke 11:56, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If the article is at Honey shouldn't we call it that on ITN (or should the article be at Bal)? I don't know much about the film naming guidelines - Dumelow (talk) 12:28, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NCF states that the article should be in the English title, but the press are likely to use either. Lugnuts (talk) 14:19, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
@Howard: I'm seeing it as the top Eğlence » event on that Google News link and it does appear to be getting a high amount of coverage compared to the others in that section. --candle•wicke 15:22, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It's a big entertainment story, but I'd have to see at least a part of the main(stream) news stories at the top of the page before I'd consider to be it as a "big story" in Turkey. –HowardtheDuck 15:39, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Do the Oscars feature in the "main(stream) news" or just entertainment? My experience is that these events tend to be classified as "entertainment", even major national award ceremonies in the countrywhere they aretaking place. I have used three examples of events where awards were handed out from last Tuesday, Friday and Saturday (yesterday for some). --candle•wicke 16:40, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm pretty sure last year's Oscars were reported along with the "mainstream" news along with the elections wars, accidents and disasters in most news websites, aside from being the top story in the entertainment section. –HowardtheDuck 16:55, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I had to scroll to the bottom of the Guardian'sfilm section to find a mention of the Berlin Film Festival. The film festival is not getting a great deal of prominent press coverage that I can see. Nothing remotely compared to Oscars, Golden Globes, Cannes or even the BAFTAs. I'm sure there's an English language bias here but I'm still struggling to see the notability.--Johnsemlak (talk) 17:42, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'd also have to question that fact. The 2009 Metro Manila Film Festival had a gross of 428.2 million Philippine pesos. Assuming the average ticket costs 120 pesos, the total attendance for the festival would have been ~3.5 million, 7 times Berlin's number. (Of course it helps that the MMFF includes the entire Philippines and no other films are allowed to be screened while the festival is ongoing.) –HowardtheDuck 04:37, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The update to the article seems a bit short. Is there really nothing else that can be said? -- tariqabjotu 17:01, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There's a bit more available in German (see dewiki), but nothing really Earth-shattering. I will try to motivate myself to translate some of it. Physchim62(talk) 17:20, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It should be long enough now? I added a few more lines earlier too. --candle•wicke 19:03, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Posted, article looks good enough now - Dumelow (talk) 11:46, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Romania's fast food tax
(again)
- please see the discussion of Feb 19 - TouLouse (talk) 19:57, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
We still need an article with an update - is there any? --Tone 20:22, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Any purpose? A Romanian topic existing article? Or something like this... - TouLouse (talk) 20:59, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to see an article update and a suggested blurb, then I can decide for my part.. --Tone 21:04, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have no opinion on the merit of the story, but I'm going to oppose until such a time as we have an article or an update to an existing article. HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 21:12, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose in the current circumstances. The story is reasonable as a "wackinews" piece, which we should have from time to time, but I don't think the background coverage is there, nor that it could be created in time for the story to be posted. Physchim62(talk) 21:24, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: why did you list this twice? Nothing new has happened to the story, and it's just splitting discussion up in several places. Modest Geniustalk 16:29, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support (same arguments as recently displayed "An avalanche buries a village in northwestern Pakistan, killing at least 40 people."): an unique event in the island and the worst single day tragedy in Europe in 2010, so far. Zdtrlik (talk) 19:44, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The article is still in a pretty poor state for the Main Page. Physchim62(talk) 20:44, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
With some more prose it will be ready, could you also propose a blurb? --Tone 20:49, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Flooding on the Portuguese island of Madeira, in the North Atlantic Ocean, kills at least 32 people and paralyzes many basic services in the regional capital Funchal. Physchim62(talk) 21:09, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Posting. --Tone 21:32, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't oppose posting, particularly as there is not a huge amount of info available even in Portuguese for the moment. But if any ITN regulars could help out with improving the article, that would be great, especially as regards to background information. Physchim62(talk) 21:36, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support. More than just a simple army general, even for a four-star general. And the biography is in good shape. My hesitation is that he was not in the public arena for at least a decade before his death, so we will have complaints as to why we post this. Physchim62(talk) 15:20, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Even though the death criteria places the emphasis on holding a high ranking position at the time of death, I think in this case, as the deceased was both a former US Secretary of State and former White House Chief of Staff, he has held notable enough positions in that past to warrant inclusion now. --Daviessimo (talk) 16:12, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with Daviessimo, but I would put the emphasis on the totality of his career. I dont't think we would automatically include every former US Secretary of State or every former White House Chief of Staff, but this one seems particularly notable to me. Physchim62(talk) 16:17, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support - looks good. I'd say he's pretty well-known enough to be on the main oage. Connormah (talk | contribs) 18:17, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Notable individual (Are there links to News sources?) 220.101.28.25 (talk) 18:42, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support. Certainly a significant figure in US politics for several decades; I think the most important part was his role in Nixon's resignation (though the exact role is left somewhat to speculation), which concluded the biggest political scandal in US history.--Johnsemlak (talk) 19:43, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Individual held several high-ranking positions over his life, which combined make Haig's death important enough to feature on ITN. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 21:37, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as it fails at least one of the criteria listed at WP:ITN/DC - no impact by his death. Pavarotti's death wasn't featured on ITN; I have no idea why this would deserve it instead. Nergaal (talk) 23:05, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Haig's death currently has the number three spot on the BBC News front page (#s 1 and 2 are already on ITN), and it has had that spot for several hours. Also on the front page of France24 at the moment. The idea that we can't post this obituary because Pavarotti's obit wasn't posted is pathetic: it is equivalent to saying that ITN should never learn from its mistakes! Physchim62(talk) 23:25, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose because he was age 85. -SusanLesch (talk) 23:30, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support. Most secs. of state I would oppose, but he was certainly a major figure for some time. I wasn't sure at first but the opposes are unconvincing at best. WizardmanOperation Big Bear 23:47, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Err, Wizardman, unconvincing? One of the death criteria is an "unexpected death". A man dying at age 85 is hardly unexpected. -SusanLesch (talk) 00:17, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think "unconvincing" is a polite way of describing Susan's arguments. Either we don't do any obtuaries at all, which is obviously not the consensus position reached at WP:ITN/DC, or we run obituaries of old people as well of those rare deaths of relatively young people who had already made a global name for themselves in their field. Mr Haig's death was just as terminal for the person concerned as Mr Jackson's, the only question left is whether readers will be looking for information about the person concerned. Physchim62(talk) 00:40, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, but how is this guy in any ways better than Pavarotti? Nergaal (talk) 01:25, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't saying we shouldn't post Haig because Pavarotti wasn't posted three years ago kind of bureaucratic? Does one decision- even a poor one- bind decision making three years later? No; WP is not a bureaucracy, consensus can change, and stare decisis isn't a trump card to that. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 01:37, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Do current death criteria ( The deceased was in a high ranking office of power, and had a significant contribution/impact on the country/region.) require the deceased to have had the position at the time of death? This rule would exclude many former heads of state. --Johnsemlak (talk) 04:35, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Which parts of this person's life are notable enough for ITN? Several of those in favour of this are quite vague, e.g. "I'd say he's pretty well-known enough to be on the main oage", "Notable individual (Are there links to News sources?)" and "agree with above". The rest suggest he was around for so long he must be important, he has a good biography and he held two non-Presidential/leaderly positions in his life? Is a four-star general a particularly great achievement (I'm seeing 5 star rank here)? What am I missing? --candle•wicke 05:41, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support per his career as a whole's impact, as said by Daviessimo & Physchim62. Ks0stm(T•C•G) 06:29, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The Wall Street Journal says he was " a retired four-star Army general" and "a prominent figure in American politics for more than a decade". How many people are that? Xinhua: He once ran for President but did not succeed, he was in hospital since January and had been critical since then. Reading The Independent, "His tenure as secretary of state lasted only 18 months, and was notable for ferocious turf battles with colleagues, and for an unsuccessful effort to mediate a settlement of the Falklands crisis in 1982. After Haig's efforts at shuttle diplomacy between London and Buenos Aires broke down, Britain went to war to reclaim the islands. His replacement that June by steady, unflappable George Shultz brought general relief, inside and outside government." Doesn't sound like a leader there. The Times includes: "In 1979, in his final week in office, a remote-controlled bomb detonated under a bridge in Belgium as his car drove by. The blast threw the Mercedes into the air, but Haig escaped uninjured". Most mention the "I'm in control here" soundbite. It's all very interesting of course but I just don't see anything to convince me to support for ITN. --candle•wicke 10:44, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) For those still struggling with notability, my own and other's arguments place the emphasis on the totality of the career rather than one thing. If he had only been just a US Secretary of State or White House chief of staff or if he had only been a US army general, then likely he would not have been notable enough. However, over the course of his career he has held several very high positions and served as a senior aide to two US presidents. I had not personally heard of him, however reading his article certainly suggests a great deal of notability.
@John Semlak, yes the criteria does say to hold a position of power at the time of death, but for those who hold an official position this criteria is harsh because often there is a limited period they have this power. Its the same thing with sport. Most notable sportsmen and women die long after they've finished playing, but that shouldn't stop us listing the Pele's, Nicklaus's or Navratolova's of the sports world. Michael Jackson died long after the peak of his career, but it didn't stop us posting his death. I would also say it's important to remember that for whatever reason, we now list more deaths on ITN and its rather foolish that we should artificially hamper progress today on the basis of past mistakes. Rather, we should always make sure that the rules developed now are applied fairly and equally to all death nominations in the future and that individuals are judged on their individual merits rather than whether they are famous or whether their death is being plastered on the front page of the BBC or CCN --Daviessimo (talk) 11:02, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I remain unconvinced and will oppose now based on all my reasons of uncertainty. I'm not using past mistakes, I'm not basing it on the BBC or CNN CCN (of course it would be on CNN CCN) and - for comparison - I would most likely support the three sports personalities mentioned above but I unfortunately - despite my best efforts to work him out - can't see this person being in the same league as those three (for a start they're all household names, record breakers and among the first names that would be mentioned when talking about these sports; I can't see Haig as a first name mentioned for anything except possibly for an assassination attempt on a President and yet there certainly have been plenty of those too, even in the United States). --candle•wicke 11:24, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support.' Politico.com called him "the thirty-seventh-and-a-half president"... I dunno how many cabinet ministers/secretaries got to be called like that. –HowardtheDuck 17:58, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That "37½th President" line was also reported in the Spanish press, attributed to White House commentators while he was Nixon's Chief of Staff (during the Watergate scandal...) (El País) But there's another point we should remember: we had 62.8k readers looking at that article yesterday – thank God it was in good shape! On what grounds are we denying those readers, who are presumably interested in background information on the subject, a quick link to the article from the Main Page? After all, quick links to articles from the Main page is what ITN is all about! ITN isn't here to decide if a dead U.S. politician is more or less important than a dead Argentinian composer – what a ridiculous question! – ITN is here to provide a service to our readers. These endless debates about arbitrary "death criteria" do no service to our readers whatsoever. Physchim62(talk) 22:16, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Posted. This has been discussed for a sufficiently long period of time and consensus is support. I have used a fairly basic blurb if someone can think of anything better feel free to change it - Dumelow (talk) 23:45, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
ITN has traditionally used very basic blurbs for its reports of individual deaths. We are all equal in our mortality, after all. There's also the journalistic argument that a very simple death announcement incites people to read the article to find out why we thought the person was important ;) Physchim62(talk) 00:21, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I oppose this posting. I get that there is a backlash against a lot of U.S.-based posts, but there are many, many, individuals who have died in the past year that surpass Haig's notability who have not been posted. And in all sincerity some of these U.S.-related events are just not that notable, not because they are American, but because they are not notable. There are many opposes to this entry and it fails on at least one criteria. If it remains then it is only a symbol of Wiki-administrator stubbornness rather than a decision based on consensus. Colipon+(Talk) 04:12, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Good post, he's clearly was a high profile figure in American politics for years. We need to break out of the bureaucratic knee jerk application of the rules here. ITN is exists to highlight articles and isn't a news service. This is a good chance to lead readers into subjects not covered here much (American politics in the 70's and 80's), how many times do we want to highlight articles about the Middle East by way of violent events in the news (for example)? And this isn't limited tp American politics, we routinely pass up interesting news because of overly strict application of rules. RxS (talk) 05:25, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Haig was a huge deal in the 80s, recent enough for many Wikipedia users to remember. I think all living U.S. secretaries of state (Kissinger, Shultz, Baker, Christopher, Albright, Powell, Rice, Clinton) -- I'm not including lame-duck Eagleburger -- should go up if/when they die. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 06:22, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It's ridiculous to see this totally expected death on the front page. This would only have happened for an American, and if people don't see that as a problem, they really don't understand the issue of systemic bias at all. ITN does not exist just to help readers too clueless to be able to copy and paste a name into the search box. MickMacNee (talk) 11:52, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
He was an important diplomat and politician. Yes, part of that was because he was an American Secretary of State and not a Andorran Secretary of State, but the U.S. is a rather important country in the world, and it's also where the majority of our readers come from. —Ed(talk • majestic titan) 17:32, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"The U.S. is a rather important country in the world" So what? If you, or anybody else, wants to turn ITN into an American news ticker for the majority{cn} of our readers, then propose it, otherwise, do not archive this section (items can and do get pulled once it is realised a posting was a total error), and do not pretend 'he was an important American' is anything like an established inclusion criteria. MickMacNee (talk) 17:46, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize; I wasn't aware that sections couldn't be archived. It's a widely known fact that the overwhelming majority of en.wiki readers are from the United States, not sure why you have a {cn} there. See http://stats.wikimedia.org/wikimedia/squids/SquidReportPageViewsPerLanguageBreakdown.htm . Yes, we aim to cover the world, but we aren't aiming to turn ITN into an 'everything but America' news ticker, and Haig was an important man internationally for what he did as the Secretary of State. ITN, just like every other place on Wikipedia, does not operate within a fully-defined set of rules; exceptions can be made to anything, including ITN's inclusion criteria, if there is sufficient consensus to do so. —Ed(talk • majestic titan) 21:51, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I already knew it was 60%, which in anybody's book is not an 'overwhelming majority' in the slightest, it is certainly not a justification for such blatant bias as listing someone who has been out of public life even in the almighty united states for the last 20 years. Still, what does it matter, you are right about the rules, there are no rules at ITN, just total chaos, every single day. It really is funny though how the exceptions only seem to land one way, and yet again, ITN is nothing but a yank news ticker interspersed with deaths over a max number. Still, we haven't had an election for a week, so I guess that's something. It's even funnier that items only get pulled from listing when they aren't US news items too. Still, let's keep up the pretense that consensus can change at ITN just like anywhere else, and forget that the tarpit phenomenon doesn't exist in the slightest. MickMacNee (talk) 00:50, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose we need to have a bar-line for what are notable deaths and what aren't. I understand that it's good for ITN to post recent events but we need to keep out the less notable news (such as this guy's death), so we can priorotise on more important news. This death fall way below the normal bar at ITN for notable deaths. JollyΩJanner 16:37, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This does seem to be attracting a fair bit of opposition here now and on various talk pages. Not to mention one section ("Vietnam") now having a tag requesting citations. --candle•wicke 21:57, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There's this many "opposes" and it is still on the main page?? Unbelievable. Take this posting off please.
Above user mentioned that "most English Wiki readers are American" as justification for this posting. I don't know how he could stand by this twisted logic. We are fighting systemic bias precisely because of these skewed demographics of our readership. Just because there are more Americans visiting this page does not mean we should give American news greater weight. Colipon+(Talk) 19:03, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It is official: BBC and IUPAC. Also, please use Copernicus' image. Thanks, Nergaal (talk) 06:14, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support per my comments below; though I have no idea why a new section was necessary. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 06:33, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Because deaths and AfPak already takes 2/3 of the space at ITN and ITN/C. Nergaal (talk) 06:44, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Obviously, it is ITN type. --yousaf465 07:09, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Monstrously obvious "why isn't there already" support. Let's do it. 86.147.43.154 (talk) 09:51, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Posted. It "isn't there already" because it has been only 4 hours since it was brought here (with the confirmation of the new name) which is a reasonably quick turnaround. Admins are only volunteers and cannot guarantee a 24 hour response. The addition of the item is further slowed when the posting admin, as in this case, has to create a blurb (because this requires reading the relevant articles, fact checking etc.) - Dumelow (talk) 11:49, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If this results in the current PM going, an obvious support. HonouraryMix (talk) 04:41, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support: Obviously. ≈ Chamaltalk¤ 04:56, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose you guys didn't get tired of having continuously one news about Afghanistan and one about Pakistan AT ALL TIMES on the ITN template? Seriously, there are other parts of the world asides from these two subsisting countries. Nergaal (talk) 06:21, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This is not "just another story" about the war. A government has collapsed because of a decision related to it. That's kind of significant, isn't it? ≈ Chamaltalk¤ 06:27, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
To add a bit more, ITN normally features items about election of new governments and dissolvings. This is something similar IMO, except that it's a bit more unusual and "dramatic". ≈ Chamaltalk¤ 06:31, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but it is the tenth news about Afghanistan/Pakistan IN A SINGLE WEEK. Nergaal (talk) 06:32, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support Guys, the government collapsed. There will be early elections etc. This should be on the main page. Omegastar (talk) 12:51, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support We often (but not automatically) run stories on the collapse of entire governments in parliamentary systems. This one is particularly deserving of an ITN piece given that reason for the collapse is a political debate going on in many countries, not just the Netherlands. The article is updated, with an almost silly number of references! I propose:
We have a free picture of Balkenende, but there's no rush given that we've just changed the ITN image anyway. Physchim62(talk) 13:20, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, Omegastar's version is better than mine! I tried to find a link for the Dutch involvement in Afghanistan, but I couldn't find one. Suggestions are welcome. Physchim62(talk) 13:53, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Posting. It's a rather long blurb, any chance we make it shorter? --Tone 14:14, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I recommend rewording it. The dispute was not over the military mission in Afghanistan as a whole, the dispute was over extending the mandate of Task Force Uruzgan. There was no dispute over the Dutch troops in Kabul or the Dutch airforce in Kandahar. 94.212.31.237 (talk) 14:21, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, that is long! How about cutting the words "a possible extension of". I take 94.*.*.*'s point that it wasn't the whole mission which caused the problems, but the argument wouldn't have happened without the context of Dutch troops deployed in the country. Physchim62(talk) 14:29, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(BBC). A 400-year old minaret collapses at a mosque in Meknes, Morocco killing at least 36 and injuring more than 60. The collapse followed heavy rain, people are said to still be trapped beneath the rubble (300 were inside praying when it collapsed) - Dumelow (talk) 00:21, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
File photos of the minaret that collapsed are very sparse, so it took me a while to confirm this, but I believe this is a picture of the minaret that fell. A file photo circulated by the AP points to this specific minaret and says "This minaret collapsed during Friday prayers..." I know for certain that the location of the photo corresponds to the location of the mosque. Though this photo led me on a wild goose chase (contradicted by this one), I'm sure I got it. (Note our photo is far more recent and far better.) I'd add the photo myself were it not for the fact that I took and uploaded the photo myself; it might be a bit of a conflict of interest for me to do it myself. But if I see tumbleweeds when I wake up tomorrow morning (or rather later in the morning), I'll just add it myself. -- tariqabjotu 06:03, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Added, can someone make sure I put the (pictured) in the right spot? —Ed(talk • majestic titan) 07:40, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hamas threatens Western nations and trades accusations with rival Palestinian faction Fatah over alleged involvement in the affair. (The Jerusalem Post)
Dubai's police chief calls for the head of Mossad to be arrested if Israel's spy agency is found to have been behind the killing of a Hamas boss in the emirate. (BBC)
Israel denies involvement in the assassination and claims that there is no evidence "that even remotely connects this incident to Israel" (The Jerusalem Post)
This was talked back in July and people argued that it should go on the ITN only when it is official. Here it is! Nergaal (talk) 21:16, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Also, some administrator should move the article to the correct name. Nergaal (talk) 21:24, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The RM discussion on the talk page actually appears to be getting some pushback on grounds that it's actually not "official" yet. Support if and only if this is confirmed as the real, official announcement. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 22:43, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Per Bradjamesbrown, I'll support upon verification. Besides, it would be nice to have something other than war and politics on ITN for a change. HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 22:51, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Give the article some time so that all the details can be fixed. Then, support. --Tone 22:54, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. New and notable naming of element. ~AH1(TCU) 02:04, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Suppost. When 'official'. But article needs renaming (as per Nergaal) as is is still called Ununbium. Confusing. --220.101.28.25 (talk) 02:29, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support as per above conditions. A change in the Periodic Table works for me.--Johnsemlak (talk) 05:22, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It is official, see above. Nergaal (talk) 06:30, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral leaning towards support. I'd like to know a bit more and if there were a decent article on it, I'd be more inclined to support. HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 22:58, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'd prefer to see some sort of an article before I evaluate the item's merits. SpencerT♦Nominate! 23:09, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Very few items are directly taxed because they are bad for us, I mean I can only think of cigarettes and alcohol, so I'd say this is pretty notable. But is anyone else envisioning the backlash we are going to get because of "Europe's first fast-food tax"... Eurocentrism, anti-Americanism (I mean the US did invent most of the involved fast foods!), pro-Romania bias, anti fast food bias, pro health bias, pro-tax, anti-tax... ahh! --Daviessimo (talk) 09:21, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What article could be updated? - TouLouse (talk) 08:50, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I searched for somewhere and found Romanian cuisine unless anyone can find a better place... Romanian humour but perhaps that's not very funny. --candle•wicke 21:44, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. According to our article on him, he was the last (known) Canadian WWI veteran. HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 22:54, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Likely not to make it, but IMO, significant, The article is a GA, and appears to be in decent shape regarding his death. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 22:55, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - As far as I'm aware, we haven't listed any other WWI Veterans, who were the last survivor from their country. Also, we didn't list either Harry Patch (who was the last surviving person to have fought in the trenches) or Henry Allingham (at the time of death, the world's oldest man). As such, I'm wary of putting this up, especially given that the last surviving Australian veteran died last year and wasn't listed --Daviessimo (talk) 23:41, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, generally we don't post things like this (it has come up in the past, maybe someone can post some links to archived discussions?) - Dumelow (talk) 00:24, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support he is to recieve a state funeral, if I am not mistaken. A few years ago when we were changing up the death criteria, we made a plan to put up the death of the last WWI vet. The only reason I see why this shouldn't go up is that we would likely have to put up the death of the other two when they kick the bucket. --PlasmaTwa2 07:55, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It emerges that two additional fake Irish passports with genuine issue numbers were used by the suspects, with efforts underway to locate the two genuine holders. (RTÉ)(The Irish Times)
