Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
For administrator instructions on updating Template:In the news, see Wikipedia:In the news/Admin instructions.

This page provides a forum for editors to suggest items for inclusion in Template:In the news (ITN), a protected Main Page template, as well as the forum for discussion of candidates. This is not the page to report errors in the ITN section on the Main Page—please go to the appropriate section at WP:ERRORS.

This candidates page is integrated with the daily pages of Portal:Current events. Under each daily section header below is the transcluded Portal:Current events items for that day (with a light green header). Each day's portal page is followed by a subsection for suggestions and discussion.

John Key

Ongoing: Ebola outbreak Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant
Recent deaths: Ian Paisley

How to nominate an item[edit]

In order to suggest a candidate:

  • Update an article to be linked to from the blurb to include the recent developments, or find an article that has already been updated.
  • Find the correct section below for the date of the event (not the date nominated) in UTC.
    • Do not add sections for new dates. These are automatically generated (at midnight UTC) by a bot; creating them manually breaks this process. Remember, we use UTC dates.
  • Nominate the blurb for ITN inclusion under the "Suggestions" subheading for the date, emboldening the link in the blurb to the updated article. Use a level 4 header (====) when doing so.
  • Please consider adding the blurb to Portal:Current events (the green box at the top of the date section) at the same time.

Purge this page to update the cache

There are criteria which guide the decision on whether or not to put a particular item on In the news, based largely on the extensiveness of the updated content and the perceived significance of the recent developments. These are listed at WP:ITN.

Submissions that do not follow the guidelines at Wikipedia:In the news will not be placed onto the live template.


  • Items that have been posted or pulled from the main page are generally marked with [Posted] or [Pulled] in the item's subject so it is clear they are no longer active.
  • Items can also be marked as [Ready] when the article is both updated and there seems to be a consensus to post. The posting admin, however, should always judge the update and the consensus to post themselves. If you find an entry that you don't feel is ready to post is marked [Ready] you should remove the header.

Voicing an opinion on an item[edit]

  • Format your comment to contain "support" or "oppose", and include a brief (or detailed!) rationale for your choice. Comments and other objections are welcome, but this is the basic form.
  • Be aware that RD refers to "recent deaths", a subsection of the news box which lists only the names of the recent notable deceased. Blurb refers to the full sentences that occupy most of the news box. Most eligible deaths will be listed in the recent deaths section of the ITN template. However, some deaths may be given a full listing if there is sufficient consensus to do so.
  • Be aware that the blurb of a promoted ITN item may be modified to complement the existing items on the main page.

Please do not...[edit]

  • ... add simple "support" or "oppose" !votes. Similarly, curt replies such as "who?", "meh", or "duh!" are usually not helpful. Instead, explain the reasons why you think the item meets or does not meet the ITN inclusion criteria so a consensus can be reached.
  • ... complain about an event only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. This applies to a high percentage of the content we post and is unproductive.
  • ... accuse other editors of supporting, opposing or nominating due a to personal bias (such as ethnocentrism). Conflicts of interest are not handled at ITN.
  • ... comment on a story without first reading the relevant article(s).
  • ... oppose an item because it is not on WP:ITN/R.


September 22[edit]

September 21[edit]

[Posted] MAVEN probe[edit]

Proposed image
Updated article: MAVEN

Blurb: The NASA probe MAVEN enters orbit of Mars to study its atmospheric loss.
News source(s): NBC News ABC News (US) BBC The Guardian Sydney Morning Herald
Nominator: 331dot (give credit)
Updater: Byronellis93 (give credit)
Other updaters: BatteryIncluded (give credit)

Article updated

Nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, meaning that the recurrence of the event is generally considered important enough to post on WP:ITN subject to the quality of the article and the update to it.