If it results in a major reaction from China maybe but Obama meeting a political leader by itself isn't notable, including the Dalai Lama (who has met every previous US president since 1959).--Johnsemlak (talk) 16:13, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose at this point. The PRC likes to put up a fuss whenever anyone meets the Dalai Lama; nothing significant ever comes of it. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 22:56, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, since this hasn't created any more of a stir than every other Dalai Lama meeting. Modest Geniustalk 18:50, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Irish defense minister resigns
How often does the defense minister of an English-speaking country resign after linking a political opponent to a brothel and then lying about it under oath ([15])? The article needs some updating. Currently it does not go into detail about what O'Dea said, perhaps to avoid repeating the libel, but media around the world have reported O'Dea's false accusation. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 01:24, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: if he had accused an opponent of financial mismanagement would it have gained the nomination? Let's avoid tabloid priorities. Worried that the nominator considers that this happened in an English speaking country to be relevant: systemic bias? Which invites the question, how often indeed does a minister of state have to resign over a false allegation: probably far more often than we even consider posting it. (but if it is posted, defence would be the appropriate spelling) Kevin McE (talk) 09:59, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The article is sufficient and updated. I am Irish and will give this support if others support it. This is a major blow for the Fianna Fáil/Green Party coalition. There was a motion of confidence in the Dáil which was narrowly passed. But a member of the small partner in government who is in the upper house went against this on Twitter and is believed to be a contributory factor in the resignation. But probably the ultimate event that made him decide was because of an interview he gave on a radio programme where he mentioned he had got the police force involved with the brothel/court/journalist thing. (RTÉ) Also in that source you can see the chief whip of the government saying they no longer supported him. — Cargoking talk 10:02, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: I have to oppose. This is really of no major importance outside of the country. Had the motion of confidence failed due to this controversy and government would have lost then it would have been a significant event. But just one resignation (that too not of head of state) does not merit ITN. I do not understand how English speaking nation theory helps the support call? --GPPande 10:19, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Wasn't expecting to find this here. Support as its an unusual sequence of events and lying under oath is apparently very serious and about a brothel too. Will this be of any use at all? --candle•wicke 04:35, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, domestic politics, no major internationally-notable ramifications. Modest Geniustalk 18:50, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Avalanche buries Pakistani village
Initial report from the BBC[16] puts the death toll at 38. __meco (talk) 17:41, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Leaning towards support. An avalanche that buries an entire village and kills 38 people seems like ITN material. We still need an update and a blurb. Physchim62(talk) 18:26, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Shouldn't we include the village aspect. I think the fact that a village "was buried" is mentionable here. __meco (talk) 20:14, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I'm helping to expand the article now. - JuneGloom07Talk? 21:16, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Article now looks more than adequate to meet ITN criteria thanks to June's efforts. How about:
It's already posted but I'll throw in weak support. A fairly large-scale tragedy. More deaths than the Halle train crash.--Johnsemlak (talk) 03:41, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. FAA says it was a Piper PA-28 Cherokee, so the accident, while tragic for those involved, is more like a road accident than anything else. Minus three points on the credibility scale for CNN for giving it minute-by-minute coveragePhyschim62(talk) 18:32, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
According to CNN, it was confirmed to be an attack, not an accident. --TorsodogTalk 18:35, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
*Oppose 1-sentence only!!!....--TheFEARgod (Ч) 18:47, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
An attack by a four-seater plane? A great rallying call, that reminds everyone of Pearl Harbour! As I said above, CNN does not seen to be a WP:RS on this story. I urge the greatest care before posting this, as we do with all air accidents wherever they happen. Physchim62(talk) 18:49, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Oppose. The news media is already treating this minor incident like the next 9/11 ("PLANE SMASHED INTO BUILDING!"). Let's not contribute to the hysteria. ShadowUltra (talk) 19:22, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - While I consider this item very interesting, it is not important enough historically for this section on an encyclopedia. Wikinews is handling the news coverage aspect just fine. Blood Red Sandman(Talk)(Contribs) 20:03, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - I'm not normally one to throw around claims of U.S. centrism, but...--WaltCip (talk) 20:31, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - It's an interesting item, but I agree that it doesn't belong in the ITN section. __meco (talk) 21:32, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
changing my vote to neutral. This story seems to have a greater scope than the initial impression would have led us to think. There appears to be a lot of sentiment coming to the surface in the wake of this. Also the development that Facebook is actively censoring support groups for the dead pilot is quite interesting. __meco (talk) 14:48, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support - If we can mention a shooting at a mall where only six people were harmed on ITN, we can mention this. --J4\/4 <talk> 21:59, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe that means we just shouldn't mention shooting attacks (they don't get much readership anyway). Physchim62(talk) 22:07, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Shootings should be dealt with on a case-by-case basis. While some should be here, I am far from convinced as many should appear as do - again, they are something I find interesting, but that doesn't mean there's any rationale for posting here. Blood Red Sandman(Talk)(Contribs) 22:39, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose the article even existing. I imagine it will fall to WP:NOTNEWS at AfD eventually; we don't need to mention a very minor incident because someone used a plane to kill himself against a gun. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 22:57, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I'm not going to pile another oppose onto what is now a very battered nomination. I think its probably had enough punishment for today! :) Instead, I just want to point out how this case illustrates perfectly the sensationalising of news that often prevails in the media, even from what should be a respectable source such as CNN --Daviessimo (talk) 23:10, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
People were pretty transfixed by it at my workplace. It certainly is an interesting story. Two of the four most-read stories on cnn.com now deal with the plane-crash guy. I'm not saying it should be on ITN, only that we can't blame CNN for giving the people what they want. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 00:43, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
They could do it in a less sensational way. I'm fascinated by such tales and the motivation behind them, but that doesn't mean I condone media sensationalism.Blood Red Sandman(Talk)(Contribs) 01:17, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Just another of pipers crash. Too few deaths.--yousaf465 03:36, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support crashing a plane into a building - rare and notable event.--TheFEARgod (Ч) 14:28, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support extremely rare event, which has garnered more reads than most news stories posted on here. Seems to me most people are opposed because of their perceived notion that it was over-sensationalized by CNN and less by the actual event. Guess you're all above the "hype." Please. --Cdman882 (talk) 14:49, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
well till the AfD discussion is over it can not go up. so oppose (would have opposed on grounds that it was a tiny plane with personal motive and one death besides the attacker)-- Ashish-g55 15:03, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: The result of the AFD was keep per WP:SNOW. AFD went for a grand total of less than 15 minutes; I would've agreed with the result, though. Lengthening the discussion at this time will cause more wiki-drama. –HowardtheDuck 15:23, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: Yeah, a man writes a scathing 3,000 word "manifesto/suicide note," posts it online, sets his home on fire, targets and hits a building which houses nearly 200 Federal employees, attempting to take out as many as possible with full fuel tanks, and it is not worthy of a coveted Wiki In the News spot. No news here people, move along... --Cdman882 (talk) 16:30, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The sad reality is these things don't tend to be historically important. However, this one - as noted above - has stirred up feelings. There could well be political controversy caused soon; that would be worthy. Blood Red Sandman(Talk)(Contribs) 12:48, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Far from an everyday occurrence and the article looks good. HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 22:44, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Blurb? And possibly an update to the article that doesn't sound like it's still unclear whether a coup really occurred. -- tariqabjotu 00:25, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I prefer Niger coup d'etat, to avoid confusion hetween Niger and Nigeria.--Johnsemlak (talk) 00:30, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support It's confirmed.--yousaf465 03:39, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I was about to post this on ITN, but I realize that for some bizarre reason, there has been no nomination for this (or I just can't find it). Why? I'm not sure; this seems to be the biggest story just about everywhere. It involves spies, fake passports, murder, intrigue, sex (okay, maybe not)... Its article is very good too. Not sure about the angle for the blurb, though. He was murdered awhile ago, but perhaps we could focus on the fake passports or the UK's response to it. There's clearly a story here though. -- tariqabjotu 11:00, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There's clearly a story somewhere in all this, but what is it? I'm not feeling inspired enough to propose a blurb, so I shall leave that to someone else! Physchim62(talk) 12:05, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
To be honest, I don't think anyone knows what is going on. The British and Irish have summoned their Israeli ambassadors regarding the issue after admitting they have no idea who these people are. Dubai says it is 99% certain Mossad was involved, whilst Israel says it knows nothing. The BBC angle seems to place more emphasis on the possible diplomatic row between Israel and the UK/France/Ireland/Germany if it turns out the Israeli authorities knew that agents had used fake passports from these countries. But... that relies on this being an Israeli operation, which at the moment is only a claim by Dubai. The only facts at the moment are Mahmoud al-Mabhouh has been killed with the 11 people on the run accused of his murder, having used fake passports. My inclination would be to run with FearGod's suggested blurb for now, to be updated as more information becomes apparent --Daviessimo (talk) 16:56, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support FARgod's blurb until we know wtf is going on and which angle to take. HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 17:07, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Posting soon, if there are no objections. --BorgQueen (talk) 18:49, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Afterward support, I believe this to be a rather intriguing entry as well as notable...the person obviously died unexpectedly. SpencerT♦Nominate! 23:29, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Guam name change
Guam - Governor Felix Camacho's executive order that the name of Guam be officially changed to Guahan. So far this applies to official government documents, ceremonies, signs etc. Scanlan (talk) 02:48, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The Guam article needs an update. Support when updated.--Johnsemlak (talk) 03:13, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I will try to update the article today when/if I have the chance. Scanlan (talk) 11:24, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The confusing thing here is that the territory's name in English will still be Guam, I imagine, and will still be referred to Guam in the English press, and on Wikipedia.--Johnsemlak (talk) 11:34, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support: I think WP should redirect Guam to Guahan. --GPPande 11:53, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Name changes of countries (or, in this case, a territory) are not common events. This is not going to change much in the world, but I think readers will be interested. Physchim62(talk) 12:05, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've now added a preliminary, basic section on the name change under Guam#History, but it could just as easily be added under Politics as well. I'll expand and edit it later if possible. Should be OK to post now. Scanlan (talk) 17:04, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I've added more material and citations. Suggest using the Flag of Guam image, which spells out the name "Guam", or a pic of Gov. Felix Camacho as a picture if needed. Scanlan (talk) 02:27, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Good work. Guam#Name change gives a nice bit of background, all the pertinent facts )as far as I can see) and decent references. I see no reason this can't be posted... HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 02:53, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It emerges that fake Irish passports used by suspects in the assassination of a senior Hamas military commander in Dubai had valid numbers with mismatched identities, with the Irish Department of Foreign Affairs embarking on an urgent mission to track the three genuine passport holders with these numbers. (RTÉ)(The Irish Times)
Walgreen Co. announces that it is buying Duane Reade Holdings Inc., operator of a chain of 257 drugstores in the New York City area, for about $1.08 billion including assumption of debt. (Marketwatch)
Five southern Africans, including ArchbishopDesmond Tutu, have their genomes analysed by scientists and published in Nature, with Tutu excited to discover he is "related to the San people, the first people to inhabit Southern Africa". (BBC)
Yes of course, otherwise we are misleading our readers. --candle•wicke 21:32, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No, we don't have "readers", we have people who click on the links in response to our blurbs. Obviously, we correct, or even remove, stories that are on the main template, but I don't see that we have an obligation to correct old stories. Physchim62(talk) 21:53, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think the suspension of an election result is ITN-worthy. HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 00:09, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, upon further thought, I'd say that this is not an overturning of the results, but merely a suspension. It certainly appears that the result is likely to stand. Tymoshenko claims the result was rigged, but according to the BBC article, international observers deemed the result fair. I think we should wait for the court decision, which the BBC says should happen 'in the coming days'. --Johnsemlak (talk) 03:00, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to oppose for the moment, because this is only a suspension. If illegalities are found, the result will be annulled, which is the ITN-worthy story. If nothing is found, the result will stand, Tymoshenko will be called a bitter loser and the whole thing will blow over. As such we don't want to imply this is a major crisis, when, as of yet, it is not --Daviessimo (talk) 08:27, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with Daviessimo. I'd also remark that court challenges over election results are not that uncommon (see Al Franken for just one example). Physchim62(talk) 09:44, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Argentina Falklands claim
(The Times)Argentina has claimed rights to control all shipping heading for the Falkland Islands, almost certainly in an attempt to stop a British drilling rig from entering the area to drill for oil. Article probably at Argentina – United Kingdom relations which needs expansion. Maybe worth waiting to see what they actually do when the rig arrives later today - Dumelow (talk) 11:11, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, unless this all degenerates rapidly. Argentina has long done loads of things to make life difficult for the British in the area, without referring to the obvious Falklands War. Flights have been restricted, Argentinian fishing vessels have strayed into Falklands territorial waters to do work there etc. Unless there is some kind of conflict over this, it doesn't seem too much out of the ordinary to be put on the main page. HonouraryMix (talk) 11:24, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose unless the becomes something major. Argentina likes to rattle their sabres every so often on the Falklands issue, without actually wanting the Royal Navy to come calling again; I suspect this is one of those times. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 11:28, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This is really very minor, simply Argentina reasserting its claim to sovereignty over the islands. It would have been more surprising if there had been no reaction at all. There are bigger incidents between Spain and Gibraltar that never even get reported outside the region. Physchim62(talk) 11:47, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
fair enough, I'll withdraw this then - Dumelow (talk) 11:52, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. The above characterisations of the events in the suggested nomination are totally innaccurate. (my previous posting was inexcusably removed as "trolling" by Physchim62 [19]). MickMacNee (talk) 14:50, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Assassination of a senior Hamas military commander in Dubai:
Dubai police release the passport photographs of 11 “Europeans” suspected of the murder of Mahmoud al-Mabhouh. (BBC)
It emerges those suspected used fake British and Irish passports with Dublin saying it did not issue passports under their names, there is no evidence of their names on official Irish records and the counterfeits contain passport numbers with incorrect combinations of letters and digits. (The Daily Telegraph)
BBC. Tut may not have been murdered. malaria killed him. (i know its a may but please remember this is a historical topic that will always be a may). This is quite a big news in the history department. -- Ashish-g55 03:38, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. The results appear today in the Journal of the American Medical Association[20]. Physchim62(talk) 10:15, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
According to BBC, this is also "the oldest mummified genetic proof for malaria in ancient populations". Anyway, Tutankhamun is an interesting topic worldwide, so I think I'd support this. ≈ Chamaltalk¤ 11:42, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What about his leg and foot? The malaria was only part of it. Simply south (talk) 13:56, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I think the most interesting part of the story is the possibility of more information on the incredibly complex and incestuous family lineage of the Pharoahs, but that is still early days. Neutral. I'm still asking myself whether "Man dies of malaria 3300 years ago in Egypt" is a news story or not! Physchim62(talk) 14:22, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
well tut isnt just some man otherwise they wouldnt be talking about him 3300 years after his death. how he died has been a major topic for quite some time. -- Ashish-g55 14:51, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Very true, but the article abstract says "an accumulation of malformations in Tutankhamun's family was evident." So it probably wasn't just malaria, even if he was infected (which they seem to have shown). Physchim62(talk) 15:16, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
ya as Simply south said there were some leg and foot thing involved (weak bones apparently). can mention that once article is properly updated -- Ashish-g55 16:15, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm thinking of something along the lines of "DNA analysis traces the ancestry of Tutankhamun back through five generations, and suggests that he died of malaria.". However, it depends on the updates: I don't have access to the complete article. Physchim62(talk) 16:25, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The theory that he was murdered has never had that wide an acceptance, the evidence about the leg injury has been around for years, as has knowledge that life threatening diseases were rife 3000+ years ago. It will never be more than speculation. oppose. Kevin McE (talk) 11:04, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I know this has been reported everywhere from Al Jazeera to the BBC over the past few days but (apart from the Pope's "heinous crime" comments) I noticed some parts which might be considered significant so I thought I would nominate it. There are two lines from today's RTÉ coverage which caught my eye: "Last night, the bishops stayed in Vatican accommodation that is reserved for Cardinals when they are electing a new Pope" and "It is the first such Pastoral to be devoted exclusively to child abuse by priests and religious". Is there any support for including something from this summit as it seems unusual (in my opinion)? --candle•wicke 21:32, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If Benny were to sack Bishop Drennan (Irish bishop accused of covering up child-abusing priests, who refuses to resign of his own accord) then I would support, but that's not going to happen in the proverbial month of Sundays. As it is, I think I'm going to have to give it the same treatment we reserve for political speeches, as I feel that that's what this is. Oppose. Physchim62(talk) 21:52, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You might be interested in this analysis. That picture is on the front of all the newspapers, it's a shame they don't have it online. --candle•wicke 21:56, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, I have to concur. If/when actual action is taken, re-evaluate, but right now I have to oppose as a glorified speech. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 06:49, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A Naxalite attack on an army camp in West Bengal kills 24 Indian soldiers, with many more reported missing.--TheFEARgod (Ч) 15:12, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(New York Times). The attack occurred yesterday on a camp of the Eastern Frontier Rifles and was made by more than 100 Naxalites armed with rifles and mortars. In addition to the 24 dead paramilitary police officers four Naxalites are believed to have been killed. This seems significant, support once a decent article is available - Dumelow (talk) 18:02, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
forgot to link the article .. --TheFEARgod (Ч) 18:13, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Some of that article is a copy vio. Much of it comes from here and here. It needs to be rewritten in your own words - Dumelow (talk) 18:47, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The reference section is made up of bare URLs as well. --candle•wicke 22:03, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
so what? this is not an FA nom.--TheFEARgod (Ч) 23:39, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
References are all formatted correctly now. __meco (talk) 09:59, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Significant in size. The Indian insurgency movements rarely receive international coverage and most people are oblivious to their even existing. This item would seem to be important enough to be featured on ITN, and should. __meco (talk) 00:13, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yes indeed a large attack, veterans may rewrite it to be posted on the ITN.--yousaf465 04:24, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The issues with the article now are very minor. It could be restructured somewhat and tightened up a bit, but in large it is quite presentable now. __meco (talk) 09:59, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Except that paragraph one is essentially copied word-for-word from here, first half of para 2 from here, the entire rest of the article is presented as direct quotes of sections of news stories. This is not ready for the main page - Dumelow (talk) 10:47, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support: Big & bold attack with heavy casualty. --GPPande 10:42, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. The blurb should say that it took place in India, not just West Bengal.--Johnsemlak (talk) 16:02, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment If this happened on February 13, isn't this already below the fold (of ITN)? -- tariqabjotu 17:24, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
the NYT article says it happened on Monday (15th). Our article might be wrong - Dumelow (talk) 17:31, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Anyway, I'm going to assume that February 13 is just wrong and change the date to February 15. I don't see any sources saying it happened on Saturday, and it seems no one actually involved in writing the article has the desire to figure out the correct date. -- tariqabjotu 10:08, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Where I can't find it in ITN.--yousaf465 03:41, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Problem solved.--yousaf465 03:53, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider
Scientists working at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) announced that they had made the first observations of symmetry transformations, and that their observations may suggest that "bubbles" formed in the aftermath of the collisions created in the RHIC may not obey mirror symmetry. The experiments produced temperatures in excess of "7.2 trillion degrees", in what is described as an attempt to recreate the conditions which existed during the birth of the Universe. — V = IR(Talk • Contribs) 08:18, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm always happy with science news. But, we need to be careful. Have the results been published in a peer-reviewed journal yet? At the moment, I see too many may-s in the story, better wait. --Tone 09:16, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I understand, but I'd like to make this observation: the "may-s" are intentional in physics/science articles, and are really more appropriate then less uncertain terminology would be. There are very few certainties in physics... — V = IR(Talk • Contribs) 19:01, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose until the news item is referenced with something better than a rehash of a press release on a site called "Science a Go Go". I looked in Physical Review Letters (which comes out on Fridays) but couldn't find the original article. Physchim62(talk) 16:03, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. No refereed article provided, no indication of why this is a significant breakthrough (I'm a physicist and I'm nonplussed by this), and saying it disagrees with a theory which currently has no observational evidence anyway is just plain weird. Modest Geniustalk 17:03, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
According to the NYT (and Useless Today - or USA Today for those of you who like them) it has been published:
The Brookhaven scientists and their colleagues discussed their latest results from RHIC in talks and a news conference at a meeting of the American Physical Society Monday in Washington, and in a pair of papers submitted to Physical Review Letters. “This is a view of what the world was like at 2 microseconds,” said Jack Sandweiss of Yale, a member of the Brookhaven team, calling it, “a seething cauldron.”