Nominator's comments: Space probes reaching their destination are ITNR. An Indian Mars probe (the Mars Orbiter Mission) will arrive on Tuesday; perhaps a combined blurb? I welcome advice on the blurb. --331dot (talk) 09:18, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

  • I suggest we post this now and expand the blurb tomorrow. --Tone 09:25, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support I think it is newsworthy and a quality article. Mattaidepikiw (Talk) 09:30, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
@Mattaidepikiw:; just FYI if the event is on the ITNR list it has already been judged notable enough for posting; we are now just judging article quality and deciding on a blurb. 331dot (talk) 09:34, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - INTR, and the article is in good shape. Happy to support as a solo, or combined blurb, but I have not looked at the other article yet. Tone's suggestion is good. Jusdafax 09:32, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Posting. Feel free to update the image. --Tone 09:38, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

People's Climate March[edit]

Article: People's Climate March
Blurb: Over 300,000 people take part in the People's Climate March in New York City.
News source(s): NY Times NBC News
Nominator: Johnsemlak (give credit)

Note: I'm open to suggestions on amending the blurb. We may want to mention related protests worldwide. Also the article needs to be updated to reflect the day's events.

 --Johnsemlak (talk) 23:04, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

  • Sounds like OR to me. It's on the top of the news here, probably because it wasn't expected to do so well. Also, marches held in many cites across the world, not just NYC. Abductive (reasoning) 01:34, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
  • One note on the number--I would like to see an independent estimate on the crowd size in NY. The estimate of 300,000+ is by the organizers. The major media sources have quoted that figure but not made their own estimate..--Johnsemlak (talk) 01:46, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment As this appears to have been something that occurred in several worldwide locations, if we could get an accurate (within Medeis' concern above) count and a city number, a better blurb would be "Over x00,000 people in y cities participate in the People's Climate March". --MASEM (t) 01:50, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
    Protests happened in several cities but the main one was in NY which is aimed at a UN summit on climate change .--Johnsemlak (talk) 01:56, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
    Maybe that the march was in advance of the summit might help the blurb (to give more relevance in the ITN box) eg, staying with your current language "Over 300,000 people take part in the People's Climate March in advance of the UN Climate Summit in New York City." --MASEM (t) 02:00, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose- We should post only the summit, not these meaningless preliminary protests. Bzweebl (talkcontribs) 03:35, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - Major event, worldwide coverage in the news. Article looks ok. Opposes fail to make the case that this is not a valid ITN blurb. Jusdafax 04:22, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support if the blurb is globalized as the event was not limited to New York. Starting to get coverage in MSM. Not sure where the crowd estimates are from but we should try to lock that down too. 331dot (talk) 09:26, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose per Bzweebl. Protests, marches and demonstrations around the world take place every day, but we usually post only those who end up in civil disorder, political response and significant international reactions. Unfortunately, this has nothing to do with it and seems to be notable only for the record, although the number of participants in the march also seems to be heavily inflated. The article is in very good shape, though.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:48, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

2014 FIVB Volleyball Men's World Championship[edit]

Article: 2014 FIVB Volleyball Men's World Championship
Blurb: The 2014 FIVB Volleyball Men's World Championship concludes with Poland defeating Brazil in the final.
Nominator: Kiril Simeonovski (give credit)

Nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, meaning that the recurrence of the event is generally considered important enough to post on WP:ITN subject to the quality of the article and the update to it.

 --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 22:05, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

  • Oppose- Orange tag, article has little prose. Bzweebl (talkcontribs) 03:36, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose Amazing work putting all those tables together, but all tables and no text makes Jack a dull boy. Mattaidepikiw (Talk) 09:23, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

Ashraf Ghani and Abdullah Abdullah[edit]

Articles: Ashraf Ghani and Abdullah Abdullah
Blurb: Ashraf Ghani and Abdullah Abdullah agree to become president and chief executive officer of Afghanistan, respectively.
News source(s): Businessweek
Nominator: Jinkinson (give credit)

One or both nominated events are listed on WP:ITN/R, meaning that the recurrence of the event is generally considered important enough to post on WP:ITN subject to the quality of the article and the update to it.

 --Jinkinson talk to me 15:22, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

September 20[edit]

[Posted] New Zealand general election, 2014[edit]

Article to update: New Zealand general election, 2014
Blurb: Prime Minister John Key's National Party wins a majority in the New Zealand general election.
News source(s): BBC
Nominator: The Rambling Man (give credit)

Article needs updating

Nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, meaning that the recurrence of the event is generally considered important enough to post on WP:ITN subject to the quality of the article and the update to it.