That merely says the articles have been "submitted", which is not the same thing as being published. In fact, if they've only been submitted, Brookhaven are being a bit naughty in issuing the press release. Still, it's Brookhaven, they'll get away with it... won't do for ITN though. Physchim62(talk) 19:05, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Uh huh.. I could keep quoting, but I'd suggest reading the article. The guys at Brookhaven are being more responsible then the CERN folks. — V = IR(Talk • Contribs) 19:32, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Really? When was the last time CERN announced a new science result in advance of its publication? I can't see any press releases that do so over at least the last 3 years. Modest Geniustalk 16:36, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(BBC). This guy has been described as the top Taliban military commander for Afghanistan. He was captured in Karachi seven to nine days ago but the US have just announced it (Pakistan have not yet confirmed it). Article needs some work - Dumelow (talk) 11:30, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support: Prize catch! First major blow to Taliban since death of Baitullah Mehsud. --GPPande 12:12, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Karachi is in Pakistan. Also I thought he had been captured by intelligence services (ie. ISI and CIA)? - Dumelow (talk) 12:28, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Also why do we require two articles - one about the terrorist & another of his capture. Better merge. --GPPande 12:34, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
PostedPakistan. -- tariqabjotu 16:18, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Remove Until we don't have a confirmation, we can't act on rumors only. According to news report he was killed way back in 2007 too, so wait until , he confirmed as captured, instead of being killed again in 2011.--yousaf465 04:19, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This has been a bit of an ongoing row over the Swiss arrest of Gaddafi's son, but it has spread now, with the Libyans not issuing visas to any country that is part of the Schengen Agreement. Anyone else think this is notable? --Daviessimo (talk) 21:15, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That seems like a fairly extreme response, and sounds notable to me. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 23:11, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Reading the section, all of the info happened last year...I'm not sure why this is notable now. Could you clarify? SpencerT♦Nominate! 23:22, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The article isn't updated. Libya only just today announced that they are suspending visas for Schengen members. But this doesn't have to (directly) do with the arrest of Gaddafi's son; it has to do with some list of Libyan government officials Switzerland banned from entering the country. -- tariqabjotu 23:25, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support when updated. --BorgQueen (talk) 05:19, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've updated both Libya–Switzerland relations and Foreign relations of Libya, with the ban. My inclination would be to use the latter article (Foreign relations...) as this visa ban affects 25 different countries. Suggested blurb:
Should probably be the 25 countries in the Schengen area, even if we will get some moans about the European microstates. Support. Physchim62(talk) 17:41, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Convicted and sentenced for terrorism conspiracy after "longest terror trial in Australian History" (BBC), (ninemsn) 220.101.28.25 (talk) 09:49, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: A frequent event across globe in many countries. --GPPande 15:08, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Where they actually convicted and given a sentence today/yesterday or just locked up. The reason I ask is the article seems to suggest that court case finished in October last year --Daviessimo (talk) 15:51, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Reply Convicted October 2009, just sentenced as per NINEMSN link, para. 6. --220.101.28.25 (talk) 08:01, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support - this isn't very frequent unless you watch the never-ending coverage given to terror fearmongering on American news broadcasts. ;) But seriously now: this is certainly important enough to be featured on ITN, but please don't post until the article has been improved and the tag removed. —Ed(talk • majestic titan) 16:36, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The article was already featured on ITN in October 2009. --BorgQueen (talk) 07:29, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Terrorism is just not that important, whatever some governments would like us to believe. Certainly not important enough for a second ITN posting. Physchim62(talk) 10:11, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Probably best to keep an eye on this - reports are saying up to 20 dead, but as of yet unsubstantiated --Daviessimo (talk) 09:27, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Creating a starter stub... Tentative support when more is known. --Tone 09:45, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The article is more or less ready. Two trains collide near Halle, Belgium, killing and injuring several people and disrupt high speed rail services. --Tone 12:23, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'd possibly put "causing widespread disruption to high speed rail services", as the impacts are being felt in France, the Netherlands and Germany as well --Daviessimo (talk) 12:29, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Agree. I'd like to see some more support before this goes up. --Tone 12:30, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Seems to be big. Article of agreeable length. — Cargoking talk 13:02, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Posted. Feel free to alter the blurb when more details are known. --Tone 13:56, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose and take down. How is this of any international interest or significance? Replace "Halle, Belgium" with "Topeka, Kansas", and this would have gone down in flames. There is absolutely no reason to post a train wreck after only two supports. This should be taken down, and discussed at much more length before being reposted. Scottaka UnitAnode 14:32, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I make it three supports + the nom. You;re taking this bias thing to an extreme. The exact location is irrelevant- it's the impact of the incident and its effect. If a similar incident happened in Kansas, I'd support that and I expect it would be posted. HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 14:39, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yup, totally US biased. Which way is the bias is clear with Daviessimo's refs above :-) --GPPande 15:05, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A quick look at major news websites outside the region of influence (like CNN or al-Jazeera) indicates that it's of international interest, even if it has little effect outside Belgium or surrounding countries. -- tariqabjotu 15:06, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The irony is of course, that not only does this have huge international interest (as Tariq points out above), but it also has international significance because high speed rail services in Germany, France, Holland and the UK have all been affected in some way --Daviessimo (talk) 15:11, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Meh, another transportation accident. Certainly getting news coverage. Anyway, Neutral but not opposed.--Johnsemlak (talk) 18:22, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Support, as Daviessimo says - this has affected trains in other countries. --candle•wicke 18:24, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'd be hard for even a small accident not to affect other countries in Belgium.--Johnsemlak (talk) 18:28, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand. How many countries are in Belgium? --candle•wicke 18:29, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry poorly worded. I'd be hard for a small accident in Belgium not to affect other countries.--Johnsemlak (talk) 18:32, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, they do speak three different languages in the country and given certain internal pressures it could be conceivable that there is actually more than one country in Belgium :) --Daviessimo (talk) 18:37, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well it seems to be the top story in other countries, Ireland and the UK for example. And, regarding Ireland, it has been above all the bishops meeting the Pope about child abuse. Don't know what the major UK event of the day is, possibly that lottery win. On other continents, CNN, CBC, India, New Zealand. --candle•wicke 18:41, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral, though I agree that this item should have been discussed more before it went up. --PlasmaTwa2 23:34, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. While the reasoning that this is an "international" event is merely a reflection of the fact that Europe is divided into small countries, I think this is of interest to a lot of readers since we have a lot of users from Western Europe and it's close to the UK and Ireland. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 00:52, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The reasoning also included several non-European countries - Canada, India, Japan, New Zealand, for example. But you're right about it having to do with where the accident took place, just look at the difference between the media coverage of this and the transport deaths in Nigeria... ;-( --candle•wicke 22:07, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Such events are not uncommon in northern France. 20,000 people is more than usual, but there are several smaller operations each year. Physchim62(talk) 10:09, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
All-star games aren't ITN items normally, but I think this is significant for the attendance record. (The previous record was 78,000 or 80,000.) -- Mwalcoff (talk) 04:30, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. This is at most a glorified pick-up game, although the attendance record is for any level of the sport: high school, college, amateur, professional, national team, World Championship, Olympics, pick-up games, any level. –HowardtheDuck 07:04, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Oppose Is the game of any significance other than crowd count? --GPPande 15:10, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, a similar nomination involving rugby union was rejected last year and what's the difference between basketball and rugby union? --candle•wicke 18:26, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I can remember, that event was on a international rugby match, on the semifinal stage, played by teams from the same country, in a stadium that was used large enough to accomodate the people concerned, and the record was for a club rugby match. I'd say this achivement is harder to do, since that match was for a place in a final, and this one is, what I've said, a glorified pick-up game. –HowardtheDuck 07:03, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Opposed; nothing but a glorified exhibition, getting an attendance record in this arena (by the largest ever to hold this competition) was a fait accompli as soon as the venue was announced. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 20:06, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I oppose, but Candlewicke, I think there are major differences between Basketball and Rugby Union. For starters this notes that 450 million people play basketball (not just follow it). Somehow, I doubt the same can be said for rugby union. SpencerT♦Nominate! 23:36, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose if we put this up, the we would have to put up the Germany/United States game during the IIHF 2010 World Championship if it breaks the attendance record for hockey. --PlasmaTwa2 00:36, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What is this and is it important? I can't see it on WP:ITNR but I suppose it could be added if that is desired. Or is McMurray the reason for this being important? --candle•wicke 00:51, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Read the article, Candlewicke, read the article. It is the most important race in NASCAR, sort of like the Super Bowl, except nowhere near as popular, at the beginning of the season, and having only minor effect on who wins the championship (so, not like the Super Bowl at all). It's prestigious in NASCAR, but not prestigious in auto racing overall, insofar as I can tell. I assume if it was omitted from ITNR, there was a reason. -- tariqabjotu 01:01, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It is difficult to tell from the largely unsourced article if it was internationally important, that was why I asked. --candle•wicke 01:18, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Dude, I remember back in May the Indy 500 results was posted on ITN. Richard (talk) 01:33, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I see. That appears to be on the recurring items list. You would need to add more sources to this though if you want to avoid opposes for that reason alone. --candle•wicke 01:35, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Daytona 500 is huge. Everybody knows that. It kicks the Minor Olympics Ass, as the septics would say. It is also more important than any of the dirge that has somehow made its way onto the front page in the last few hours. MickMacNee (talk) 01:41, 15 February 2010 (UTC) With apologies to the Americas Cup, which is of course a fine event. MickMacNee (talk) 01:43, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Please refrain from referring to Americans as "septics." I'm familiar with the rhyming slang with which the expression originates, and the connotation is rather uncivil (as one would assume from the word itself). —David Levy 01:47, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It is an affectionate term, much like limey etc. MickMacNee (talk) 01:54, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It also is used in a derogatory context, and I assure you that not all Americans regard a comparison with a septic tank as "affectionate." It isn't exactly comparable to an association with citrus fruits. —David Levy 02:06, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've never met an American yet who didn't take it in the good humour it is always intended in. Maybe its just the company I keep. MickMacNee (talk) 02:17, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
More likely, it's because you consistently use the term affectionately. Not everyone does. —David Levy 02:37, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)I'll support in principle, but in practice, the article desperately lacks refs. Obviously if/when that's addressed, you can consider this a full support. HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 02:08, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as it is now. Upon improvement of the article I'll reconsider. WizardmanOperation Big Bear 02:51, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. As per Tariqabjotu. It's big in the US but not elsewhere. And honestly, if you look at the US press, it's not being covered that prominently. Pretty much everywhere I've checked the Olympics and the NBA All-star game are higher-profile events.--Johnsemlak (talk) 02:53, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. While I know ITN decisions are not precedential, the fact that we have three open-wheel races to me indicates we ought to have the most important stock-car race. I know NASCAR isn't followed everywhere, but it has quite a passionate following among a whole lot of people. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 04:21, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - this is one race, in one series of motorsport. The Indy 500, Monaco GP and Le Mans are posted because they form part of the triple crown, which are the three most prestigious individual races. Also, if we post a stock car event, why not a touring car event, why not a Rallying event, or why not a Rallycross event, all or which are more popular forms of motorsport than NASCAR in the international arena --Daviessimo (talk) 08:07, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. It's utter nonsense that a train crash in Belgium sails through, but the result of the most important race in the most popular racing series in the US is stonewalled, because "it's big in the US but not elsewhere." I only poke my head in here from time to time, to see if any of this BS bias has changed. It apparently has not. Scottaka UnitAnode 15:13, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Can you not see the hypocrisy in what you are stating. You're quite clearly advocating putting up an item with no real international interest or significance yet at the same time moaning about the inclusion of another item, which you claim suffers from exactly the same problem? --Daviessimo (talk) 15:20, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)Actually, the biggest problem is not its location, as you'd like to believe, but the quality of the article. The reason this discussion has stagnated is that nobody has bothered to add more references. Perhaps you'd care to add some or do we have to put an almost totally unreferenced article on the Main Page to counter some imaginary bias? Note that the America's Cup sailed trough (sorry, couldn't resist) yesterday... HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 15:28, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If I was convinced that adding references would see it posted, I would do so. However, my experience here tells me that it would not. Even if the article were FA status, most of the above opposers would not be swayed. Scottaka UnitAnode 15:36, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In other words, you aren't interested in improving the article for the sake of having a better article.
For the record, I would support its inclusion if it were in decent shape. Until such time, I oppose. —David Levy 15:41, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That's not my point. My point is that if I were convinced that were the only reason people were opposing, I'd go improve it myself. But I don't edit NASCAR-related articles much, so why would I put an hour or two into researching it for the ITN crowd, when the Tariqs and Daviessimos are going to knee-jerk oppose it anyway? There should just be a standard template with an output of "Oppose, too American." Scottaka UnitAnode 15:52, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Have you even read my comment? I clearly explain that only the 3 races that consist the triple crown go up, because they are globally accepted as the three most prestigious individual races (I suppose the fact that only one is a US based race illustrates further anti-American bias). I ask a simple question, why does Daytona deserve to go up, ahead of other motorsport events, whether they be the World Touring Car Championship, World Rally Championship or Moto GP. After all, it is only one race in one championship. Simple arguing, "oh its big in America" is not in my mind a valid argument. --Daviessimo (talk) 16:02, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(EC)Well first of all you could find sources that show media across the globe have an interest in it. I've had a look on the BBC, Le Monde and Al Jazeera and can find no mention of it at all (all of these sources and many more have the Belgian train crash as the top story). That for me suggests there is virtually no interest in it outside of the US. Simply complaining that because others oppose it, that there is some form of 'anti-American conspiracy' is silly and quite frankly very tiring. It seems that anyone who opposes the inclusion of an American item, whilst at the same time supporting a non American item is automatically branded as an 'America-hating-Europe/Africa/Asia-loving-biased-loony'. --Daviessimo (talk) 15:48, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, and the same wild accusations often are hurled when someone supports the inclusion of an American item and opposes the inclusion of a non-American item. I wish that we could move past this nonsense.
In this case, I believe that the event qualifies because it's the "most prestigious race" in the Sprint Cup Series, which is "the de facto premier series of stock car racing." We have longstanding agreement to include the premier competitions of all major sports (including those confined primarily to a single nation, though this one apparently is popular in five), provided that the requisite article creation/update has occurred (which it hasn't in this instance). —David Levy 16:09, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with you that we need to move away from this mud slinging that goes on repeatedly and I admit that in the past I have sometimes been involved, but nowadays I try and be a subjective as possible (hence the reasoning of my argument). Now, in response I would say I'm not opposed to a NASCAR item being listed, as long as we extend the same rules to rallying, touring cars, and motorcycle racing and allow these items to be included on the main page also. However, within these forms of motorsport the priority for a driver or team is winning the championship, as opposed to one race and instead of a single race listing we would be better posting the drivers champion. I don't know enough about NASCAR to comment on which is bigger for the driver - winning Daytona or winning the champioship, but I feel only one should be listed --Daviessimo (talk) 16:21, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I agree 100% that every major sport (motor or otherwise) should receive equivalent treatment, irrespective of where in the world it's popular. And you're quite right that what constitutes "equivalent treatment" must be determined on a case-by-case basis. For example, the FIFA World Cup is the premier competition of association football, but we also include annual association football competitions that are comparable in prestige to other sports' premier competitions. —David Levy 16:42, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Article needs references and some expanding, otherwise I would support. @Davessimo, probably the championship, but not by much. —Ed(talk • majestic titan) 16:33, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
After all this discussion there's still only one reference in the article.--Johnsemlak (talk) 18:10, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support, and while I know nothing about auto racing, I was able to put seven more references into the article. (But I'm too ignorant of the sport to try and re-vamp the prose) Bradjamesbrown (talk) 20:42, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support NASCAR is a major sport in North America. I do not follow the sport, but I am aware that the Daytona 500 is a huge race. --PlasmaTwa2 23:36, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose the skill level of the the drivers is lower than in a few other motorsport categories. Yes, driving around in a velodrome....the likes of JP Montoya aside YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars photo poll) 00:11, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Your opinion of the sport's quality is entirely irrelevant. —David Levy 00:31, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Not to mention, totally wrong. MickMacNee (talk) 12:43, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well... if their skill level is lower... maybe it does say something about the quality of the sport compared to other events? --candle•wicke 22:10, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What does it matter now? The nomination is now in the tar pit, any reply detailing the deficiencies of Yellowmonkey's opposition rationale would be a waste of time. MickMacNee (talk) 23:41, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(Edit conflict.) This debate shows the pointlessness of trying to compare different sports. How can you judge the comparative skill levels of people in two completely different types of event? It's like trying to say whether rugby or American football players are better. And does skill level really determine whether a sporting event is "big" or not? The Pro Bowl undoubtedly has a higher average skill level than does the Super Bowl, because the Pro Bowl players are theoretically the best in the league at their positions, but most fans consider the Pro Bowl a joke. The United Football League probably has a higher average skill level than does Big Ten football, yet the Big Ten plays to six-figure crowds and large television audiences while the United Football League gets tiny crowds and TV viewership. The way to determine the importance of a sporting event is by asking how many people care about it and how much they care about it. In 2004, a Gallup poll of American adults found 30 percent called themselves auto-racing fans, below pro and college football, MLB, figure skating and college and pro basketball but ahead of golf, tennis, hockey and WWE. (NASCAR is by far the most popular circuit among American racing fans.) And some of those NASCAR fans have insane passion for it -- when Dale Earnhart Sr. died, people were stealing Coke machines with his picture on them and hanging out flags at half-staff. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 23:52, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
support. but only if this is made an ITNR item and the only NASCAR item. there should not be another similar debate for daytona 500 or attempts to get other nascar races like pepsi 400 up by saying those are more popular than this one... -- Ashish-g55 23:59, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well a decision needs to be made soon, because otherwise it will be made by default (i.e. the Daytona result won't go up so we'll be left with the champion at the end of the season). Personally I favour the champion because an individual race result is likely to be more problematic and controversial and realistically we already post the three race results that are considered most prestigious. I'll add the items tentatively to ITNR in the meantime. @Mwalcoff, the perception that the skill level in NASCAR is lower is more than likely due to the fact that to non fans, the common perception is the only thing that happens is that the cars crash a lot (there' even an article on Nascar crashes! :) --Daviessimo (talk) 08:14, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Misfired rockets kill civilians
Sky News: "The head of the international force in Afghanistan has apologised after 12 Afghan civilians were killed by two stray rockets during Operation Moshtarak". BBC: "President Hamid Karzai has called for an investigation into the civilian deaths. [...] The use of the the rocket system involved has been suspended pending a review". This event "happened less than 24 hours after [Karzai] warned troops to take all precautions to protect residents of the region". This is apparently "very damaging" (Frank Gardner: BBC) for the reputation of this campaign. --candle•wicke 00:26, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Does anyone care about these people? --candle•wicke 03:33, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral - The event itself is not that notable (unfortunately), however, given the high intensity coverage of this operation this is likely to be more heavily scrutinised. Any thoughts where the updates would go? --Daviessimo (talk) 08:11, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support butwe can merge with the news item about the operation itself, by rewording it.--yousaf465 09:01, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Blurb perhaps? Either way, considering more civilians were killed in the operation today, what can we be expected to say? Civilians are killed in a military operation? Doesn't sound particularly unusual, unfortunately. -- tariqabjotu 16:19, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah but the President has ordered an investigation, commentators are saying it is damaging for the entire operation, the rocket system is suspended... lots more effects than people just dying. --candle•wicke 22:14, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Reuters: "Rolling Stone magazine referred to the band as "the new fab four," a reference to the Beatles". --candle•wicke 01:00, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If nothing else, that bloody song is now playing on a loop in my head. MickMacNee (talk) 01:55, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to oppose. Not really all that notable. SpencerT♦Nominate! 23:43, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What has happened to this page? --NOTKs0stm(T•C•G) 09:43, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Wait, I said that... --candle•wicke 09:44, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Misplaced nowiki tag caused the whole page to nowiki. Ks0stm(T•C•G) 09:45, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, thought we were under attack. --candle•wicke 09:48, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If America's Cup is to be the target article, it will need some serious work on it- the coverage of the 2010 event is currently 2 lines and the article is tagged with {{refimprove}}. HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 18:24, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed it does. I have no strong opinion either way on the nom, though I'd like to see the refs properly formatted in the article- there are a number of bare URLs. Other than that, the article looks pretty good. HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 19:33, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
ITNR, so support. Article looks adequate.--Johnsemlak (talk) 20:36, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The vast majority of references are still bare URLs- no accessdates, authors, publication dates, titles, publishers etc. I know it seems like nitpicking, but if it's to go on the Main Page, I feel this should be addressed. This is my only objection to the nom. HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 21:12, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I agree it should be of a higher standard for the Main Page (but have already encountered unhappiness when I suggested similar for the Superbowl). Then again this does not appear to be an annual event. --candle•wicke 21:27, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support, on ITNR, decent looking article. Sure the references could be formatted better, but there's loads of them and I don't think that's enough of a problem to prevent it going up. Modest Geniustalk 23:48, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think the score is supposed to be posted. --candle•wicke 00:30, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Posted I think I got it right. The lead of the article is very difficult to follow. -- tariqabjotu 00:35, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Not opposing, as it's ITNR, but is the America's Cup that big a deal nowadays? An American boat won it, and it's getting almost zero coverage in the US (e.g. not a single mention at the ESPN main page. I know it was a large sensation back in the 80s when a non-US team won it for the first time but is it really that big now? From a US perspective, it certainly seems like the Daytona 500 or the NBA All-Star Game are bigger events; and the NBA All-star game is surely bigger globally.--Johnsemlak (talk) 03:01, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Concur with Johsemlak. This is an ITN-worthy event when there is an initial regatta to determine which boat races against the Cup-holder. This year's event was hardly covered in the mainstream media, as far as I can see. -- Flyguy649talk 03:04, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sure it could always be removed from ITNR and the Main Page if there is new evidence that it is not important enough. --candle•wicke 03:18, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with previous comments that the America's Cup was a big deal in the '80s but does anyone really follow it anymore? -- Mwalcoff (talk) 04:24, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I don't suggest we remove it without getting some more input. The America's Cup is certainly a very notable event, being the oldest trophy in modern sport, according to our article. It certainly is the world's premier sailing event, and it does have a global profile. Not many sporting events inspire heads of state to encourage workers to show up late for work. It just seems like now the's a very small amount of global interest in this.--Johnsemlak (talk) 04:30, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The BBC have covered it and it is currently the top item on the 'other sports' section (that is all sports other than those big in the UK like football, cricket, rugby, golf, F1 etc etc), ahead of NASCAR and basketball (neither of which are not mentioned at all). Sailing is a global pastime and sport, so I personally think it should remain on ITNR. I also think its worth pointing out that the Olympics seems to be dominating most sports coverage, with only the rugby (six nations) and football (the proper kind :P), still getting a mention in the UK at the moment. As such its hard to judge notability by media coverage in the circumstances --Daviessimo (talk) 09:03, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I wouldn't call top headline in the 'other sports' section is prime coverage, though like you said it could be because of the Olympics. I'll just cite one alternative news source, the sports section of El Pais which features multiple headlines related to rugby six nations and the NBA game but nothing on the America's cup (or NASCAR). So coverage of it certainly varies. On another note, though I'm not sure this is relevant, I'll point out that while sailing is a global pastime, competing in the America's Cup is really only possible for a small wealthy minority.--Johnsemlak (talk) 19:54, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. For those reasons. Also struck by the quote from (3) — "Not to read Dick Francis because you don't like horses," remarked one reviewer in Newsweek, "is like not reading Dostoyevsky because you don't believe in God." --candle•wicke 16:58, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, we just had a death posted. I'm not so sure about posting another one. This person certainly died well after the height of his career. Oppose for now.--Johnsemlak (talk) 17:03, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There is no proper death on the Main Page right now. Nodar Kumaritashvili's is a special case which, as I said at the time, was unlikely to have been posted had he not died in those exact circumstances at that exact moment, and it is part of the 2010 Winter Olympics opening ceremony ITN. Dick's bibliography would suggest he has been writing as recently as last year, indicating he was not finished. --candle•wicke 17:12, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, personally I'm not sure we meet the criteria 'very important figure in their field of expertise, and was recognized as such.' (unless we consider his field 'horse racing crime thriller writing'). He won some awards but I don't see that he won the Man Booker Prize for example or something of similar stature. In comparison to J.D. Salinger's death, which we recently featured, I see, well, no comparison. And so far I don't see an extensive media reaction to his death as we saw with McQueen.--Johnsemlak (talk) 17:25, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose He was 89 for gods sake. MickMacNee (talk) 17:32, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - per above. - TouLouse (talk) 18:36, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support - He was a famous and notable novelist. --FixmanPraise me 21:05, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I like his books and so forth, but there's no significance or unexpectedness to it. --Smashvilletalk 21:23, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"King of fiction"? Also, CBC is now saying he "sold more than 60 million books in 20 languages ". He "won many accolades including The Edgar Allen Poe Award in 1970 and 1980, the Gold Dagger Award in 1980 and the British Crime Writers' Association lifetime achievement Cartier Diamond Dagger Award in 1989". "He remains the only three-time winner of the Mystery Writers of America Edgar Award for Best Novel". The Queen is even reported to be "saddened by the news". Reuters: "Francis rode more than 350 winners, and was champion jockey before injury forced him to take up the pen, first writing for a national newspaper as a racing correspondent and then producing more than 40 novels, many of them international bestsellers". --candle•wicke 21:55, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The men's downhill skiing is postponed due to "slushy conditions", with the women's super-combined event having already been postponed. (BBC)(Sky Sports)
It is unknown how many were on the bus. Some of the dead were just passing by as well. --candle•wicke 15:25, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
30+ dead now. "The two buses, whose occupants were electrocuted, were registered and painted with the Rivers State Ministry of Transport colours". --candle•wicke 15:28, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. This can't be a common occurrence. Do we have an article or shall I create one? HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 15:32, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) 40 deaths, 30+ injuries actually. "Hundreds of residents who witnessed the evacuation of the charred remains of the victims to the morgue at Braithwaite Memorial Hospital, wailed openly some of the victims were burnt beyond recognition". --candle•wicke 15:34, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Can't see an article, should be possible to create something with all those links. --candle•wicke 15:36, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Considering what events have been ignored in the last few days, it would be mad to post this non-event. Still, that probably means it will now go up in a few hours. MickMacNee (talk) 17:35, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not even going to bother rebutting that. The arguments provided above completely invalidate it, though I would ask how often 40 people are electrocuted in a bus on the way to work? HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 17:42, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Deaths by electrocution has, among others, the interesting electrocution execution of Topsy (elephant) from 1903. It doesn't seem to have many incidents involving such a large amount of people though, suggesting that perhaps they are not very common. --candle•wicke 18:37, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I would say that the same can be said for every single nomination on this page. It makes no difference as to whether they get posted, or ignored. MickMacNee (talk) 18:54, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
So that's an automatic oppose for everything on this page from you (or am I reading that incorrectly)? Ore you opposing to see if it is more likely than something you've supported to be posted? And if it makes no difference why are you here or why does ITN exist? I'm a little confused. --candle•wicke 19:22, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The BBC is still reporting 'at least' 10 deaths; none of the sources cited here are confirming more than that, though there seems to be lots of speculation that the death toll is higher. I'm inclined to wait until there's at least firmer information on the death toll. While it certainly is an unusual accident, 10 deaths is not a number that makes it that notable of an event. Oppose for now.--Johnsemlak (talk) 19:28, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Just for the record, there are only 9 deaths in the India bombing on ITN now, but I don't think death toll is the right measure to be using. This is far from a common event, though I agree we should wait for more info to come out and a confirmed death toll. I could do with a hand getting the article up to scratch- I'm struggling to find a lot of information, but I'll keep working on it. HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 19:37, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm saying that 'it doesn't happen everyday' is irrelevant, it doesn't add any weight to this, or any other suggtestion. I'll oppose any nomination if this is the only reason given for it, while others are simply ignored. MickMacNee (talk) 19:30, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I try not to ignore (m)any nominations unless I lack time. Is there one you would like me to help you with? :-) --candle•wicke 19:40, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. This is an extraordinary occurrence of international concern, for which a well-sourced article has been created. —David Levy 19:51, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A "double bus electrocution"? I don't think that's a common phrase. -- tariqabjotu 00:13, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It's not really a phrase, just a way of describing it using a small number of words. :-) --candle•wicke 00:40, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I think the NASA mission is a lot more notable and has more of a long-term effect on the future and don't think it should be kicked for this. Unfortunately, transport accidents happen all the time, especially in 3rd world countries and more unfortunately, lessons aren't learnt, or not quickly enough YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars photo poll) 00:25, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