 The Rambling Man (talk) 11:18, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

  • Support - A general elections in a country is always important.--BabbaQ (talk) 20:12, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
    Just as a side note, this article does not need your support on importance, ITNR says we've already pre-approved it on importance. It needs your support on quality. --Jayron32 20:56, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
    However, as per the "2014 Asian Games opening ceremony" discussion, you are absolutely entitled to discuss the importance of the ITNR, although this would not be the best venue for such a discussion. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:58, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
    A support goes hand in hand with all that you mentioned Jayron. --BabbaQ (talk) 22:55, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
    That's not really clear from your comment, which is just about the merits of posting this(which, as Jayron said, has already been judged by being on the ITNR list). If you think the quality is adequate for an ITNR item, simply state that. 331dot (talk) 23:06, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
    Obviously not for this specific items, but ITN/C item that is an ITNR item can still be judged if that instance shouldn't be posted, considering possible issues beyond article quality. A case I would consider would be where an incumbent is fully expected to win by a landslide and remain in power, and does win by a landslide and remains in power, and absolutely no one in the world is surprised by that. Yes, the election happened, but there's no real news story about that. It doesn't mean the overall ITNR entry on that list is bad, just that some cases it will be a non-newsworthy result. This type of situation would be very exceptional, of course, but the ITNR/ITNC process does account for this (note the language on the ITNR blurb in the template box above). --MASEM (t) 23:14, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Posting. That is one seriously updated article ... --Tone 22:08, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
    Can we get someone to put up File:John Key 2014 (cropped).jpg? I know it's not going to be much of a change (slightly balding white guy in grey suit being exchanged for another slightly balding white guy in a grey suit), but at least it will be the slightly balding white guy in grey suit who was most recently elected. Maybe @David Levy: who's usually on the ball with all the picture stuff? --Jayron32 01:14, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
    We also have the final Fijian election results due in 6 hours which might put a "brown" balding man on the main page, the decision is on wikipedia lol, the win for Key was a majority but a win for bainimarama would mean Fiji having a democratically elected government for the first time in 8 years...technically both the john key image and the swedish PM image were cropped by me so whatever works.. :P --Stemoc 02:02, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

September 19[edit]

Alibaba IPO[edit]

Updated article: Alibaba Group
Blurb: Chinese e-commerce giant Alibaba Group raises US$21.8 billion in its initial public offering on the NYSE, the largest ever in U.S. history.
News source(s): [1]
Nominator: King of Hearts (give credit)

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Very important financial event. --King of ♠ 02:05, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

  • Support - A record, notable enough for ITN.--BabbaQ (talk) 20:20, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
  • I find this a good story to post but I'd like to see some more support. --Tone 22:12, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support A notable record. Neljack (talk) 04:24, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support Seems very newsworthy to me. Mattaidepikiw (Talk) 01:48, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support, based on the "what does this mean for you?" type news articles I'm seeing. Abductive (reasoning) 02:58, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support- Not notable for an arbitrary record, but for the significance of a massive Chinese corporation making an IPO in the US. Bzweebl (talkcontribs) 03:38, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment good level of support, article has a couple of "out of date" orange tags that could use a fix before posting. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:53, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - Revise header to $25 billion after greenshoe option. Now makes it the largest IPO in world history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:28, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

2014 Asian Games opening ceremony[edit]

Updated article: 2014 Asian Games opening ceremony
Blurb: The 2014 Asian Games opens in Incheon, South Korea
Nominator: Howard the Duck (give credit)
Updater: GTVM92 (give credit)

Article updated

Nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, meaning that the recurrence of the event is generally considered important enough to post on WP:ITN subject to the quality of the article and the update to it.

Nominator's comments: Updates are a bit light, but for a new article, this could be acceptable. --–HTD 17:05, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