1. We don't exclude new items to prevent existing ones from being replaced.
2. Do transport accidents of this nature "happen all the time"? —David Levy 00:31, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
YellowMonkey, under normal circumstances, I'd agree with you, but this is not a collision or a "conventional" accident- ten people died from electrocution on their way to work at 8am which, according to category:accidental deaths by electrocution, seems quite rare. The article is now also of reasonable length and quality for inclusion. The purpose of ITN is, after all, to showcase content which has been updated to reflect current events.
Any help linking to the article would be greatly appreciated. HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 00:46, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
[citation needed] Could a source be provided for the above statement by YellowMonkey? I'm aware some countries have a terrible accident with road records but labelling Nigeria like this may be quite insulting if it turns out to be inaccurate. --candle•wicke 00:48, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Double bus electrocutions? -- tariqabjotu 01:02, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Compared to recent ignored postings, this has negligable support. It's debatable whether it even passes NOT#NEWS, let alone whether it deserves to be on the front page. And some people are wondering why Wikinews is dying on its ass. MickMacNee (talk) 01:51, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I doubt very much the deaths of 10-40 people in unusual circumstances could be considered ordinary or a violation of NOT#NEWS. What on earth does this have to do with Wikinews? --candle•wicke 02:44, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This items was nominated yesterday and again earlier today, but the article is still tagged with a POV issue so it still can't go up. At least we know when this is resolved there is a lot of support --Daviessimo (talk) 20:31, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I do not think the article has a large-enough POV to prevent it from being on ITN. There's a large paragraph in the background section that is mostly UK-related, but the rest is fine and more importantly the recent information is not POV. JollyΩJanner 21:04, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support POV issues have either been resolved or are very minor as I can't spot them. This has been a top story on most news networks all day, we need to get it up on ITN now. -- Love, Smurfy 00:18, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Posted That picture is from February 9, so I don't see how that can be from this offensive. -- tariqabjotu 03:12, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Olympic link
Not to nag, but there seems to be both precedent and consensus for putting a link to Chronological summary of the 2010 Winter Olympics at the bottom of the ITN box (see discussion below). The first medals will be awarded very soon, when should this go up? Lampman (talk) 18:29, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The first medals of the games have been handed out. Any admin that wants to add it, that'd be great. --PlasmaTwa2 19:49, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'm not very familiar with the inclusion criteria, but event seems to satisfy international significance as it is (currently) on front pages of CNN, BBC News, ABC News and Le Monde SPattalk 05:14, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
comment We can probably have a better blurb: "9 killed, more than 45 injured in suspected terrorist blast in western Indian city of Pune" SPattalk 06:33, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Personally I prefer Candlewicke's version because its flows smoothly. "9 killed, 45 injured" is quite disjointed and sounds very tabloidy. Also, I would add India after Pune, because most people probably aren't overly familiar with the states of India --Daviessimo (talk) 09:28, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
9 Killed isn't exactly a huge amount of deaths to warrant ITN posting. However, it's a bombing, and it's not in a country where such high profile bombings are that common. Plus, there were foreigners among the injured. Neutral but not opposed.--Johnsemlak (talk) 10:34, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. The prorogation of the parliament in Canada led to the 2010 Canada anti-prorogation protests, yet neither event was featured on ITN. Should we include every dissolving of parliament on ITN? ~AH1(TCU) 22:14, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The prorogation (sp?) wasn't featured, though perhaps it would have been had it been nominated and supported. (There was discussion of posting the protests but I think the feeling was that we had already missed the boat). However, a dissolution is much more dramatic than a simple parliamentary break; however, Ivory Coast's government is much less stable.--Johnsemlak (talk) 10:27, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. A significant person yes but not ITN worthy. If the person was the leader of the Anglican Church worldwide maybe.--Johnsemlak (talk) 05:36, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I don't think this person was a significant in lay society as, say, the Serbian Orthodox patriarch who we posted a couple of weeks ago. The biography is rather short as well. Physchim62(talk) 10:41, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Significant, but pretty much the only Anglican I'd consider significant enough for ITN would be the Archbishop of Canterbury. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 15:13, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support He is the firth Pacific Iaslander to be made an Anglican bishop, that is more than enought. --FixmanPraise me 17:20, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Bryce's appointment in 1975 represented a signifcant change within the Anglican church, as well as in the Pacific Islands region. On top of the fact that he was the first Pacific Islander to become an Anglican bishop, he was also the longest serving Anglican bishop in the world. Religious figures have been included in the past, and Bryce's death, and appointment, was significant. Support. Scanlan (talk) 21:18, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting weather fact, possibly never having occurred before. --71.230.178.47 (talk) 03:55, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If it snows in Hawaii, then that's something. –HowardtheDuck 04:03, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support if it snows in Hawaii.--Johnsemlak (talk) 05:19, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is, Hawaii isn't expected to get snow, and tentatively, it appears that even 49 states having snow has never happened before. --71.230.178.47 (talk) 05:25, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I was joking really. The thing is we've already reported heavy snows once just recently. This item does look interesting and significant but it's probably a bit too US centric. Also, I assume we don't have an article.Oppose--Johnsemlak (talk) 05:30, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
True, regarding the US centrism and the recurring focus on snow. FWIW, the main winter article now mentions that fact. And BTW, har har: if it did snow in Hawaii, I would personally write an article on the event and make it main page worthy! :P I just figured this would be the next best thing. --71.230.178.47 (talk) 05:35, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, and trout-slap National Public Radio for wasting our time. After all, there probably is snow in Hawaii, given that Mauna Kea rises to nearly 14,000 feet above sea level! We have a photograph of snow on Mauna Kea in our article, which goes on to state: "Snowfall often occurs at elevations above 11,000 feet (3,400 m) during the period from November through March. During particularly cold and wet winters, which are usually linked to La Niña, a snowpack several feet (1 m) deep may remain in the summit region above 13,000 feet (4,000 m) for weeks or months. This permits skiing and other snowplay activities on the slopes of the cinder cones." Physchim62(talk) 09:23, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, but, the people who are actually on Mauna Kea say there's no snow left there at the moment (although they are looking for some in isolated valleys). See [action=search&serendipity[searchTerm]=snow&serendipity[searchButton]=%3E here] for snow in Hawaii! Physchim62(talk) 14:54, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Don't you think a blog is perhaps not the most reliable resource? –Juliancolton | Talk 14:59, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think the blog is very good when it describes this "story" as a "meme". I'm still Opposing actually posting this factoid on ITN. Physchim62(talk) 15:06, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as trivia & cruft, not to mention an accident of state lines. Not important in the slightest. Modest Geniustalk 19:16, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support. This weather event has been featured in many news agencies[23][24][25][26][27][28][29], and an article we could use is winter storms of 2009-2010. There have been superstorms in the US more than once a week for the past two months now and including this bit of information on ITN would provide a good overview of the situation. Since it's implicated in the recent snowfall, we should probably mention the El Nino and Arctic oscillation as well as the unusual jet stream pattern. ~AH1(TCU) 22:30, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose this item is just trivia; we already had an item covering the blizzards. --PlasmaTwa2 00:56, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The very fact that the blizzards are occuring so often is climatologically unusual, and deserves an ITN entry of its own in order to address as big of the whole picture as possible. ENSO and the other oscillations as well as a recent spike in global average temperatures is likely behind this. ~AH1(TCU) 03:13, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support! But then again, I do have the nickname "weatherman" for my obsession with weather =) Ks0stm(T•C•G) 06:40, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose unless every single inch of the country is verified as being covered by at least a spoonful of snow. That just might be unusual enough. --candle•wicke 16:24, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Not that big a deal. I suppose I might support Kenya's first gay wedding, but not this. And anti-gay protests are unfortunately not that notable around the world.--Johnsemlak (talk) 05:33, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Like with the 2008 Summer Olympics, there should be a subsection of ITN opened for Olympic events. This should be populated initially with the blurb in February 12 section for the death of Nodar Kumaritashvili. --Kitch(Talk : Contrib) 01:14, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There is a discussion about this below, and again I'll restate my belief that the death of Kumaritashvili should be its own item on itn. I believe this incident is of more notability than just a small blurb in a subsection. --PlasmaTwa2 01:39, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It would be just as visible in the Olympics subsection. --Kitch(Talk : Contrib) 02:01, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support I believe that through my and several editor's efforts, such as Lordandrei, Musikurt, as well as others, seen in the history: [30]. This should be almost suitable now. --Patar knight - chat/contributions 05:08, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support as said above this is pretty significant. It might stand more chance than those avalanches buried under several days of discussion. :-) --candle•wicke 23:46, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It does sound notable. Support when ready.--Johnsemlak (talk) 04:55, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The offensive has started: the article will therefore be in a state of flux for some time as info is released, but if we wait for the page to be stable, it will no longer be news. Kevin McE (talk) 09:46, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Military articles normally have a large number of contributors and this article is no different (the last 50 edits where made today). It seems well referenced, so once the article is balanced to a more international viewpoint it should be good to post --Daviessimo (talk) 10:29, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I think the article is now in an acceptable state. I have written a front page Wikinews article on this, it is indeed very significant and is making top stories on all major news networks. BBCCNNMSNBCWall Street JournalUSA Today -- Love, Smurfy 15:10, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I still find the article a bit short on background: background information should go back months or years in a case like this where such info is available. At the moment, the article doesn't give any clear information over and above what can be gained from news sources. Oppose. Physchim62(talk) 15:12, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. This has got to be the most pre-publicised operation in the history of warfare. Posting this would not inform anybody of anything, unless they don't have a TV. MickMacNee (talk) 16:38, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
How is that relevant? This is the In The News section, not some weird 'stuff you've never heard of' section. The purpose is to highlight encyclopaedia articles on subjects which are currently in the news. Modest Geniustalk 19:20, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Article is sufficient. Significant development in the War in Afghanistan in that it shows a shift in tactics.--Cdogsimmons (talk) 16:47, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The article still has a tag on it regarding a skewed focus towards the UK perspective. That will need to be fixed before it can go up --Daviessimo (talk) 18:02, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The only 'shift in tactics' I can see is that they pre-announced it, knowing full well that meant the insurgents would just leave beforehand (as well as most of the population too), and thus there would be no awkward rise in casualties. I fail to see how this is a significant development at all. MickMacNee (talk) 18:10, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Operation is under way, and should really be on the front page by now. Mjroots (talk) 18:48, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, since I can't actually see the significance of this. Other than it's big and was pre-publicised, how is it any different to all the other operations that take place in afghanistan? Modest Geniustalk 19:20, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It is being reported as the single largest operation in the country since 2001 involving a combined force of ~15,000 troops --Daviessimo (talk) 20:33, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"Other than it's big"? Size does not automatically result in importance. Modest Geniustalk 00:09, 14 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm thinking this is going to be a fairly major story over the next two weeks. As far as I can tell, this may be the first Winter Olympic fatality. Don't quote me on that. --Smashvilletalk 20:14, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The article will have to be considerably expanded first. --BorgQueen (talk) 20:25, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Give it a couple of hours. If WP has taught me anything, the article will probably be near FA status by tomorrow morning. --Smashvilletalk 23:00, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A fatal accident at the Olympic Games is definitely ITN-worth, imo. Support. 94.212.31.237 (talk) 20:33, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. This was the fourth fatality at the Winter Olympics in its history, but it is significant enough for ITN as it happened at the Olympic practices in Vancouver. ~AH1(TCU) 21:34, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose - not a important competitor, and the deadly event was not occurred during the proper competition, was at training - TouLouse (talk) 21:40, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't really think the "importance" of the competitor makes a difference, nor does the fact that it wasn't in competition. A competitor dying during official practice during the Olympics is definitely not your normal run-of-the-mill news event. In other words, it doesn't follow the normal ITN criteria because it's more about the context than the individual. --Smashvilletalk 21:45, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. The Winter Olympics tragedy is an international event, thus I stress this tragic event must be "In the news" template. --EfferAKS 22:35, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
My design for a headline. As you can see I support. A death at a major global sporting event meets notability IMO. --Kitch(Talk : Contrib) 23:19, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
support but this should not overlook the opening ceremony otherwise ITN will look like its intentionally making Vancouver look bad. i suggest this being a note in the opening ceremony blurb. (Opening ceremony will MOST likely hold a moment of silence or atleast a mention of this. we should simply mention what was done) -- Ashish-g55 23:38, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support as its own item. I do not believe that having this as its own item in itn will overlook the opening ceremonies. This is a (tragic) news story in its own right and I think it should be so on itn. Reporting news will not make itn seem like it is trying to make Vancouver look bad, especially if we include both the opening ceremonies and the Olympic highlights link at the bottom. --PlasmaTwa2 00:08, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support as own blurb per above. Also, he's more notable than Alexander McQueen, for what it's worth. ~DCTalk To Me 00:12, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I disagree with the McQueen comment, but this is certainly ITN-worthy. That said, the article will need some serious work. It has 9 lines of prose, of which 7 relate to his death. HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 00:22, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think the Life and career section needs some serious help before this can go on ITN. -- tariqabjotu 04:13, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Are we reporting his "life and career" at ITN? Why are we discussing this? Because he died. The death section is more than sufficient. –HowardtheDuck 04:15, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with what Howard said above. The death section is what everyone will come to see. --PlasmaTwa2 04:19, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with Howard--we're not reporting the death of Nodar Kumaritashvili, whose life isn't particularly notable. We're reporting the death of an athlete at the Olympics ('an athlete dying young'). Perhaps we're going about this wrong. Why not include this in the Olympics opening blurb? Also, don't put the boldfaced link to Nodor, but link to the main Olympic's article (which should have a section covering this).--Johnsemlak (talk) 04:29, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I doubt the death criteria and the need for a long and detailed article applies here. Would this person ever stand a chance of being on the Main Page if he hadn't died right now? If he had died next year or at a very old age I don't know if his inclusion on the Main Page would be supported by anyone. In life he was ordinary: it was his death that was extraordinary. It has more than enough detail in the circumstances. --candle•wicke 04:35, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support, presuming this replaces the current death on the main. (Even I'm supporting this, for a death that says something) WizardmanOperation Big Bear 04:38, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What have you got against death? :-) --candle•wicke 04:52, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
well there u go a moment of silence held for him. i still suggest we mention this in the opening ceremony along with his name. that would seem a lot more honourable. -- Ashish-g55 04:47, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
current blurb is not good. this is what i meant when i said before to be careful in not overlooking the olympic ceremony. right now it sounds like the ceremony took place even after the death (implying they shouldnt have... which obviously isnt the case). -- Ashish-g55 04:52, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The current blurb draws the eye more towards the death than the opening, due to the length of his name. They should be split up. --PlasmaTwa2 04:56, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Posted There's nothing we can do about the length of the luger's name, so I'm going to ignore that. However, to Ashishg... I can see the point you're making, but I don't think it's a problem. Unfortunately, I didn't get to see the Opening Ceremony myself. However, it does appear that the death of Kumaritashvili did add a somber note to the ceremony with the Georgian contingent recognizing their team member with black armbands and the audience giving them a standing ovation. The organizing committee for the Games even dedicated the Opening Ceremony to Kumaritashvili. If there is any conclusion to be made about the juxtaposition -- in a twist on your characterization -- it could be that the Opening Ceremonies happened despite the death of the luger. That's a point that, frankly, I don't believe is far from matter-of-fact. The idea that the blurb also suggests that they should have canceled the Games is a personal judgment, and one that would not be eliminated by splitting up the blurb. Aside from the awkwardness of having two Olympic items back-to-back like that, I think it would seem very strange to pretend like one had no effect on the other. Clearly, as I mentioned in my examples, they are related, so there is no problem with joining the blurbs. -- tariqabjotu 05:13, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb as is. It's exactly what happened.--Johnsemlak (talk) 05:17, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Truce ends six months of bitter warfare in Yemen.--TheFEARgod (Ч) 09:24, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. This is a recent war that involved insurgency and at least two, possibly up to seven countries, but there appear to be some neutrality issues in the article. How about "A truce signed by the Huthi rebels in Yemen ends six months of fighting during Operation Scorched Earth"? ~AH1(TCU) 21:42, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
umm...since this will be main news for the day for atleast 80 countries i am gonna give it obvioussupport. (change blurb as olympics progresses) -- Ashish-g55 04:27, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I know what you were talking about, but I don't see the relevance to the rest of the world outside North America. It's just a sports event. -- tariqabjotu 04:37, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
?!?! Over 80 countries around the world are competing...if that's not at least somewhat international, I don't know what is. Ks0stm(T•C•G) 04:41, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You know he is just being sarcastic, right? --PlasmaTwa2 06:50, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It's one of those where I respond "I sure hope so!" because I'm not picking up through text whether there's a sarcastic tone or not. Much easier to detect via audio or visual clues than textual ones. Ks0stm(T•C•G) 10:31, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support This is the Olympics, after all. Opening and closing of Olympic Games is listed on WP:ITN/R. Shouldn't go up just yet, until the opening ceremonies start, though. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 04:45, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support: As per ITN rules and has been regularly featured. --GPPande 08:25, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
We need to wait until 1800 PST (0200 UTC). Physchim62(talk) 09:24, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'd mention it as "Vancouver, Canada" rather than just "Vancouver" when posting, to better indicate the host country. Ks0stm(T•C•G) 10:28, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
i agree with putting the country but i dont know about the governer line however. since we are going to post it before start of ceremony we shouldnt say who it was opened by. or we can just wait till they light the flame and mention the person who lights the cauldron (its being kept a secret who will do that) -- Ashish-g55 14:19, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support when opening ceremonies begin. Nirvana888 (talk) 14:33, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think we should wait until the end of the ceremony before putting it up. At least wait for them to say "Let the games begin". I don't think the Games officially begin when the TV cameras start rolling. -- tariqabjotu 17:05, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support posting the opening, as per ITNR, and no need to mention the governor general.--Johnsemlak (talk) 17:08, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think Vancouver, Canada is awkward. You wouldn't say Philadelphia, United States or Paris, France. If anything is needed after Vancouver, it should be British Columbia, though I think just Vancouver is fine. Also, posting when the ceremony starts seems fine to me. ~DCTalk To Me 18:04, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think it should just be Vancouver; it is a well known city worldwide and I don't think anyone is going to get it confused with anywhere else. I also support the blurb about the Governor General. --PlasmaTwa2 18:53, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Is it well known to the average reader outside North America? If asked to name an American city I don't think I would have Philadelphia in the first five I might think of either... --candle•wicke 19:14, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, to be honest, I don't think adding "British Columbia" would make it any less ambiguous. Is it common to do the City, State thing in Canada like it is in the US? I think we'll be alright as long as it's linked. HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 19:28, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Most likely more ppl know where vancouver is than british columbia. I suggest Vancouver, Canada to make it clear to those who may not know. Vancouver, British Columbia doesnt do any good without another Canada there. -- Ashish-g55 20:52, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Why not just Vancouver? Don't we have the article listed as just the city name for the exact same reasoning? If they're one of the very, very few people who don't know where Vancouver is, they can click the link. --Smashvilletalk 20:56, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
To answer Candlewicke, yes, I think Vancouver is well known enough internationally; obviously in North America and then I think in Asia due to Vancouver's large Asian population. I find it funny that during an argument to create a disam. article for Vancouver one of the arguments used was that "the 2010 Olympic city is known throughout the world" (or something like that). --PlasmaTwa2 00:12, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Some time about now..or are we waiting for the torch? Ks0stm(T•C•G) 02:10, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
When are you guys adding this? When Bigfoot (finally) makes an appearance? –HowardtheDuck 03:29, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The games have officially been opened. Any time now, guys. --PlasmaTwa2 04:32, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Gimmie a break this is so painfully obvious it's going in - I'm gonna do it unless someone does it before me, this has gone on long enough -- Tawker (talk) 04:41, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It's nearly 5:30am in the UK. I did not expect that I was going to be the one to post this. Still, I did suggest waiting until the end of the ceremony; I guess that happened. -- tariqabjotu 05:25, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Posted By the way, I think the name-recognition of Vancouver is not clear-cut. It's not particularly high among global cities, for instance. I wouldn't mind if someone nixed the Canada, but I also don't think it hurts to have it. -- tariqabjotu 05:17, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Olympic highlights
On a related note, in 2008 there was a quick link at the bottom of the ITN box to the highlights of the Beijing Olympics (like this). This worked very well; it resolved any issues over which events should be featured or not. Anybody could just follow the link and find a summary of that day's gold medallists, world records, etc. I've just created the page Chronological summary of the 2010 Winter Olympics, and this could go up tomorrow or later today, if there's consensus. Lampman (talk) 11:20, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support - per 2008 OG - TouLouse (talk) 13:25, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support tomorrow, as a replacement to the opening ceremony. If nothing else, it's a handy link fro readers. HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 17:45, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I say we post the opening ceremony blurb first, then when it disappears from the list we add the ITN box link. ~AH1(TCU) 21:49, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support and post sometime today. By the time the opening ceremonies drop off, the Olympics will be a quarter of the way over or more. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 11:53, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I was thinking the same, to wait that long would be pointless. The first medals will be awarded late this evening (UTC). Lampman (talk) 12:22, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'm curious about the phrase "Olympic highlights". First, the article doesn't use highlights in the title, which I believe the 2008 article used during its duration on the Main Page. And, secondly, and perhaps more importantly, I don't think "highlights" is the right word to use when one of the items in the chronology is the death of a competitor. I'd go for "Olympic recap" or "Olympic summary" or something along those lines. -- tariqabjotu 12:55, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes that is correct, the 2008 article originally used the word "Highlights"; the name was changed to "Chronological summary of..." after the games were over, so I took that to be the new naming standard now. Any wording is fine with me, even simply "Olympic Games" would work. Lampman (talk) 14:04, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have added the link (now that we have the first medal winners). I went with "Olympic summary" as that was closest to the article title - Dumelow (talk) 21:10, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sergey Aleynikov, a former computer programmer for Goldman Sachs, is indicted for three counts by a U.S. federal court in Manhattan for theft of trade secrets, transportation of stolen property in interstate and foreign commerce, and unauthorized computer access. (Wall Street Journal)
Iran has gone from 3.5% to 20% according to Ahmadinejad and their IAEA representative. This is described variously as a significant step in a weapons programme. Iran of course denies they are making a bomb, and that it is for a medical research reactor, however the Western world points out that, not only does Iran lack the ability to convert it to reactor fuel rods, you don't need such a high level of enrichment for this purpose. While 20% is not "weapons grade", it is according to our own enriched uranium article, the lowest band of "weapons usable" material, the starting point of the "highly enriched" grade, and is sufficient for crude weapons. According to the Times: Although weapons-grade uranium is 90 per cent enriched, the first stages of the process are the hardest and most time-consuming. The leap from 20 to 90 per cent is more rapidly bridged. All in all, this really should be a no-brainer in terms of international significance, especially compared to what's been on offer recently. MickMacNee (talk) 20:32, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, the headline above is misleading, as it ("Iran declaring itself a nuclear state) certainly has not happened. OK, upon reading the BBC article, apparently Ahmadinejad did say that. Hmm, I'd say keep an eye on this for now.--Johnsemlak (talk) 20:44, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
OpposeI think just by boosting, they cant become nuclear power. Cant post until they are recognized as such.--yousaf465 08:07, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The nomination does not say they have become one, it says they have declared they are one, and for pretty good reasons. Nobody waits for a 'declaration' from someone else to say you are or are not a nuclear power, you just wait for the detection of the first test, just like for North korea or Pakistan. I very much doubt that Iran is going to be allowed to get that far, do you? Still, it's a pretty sorry state of affairs that the death of some fashion wonk or the entirely predictable opening of the minor Olympics warrants more attention that this pretty important development in international affairs. MickMacNee (talk) 12:29, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that this is important, so I support the placement of this item. __meco (talk) 13:36, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What is up with you guys? Is it compulsory to have a NASA item on ITN as soon as previous one gets buried down? Lets balance. --GPPande 08:21, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support'. Leading international fashion designer. Struck down for what are presumed to be natural causes, but at the age of 40 and still in the creative part of his career. Physchim62(talk) 15:48, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think the article is OK: it gives background to McQueen's career (and also to the circumstances of his death, although that actually seems less relevant). I'd be happy to post it now. Physchim62(talk) 18:35, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Whilst I also support, I don't know whether this can be put up when it still has a tag regarding the lead --Daviessimo (talk) 18:48, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I did notice the lead was quite short, but somehow I glossed over the presence of the tag when I decided to add it to ITN. Quick! Somebody fix it! -- tariqabjotu 18:55, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The tag is yellow, not orange, and could be fixed by any editor who cared enough to tag it in the first place. The story should go back up if there is support, because you can be sure that there are people typing "Alexander McQueen" into the search box right now whether or not ther is a tag on the article. ITN is not a prize for editors, it is a tool for readers. Physchim62(talk) 19:10, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It's a terrible, terrible lead. It doesn't have to be award-winning, but it's basically the sentence that would be on ITN. -- tariqabjotu 19:19, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Perhaps I'm ignorant of fashion design (or fashion in general) but I just don't see this as that big a household name in fashion design, like Giorgio Armani, one of the Benetton family, or Calvin Klein. Plus, I find the article short of what I'd call adequate for a person whose death is notable enough for ITN (though I'd say that all the names I mentioned above had short articles, so perhaps WP covers fashion designers poorly). I know we judge it a bit differently when it's a death at a young age but still I'm gonna say strong oppose.--Johnsemlak (talk) 19:27, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Just to point out, that if you scroll to the bottom of the article you'll see that as a 'Grand Couturier', Alexander McQueen was, within the fashion world, held with the same regard as people such as Armani. Just because you've never heard of them doesn't necessarily mean they are not notable --Daviessimo (talk) 19:36, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I saw that, but I think he should be held in regard outside the fashion world as well as within it. Perhaps he is. Plus, I don't think all those "grand Couturiers' mentioned would be automatically ITN worthy. And that still leaves the issue that the article isn't all that good. If this were the death of a British or American political figure being debated that article would be considered woefully insufficient for ITN.--Johnsemlak (talk) 19:42, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I was aware, the death criteria does not state that a person has to be well known in the mainstream to go up, but rather they must be a leading figure within their chosen profession, which is true in this case. As for the article, I was never under the impression that only 'large' articles were allowed up when it was a death, as opposed to the normal criteria of a several sentence update with a number of references. Finally, with regards to who are the more notable of the world renowned designers, that is simply are matter of personal opinion. Surely you should be looking at this objectively? --Daviessimo (talk) 19:50, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think the article has issues, as have been pointed out above, and that's a perfectly objective observation. One aim of ITN is to showcase quality material. Plus, a decent article can be an indication of notability. That said, I have found front page coverage of this at El Pais, Al Jazeera, Le Monde, and the New York Times as well as top billing at the BBC, so I'll drop my opposition as far a notability is concerned; but I still maintain the article is inadequate as per objections already mentioned.--Johnsemlak (talk) 20:10, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
And, of course, I disagree in terms of quality. We have posted current-events articles with far less detail than this (like most of the articles on ITN right now). I think it's fine. -- tariqabjotu 20:16, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)x 2I also disagree, but would you care to elaborate? I'll be happy to do what I can to get it up to scratch but, being unfamiliar with subject, I can't see any fundamental issues with the article. HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 20:18, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Removed for now in favor of Sri Lanka world's largest exporter, which is more important. Leave time for debate; this was posted a mere four hours after its nomination. —Ed(talk • majestic titan) 20:02, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Why can't both be put up? The bottom item has been up for 3 days and, let's be honest, people are always criticising ITN for its slow turnover, so surely this shouldn't be an issue --Daviessimo (talk) 20:07, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly. Both can go up. There isn't sufficient dissent for this to be a case of "remove until there's consensus". -- tariqabjotu 20:09, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It was posted quickly because it was updated quickly, even if there was a last minute scramble to bash the lead into shape. Removing one valid blurb in favour of an older one seems nonsensical to me. Surely the oldest on the template should be removed if you're worried about balance?? The Sri Lanka item, "way more important" as it may be (I don't disagree with you), was not updated substantially enough for ITN until recently, which, from following the discussion, is the only reason it wasn't posted earlier. HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 20:10, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
And why it still shouldn't have been posted, and why ed removed it himself. Also not sure about putting lists on ITN. -- tariqabjotu 20:14, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I wont' comment on it being posted and removed but why dont' we wait a bit on this and get some more opinions, and perhaps improve the article?--Johnsemlak (talk) 20:17, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(5x e/c) Question: how exactly is this man different from the rejected Ali Dizaei below? I, for one, am not convinced that this man's death is important enough to receive a mention on ITN. —Ed(talk • majestic titan) 20:19, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Man, this is a fast moving situation! Sorry if I've haven't kept up but my earlier objections were based on previous states of the article--it looks ok now. I drop my objections, though for what it's worth I guess I'm biased against having a fashion designer on ITN but that's not an objective point. My apologies.--Johnsemlak (talk) 20:23, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Well one difference is that Ali Dizaei didn't die. We have death criteria, and this fits under "2. The deceased was a very important figure in their field of expertise, and was recognised as such." Also, considering some of the older criteria, he died unexpectedly. You may not have heard of him; fine. Neither have I. But it's quite clear he's a very important figure in his field of expertise, he died unexpectedly, and the item itself has support for going on ITN. It has been adequately updated and the article is of decent quality and length, in my opinion. Seems good enough. Lastly, I must say I think it's a bit improper of you to remove an item from ITN based on no one's objection but your own. -- tariqabjotu 20:29, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ed if you are not convinced that this man's death is important then you should discuss it here just like everyone else. Just because you are admin does not mean you can just remove items you dont like. i dont see that much opposition here to make it such that it needed to be removed. This defeats the whole purpose of everyone talking here if admins can remove and add whenever they want. btw i dont have any objections either (PS: can we look at other nominations too please.) -- Ashish-g55 20:31, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I removed it becuase there had been two supports and an oppose in a little under four hours, not because of any personal opinion I hold (though rereading the "more important" statement I wrote, I can see why my action was seen as opinionated...) This doesn't appear to be the case any longer. I still don't see from the article just why he was so important, but I also know nothing about the fashion-designing beyond Zoolander. :) As such, I would have no objections to reposting. Regards, —Ed(talk • majestic titan) 20:49, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support, I read about him a few hours ago and I trust he hasn't become any less significant since then. Just in case I've had a quick look again and found these. The Sydney Morning Herald says "the fashion world's leading voices have paid tribute". According to The New York Times, "Throughout Thursday, reports of the suicide of Alexander McQueen, the dark star of international fashion, had swirled across the Internet, a medium that the brilliant British creator had embraced with vigor". According to the Irish Independent, "Just one month before he was due to unveil his new collection at Paris fashion week we’ve lost one of the greatest visionaries in fashion". The New Zealand Herald says it is "a tragedy for the fashion industry". --candle•wicke 21:34, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I just wanted to come by and drop in my belated support for featuring this article. An extremely important figure, and good to counter systemic bias. (We have way too many male-centric "trivial" topics like sports and not enough female-centric "trivial" things like fashion.) I don't think we've ever had anything related to fashion in ITN before. Calliopejen1 (talk) 21:57, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Tough one. He was no Vivienne Westwood that's for sure. He was well known in fashion, but a nobody outside of it. There are already complaints on the Main Page for posting this item. MickMacNee (talk) 21:59, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose. A nobody that 99% of the world never heard of. Woogee (talk) 22:37, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support I certainly had heard of him, and I don't care about high-fashion at all. He's not a nobody by any stretch. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 22:39, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If you look at the List of grands couturiers, you'll see that there are almost a hundred listed, so this in itself doesn't seem to establish notability. On the other hand, it should be said that McQueen was one of only eleven listed under "Fashion" in the list of important living people, which was created exactly with situations like this in mind. Of course this list has simply been put together by a few editors, and is in no way definitive. There are certainly arguments both ways, but I lean towards oppose, for the following reason: Even though the subject was not highly notable outside of his narrow field of work, media coverage of his death gives the impression that he was. The reason for this is that the occasion gives the media a chance to name-drop celebrities, and print pictures of supermodels like Naomi Campbell and Kate Moss, thereby maximising page views. This brings out the most tabloidy side even in serious news sources (example from the Los Angeles Times), but since Wikipedia is not meant to be a tabloid, we shouldn't have to follow suit. Lampman (talk) 22:51, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strongly opposed Fashion designers, by their nature, get noticed by many so-called celebrities, which then gets picked up by the media. This doesn't make the death significant, and I don't see the great significance needed to post a death. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 22:56, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strongly opposed : what that news ? that's just a fashion guy. Is this guy death more significant than China becoming the 1st world exporter ? ITN work in a really strange way today. Yug(talk) 05:40, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- fits in any death criteria ITN has had used. –HowardtheDuck 05:43, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Oppose: Does not fit death criteria. No major international impact. Fashion designers, celebrities are just news makers. --GPPande 09:30, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I don't think "leading international fashion designer" is sufficient. He would have to be an icon for his spot at ITN to be appropriate, in my opinion. __meco (talk) 13:40, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Might TIME's headline "Alexander McQueen: Fashion Mourns an Icon" be of any use here? :-) --candle•wicke 15:57, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I would have opposed before I read the article and talked to people who know about fashion-y things and this from the Beeb makes a pretty strong case for him being an "icon". HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 16:02, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with HJ: My initial gut reaction was 'a fashion designer--no way', but the massive amount of coverage this guy is getting clearly supports his notability. It's at least as notable, and important, as a number of sports related items we post. Plus, as stated above, he clearly meets ITN death criteria.--Johnsemlak (talk) 17:36, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Any human casualties? -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 22:41, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Unknown at this time...it just occurred today like 7 hours ago. Ks0stm(T•C•G) 23:03, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Although this volcano has erupted a few times recently, this eruption should be significant enough. Did we post the eruption of Mount Redoubt on ITN? ~AH1(TCU) 21:58, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Nationwide strikes led by Communist and Socialist parties take place in Greece to protest the government's handing of the country's debt. Most of the country was brought to a standstill as factories, schools, airports and hospitals closed down or reduced capacity (BBC)(Deutsche Welle)(Al Jazeera)
Prominent Uzbek photographer Umida Akhmedova is found guilty on charges of "slandering the nation" in her work, but is immediately pardoned under an amnesty. (BBC)(The Moscow Times)
Afghan officials report that at least 150 bodies were pulled from vehicles buried by avalanches in the Salang Pass in the Hindu Kush mountains earlier this week. (UPI.com)
"The blaze was one in a string of 11 fires in east Texas churches this year. 8 have been ruled arson"
"We certainly can connect several of them" said ATF Tom Crowley [31]
A serial arsonist who burns 11 churchs in a matter of weeks seems to be newsworthy. --Dashbullder (talk) 02:22, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose not significant enough. Serial arsons happen every few years, it seems like, so it's not out of the ordinary. ~DCTalk To Me 02:32, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A person or group setting fire to almost a dozen churchs in weeks is waaaaaaaay out of the ordinary. --Dashbullder (talk) 02:41, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The article is being considered for deletion, and is definitley not up to scratch for ITN. It does sound interesting potentially, but definitely oppose for now.--Johnsemlak (talk) 04:31, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose There are tons of serial robbers, rapists etc out there. Luckily they can't affect the world that much except the people they directly attack, unlike political violence. YellowMonkey (Southern Stars photo poll) 06:45, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
New social networking feature on
Gmail. Only if it's a slow news day. username 1
(talk) 20:53, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Opposed because 1) it's not a slow news day, and 2) all the same reasons we declined the iPad, putting this on the main page is little more than a free ad for Google. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 21:18, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. We can't post every new feature on Google (or any, perhaps).--Johnsemlak (talk) 04:32, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think this is significant so early after Beijing 2008 ... Hektor (talk) 20:55, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. This is the youth olympics, not that big of a deal.--Johnsemlak (talk) 04:29, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose the bidding is nowhere near even the levels for a World Champs in athletics or swimming, let alone the football world cup or the Olympics, with all the iconic politicians being wheeled out YellowMonkey (Southern Stars photo poll) 06:46, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Opposed though Singapore might prove me way off base, at the time I don't think these games are going to be all that significant; at best equal to the FINA World Championships or equivalent. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 10:04, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Funeral pyres are declared legal in England and Wales
A landmark legal ruling with cross-continental implications for Sikhs and Hindus with connections to England and Wales, of which there are millions. MickMacNee (talk) 15:25, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Indifferent Although this isn't important news, it is interesting and it somehow "feels" important on an ineffable level, meaning: funeral rituals are a very deep-rooted component of cultural identity, and this change is a very big change, almost like a paradigm shift. __meco (talk) 17:52, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Similar reaction to meco above. I'd like to wait and see what kind of reactions there are (so far I'm not aware of any) which might indicate its significance.--Johnsemlak (talk) 04:36, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support this has had news coverage here in the UK and is fairly important. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 22:35, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Just for the variety. It is something different. And an important legal ruling after a long time, apparently affecting millions of people. No opposes here yet? --candle•wicke 19:07, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Goodluck Jonathan named acting president of Nigeria
Support. Long running story that has been going on since before Christmas, and finally seems to be reaching a resolution. Physchim62(talk) 11:07, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support - This story has been going on for months. Deserves additional coverage as this is Africa's most populated nation. Scanlan (talk) 19:33, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support, This mess started back in November, and this is de facto a change in head of state. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 21:24, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support as nominator. I believe this qualifies as an ITNR event as a change of head of state.--Johnsemlak (talk) 04:34, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support'. Improvement will come when the article will be ITN. Yug(talk) 16:34, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The article still needs to be updated. --BorgQueen (talk) 13:29, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Posted It looks adequately updated now. -- tariqabjotu 19:58, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The Italian Embassy in Iran is attacked by protesters unhappy with Italy's decision to scale back economic dealings and push for tighter sanctions and protests are also held outside French and Dutch embassies. (The Jerusalem Post)
China replaces Germany as the World's top exporter
Sometime ago lot of poeple supported it when it was said China would likely be the no.1 exporter. Well now, Germany releases their data and its confirmed. A monumental event in world trade and one that is likely is likely not to change for as far as the eye can see. New York Times [32] AFP [33] Wall Street Jornal [34] FT [35]—Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.69.63.73 (talk) 23:14, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I quite like this story, economics doesn't often make it to the main page. I guess the article is at List of countries by exports but I wouldn't want to post it whilst it is tagged for updates. Support once article is improved - Dumelow (talk) 11:22, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support on a "why not?" basis. The news hardly strikes me as earth-shattering, but it's harmless and, as Dumelow points out, we rarely get economics stories through ITN so this one should have its chance. Physchim62(talk) 13:14, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Africa topping one billion was opposed as being entirely predictable - well this event was also entirely predictable. It's not even as permanent as suggested, it only occured due to the western recession, which Germany is already exitting. Germany is even money to regain top spot if anybody ever gets around to forcing China to adopt the laws German industry has to abide by. MickMacNee (talk) 15:30, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. This is almost a watershed-size shift in international economic relations. I supported this story before Germany had released confirming data and I firmly support it now. __meco (talk) 17:56, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Significant. Yug(talk) 16:35, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Retired General Sarath Fonseka, defeated Presidential election candidate, is arrested
As far as Asian countries with law of the jungle, where opposition are routinely thrown in jail on trumped up charges, he may as well as already have been found guilty. And he isn't just a normal politician either, as he gained national fame/honour for finishing off the Tamil Tigers. Imagine Eisenhower losing the 1952 election and getting tossed in jail by Adlai E Stevenson a few days later. This is basically a reverse-military coup YellowMonkey (bananabucket!) 03:16, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Why Sri Lanka? This sort of thing happens all too often in various corners of the world. Physchim62(talk) 11:45, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: It's not very often that a country arrests its former commander of the army and chief of defence staff. He has been arrested by the army and not the police, and will face a court martial,[36] and I'm sure such an officer does not often get court martialed either. The charges seem to be revealing military secrets and being involved in politics while in office (both of which he has done afaik) so as YellowMonkey said, the result is obvious. ≈ Chamaltalk¤ 12:04, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
'Strong support after the verdict is given. There is no question that this is important. We'd just have to wait. I'm not sure about Sri Lanka's military justice, but military trials are quite quick. –HowardtheDuck 12:16, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Support for arrest news. General Fonseka is no other opposition candidate. He was chief of Lankan military and has played pivotal role in defeat of LTTE. He has made a big impact on history of island nation. He is surely the greatest general Lanka had in recent times. His arrest news deserves more attention for sure. --GPPande 12:20, 9 February 2010 (UTC)b[reply]
'Sri Lanka has dissolved its parliament in the aftermath. I'm not sure what article to link to but something connected to this should definitely be posted.--Johnsemlak (talk) 17:15, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support, there is definitely something here for the Main Page. --candle•wicke 20:34, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've moved it up as someone will surely otherwise nominate this again. --candle•wicke 20:42, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support even though Parliament had to be dissolved this year, this appears to be a developing constitutional near-crisis when the arrest of the opposition candidate is added to the mix. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 20:51, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
So, which is the story here, and what article(s) has/have been updated? -- tariqabjotu 20:59, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
From the Portal: The recently-elected President of Sri Lanka Mahinda Rajapaksa dissolves his country's parliament one day after the arrest of Sarath Fonseka. Sarath Fonseka in bold? --candle•wicke 21:14, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Considering the dissolution of parliament is the focus of the blurb, and, in my opinion, the main part of story, I think Parliament of Sri Lanka needs to be updated too before this goes on ITN. That article doesn't even mention the dissolution; we shouldn't be a fact on the Main Page that is not apparently mentioned in any article on Wikipedia. -- tariqabjotu 22:20, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Don't spoil it for me! LOL. At least ITN has a personal touch, a person actually sends it the "notice". –HowardtheDuck 10:23, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Did you mean ITN has "personal touch" or it is "completely out of touch"? :-) --GPPande 10:50, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't like bots delivering me messages or humans templating me soooo...