  • Comment/question. Do we typically post the opening and closing ceremony of non-Olympic sporting events or just one of them? Thryduulf (talk) 23:00, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
  • The ITNR list states that only the opening of this(and the other non-Olympic events) is posted; the closing would have to be nominated and judged on its merits. 331dot (talk) 23:37, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose I can't even imagine the uproar if we had an American or European games, let alone an opening ceremony. μηδείς (talk) 23:34, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
    • European Games, Pan-American Games, All-Africa Games, Pacific Games. Thryduulf (talk) 00:31, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
      • To all of which I am opposed. Nothing regional/racist. All that should be posted is significant new world records if they occur in these games, otherwise we are saying nothing more than some calendar event like Christmas has come around. It's a total bastardization of the encyclopedic system. μηδείς (talk) 00:54, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
        • I can understand this reasoning, but then we'd have a problem on which "story" would be posted. For the Winter Olympics, would it be the much opposed (and supported) ice hockey final? There'd be a long discussion on this, the 12-hour veto won't have to be invoked if ever that was passed. –HTD 10:51, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
  • If you look at talk you'll see there's even more opposition to this carp, from User:HiLo48, nonetheless, the two of us being sworn emenies. μηδείς (talk) 03:35, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support Listed on ITN/R means it should be posted. IMO this is not the place to discuss if Asian Games should be ITNR, that place is the ITNR talk page which is that-a-away ----> - NickGibson3900 Talk 08:42, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support- This is ITN/R so importance is not discussed on this page, only article quality. American or European Games are much smaller than this. Bzweebl (talkcontribs) 23:49, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Consensus to Remove the consensus so far is to remove the opening ceremonies from ITNR. The fact that they habve until now been listed at ITNR is not itself a reason the item should be posted. A listing at ITNR is supposed to indicate repeated overwhelming consensus to post, and that most obviously does not exist. Again, any new world record at the games should be nominated and posted on its own merits. μηδείς (talk) 00:24, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Show me the consensus and I'll agree we should propose removal from ITNR and discuss. Right now I'm not seeing any consensus on anything related to this nomination, especially since you were the only one who opposed. Bzweebl (talkcontribs) 03:39, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
Here. HiLo48 (talk) 03:42, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
Ok, stricken. Bzweebl (talkcontribs) 03:46, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

[Removed] Remove from Ongoing: Ukraine Conflict[edit]

In terms on new encyclopedic news, this is in a bit of a lull. The ceasefire seems to pretty much be sticking and although there are outbreaks of incidents, they haven't been of individually significant to be full news stories in themselves. Latest events are here War_in_Donbass#September_ceasefire. I'd like to start a place for people's opinions on when this would drop below the criteria for staying on as Ongoing. For reference, the Gaza conflict ceasefire took place on the 26th August, and we pulled it from ongoing on the 28th [2]. CaptRik (talk) 21:36, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

  • Not to prejudice the question, but is there a template for ongoing? And if not, shouldn't there be? μηδείς (talk) 00:56, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Remove this has dropped off the bottom of most news outlets, we can always re-add should something kick off again. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:19, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Remove as this is not a top ongoing story; as TRM said it can always be put back. 331dot (talk) 22:02, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Removed, as suggested. --Tone 22:05, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

September 18[edit]


Article to update: No article specified
Blurb: The United Nations Security Council declares the recent outbreak of the Ebola virus a "threat to world security".
Alternative blurb: The United Nations Security Council declares the recent outbreak of Ebola virus a "threat to international peace and security" in its first-ever resolution regarding a public health crisis.
News source(s): BBC
Nominator: The Rambling Man (give credit)

Article needs updating

Nominator's comments: Move from Ongoing to blurb considering the gravity of the situation. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:29, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

  • The BBC page states that it was the UN Security Council, not the WHO. 331dot (talk) 20:33, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
    Wow, where did I get that from? Updated. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:38, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
    Understandable; the WHO is mentioned in that article. 331dot (talk) 20:40, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment If this is blurbed, this should not remove the ongoing, since this is only a critical midpoint and the ebola story will still be going strong. --MASEM (t) 20:42, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
    Ok, no big deal. We could always place it back onto Ongoing once the blurb got stale. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:49, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Is there a link for some solid numbers? I have just recently read that this might go into six figures, but some bureaucratic body pontificating makes me want to ask how many divisions the pope has. μηδείς (talk) 21:01, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose there's already a sticky on the epidemic. The UN's $0.02 on the subject doesn't really change the facts of the epidemic. Didn't the UN warn us that the polar ice cap would be gone by now anyway. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 21:16, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose. The UN expressing an opinion does not create a material change in the situation. Resolute 23:17, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak Oppose It's a major story but I worry about it yo-yo'ing between full blurb and Ongoing if major announcements are made about it. As it stands, a full blurb would drop back off again in 7 days or so. There's absolutely no doubt that it should be on the main page, but as it stands I believe we've not even reached the peak of the outbreak. CaptRik (talk) 18:39, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support with added altblurb. Per the BBC ref: "Never before has the United Nations Security Council met to confront a public health crisis". From a Science article [3]: "the resolution had 130 co-sponsors, more than any previous one in the history of the Security Council." IRW0 (talk) 22:20, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Will the UN's statement have any lasting significance? No. -- Ypnypn (talk) 02:43, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