ITN has been painfully slow since time immemorial so I dunno how you can deal with that, aside of course from letting some users editing protected pages. –HowardtheDuck 13:20, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No one appears to have updated an article with info on the dissolution yet - Dumelow (talk) 11:14, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Article Sarath Fonseka is accurately updated. Check the lines in header along with sections After Presidential Election 2010 and Arrest. Lets put the news of arrest right away. No more delays please. --GPPande 12:17, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think the dissolution is a major part of the story here and would like to see an update for that. I certainly won't post the above proposed blurb without it being backed up by an article - Dumelow (talk) 12:41, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think arrest of Sarath Fonseka deserves to be on ITN. That was the original proposal and the article nicely updated. Use any blurb as you deem fit but PLEASE post the arrest news. --GPPande 13:08, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia in general (and ITN in particular) is not the place to fight RL political battles. Nobody has yet answered my question above: why should we post another piece about Sri Lankan politics? We don't post the various measures taken against Aung San Suu Kyi, for example, or the current sodomy trial against Anwar Ibrahim. Physchim62(talk) 13:19, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean by "another"? When was this on ITN earlier? Nobody here is pro or anti Fonseka. It is an important event in the country and so deserves to be on ITN. Regarding news about other folks you are talking about - I think I saw a few entries of Aung San Su Kyi in ITN few weeks back. You can always nominate them. But it cannot be an argument for your oppose. --GPPande 13:40, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The article Sarath Fonseka has a citations tag, a BLP tag and a NPOV tag. I believe ITN rules require these be fixed before posting? ≈ Chamaltalk¤ 13:27, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It is not in the article section of interest here. --GPPande 13:43, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The entire article should be in good shape if it goes up on the front page. Wouldn't we look good, putting up an article that is in violation of two of the five pillars, as well as a third highly important policy? There's no hurry and this is a sensitive topic that can't be biased. It should be fixed IMO. ≈ Chamaltalk¤ 13:54, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Chamal_N. The issues have to be dealt with first, especially NPOV. --BorgQueen (talk) 18:22, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Opppose. Not exactly remarkable or unexpected. Possibly add as background to the inevitable election result posting. MickMacNee (talk) 15:34, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. As the was in Sri Lanka has been well covered in international media, this incident seems to me important enough to feature on ITN. __meco (talk) 18:01, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Arrest with freedom activists and foreign power worry about this issue. why this isn't post yet ? Yug(talk) 16:37, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not as major, record-breaking, or notable as the last one. We will also have tomatoes thrown at us if we post this. -- tariqabjotu 20:43, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
More likely snowballs would be thrown :D. (oppose)--Johnsemlak (talk) 04:05, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Opposed not as significant as the prior one. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 21:26, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Columbian Drug Bust
According to this, this is being described as "the biggest anti-drugs operation in a decade" in what is one of the most notorious drug producing nations. Not sure where the update would go, but the article mentions Mexican drug cartels so possibly in Mexican Drug War or alternatively the Illegal drug trade in Colombia --Daviessimo (talk) 15:08, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ukraine elections
Why isn't this on the mainpage yet? Various important sources give the winner. This should be important enough for the mainpage. Nergaal (talk) 14:21, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Is the article fully updated. The results table for the second round does not have any figures as of yet and it states at the bottom that whilst the lead is statistically insurmountable, Tymoshenko has as of yet not conceded --Daviessimo (talk) 15:19, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It's a difficult one because policy is to wait for the official result or at least a certain result. It's pretty certain who has the most votes currently but there seems to be a real chance that Tymoshenko will challenge the results.1. I'd say wait a bit.--Johnsemlak (talk) 17:18, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
So what if she challenges? The blurb will be rewritten. Outside observers praised the election for being free, so it is really unlikely that the challenge will change the final result; and if it does, it will merit its own blurb for that only. Nergaal (talk) 23:22, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Or indeed more than 60. Perhaps could combine it with the flooding which has killed and injured even more in the south of the country. This is serious enough. It has also closed the Salang tunnel if that makes it more important. Support. --candle•wicke 20:50, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps the Salang tunnel could be updated if there is no new article. --candle•wicke 20:52, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've done it myself. As many as 64 people are killed and around 400 are injured as 17 avalanches trap motorists around the Salang tunnel. --candle•wicke 21:54, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose more than that probably die daily due to the war. Nergaal (talk) 03:34, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That is a big probably with no proof. And how exactly does one compare 17 avalanches to a war in the first place? And if that is the case does that mean any disaster in Afghanistan is not important enough? --candle•wicke 21:44, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support this seems pretty significant, especially now the death toll has been revised to "at least 150". Hundreds more are still trapped and 2,500 have already been rescued - Dumelow (talk) 11:26, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well? How many more people have to die here before someone notices? --candle•wicke 21:45, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Can I do anything to improve this? --candle•wicke 14:44, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, support if it makes any difference at this point. Avalanches don't kill 150 people every day; in fact, that large of a toll in one is pretty unusual. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 14:54, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support since a new cabinet of the U.S. would automatically go up on the mainpage. Nergaal (talk) 23:27, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Opposed; I can't find any record of ITN posting a new U.S. cabinet, and I don't believe it would go up. Recurring, expected change, no different than the AU leadership change we turned town last week. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 21:27, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose the rule of the thumb here is to wait until court proceedings finish, not start. Not sure it's notable enough anyway ~DCTalk To Me 00:30, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. As DC says, convention is to post verdicts, not charges. Considering it's only an involuntary manslaughter charge, though, I doubt I'd support the verdict. HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 00:44, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose (and not anywhere near as important as events in Sri Lanka). --candle•wicke 20:44, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Opposed, Wikipedia is not people's tabloid. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 21:28, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
France-Russia arms deal
(BBC) France has agreed to sell an amphibious assault ship of the Mistral class to the Russians, with Russia wanting at least three more. This is the first arms deal between Russia and a NATO member. The US Department of Defense apparently has "questions" about the sale - Dumelow (talk) 00:45, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support - "first arms deal between Russia and a NATO member". Interesting... I would be rather scared and very angry if I were one of the small former Soviet republic states on the Baltic or Black Seas. —Ed(talk • majestic titan) 05:12, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support (but wait til Russia approves). Blurb needs to mention that it's the first arms deal between a NATO member and Russia ~DCTalk To Me 05:18, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I know the first arms sale between a Nato member and Russia sounds signficicant but it's just an arms sale and I haven't seen the kind of reactions or immediate effects that would make it notable. Oppose--Johnsemlak (talk) 18:45, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support it actually caught my attention in the newspaper, which is an achievement given my age. Ks0stm(T•C•G) 20:56, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
17 Indian army personnel killed
An avalanche has killed 17 Indian Army personnel and injured 17 more in Kashmir (BBC). They are not exactly uncommon there but this is "one of the deadliest to occur in the region in recent years" - Dumelow (talk) 00:40, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What do people think about this in terms of notability. He was a commander in the Met, which is a pretty senior role, and has been convicted or a pretty serious offence. Thoughts? --Daviessimo (talk) 20:29, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Commander is not that senior (5th highest in the met) and one officer being convicted of "abuse in a public office" is not that significant in the grand scheme of things. HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 20:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, to clarify, I was stating seniority on the basis that he holds a high enough rank to be part of the Association of Chief Police Officers, which probably consists of the 100 most senior police officers in the whole of the UK, rather than his positional rank within the Met --Daviessimo (talk) 20:46, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose To quote HJ, this conviction is "not that significant in the grand scheme of things". Loads of high-ranking police officers around the world have been convicted for criminal activities. HonouraryMix (talk) 23:20, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Opposed same reasoning as HJ Mitchell. Neither all that significant or (unfortunately) unique. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 00:06, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support, after reading in the non-British, non-European, non-Northern Hemisphere Sydney Morning Herald that this man is "the highest ranking officer in 33 years to be convicted of a criminal offence", "was once hailed as a role model for ethnic minority officers and even mentioned as a possible future head of the force", "tried to counter misconduct allegations by accusing his force of racism", was "an outspoken critic of the police on race, leader of the National Black Police Association and a figure in a race war that erupted at the top of Scotland Yard in 2008", was previously "cleared of criminal charges in 2003 and returned to duty although Scotland Yard suspected him of serious offences" and MI5 considered him "a danger to national security" (although he considered himself "untouchable"). I suppose this is all rather serious. --candle•wicke 21:04, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ukraine Elections
Multiple sources appear to give the winner as Yanukovych [37][38][39]. I think it is worth putting it up and alter it if new information comes up. Nergaal (talk) 17:11, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it seems like a mathematical certainty now: the difference is over 800,000 votes, with fewer than 150,000 votes left to count (Ukrainian Central Election Commission). How's the article looking? Physchim62(talk) 18:55, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Concur with Wizardman. ~DCTalk To Me 18:14, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Opposed for much the same reasons as Wizardman. Two-time winner of a race few have even heard of will be of little interest. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 20:23, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Galapagos Islands
Some earth-shattering news now from the Galapagos Islands, experts are saying that this has never happened before. Charles Darwin will be spinning in his grave. --candle•wicke 04:15, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Erm, how did the sea lions get to the Galapagos in the first place? I doubt they flew business class... Physchim62(talk) 08:33, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting, but I can't say it's ITN material. SpencerT♦Nominate! 23:19, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Physchim, I think that there are a separate species of sea lions that only live on the islands (well, used to only live there). —Ed(talk • majestic titan) 05:03, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support - seems similar to the Tasmanian devil face cancer we had a little bit ago. —Ed(talk • majestic titan) 05:03, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't this quite encyclopedic enough for Wikipedia? --candle•wicke 21:16, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Son of the President, has been ordered to pay more than $22m (£14m) to five people tortured during a civil war. Thye claimed they were "held in pits in the jungle that were filled chest-high with water, had been exposed to electric shocks to the genitals and other body parts and had witnessed the killing of others by the paramilitaries". --candle•wicke 04:04, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Opposed; Son of a former president, already in prison for these acts, and a civil case finds him civilly liable? Doesn't appear to have the importance of some of the other stories we're considering at the moment. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 18:13, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It is a "most politically turbulent state" of several million people and there are complaints that it has been "marred by widespread irregularities", a few "hiccups" of which the government has admitted. Voters were intimidated and harrassed, some names were not on the electoral register, ballot boxes were stolen. All the other parties have rejected the result. --candle•wicke 02:00, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Didn't we featured the recent U.S by polls ?--yousaf465 07:48, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
We featured the U.S. by-election because it changed the balance of power nationally. This is an interesting case, however. I'd lean towards weakly supporting this if/when the article gets some more work. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 18:10, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose not really significant. We shouldn't be tricked into supporting something by the hyperbole news outlets use. ~DCTalk To Me 18:17, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, not a significant figure outside Nigeria (also some actual info in the nomination would have been good) Modest Geniustalk 19:53, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, hyperbole aside, a state of several million people in a large and influential English-speaking country (eighth most populous in the world) had an election of which the result is disputed and the government has admitted something. --candle•wicke 21:22, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
...When the game is over. Ks0stm(T•C•G) 00:47, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
ITN/R event. It might be worth trying to come up with a blurb now so that it can be posted as soon as it finishes (and the article is updated), note that we don't normally post the final scores on the main page (just x beats y) - Dumelow (talk) 00:54, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
X beats Y in Super Bowl XIV. Simple. :-) --candle•wicke 01:36, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
please do not post till article has been updated properly. admins please check for updates in article first. thanks -- Ashish-g55 02:09, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'd imagine the "X beats Y in Super Bowl XLIV" would be barraged with complaints on context.
As for speed of update, the people there know the rules in updating it should be ITN ready by the time the trophy is presented. –HowardtheDuck 02:35, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There's no way the MVP is going on ITN. Anyway, the article needs to at least be put in past tense before it goes up; most of it still reads like it's happening in the future. -- tariqabjotu 02:57, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
why does it need to be ASAP... article has no refs for actual winner. it looks like live commentary right now. -- Ashish-g55 02:59, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(7x EC) I'd prefer "In American football, the New Orleans Saints defeat the Indianapolis Colts 31–17 in Super Bowl XLIV at Miami." (I was considering appending "United States" after Miami but it's redundant to have both "American" and "United States" in one sentence.) The MVP can be added if we have a free pic of him. –HowardtheDuck 03:01, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
And "Miami" probably won't be going up either... it's not like we haven't posted the Super Bowl before. The wording is pretty standard. -- tariqabjotu 03:10, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
←Well, the game's over now. Why not "X beats Y in Super Bowl XLIV with Z becoming the game's MVP"? fetchcomms☛ 03:16, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Why the hurry? Better to get it right. If you're going to put in the awards and everything else you might as well mention The Who as well. It might make it more interesting for anyone who doesn't follow the sport. X beats Y in Super Bowl XLIV with Z becoming the game's MVP and The Who performing during the game. --candle•wicke 03:20, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm still seeing some future tenses so this definitely isn't ready. --candle•wicke 03:22, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The Who can't perform the game, the players will be distracted and The Who will be hit by flying bodies and pigskin. All we need is an update and a reference. That's what I did at the Grammy Awards. –HowardtheDuck 03:25, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have no idea what you mean. Where are the dead people coming from? --candle•wicke 03:30, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The Who will be tackled if they performed during the game, or when the game was ongoing, ball is in play, and after the performance their bodies will ache like hell. –HowardtheDuck 03:32, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
X beats Y in Super Bowl XLIV with Z becoming the game's MVP and The Who performing at some point when the game was not ongoing. Or something to that effect. I'm sure someone will be able to insert a technical term. --candle•wicke 03:36, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Why are should we include The Who again? –HowardtheDuck 03:38, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Was this performance not as good as the last time they played? I thought those shows were considered important too and since everything else is included why not? --candle•wicke 03:41, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That's still too much detail. --candle•wicke 04:26, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support, Jayron's version. Or possibly with "In American football," in front for our foreign friends. Oppose, mentioning the Who or the MVP or the number of titles won. Dragons flight (talk) 04:29, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Article looks ok now. Support' Jayron's version.--Johnsemlak (talk) 04:36, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Jayron's version has the score though... --candle•wicke 04:38, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The phrase "In American football" needs to be added. Every sports item has that, whether it be "In basketball" or "in ice hockey". --PlasmaTwa2 04:40, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Also some sections do not have even one citation, such as "New Orleans second drive", "Indianapolis second drive", "Second quarter", "Fourth quarter", "Pro Bowl changes", "New Orleans Saints", "Playoffs", "Officials", "United States", "Pregame". And I was overlooking the many other (quite large) sections with only one citation. Surely we should expect higher quality for such a popular event? --candle•wicke 04:46, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
All we need is an update with an appropriate reference. I cringe at the people who tried every trick in the book to postopone this addition. –HowardtheDuck 09:34, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You mean like you, who, every time a sport is put up that you don't like (like the Champions League Final) immediately starts pointing out reasons why it shouldn't be put up! Pot. Kettle. Black --Daviessimo (talk) 09:50, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
FYI, I fought for the inclusion of the FA Cup Final when the new Wembley opened and Chelsea And ManUtd. played, and the 2007 AFC Asian Cup; both are association football events. Dunno where that "pot meet kettle" accusation came from. –HowardtheDuck 12:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The UEFA Champions League article had serious issues: the entire match section was a copyvio, which was even worse than an unreferenced section! My opposition then was way more valid than the delaying tactics employed by the people here. –HowardtheDuck 12:45, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delaying tactics? It was two hours. Most ITN stories wait far longer than that for them to go up, and there is nothing wrong with ensuring the articles we feature on our Main Page are of decent quality and relevance, especially when there is such a wealth of information available on the Super Bowl. -- tariqabjotu 13:56, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If Ed didn't add it we would still be discussing about having refs to the "background" section which is not really needed -- at least for ITN purposes. –HowardtheDuck 14:10, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Um... no, we wouldn't. I don't know what section you're reading, but half the discussion here is about how to phrase the item on the Main Page. Hardly delaying tactics, hardly trying every trick in the book to postpone this addition. The only thing beyond that is a bit of concern that the article still read like the Super Bowl hadn't happened yet (which is kind of a big issue) and you trying to be funny by saying The Who can't perform during the game. It's unclear who exactly you're talking about, but I think it's very insulting that you think anybody's input here had ulterior motives. Again, it was two hours; maybe without Ed it would have been two and a half. -- tariqabjotu 14:36, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I can point out that this person will always be me when it comes to article quality, and after looking, the Super Bowl article could use a couple more refs (but still stay on ITN). SpencerT♦Nominate! 12:09, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Howard, I was in particular referring to last seasons Champions league final when you suggested the article should come down because it had been put up without a referenced update. Yet here, you are criticising the very editors who are doing to same with this article (i.e. suggesting that as a main page item it needs more references). Hence the Pot. Kettle. Black remark --Daviessimo (talk) 14:44, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, well, there are plenty more similar problems. Serena Williams had to wait twelve hours to be put up, despite an admirable update: Roger Federer was put up in less than six hours with an update that we'd usually refuse and the update for the 2010 Africa Cup of Nations was little more than the final score. The question of updates on sporting articles (and in general) in one that needs resolving, but the Super Bowl is not the time to do it. Physchim62(talk) 15:46, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The INLA, responsible for the murders of 120 people, including MP Airey Neave and the Droppin Well bombing, is expected to be confirmed to have decommissioned its weapons by the Independent International Commission on Decommissioning (IICD). The move comes a day before the IICD is due to disband and a deadline expires that would have seen any remaining armed groups treated as criminals rather than remnants of Troubles-related organisations. (BBC) - Dumelow (talk) 16:20, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think we should post it. Northern Ireland issue seems to be cooling down.--yousaf465 03:03, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No announcement has been made yet but it is expected at some point today. I will try to update the article later (I am out all day so it may be a while) - Dumelow (talk) 08:00, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Significant step in the peace process. Hopefully. HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 17:00, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It has been confirmed. I didn't get around to it today, hopefully tomorrow (if nobody beats me to it) - Dumelow (talk) 00:36, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Article at STS-130. Launch scheduled for 9.14am (UTC), if it is not delayed again - Dumelow (talk) 00:56, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
i am going to oppose this since there is another launch tomorrow of SDO which is actually a lot more unique than regular shuttle launch. we are going to get more shuttle launches posted soon since the upcoming (after next) ones will be last for the shuttles. -- Ashish-g55 01:04, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Remember the tradition, we publish anything shot into space.--yousaf465 03:01, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
that is not necessarily true. we have 2 launches within 2 days. people will start complaining about too many space items right away if we put both. if we have to pick i suggest the latter (SDO). i dont personally mind posting both -- Ashish-g55 03:06, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support both to be fair or someone will complain about one being considered more important than the other. There were two sports from the same day just last week so I don't see the difference. --candle•wicke 03:26, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support per ITNR, though I think we need to look at the space launches section again (I have some ideas) Modest Geniustalk 03:34, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Also, just for info, the Solar Dynamics Observatory article is currently nowhere near good enough to post (stub, one reference, no infobox) anyway. Modest Geniustalk 03:53, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
work in progress. it should be ready to go up by launch time. btw space shuttle has already launched. -- Ashish-g55 16:07, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
btw it might be worth mentioning that this was the last night launch of space shuttle -- Ashish-g55 16:14, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Posted, although I left out the night launch piece. I don't really think NASAneeds to be mentioned, but I imagined a systematic bias claim, and it was 50-50 with mentioning the launcher of Space Shuttles (as I think most people know the space shuttles come from the U.S., but maybe not). -- tariqabjotu 17:39, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support, as Murtha was an extremely powerful congressman (head of defense appropriations, I believe). If we're going to allow a sumo wrestler's retirement, then a powerful congressman's death is a must as well. UnitAnode 20:21, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - He wasn't even a senator, so there is no way he can be considered to have held a high enough position to be seen as noteworthy outside of the US --Daviessimo (talk) 20:27, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support He was significant within the House, he was nearly elected as Majority Leader in 2006 and was a large participant in the Abscam scandal in the 80s. Doc Quintana (talk) 03:04, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A Pakistani lawyers' group in Lahore threatens to "burn alive" anyone who prosecutes lawyer accused of murdering a 12-year-old servant girl. (Asia News)
Britain is to tighten the rules on immigrants entering the country on a student visa in a clampdown on a system which some security experts say has been exploited by Islamist militants. (Reuters)
Oppose unless casualty numbers are around that of the Texas city explosion. A quick look at this suggests that explosions with low death tolls at oil refineries in North America are pretty common --Daviessimo (talk) 18:22, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This isn't a refinery though. Explosions at power plants in the U.S. seem uncommon to me. ~DCTalk To Me 18:38, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Opposed for now; with 2 fatalities this isn't all that significant at this point. (And, hopefully, nothing happens to make me change this opinion.) Bradjamesbrown (talk) 18:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Complete casualty number/injured unknown at this time [40]. Shinerunner(talk) 18:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, authorities say deaths may be in dozens. Anyway we have to update the article right now. We can wait for the numbers.yousaf465 18:43, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I see information on mass casualties, which includes injuries. It seems to be making news around the world, but it not sure why; it doesn't seem ITN-worthy at this point. I hate to say it, but it needs more dead people for me to consider it. -- tariqabjotu 18:50, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Just read on dunya news 50 killed.--yousaf465 18:58, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Please update, I'm going for a sleep now.--yousaf465 19:03, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Seems like there are a lot more injuries than deaths. Even taking that into account two isn't a large figure for an explosion on the same weekend as both of these double explosions elsewhere in the world: this (At least 40 people are killed and more than 140 are wounded in at least two explosions in Karbala during the final day of Arba'een) and this (At least 22 people are killed and more than 50 are injured in two separate explosions in Karachi). This is not the most notable explosion to occur recently in my opinion. --candle•wicke 19:15, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Apples to oranges. You're comparing an explosion at a power plant to terrorist attacks? ~DCTalk To Me 19:18, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It has been suggested above that this type of explosion is also quite common. Terrorist attacks are also quite common but I don't see anything here that convinces me it is more special and suitable for the Main Page. Sorry if I didn't make it clear enough. --candle•wicke 19:28, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above claim is misleading. Refinery fires/explosions are common, but this is a power plant, and explosions in those are much less common. The refinery thing is basically a red herring. ~DCTalk To Me 20:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment If there are close to 50 people dead, then this would definitely appear to be a major industrial accident worthy of being on ITN. But with the two confirmed now, it's not. -- tariqabjotu 19:30, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for now, but as noted, if there end up to be many more casualties, it would probably be a large enough disaster (though that would be horrible!) fetchcomms☛ 19:55, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Waiting now for further developments, ed and candlewick bring up some good points, but damage estimates might take a while. Of course, I saw a report saying that a nearby hospital had its windows blown out and people thought it was an earthquake, so it's likely to be a lot of damage. fetchcomms☛ 22:01, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
All I can see so far about the 50 dead is speculation from the news, something close to the final count will probably be confirmed by tomorrow though. fetchcomms☛ 20:31, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think we should take damage into account as well as just the number of dead in considering if this is "big enough". I'd definitely like to wait a few more hours to see what comes of it, but I wouldn't rule out posting it just yet. Physchim62(talk) 20:59, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The damage seems to have been large (people thought they were feeling earthquakes from 10 miles away!), but now they've found that there were less than 50 injured, and maybe even none dead due to a communication error. fetchcomms☛ 21:06, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If you were going to base this on damage, the Buncefield fire is probably a good measure. In that instance the damages caused by the explosion where somewhere between £500m and £1bn --Daviessimo (talk) 21:18, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I was definitely thinking of the Buncefield fire as a comparison (none dead in that disaster, but the largest peacetime explosion in Europe for at least 30 years). Physchim62(talk) 21:31, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support - Google News has 997 stories at this point, including the BBC, The Guardian (British), CNN, Reuters, CBS, Boston Globe, New York Times... extensive coverage everywhere. —Ed(talk • majestic titan) 21:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: This seems to have done less damage than Cyclone Oli which is still waiting under February 5... the article suggests the numbers were exaggerated or miscommunicated somehow in this case. --candle•wicke 21:46, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it's currently at 14 confirmed injured and 0 confirmed dead. fetchcomms☛ 22:01, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This BBC article says five confirmed dead. If the article we have on it is good, I think it should go up (support). I'd support the cyclone article going up as well. Let me go and add my support for that as well, and see what both articles look like. Carcharoth (talk) 00:25, 8 February 2010 (UTC)Update: going neutral, as the 2010 Kleen Energy Systems explosion article is not that good at the moment, and the cyclone article (which this was being compared to) doesn't seem that newsworthy. Carcharoth (talk) 00:29, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The telegraph article ,put it from "a few to as many as 50 dead".'dozens injured or dead'. With this size of an explosion, you can't have just 2 dead,(believe me we have a huge experience on it.)--yousaf465 02:57, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No one seems to know anything for certain though. --candle•wicke 03:32, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There is some kind of confusion surrounding this. There is proverb in Urdu, Jitany muh utni baatian, which mean more mouths mean more versions of a story. This is also true of this.--yousaf465 07:45, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It needs a major expansion before it's ok for the main page. I can take care of that now. Once expanded, and results are confirmed, I support per WP:ITNR. HonouraryMix (talk) 16:22, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support once results are known, if the president is elected today. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 18:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
For reference: If needed (ie no single candidates gets a 40% vote share) the run off will be on 4 April - Dumelow (talk) 00:22, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support only when results are know.--yousaf465 02:58, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The first round of the Ukrainian presidential election, 2010 takes place with the potential to elect a president today. Otherwise the second round will occur in February - Dumelow (talk) 17:18, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There's likely going to be a second round. Again, do we stick with second round only or do we post first round as well? --Tone 10:07, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Just the second, since that's the actual result. Modest Geniustalk 13:52, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Wait for the second round, we're not exactly short of election stories. Physchim62(talk) 14:07, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I suppose we can call this a standard practice now. I'll make a notice at ITN/R. --Tone 15:27, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The run-off is today.--Johnsemlak (talk) 07:52, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support per WP:ITNR, which says that elections for heads of state are included, when results are confirmed. HonouraryMix (talk) 16:19, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support but noting that Britain's Telegraph is reporting results won't be known until tomorrow, even though exit polls are being reported the defeat of Yulia Tymoshenko. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 18:46, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support once the result is known, due to be announced tomorrow. Article is a bit chaotic, but once the results are incorporated it should be OK. Modest Geniustalk 20:06, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support once the result is known. --bender235 (talk) 22:04, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think result has been announced, with their current president declared a winner.--yousaf465 02:59, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That would be kinda hard, since he (Viktor Yushchenko) was eliminated in the first round! Viktor Yanukovych appears to have won, though we should still wait for the official announcement. Modest Geniustalk 03:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. If Tymoshenko contests the results (which is likely), then that could be added in later as well. Votes are in, so it's pretty much decided from a current numbers standpoint. WizardmanOperation Big Bear 17:43, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose there are a lot more significant politicians in the U.S. than him. ~DCTalk To Me 16:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Leader of just 8,000 people, local councillors have a bigger mandate than that. Modest Geniustalk 20:11, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Opposed Less significant than a mid-major city mayor, and such a person wouldn't even get nominated here. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 21:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, the Choctaw are apparently a "federally recognized American Indian tribe" so I thought it was appropriate to nominate this. That and being mentioned by Taiwan. --candle•wicke 21:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Eh, Taiwan News. Last time I was in Kaohsiung, I saw them run a paragraph w/ photo of the Christmas tree lighting here in Columbia, SC. At any rate, they were only quoting Beasley Denson, not expressing an opinion. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 01:12, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"A mainstay of the British jazz scene for over 60 years", according to the BBC, ""For British jazz and jazz around the world, I believe John has become such an international figure, particularly since he became Sir John Dankworth a few years ago. On his Twitter page, jazz singer Jamie Cullum hailed Sir John as a genius." The Observer headline says "John Dankworth, legend of British jazz, dies at 82: Saxophonist who played for Charlie Parker, collaborated with Ella Fitzgerald and wrote The Avengers theme tune dies after a 60-year career in music". The Sunday Times says, "Last night Stephen Graham of Jazzwise magazine hailed Dankworth as “one of the totemic figures of British jazz” and the country’s “first major jazz musician”." --candle•wicke 05:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As for if he was still performing, this says "As recently as November 2009, he played his saxophone from a wheelchair at the London Jazz Festival". Not to mention "honorary Doctorates by the University of Cambridge, the University of York and the Open University, as well as by Boston's Berklee College of Music". --candle•wicke 05:50, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for now, but if international recognition could be shown I could retract. Right now adding him seems Britain-centric. WizardmanOperation Big Bear 13:49, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
According to non-Britain RTÉ (news section and not even entertainment section where the death of an actor is reported) "Mr Dankworth's fame was worldwide". The Canadian Press reports about this death. ABC News does too. And The Washington Post. CBC says he was playing music before WWII but stopped to serve during the war then began again. "His death comes exactly as [his music venue The Stables] celebrates its 40th anniversary. The manager says the occasion will be marked in honour of the jazz musician." says Radio Netherlands Worldwide. Hopefully less Britain-centric now? :) --candle•wicke 20:03, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support, this does seem to be attracting widespread attention. However, the article needs more references first. Modest Geniustalk 20:09, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
First, for the article itself to go up, there need to be more references as well as an updated deaths section. SpencerT♦Nominate! 22:07, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Haiti debt cancellation
(BBC). I doubt this will make it on, but I think it's worth nominating anyway:
Jordan Queen's educational reform program lauded in Jordan. Rania Al Abdullah and Princess Hessa bint Salman were briefed on the Jordan River Foundation (JRF) by the organization's Director General Valentina Qussisiya. (zawya)
World's oldest monastery, St Anthony's, is restored
Sources: BBC,Discovery News The 'world's oldest' bit is perhaps speculative, but it is certainly an ancient and historically important site. Also, it's important to stress that this is still a working monastery, not just an archeological site. I'm not sure getting the article up to scratch will be feasible, however. It tends to be a challenge with these archeology stories.--Johnsemlak (talk) 22:08, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In hopes to spur some interest in this one, because we don't often post news of historical/archeological interest, I've updated the article with two short paragraphs and 5 new references. It's not much but I think that meets the requirement.--Johnsemlak (talk) 14:53, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support. I agree that this is a notable story and that we don't bring topics of this type too often. __meco (talk) 15:58, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Good encyclopedic topic. --candle•wicke 19:01, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This looks interesting but the article doesn't currently state that this is the world's oldest monastery - Dumelow (talk) 19:18, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It's difficult to definitively say that I think. The BBC article merely states 'believed to be the world's oldest' or something like that. Still, a 1600 year old monastery is quite notable, I think.--Johnsemlak (talk) 19:32, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The auction was in the news yesterday if that matters. Unusual event, to be sure. I'm not sure about ITN worthiness yet. Article needs expansion.--Johnsemlak (talk) 19:30, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Support as unusual and potentially interesting. The Skrunda article provides some background, although the update is not yet up to scratch. Physchim62(talk) 19:32, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support when expanded. --BorgQueen (talk) 19:36, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support and I did some work on the article. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 20:37, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I fail to see the significance of this- it just looks like an old military base being sold off. Also, the article could still do with some work- a tidy up, perhaps a copyedit, some more detail if it's available and that lead will need expanding. HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 02:42, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, as I also cannot see the significant of this. Some disused land, which happened to have been a military base 10 years ago, has been sold for a not-terribly-unusual price. Modest Geniustalk 20:55, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
too common for iraq. oppose for now -- Ashish-g55 03:30, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
My initial thought, exactly, but 140 injuries seems quite a lot- that a total of 180 people killed or injured. HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 03:50, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This is the third attack in Karbala this week. A quick count using Al-Jazeera figures puts total deaths at more than 105 and injured at about 400. The attacks coincide with Arba'een, when the city of Karbala is thronging with Shi'a pilgrims. Support. Physchim62(talk) 09:03, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral - Just thought I'd open this one up for debate. — C M B J 08:05, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral as well...I hate to say it, but this probably only got so much coverage because it hit the east coast. If it had hit Nebraska or Indiana, the media wouldn't have made half as big of a deal out of it. Ks0stm(T•C•G) 10:09, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Wait until effect is fully realized (aka, there's deaths). SpencerT♦Nominate! 17:08, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support - The magnitude of this storm, as noted in the NYT article, definitely warrants this to be on the ITN template. ---Dough4872 17:12, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Can't see anything here, seems like an ordinary weather event. Where are the dozens/hundreds of deaths or even injuries? The article itself mentions that roads "were likely to come to a halt". Likely isn't fact. I also get the impression that this is an annual event which this area must expect. North American blizzard of 2009, North American blizzard of 2008... therefore I will oppose. --candle•wicke 17:27, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This is the most LOL-able reason ever. "Blizzards are an annual event." What's next? No typhoons and cyclones in the Main Page since they happen monthly, heck they blow places weekly? LOL, just LOL. –HowardtheDuck 02:17, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Plus, this invalidates a vast majority of items at WP:ITNR. –HowardtheDuck 02:47, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You clearly misunderstand the scale of the storm. Blizzards in this day and age rarely, if ever, result in large numbers of deaths, so that's an irrelevant metric. Further, your mention of roads "likely" to come to a halt is... well... borderline absurd. It takes little more than a cursory glance of the news related to this story to see that, by all accounts, roads (as well as air travel, postal services, etc.) have ground to a halt. This amount of snow is highly unusual for Washington, D.C., which has received more snow than it has received in nearly 90 years -- and it may even surpass that. Although these storms carry similar names ("North American blizzard of..."), each affect different areas, and all are not all of the same magnitude. This same area had a similar-sized (but slightly less powerful) storm in December, and I'm sure that hurts this item's nomination, but that still does not change the fact that this storm (and the December storm) are highly unusual for this region. -- tariqabjotu 21:17, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral - Let's wait to see full effect of storm. Shinerunner(talk) 17:32, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Oppose America gets affected by Blizzards virtually every week, where as French Polynesia RARELY gets hit by a Cyclone.Jason Rees (talk) 17:56, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for now. Just a major weather event.--Johnsemlak (talk) 18:30, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
OK, the BBC now has this snowstorm back on the front page and calls it the ' most severe snow storms for decades'. Sounds very notable. I'm switching to support.--Johnsemlak (talk) 21:03, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support The span of the storm is not as wide as desired for it to be a "yes, obviously". That is, it's really only affecting Washington, DC, Baltimore, and Philadelphia, and leaving New York, Boston, and many other parts of the northeastern U.S. unscathed. However, the storm is still extremely powerful -- a genuine blizzard in a field of winter storms that are wrongly termed blizzard -- and it is getting front page coverage on many news sites around the world. So, I think it may be a valid addition to "In the News", even if there was a blizzard storm for the same region two months ago. Both Hurricanes Katrina and Rita hit the Main Page, right? We can have two similar weather stories on the Main Page months apart if their magnitudes are notable enough on their own. -- tariqabjotu 21:17, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support also. Whilst this hasn't has the same human toll as the recent winter storms in Europe, the fact that it is being reported as so severe means its probably still main page material. That being said, it would be best to wait until a reputable agency confirms it severity, rather than simply relying on what the media are saying --Daviessimo (talk) 21:27, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Notable facts: 60 cm of snow in the area so far, likely to be the biggest snowfall in Washington DC in 90 years; hundreds of auto accidents with two deaths, flights and trains cancelled in at least three major cites.--Johnsemlak (talk) 21:32, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. As Johnsemlak points out, this is being called the worst snowstorm for decades. I'd oppose of it was "just a storm" but the coverage this is getting would suggest otherwise. HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 02:05, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
this thing didnt even come to canada. i could have really used a day off. i am going to oppose since nothing major has happened. its just snowfall... -- Ashish-g55 03:01, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per Johnsemlak; widespread coverage about a severe event, and several notable facts. Grsz11 03:05, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Although it was a bust for me, it was quite significant where the heavy snow did fall. Impressive storm totals around three feet in some places from what I've heard. Also, in response to Ashish-g55, it doesn't have to hit where you are to be notable to others ;) Cyclonebiskit (talk) 03:30, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
the coming to canada part was a joke. my opposition was because all i see in reports is snowfall... nothing major like what a hurricane might do. -- Ashish-g55 07:08, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This seems to have support now, the article is pretty decent and it has been a while since we updated. Can anyone knock up a good blurb? - Dumelow (talk) 16:08, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support. It seems kinda significant/notable for ITN in its scope. __meco (talk) 16:12, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Now it's actually happened, it seems notable enough for ITN. Physchim62(talk) 16:49, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Posted I know I commented here, so perhaps it was bad form for me to do it myself. However, the consensus is quite clear and I was worried the snow was going to melt before someone else got around to it. Suggestions on rewording are welcome (I was wondering, for example, if we should axe Philadelphia, although doing so created an ugly line break between Washington and D.C.). -- tariqabjotu 17:55, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
non-breaking spaces are designed for exactly that eventuality (and the line break depends on the window size anyway) Modest Geniustalk 20:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, and yes, I know that. But I think 1280px is a pretty common screen width, so I see no reason to intentionally cause poor appearance for that screen width. Adding a non-breaking space for Washington, D.C., pushing the Washington to the next line, would have left a huge space. That doesn't prevent an issue occurring with the current wording at lower resolutions, but those large breaks at lower resolutions don't look nearly as bad because there are just so many. -- tariqabjotu 02:54, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The article says it's "widely known in the US". For those of us who aren't in the US, could you, or somebody else, concisely explain why this is so significant it should be on the Main Page? I'll rest at neutral until then. HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 22:44, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
HJ, the way I read the lead of the article, it says the flier (fish) is well known, not the USS Flier, which I believe is quite obscure. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 23:09, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, most ships are rather obscure, but Danton was probably just as obscure as Flier... —Ed(talk • majestic titan) 23:16, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the explanations. However, I'm going to oppose. I'm not averse to the story itself but this simply isn't "in the news". It's not on the front page of BBC News (nor is it on their "Americas" section), The Wall Street Journal (not on the "US News" section), The New York Times or CNN. HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 00:26, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Was Danton featured prominently by the media? –HowardtheDuck 10:14, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The Danton was a far more notable ship within the French Navy, than this submarine was within the US navy, as far as I can tell, which would suggest that the Danton was more notable generally --Daviessimo (talk) 11:03, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
With the high frequency of such storms, one death is not enough for a subject like this. SpencerT♦Nominate! 23:35, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Cyclone Oli missed Tahiti, by the looks of this map...what am I missing here? Ks0stm(T•C•G) 23:45, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Your forgetting that the maps only shows where the Eye of the cyclone is. Remember Cyclones stretch out for hundreds of miles at times and theres several islands in French Polynesia. Tropical Cyclones affecting French Polynesia are rare and generally only happen during years when we are in an El Nino.Jason Rees (talk) 23:56, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for now. We routinely don't post disasters bigger than that in terms of lives lost.--Johnsemlak (talk) 03:34, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose; for a category 4 storm appears to have had minor impact. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 17:26, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
We shouldn't be assessing natural disasters by how many deaths they cause, as Cyclone Oli has done major damage to French Polynesia. If it was minor damage the French wouldn't be setting up a relief fund.Jason Rees (talk) 17:45, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I agree we shouldn't be using only the death count as a measure of notability, but from the article I can't see much solid evidence of something significant. The article does say there's 'lots of damage' in French Polynesia but I think we need more specifics than there are.--Johnsemlak (talk) 18:47, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Jason Rees. An island with a population of less than 200,000 probably doesn't see this much destruction very often and with such a population an evacuation involving thousands of people and damages to hundreds of buildings must be quite a major event. Authorities told residents to stay indoors as winds of up to 200 km (125 miles) an hour threw up waves of up to 7 metres (23 ft). At least one boat had been sunk. Not forgetting that many of the people who have been evacuated are tourists and that harbours and airports are shut ("inter-island flights and maritime transport are cancelled until further notice as the weather conditions haven’t improved") that would be enough international significance in my opinion. International coverage ranges from Kazakhstan to the Netherlands. Plus it is currently at least 28 hours since the last update. --candle•wicke 19:59, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Given everything said above, support per Candlewicke. Ks0stm(T•C•G) 20:05, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Article is in fine shape, so why is this not up? Tourists, presumably Westerners, were affected. This should be a "plus" for you guys, unless mostly Americans were affacted. –HowardtheDuck 02:23, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps a word suggestion will go some way. Unless someone has anything better based upon what's in the article what about: A state of natural calamity is declared after Cyclone Oli causes damage to buildings in Tahiti and the other islands of French Polynesia. --candle•wicke 03:33, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It is now 37 hours since the last update. --candle•wicke 04:45, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Damage to a few buildings? We routinely don;t post disasters with far greater effect. This is not remotely significant enough for ITN. HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 05:15, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Its not just a few buildings and yeah it is significant enough for ITN. Jason Rees (talk) 05:18, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I would agree that the 'damage to buildings' bit shouldn't be in the blurb, as it doesn't really sound notable. Perhaps it's better to mention the thousands who've been evacuated.--Johnsemlak (talk) 05:28, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I agree (if that helps this move faster). --candle•wicke 18:58, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I still fail to see the notability as well as the extensive news coverage. -- tariqabjotu 02:58, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
BAE Fine
BAE have been fined £280m by US and UK after lying and covering up its operations in Saudi Arabia and Tanzania. Not sure how big that fine is compared to others but it seems pretty big to me --Daviessimo (talk) 18:16, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. It't a record fine in the UK and BAe is the UK's largest manufacturer and defence contractor. However, this is not quite what it looks like. They've confessed to "misleading" the US government but this saga has been going for about 25 years and actually relates to alleged 'under the table' deals with Saudi Royalty, British politicians and big business to win defence contracts with Saudi Arabia, but they have not copped to that or any of the other accusations they've faced. HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 21:39, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A record fine seems notable but otherwise I'm not excited about it.--Johnsemlak (talk) 06:46, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Nom - Important archaeological moment --Kitch(Talk : Contrib) 17:40, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
We had this up for a while, but there are serious concerns about the accuracy of the press reports so it was pulled from the main page. It appears that it is uncertain if the lady who died was a speaker of Aka-Bo, or of one of the other Andamanese languages. All a bit mysterious at the moment! Physchim62(talk) 18:04, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support. His is not the name that immediately springs to mind as an ITN-worthy anti-apartheid activist, but he does fit my personal criterion of "having done more than just his job" (in this case, his job as a politician). The article is in fairly good shape as well, which makes it much easier for me to support: the references need a consistent format though. Physchim62(talk) 15:08, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
From the article I couldn't see an extremely significant role in the abolition of apartheid.--Johnsemlak (talk) 17:11, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very significant figure in anti-apartheid movement. HonouraryMix (talk) 23:37, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, albeit weakly. Certainly not a name that comes to mind for anti-apartheid, though the article is in nice shape. Not quite getting a feel of putting him up on the main page though. WizardmanOperation Big Bear 23:42, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Anyone for pizza?
A traditional pizza napoletana, sometimes referred to as a "Margherita" in English.