[Closed] Royal & Ancient allow women[edit]

No consensus to post. --Tone 13:31, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article to update: The Royal and Ancient Golf Club of St Andrews
Blurb: Members of The Royal and Ancient Golf Club of St Andrews vote to allow women members for the first time in its 260-year history.
News source(s): BBC CNN
Nominator: The Rambling Man (give credit)

Article needs updating

Nominator's comments: Very odd, but yet curiously notable. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:26, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support. It seems notable that the 'home of golf' would change its longstanding membership policy. 331dot (talk) 20:36, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose The most prestigious club in the US did this in the 90's and the result, historically, was nix, nada, nichevo. It's almost as bad as 40 year old couple accept that their only child is gay. μηδείς (talk) 21:05, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
Point taken, but Augusta National wasn't nearly as old as this club, nor was it essentially where golf arose from. 331dot (talk) 22:04, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose welcome to the 21st century. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 21:08, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support as the home of golf. The matter (allowing women to join a golf club) isn't notably any more. It was in the 90s. But the club in this case makes it worthy of ITN. We don't post ITNs when countries legislate for same-sex marriage any more, for example. But if Afghanistan did, we'd post that. --Tóraí (talk) 05:04, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support, this really is an epoch-defining event, given the timescales and global significance involved. Rule changes made by distant foreign countries don't really factor into it; this is the real thing. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 00:10, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Is this a legitimate support vote, or a parody of users supporting this nomination and others like it? Bzweebl (talkcontribs) 03:43, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Can't you see that it's so blatantly obvious that this event has "long lasting impact" and is "of worldwide significance"??? #haha –HTD 12:29, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose, elicited little more than a yawn when it happened, and mostly forgotten already. Nsk92 (talk) 17:27, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose Other than exposing some elitist retardedness, not very notable. Mattaidepikiw (Talk) 01:47, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Closed] Archbishop of Canterbury admits he has doubts about God[edit]

No consensus to post an individual's doubts about his employer. Stephen 03:58, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Archbishop of Canterbury
Blurb: The Archbishop of Canterbury sometimes has doubts in his belief in God.
News source(s): BBC
Nominator: Count Iblis (give credit)

 Count Iblis (talk) 20:33, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose posting the mere statement; if there are repercussions from it (such as attempts to remove him from his position) that might merit posting. 331dot (talk) 20:37, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose if we didn't post the fact that the Pope suggested that there was a significant percentage of child sex abusers in the Catholic Church, why post this? I imagine most, if not all people of faith have occasional doubts. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:51, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose unless and until we get an official statement to confirm that God has doubts about the existence of the Archbishop of Canterbury. BencherliteTalk 21:07, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose not every utterance that may be construed as against the faith made by the leading priest of that faith is newsworthy enough all the comments by Pope Francis about gays and divorcees taking communion were never posted - now if he had declared himself an atheist and quit the post, that would be newsy, but apparently his doubts, however deep or fleeting they may have been, have been settled. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 21:14, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose It makes a good sound-bite, but not news. GoldenRing (talk) 01:32, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Posted] Hour record[edit]

Proposed image
Articles: Jens Voigt and Hour record

Blurb: In cycling, Jens Voigt sets a new hour record, riding more than 51 kilometres (31.7 mi) in an hour.
News source(s): Cycling News, The Guardian, USA Today

Nominator's comments: This is a very unusual record since last time it was beaten was in 2005. Nergaal (talk) 18:08, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