The BBC story doesn't make it clear that the protection only applies in Italy, even though it is a European Union measure (the EU has exclusive competence over such things). If anyone wants to know how to make a real napoletana, the official instructions (in English) are here! Physchim62(talk) 02:12, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Why not? I imagine it's a pretty big deal in Naples. HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 02:21, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
lol as much as i like the story i must oppose. not big enough for ITN -- Ashish-g55 03:26, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The rules say that the pizza napoletana should be no more than 35 cm (14") in diameter, so we can't make it any biiger :P Physchim62(talk) 11:13, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support remember that we once put a unremarkable story up on the traditional burning of a giant goat statue. I assume that this is news in Italy, and how many types of food do you know that have official protection? --PlasmaTwa2 04:06, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: Clearly of local interest. --GPPande 10:31, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Seems to be artificial hype.--Johnsemlak (talk) 10:34, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
One could say that any "Traditional Speciality Guaranteed" label is artificial hype: this one does cover one of the most globally widespread foods (a napoletana is often called a "Margherita" in English). Oh well, I guess you can't have your pizza and eat it! Physchim62(talk) 11:13, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Not really convinced either way, but we've had a run of serious stories lately, something a little more light-hearted could be nice to shake things up. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 12:40, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support it'll give the sumo dude something to eat (and more people care about this anyway). ~DCTalk To Me 15:09, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support: I think our visitor will love to not only read this story but also the "original" Pizza. Willing to support only if Jimbo announces a pizza each for our ITN team ;)--yousaf465 07:30, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support. Heard this on the U.S. news today, so it is presumably something of international concern. Seeing as the EU has relatively sane views of intellectual property, this ruling also seems like a deviation from what one would anticipate. — C M B J 08:22, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Oppose Different, but I don't think its quite suitable. If it goes up, I smell lots of vultures demanding that it be taken down. SpencerT♦Nominate! 17:10, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Northern Ireland agrees devolution of policing
The DUP and Sinn Fein have agreed do devolve policing and justice to Northern Ireland, and agreed to reform handling of parades. Strikes me as an important step in Northern Ireland history. [42]—Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.155.74.233 (talk) 12:38, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, but this still has to pass a vote in the Northern Ireland Assembly on 9 March. We might want to wait until then - Dumelow (talk) 12:44, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It's certainly big news in NI, but does it travel? You have to explain an awful lot of history and UK constitutional law before you get the significance. Even then, it is really just a return to what would be a "normal" situation in the UK, at least for policing, with the police under local political control and not central political control. The devolution of justice responsibilities is similarly fairly banal, as Northern Ireland is a separate jurisdiction and so has a self-contained courts system. There's a bigger UK story breaking at the moment, one that got pages of coverage in the Spanish press this morning as opposed to the odd paragraph for the NI deal... Physchim62(talk) 14:12, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Didn't see this here. I've already nominated at FE as it will not be devolved until April. I will bring the contents of this discussion over to here. — Cargoking talk 16:31, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
UK parliamentary scandal
It's the same old one, unfortunately! The Legg report yesterday said that more than half of UK MPs would have to pay back some expenses payments, for a total of GBP1.1 million (nearly US$2M). Some of the individual claims are for around USD100k, which is a lot of money for anyone. Today it has been announced that four parlimentarians (three MPs and a peer) face criminal charges of "false accounting" in relation to their expenses claims (a fifth case is still under investigation). United Kingdom Parliamentary expenses scandal is already at 95kB over the issue! Physchim62(talk) 15:51, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. How often do members of a national legislature face criminal charges for this kind of thing? Besides, the article is of a good standard and seems to be up to date on these events. HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 17:01, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
im gonna oppose simply because the story is very localized. international significance is quite low. I would oppose if this was US story too but unfortunately those go up either way. -- Ashish-g55 18:40, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't normal policy to post verdicts rather than just charges or accusations? I'd say wait to see if they're convicted.--Johnsemlak (talk) 03:38, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose unless someone is convicted; even then, this is relatively minor compared to corruption charges in other countries. Modest Geniustalk 14:44, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Former sumo wrestler Asashoryu, pictured before a bout in 2008.
Sorry I'm not quite sure of the procedure - I've already added this to the Current Events portal. Coverage
by BBC, CNN etc - one of sumo's major stars exiting in such controversial fashion is a pretty rare event.--Pawnkingthree (talk) 22:39, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Why not? When was the last time we had sumo on ITN? Support, a controversial end to a controverial career. Physchim62(talk) 23:26, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
support for diversity. i dont ever remember seeing sumo on ITN. in its field its quite notable -- Ashish-g55 02:28, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Sumo is quite popular in other parts of Asia, now, and even Russia and Bulgarian now that some of their competitors have become stars in Japan. And Japanese society is well known for honour codes and the like, especially sumo, and this chap was always getting into trouble YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 03:25, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The article is well-updated. Posting soon. --BorgQueen (talk) 03:34, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry I'm late for this one but I'm going to post Oppose on the basis that we normally favor sports achievements rather than retirements. (I would certainly favor increasing ITN coverage of Sumo generally). We recently did not support the retirement of Urban Meyer (which proved to be wise as he unretired later) and he was also at the top of his sport. I've looked at the article and while he seems to have retired because of some controversy, it seems to have been a series of small things rather than one particularly notable controversy that forced him to retire.--Johnsemlak (talk) 04:34, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to support if this is important to sumo as it was a pleasant surprise to discover such a diverse topic (which I know nothing about) on the Main Page. It does says he "became the first Mongolian to reach sumo's highest rank" so that doesn't sound like this is a very ordinary person in their field of expertise. --candle•wicke 15:07, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. This kind of news is as big as it gets in sumo. Important. GreenGourd (talk) 15:36, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
how often does this happen? BBC. Seems like an awfully rare thing. even though article is tiny i find it quite interesting. -- Ashish-g55 21:13, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'd seen this one as well and thought it was pretty notable. However, the article needs a lot of work on it before it can go up --Daviessimo (talk) 21:20, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support, once expanded. This sounds pretty interesting and is presumably quite rare - Dumelow (talk) 21:32, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Having said that, the BBC article states that "two languages in the Andamans had now died out over the last three months" - Dumelow (talk) 21:41, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
apparently there is a List of languages by time of extinction. well i definitely did not know that. either way i dont remember a story like this going on ITN atleast. -- Ashish-g55 21:44, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The Hindu says that the other language was Khora which died out in November (the article doesn't reflect this yet), maybe we could mention that in the blurb. Looking at List of languages by time of extinction these events still seem pretty rare - Dumelow (talk) 21:51, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
hmm article has grown quite a bit since i last looked. this is actually looking good for ITN. once posted it should grow even more. -- Ashish-g55 02:24, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I support this in principle but, much as I hate to be a stickler, I would like to see a little more than 2 paragraphs and 3 references, though I appreciate the difficulties. HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat?
Support given that I was scooped on this one. I heard the report tonight on BBC World Report tonight on NPR, raced home, and found out someone already updated the article. Newsworthy event, recently reported. Yeah, it would be nice to have a longer article, but perhaps the presence on ITN could be a catalyst for improvement! --Jayron32 04:21, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support as per above. It's surprising to me that the article isn't better, but I think it may be adequate now. It really could use attention from an expert on the subject.--Johnsemlak (talk) 04:27, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
unfortunately no one speaks the language any more :P -- Ashish-g55 04:31, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think the article is unacceptably short now. Posting soon. --BorgQueen (talk) 04:46, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The entire update has been removed by the article creator. [43] Shall we remove it from ITN? --BorgQueen (talk) 07:19, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah apparently all the news reports are wrong. The information has been removed from the article, but no-one has yet provided a source saying that it is wrong, I have requested it at the talk page. Until then someone has protected it from editing for a content dispute. I'd love to get too the bottom of this! - Dumelow (talk) 10:16, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That's interesting. I'm going to oppose though because they're not the first by some way to do this and because most of its significance in the media is over speculation about Iran;s weapons capability. HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 22:18, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. According to the Iranian Space Agency article Iran set a goal for itself in 2005 of being among the top 10 space-faring nations and allocated a whooping USD500 Billion to be spent on the program for the 5 years until 2010. Obviously their current ability to send animals into space now is a significant milestone in the country's extremely ambitious space endeavors. __meco (talk) 11:55, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
WP:ITNR includes 'The launch of satellites, shuttles, and any space mission in general.' I know this policy has been criticized lately, but surely Iran's first such launch is more notable than a routine NASA launch to the ISS?--Johnsemlak (talk) 12:23, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think that guideline is aimed at routine events, and this is a milestone, not a routine event. __meco (talk) 12:40, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support: Iran's achivements are notable. I think Iran has become first country apart from established space powers (USA, EU, Russia, Japan & India) to do this. --GPPande 12:41, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Might also be viewed as the first Middle-Eastern country to do so, though 'Middle East' might be too vague a term to use in the blurb.--Johnsemlak (talk) 12:45, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support: This is a quite notable achievement IMO; it's not like every country shoots out animals into space every other day :) ≈ Chamaltalk¤ 12:47, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support, I'm a little bit sceptical on this one because of the lack of concrete details, but go on, let's update Iranian Space Agency and post it. Physchim62(talk) 12:51, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Not much updating needed, but I added it to the lead to emphasize its significance. __meco (talk) 14:54, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Just curious - why do you think that not much updating is needed? Because not much info is available at the moment? --BorgQueen (talk) 15:26, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think I meant that the article looks decent, but the main thing is the event itself, of which the blurb says the most. I also notice that the article has been extensively updated today and yesterday, although I haven't read it other than to make the little edit which I did. __meco (talk) 20:58, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support notable milestone in the Iranian space programme. However, I think Kavoshgar-3 should be created (and updated) before any posting. Modest Geniustalk 14:52, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not so sure we need to wait for that. It's kind of a specialty article, and I'm sure the rocketry editors will latch on to it very soon after we post. Then we could modify the blurb to include mention of the rocket by name. __meco (talk) 14:57, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
added more refs and few lines. will try and find more sources later. there are 1000s of news stories for this but they all say the same thing :( -- Ashish-g55 21:33, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Eh... opposed; animals went up, a year after Iran sent up a satellite. I just don't see it as all that significant since we already knew they could get a rocket up in orbit. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 23:54, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
the animals were returned back safely. there is a huge difference in that and sending a rocket up. and we post pretty much every single NASA launches i dont see why something thats a first for iran should not be posted. -- Ashish-g55 02:17, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
WHY is this not yet up on main page???? Need admins quickly. --GPPande 10:36, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Because there has only been a two sentence update:"On February 3, 2010, Iran test-fired the Kavoshgar-3 with living organisms onboard, including a mouse, 2 turtles and worms, that were returned to earth unharmed.[3] Kavoshgar-3, a 10 foot long research rocket is also capable of transferring electronic data and live footage back to earth.[14]" which is nowhere near enough information. I would like to see an article at Kavoshgar-3 but if not, more info can be added to the Iranian Space Agency article - Dumelow (talk) 10:39, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. Expanded the article. Now, the header contains one line reference along with a new section. Let me know if more info is needed. Hopefully others will contribute too. :-) --GPPande 11:06, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I siphoned the comments of the president to a separate paragraph within the new section and readded parts of his statement that was removed earlier on today. I'm sure this section could be expanded further with comments from elsewhere, but I really think this story is ready for posting now. __meco (talk) 11:39, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Blurb: Iranian Space Agency announces successful launch and return of animals in space. It can anything else also but please post soon. --GPPande 12:03, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There actually exists and article Animals in space. We should definitely include that on this occasion. In that article Kavoshgar 3 is linked to Safir (rocket). I'm not sure that is accurate, but if it is, we could also include that link perhaps? __meco (talk) 12:24, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Why the delay? --candle•wicke 15:10, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Could we have the word organisms changed to animals as the former seems a little diminishing considering the payload included one rodent, two turtles, and several worms, all actual animals. as opposed to fungi and plants which one might contemplate upon reading the present blurb. __meco (talk) 19:06, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia says his "influence was felt throughout the Pacific". Certainly had influence in Tonga, according to this from TVNZ. "Truly one of the great academic giants of the South Pacific" as well apparently, according to TVNZ. "A critic of the semi-feudal society which had developed in Tonga" and "he is seen as someone of academic background who is uncompared in Tonga. He knows classic history and he has been able to provide a philosophical and sociological justification for democracy in Tonga", says this from Radio New Zealand. It is not often that deaths from this region appear in the ITN section. --candle•wicke 22:02, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No, oppose. We don't get many deaths from the region, but that's mostly because not many people live there! The deceased was obviously influential in Tonga, but I think his influence ended there. The biography is more of a hagiography than anything else: indeed, the complaints about the fate of the high school and the problems of the university seem to suggest that his influence outside the country was insufficient to continue the projects he himself had started. Let's find another notable Polynesian! Physchim62(talk) 01:48, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as per Physchim.--Johnsemlak (talk) 12:31, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Essentially per June. It's a world record and it's making headlines across the world. Is there a free image of it...? HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 22:21, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support. I was going to go "neutral" because I think the record-breaking price is more auctioneer's froth than anything else (there have been more expensive works sold in private sales); however, June's article gives a bit of interesting background to the story, and so a posting would be useful to our readers, IMHO. Physchim62(talk) 01:36, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I know this is unusual, but this is the last major record to be broken, and it is quite unlikely that any other movie will come close in decades; plus, the 2 bn mark is a first that will probably not be equalled anytime soon either. Nergaal (talk) 20:21, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No, it's a perfectly reasonable nomination, but not one that I can support. We ran the global take story as that was the one that was getting the attention. We didn't run the $1bn mark and I don't see why we should run the $2bn mark either: all of these points are subject to inflation, as was argued at length just ten days ago. OpposePhyschim62(talk) 20:58, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Opposed We ran the big story here; 2 billion is just numerical trivia. Also, running just breaking the U.S. record would be undue weight towards the U.S. Bradjamesbrown is travelling (Talk to my master) 01:52, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It would be nice if there was any indication of which record you were referring to. From the responses, I'm assuming it breached another revenue round number, in which case oppose since we already posted when it broke the record. Modest Geniustalk 14:47, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
New cemetery for WWI dead
bumped up from February 1 after major article work.
Is there any hope for this story? The first new military cemetery in fifty years for the dead of the two World Wars (in this case, dead from 1916) was opened 1000 UTC Saturday. The bodies were recovered from mass graves in northern France where they had lain for over 70 years (BBC News). Article is probably Fromelles (Pheasant Wood) Military Cemetery, although background information is available at Battle of Fromelles until the fork-merge is finished. Target article still needs work. Physchim62(talk) 13:52, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support for variety and general-interest. Article needs work first. Modest Geniustalk 22:12, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support once the article is updated. --PlasmaTwa2 03:47, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've (finally) finished a major expansion and update for this article. See Fromelles (Pheasant Wood) Military Cemetery. A lot of the background details provided now, and I've also updated with some details of the ceremony that took place on Saturday. I realise that the mainstream news coverage has peaked now, but it would be nice if this could still go up for several reasons: (1) General interest and rarity of historical items like this in 'in the news'; (2) It is a fairly long article created almost from scratch (the amount of material to write is one reason for it being delayed); (3) The reburials are continuing all through February, so it is still technically news for the rest of this month; (4) It got a lot of news coverage from around the world: CNN, Sydney Morning Herald, Sky News, The Daily Telegraph, The Independent, The Australian, BBC, and French regional papers and Euronews. The only thing we lack is a free picture, unless anyone is nearby and can go to one of the funerals in February and take a photo for us. If this does go up, could I get joint nomination credit? Carcharoth (talk) 08:22, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. IS there a way to say that the cemetery is located in France in the blurb? Fromelles will not be an instantly recognizable location.--Johnsemlak (talk) 15:55, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Why is this significant at all? Colipon+(Talk) 02:10, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I see neither encyclopedic nor popular significance for this story. Nominate for DYK, not ITN if you want to be on the front page for expanding an article. I've always been wary of this World War trivia (oldest surviving veteran, etc.) as a systematic bias in our coverage. Madcoverboy (talk) 19:38, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That seems to indicate that you have a systematic bias against it! Physchim62(talk) 20:13, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
lol i was going to say the same thing -- Ashish-g55 20:16, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Madcoverboy, are you saying that the burial of 250 soldiers is trivia? It received significant news coverage in three countries (UK, France, Australia). How international does coverage have to be to be international enough? I agree that the news items about oldest surviving veterans can be trivia (in hindsight, my failed ITN nomination on Florence Green was an example of this - see here), but I can't stand by and let you call this item trivia - it dishonours the memory of these soldiers. I had thought about nominating for DYK, but as it was in the news, I thought it would be worth seeing if there was support for it being in Wikipedia's "in the news" section, and there was support, so it got posted. Do note that as it went up late, it will drop off anyway with the next update. Carcharoth (talk) 02:28, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Date fixed for Feb 3 - Dumelow (talk) 10:53, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The incumbent Karolos Papoulias was returned with 266 votes out of 300. This was the expected result as he was unopposed, maybe we do not need to report this. The article is in need of much expansion - Dumelow (talk) 11:14, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support per ITNR, though the article obviously needs expansion way beyond the current single sentence. Modest Geniustalk 14:48, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Nominations for the 82nd Academy Awards are announced. Avatar and The Hurt Locker lead the way with nine nominations each, and are both among ten nominees for Best Picture, the first time more than five films have been up for consideration since 1943. (CNN)
Better to wait for a verdict on this one, I think. Physchim62(talk) 21:52, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. Let's wait for a verdict. --BorgQueen (talk) 22:01, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This was news in Dubai yesterday, so inclined to support, depending on the verdict. Right now, we can't say a whole lot, so I consider it better to hold off. Bradjamesbrown is travelling (Talk to my master) 07:53, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
BBC This is one of the most iconic songs from the 80s. I think this might be a good way to get Haiti back on the front page. Also, I think the event is notable in its own right--I don't follow popular music but it seems quite unusual for a hit to be rerecorded after 25 years. Plus, unlike many stories from sports and popular entertainment, this song has an excellent article and is already updated.--Johnsemlak (talk) 18:52, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose really not that significant. Plus we already have the Grammys up there, and there isn't a need to "get Haiti back on the front page." ~DCTalk To Me 19:33, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Plus there is a new version of "Everybody Hurts" released this week for the same cause. Oppose. Physchim62(talk) 19:54, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. If there were a need to "get Haiti back on the Main Page", there are much better stories than some pop song. HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 20:13, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I am opposing for the above reasons and my uncertainty about "one of the most iconic songs from the 80s" and "it seems quite unusual for a hit to be rerecorded after 25 years". Whatever about the former I am fairly sure the latter is not at all the case. --candle•wicke 21:37, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Retraction of study linking MMR vaccine and autism
This paper lead to many people not immunizing their children and arguably causing lots of harm. -- Flyguy649talk 16:52, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to surprise myself by supporting this. I remember the original study being announced, and that we were all fooled is big news- the consequences of the mistake here is huge. Bradjamesbrown is travelling (Talk to my master) 20:08, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I'm glad this crap has been retracted and the story has obvious significance in the medical world. HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 20:18, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
US President Barack Obama will propose a $3.8 trillion budget for fiscal 2011 that foresees the deficit hitting a record $1.6 trillion in the current fiscal year but falling to about $700 billion by 2013. (WSJ)
Let's wait for the actual report, shall we? That supposedly comes out tomorrow. Even then, there's no way they're 'abandoning human space flight', at worst they'll have to pay the Russians to launch US astronauts for them. Modest Geniustalk 17:40, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Bump section to 1st Feb. Qurq (talk) 00:56, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I would suggest something more factual and verifiable such as : President Obama's FY 2011 budget cancels Constellation program, ending the effort to bring a crew on the Moon surface by 2020. Hektor (talk) 20:21, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support for something like 'The United States cancels the Constellation Programme, which would have returned men to the Moon' (certainly not 'President Obama', and better to avoid the technicalities). More notable than the run-of-the-mill shuttle flights, but I know some think we should post less space stories. Modest Geniustalk 22:10, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The United States have not done that yet. Only President Obama's FY 2011 budget proposal has. We are just at the start of the process. Hektor (talk) 22:39, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"Cedes the future to the Chinese" is a bit hyperbolic, don't you think. ... we did that decades ago. :P --Golbez (talk) 22:41, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It'sn't about giving up on spaceflight. It's about not wasting money on doing things we've done before. We've already been to the moon. No need to go there again. NASA chief Charles Bolden says instead that we should focus on spending money on new game-changing technology such as Vasimir ion-engines. 86.148.255.254 (talk) 22:58, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
eh? moon was only stepping stone to mars. since obama killed the moon program he took down future of mars program with it. go China! i support inclusion of this news. but obviously without the china part. -- Ashish-g55 23:02, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't believe that the budget is finalized and plenty of people in Congress won't want to see the NASA cuts affect the related businesses their states. I can't find the report but I believe that there is also an idea of having the private business sector take a more active role in manned space flight as well.Shinerunner(talk) 23:34, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Obama has merely proposed ending a program that might have led to lunar flights by 2019 (if everything went as planned), but which was already overbudget, behind schedule, and seen by many as a poor way to use space resources anyway. Notably, the proposed budget actually increases total spending on NASA. Dragons flight (talk) 00:02, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support whatever the outcome. Space exploration is always exxciting etc, same as teh Large Hadron Collider and so forth YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 00:22, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Suggest Blurb: US Budget proposal includes canceling the return of astronauts to the Moon. Qurq (talk) 02:55, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The final outcome is anything but clear and the budget is only the first step in in the process. RxS (talk) 03:20, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support, as this is a hugely important and widespread story. UnitAnode 03:48, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The project itself was only in its infancy and, as has been pointed out above, it is hardly a surprise it has been cancelled. If the US announced there were pulling out of space exploration entirely then that would be notable, but as it stands this is merely the end to one programme --Daviessimo (talk) 21:11, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The President's budget is not law, thus the release of it does not presuppose the elimination of the program. Premature nomination. Madcoverboy (talk) 16:34, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I am opposing because this is deciding the very first step in a plan which may or may not have happened will now not happen (for now). Far too vague in my opinion. Perhaps would support if NASA had been closed down completely and there was a vow to never go back into space. --candle•wicke 21:42, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Eh, oppose because the attempt was thwarted, which makes this not nearly as significant as a succeeded coup d'etat. Honestly, I think the article, if started, would end up at AfD per WP:NOTNEWS- and, yes, I do know which page I'm editing right now ;). Bradjamesbrown is travelling (Talk to my master) 07:57, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I support this item but I'm not sure which article would be a candidate.--Johnsemlak (talk) 13:12, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I thought about this one, but desisted from nominating. It seems more like the old rotating Presidency of the European Council, which we have only very rarely featured (and then, on quiet days). Oppose for the moment until someone can convince me of the significance of the event. Physchim62(talk) 13:46, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Moved from WP:ITN/FE