  • Weak oppose suggest you enhance the blurb a touch to allow non-experts to understand what this is about. Target article is in a poor state, badly referenced, lots of reliance on discussion forums and so on. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:39, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
    • I have no idea why you say the article is badly referenced my friend. Only the doping section has bare URLs. Mattaidepikiw (Talk) 19:52, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
      • I was talking about the original blurb target. The change is why I've struck my oppose. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:54, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
        • OK. I'm in the process of getting more references in there (and info) Mattaidepikiw (Talk) 20:06, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support Just about to come here to nominate this. Suggest the target article is Voigt with the blurb along the lines of "In cycling, Jens Voigt set a new hour record." Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 18:47, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Perhaps, if we allow ourselves to indulge in grammatically correct blurbs and blurbs which most people could get to grips with, we could go for something like "In cycling, Jens Voigt sets a new hour record, riding more than 51 kilometres (31.7 mi) in an hour." The Rambling Man (talk) 18:53, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support It is THE record of cycling, and the only featured news about cycling is once a year, the Tour de France. Mattaidepikiw (Talk) 18:55, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
    Just a point of information, we do have UCI Road World Championships on WP:ITNR as well. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:02, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment, I don't see this as an extraordinary record. It pales in comparison to this feat by Indurain: "The definitive answer came on the 65-kilometer time trial in Luxembourg after only a week of racing. Steamrolling the hilly course, he averaged over 49 kilometers an hour, effectively obliterating his competition. Leaving his nearest competitors four minutes behind he zapped all suspense and demonstrated why "Big Mig" would be the greatest Tour rider of his generation.". In the cycling news article, we can read what is really going on with these "hour records": "The hour record dates back to the early days of the bicycle, but it was made famous in recent history by the long-standing record of Eddy Merckx. Although Merckx's mark of 49.431km held only until Francesco Moser broke 50km in 1984, the UCI retroactively changed the rules in 2000, disallowing all records set that did not adhere to the traditional position and equipment set by Merckx in 1972. Therefore, the efforts of Tony Rominger, Miguel Indurain, Graeme Obree and Moser were all relegated to the "best human effort" category." Count Iblis (talk) 20:47, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
    Your long text is interesting, but not relevant to the Hour record. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:52, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
This is similar to marathon times: unless you have some standardization, you can not exclude i.e wind from having enhanced Indurain's performance. This record is done under very well standardized conditions. Some people from the past might have beaten this distance with current equipment, but we are talking here about an officially sanctioned performance. Nergaal (talk) 21:53, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - interesting. itn material.--BabbaQ (talk) 21:42, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support Cycling's equivalent to the 100m sprint world record. Something different for ITN. CaptRik (talk) 21:52, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose 2% is not a particularly significant margin in my view, nor is it a particularly long standing record at 9 years. There are thousands of world records out there, we can't possibly post every single one. If this does go up then at least modify the blurb - the emboldened link by itself should give some clue as to the context. The fact that an inherently generic term such as "hour record" in a free standing sense points to the relevant article (for context) is irrelevant - that speaks more of Wikipedia politics than of the legitimacy of a claim of primary sense. Justin Urquhart Stewart (talk) 03:42, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
    • I would argue that 2% is a HUGE margin, as the record has sometimes been beaten by meters in the past, and he totally smashed it by 1.4 km. Most of the articles about it say he 'smashed it' Mattaidepikiw (Talk) 23:18, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Note this is a 5-1 vote. Nergaal (talk) 12:40, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose. This headline appears way at the bottom of the BBC Sport website right now and it's not getting huge coverage. This seems to mainly be of interest for cycling aficionados which is a niche group as it is. The comparison to major track and field records seems pretty weak to me-- those records generate a lot more interest.--Johnsemlak (talk) 14:23, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Could you point to me the where it states it has to be high on the BBC website before it's included on WP's frontpage? I'm guessing if Bradley Wiggins had a pop at this, it'll be frontpage on the BBC and WP. The "cycling aficionados" comment adds more weight for it to be posted IMO. A non-American in a sport not that well covered getting some good quality article updates. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 18:24, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support Article is in pretty good shape (not perfect, there's maybe 1-2 more cites needed), but really a solid article, and the information is certainly current. I see no harm in showing the world a good Wikipedia article. It's certainly better than 90% of the stuff we put up in ITN merely because something is happening now. It would be nice to post something which is meant to showcase quality work for a change. --Jayron32 14:36, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support Jens Voigt just set a very important cycling record, eclipsing a long standing mark. See also Hour record. This is a big deal! He did it on a closed track. 7&6=thirteen () 22:30, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment A pic of the record has been added to the article, so I replaced it here too. We now have a pic of the record in progress. Mattaidepikiw (Talk) 23:36, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Comment Here's some sources from around the world. This is a very big deal.
I saw the source on the kw output, but I haven't found it again. 7&6=thirteen () 23:57, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Marked as ready as I've already offered an opinion. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:13, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
What happens now? How long before it's posted? Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 09:14, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
Need an independent admin to pop by and post it. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:18, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
Sod it, posted. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:15, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
Nice one, Rambles. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 07:54, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

[Closed] 25 years of the Peaceful Revolution[edit]


Try to get this on WP:OTD instead; it was made specifically for anniversaries of this type. --Jayron32 17:42, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Proposed image
Articles: Peaceful Revolution and Joachim Gauck

Blurb: German president Gauck welcomes state officials to Mecklenburg to celebrate 25 years of the Peaceful Revolution (pictured).
Alternative blurb: German president Gauck welcomes state officials to Mecklenburg to adress demographic change in Europe and commemorate 25 years of the Peaceful Revolution (pictured).
News source(s): [1]
Nominator: Horst-schlaemma (give credit)

Nominator's comments: For all I can see we didn't have an ITN piece on the anniversary of the most important event in late 20th century history. I think we should, especially in these times of more upcoming war and despair it's important to remember how things can be carried out peacefully. ---- Horst-schlaemma (talk) 09:31, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • The demographic aspect is important and wasn't featured on ITN either, but the alternative blurb could be a bit long for the box, so we might stick with the shorter blurb. Cheers, Horst-schlaemma (talk) 09:31, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
'speedy close' if anything this is for OTDLihaas (talk) 11:44, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose. This anniversary may well be suitable for OTD, but not ITN. As a general rule we don't post anniversaries - even of things as big as WW1. Modest Genius talk 11:50, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • What's OTD, if I may ask? -- Horst-schlaemma (talk) 11:58, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose Would've been a better fit for OTD. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:24, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose. We generally don't post anniversaries unless the actual commemoration events are somehow noteworthy themselves; I don't think the President meeting with state officials qualifies. 331dot (talk) 16:41, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Posted] Scottish independence referendum[edit]

Proposed image
Article: Scottish independence referendum, 2014

Blurb: Scotland votes against secession from the United Kingdom.
Alternative blurb: First Minister of Scotland Alex Salmond (pictured) resigns after Scotland votes against independence from the United Kingdom.
Nominator: Ashishg55 (give credit)

Nominator's comments: I know this will almost certainly be posted after the result but this maybe one of few votes where readers would want some background and will be interested in it as it happens. Bump nomination to 18th sept afterwards please. ---- Ashish-g55 23:05, 17 September 2014 (UTC) [relocated under correct date as per nominator's request - Justin Urquhart Stewart (talk) 00:58, 18 September 2014 (UTC)]

  • I think this is only notable if the Yes vote passes, otherwise it's just another domestic vote. DHN (talk) 23:59, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support only if yes wins. Bzweebl (talkcontribs) 00:02, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose posting the fact of the referendum, I don't see what point it would serve, ITN is not some kind of reminder service. It'd be an obvious support for the actual result (expected on the 19th) regardless of the outcome, given its huge constitutional significance, but that is not the nomination here. Justin Urquhart Stewart (talk) 00:58, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose posting before the results. Support only if it passes. Reach Out to the Truth 01:05, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Whilst I don't support posting this now (until we've got results), why exactly would it only be news if Scotland voted in favour of independence? It would be just as newsworthy if Scotland decided to stay in union, given the close nature of the race. RGloucester 01:12, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • What is there to report if they vote no? Scotland almost declares independence but doesn't? And anyway, from a statistical perspective, the outcome of the race has been close, but has never been in statistical doubt. Bzweebl (talkcontribs) 01:26, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
This has been a slow burning issue for at least the last twenty years: whatever the outcome the matter is put to bed for a generation. It is not as if in the event of a no vote Salmond (or anyone else in the SNP) will be allowed to try again in five years - Britain has a general aversion to referenda compared to many other countries and you certainly can't simply re-poll until you get the "right" answer. Justin Urquhart Stewart (talk) 01:54, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
Times are a an EU referendum due soon. And some precedence in Quecec for a nother vote within a generation (depends how its defined)Lihaas (talk) 08:40, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
In the context of ITN, this is one of the few referendums where the outcome doesn't really matter, imnsho. The vote itself is a historic and defining moment in the history of Scotland and Great Britain, much in the way the 1995 Quebec referendum was for the province and Canada as a whole. We should post the result either way. Resolute 19:55, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support once the result is known, whether yes or no. Cameron, Klegg, and what's'sname all just signed a pledge to give each Scott a diamond-studded golden tooth plate, a low rider wif subwoofahs, and 5,000 Swiss Francs if they vote no (I realize that's bad Cockney, please don't chime in). That pledge alone is hysterical enough to be noted in an encyclopedia. When's the last time a UN security council permanent member let half a province decide to take away its sole deep water naval base? μηδείς (talk) 01:38, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support once certified election results are known. Given the worldwide interest in this, and the closeness of the opinion polling, it should be posted no matter the result. Abductive (reasoning) 02:57, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support once results are in - whatever the result. The referendum has been getting lots of international media attention. If Scotland voting to become independent would have significant effects, then by the same token it voting against independence would be equally significant since it would prevent these effects from happening. Neljack (talk) 03:19, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support regardless of the results as this is a huge story with worldwide implications. Jusdafax 04:57, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support per Neljack. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:01, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support once results are in, whichever way they go. Given the general opposition to posting before results are available, I've updated the blurb and provided an altblurb for the two outcomes. GoldenRing (talk) 23:34, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
DAMN! took my nom ;( 'support regardless with result' to be declared in under 24 hours. Its got ramification and is certainly in the news.
ALBA GO BRAIG!!!! Let freedom reign!!!!!!Lihaas (talk) 08:37, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment. We need to be careful over precise terminology, given that the question asked is simply "Should Scotland be an independent country?" We should not try to interpret the result in an over-specific way. Words like "secession", and even "United Kingdom", are not on the ballot paper and are best avoided - for example, we simply do not know if the remaining parts of the UK will still be called the "United Kingdom" or not. There is uncertainty and scope for interpretation over precisely what happens next. Hence, Altblurb2 - In a referendum, Scotland votes for/against becoming an independent country. Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:36, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
yes to "Should Scotland be an independent country" by definition means secession.Lihaas (talk) 11:46, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
Ye, should move the issues to a separate section as per the endorsementsLihaas (talk) 11:46, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support Ghmyrtle's Altblurb2, whatever the result, once announced.  — An optimist on the run! (logged on as Pek the Penguin) 11:09, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Strong support, but only once the result is known and the article has been updated. Results are expected to be announced between 6:30 and 7:30 (BST) on Friday morning, so we have plenty of time yet. Modest Genius talk 11:53, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • 'WHY is this not on the ITN template yet? Nergaal (talk) 16:05, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Because voting is still taking place and we won't know the results for at least another 13/14 hours, that's why. ITN posts results of votes, not "voting begins" stories. BencherliteTalk 16:14, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Um, Nergaal, have you suddenly become unaware of how ITN works? This is about the third or fourth time you've posted something that is most unusual. What's the deal? The Rambling Man (talk) 20:09, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
Umh, not sure what u r taking about TRM. In this particular case the story itself seems unusually well covered even outside UK so I don't understand why can't this be posted before the results are out. Nergaal (talk) 21:55, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support once results are known. It Is Me Here t / c 16:24, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support when the tally is complete, regardless of the outcome. In a discussion on the main ITN talk page, I opposed posting this before the vote took place. Given all of the news coverage I've seen leading up to the vote in this past week, I'm certain this should be posted even if the "status quo" wins. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:26, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - It would be nice to get something up to say that votes are being counted (in a few hours time), and then update it to give the result at about 07:00 UTC. Franklin's ship can certainly be moved out of ITN. Jamesx12345 17:33, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - Per Modest Genius. Miyagawa (talk) 19:25, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support posting the result, whatever way it goes. Historic event for UK and Scotland. Mjroots (talk) 19:46, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support posting the result. Defining moment in Scotland and the UK's history, no matter how it turns out. Resolute 19:55, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support when results are known to us. GoodDay (talk) 21:37, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - when results are becoming clear.--BabbaQ (talk) 21:41, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support posting result when article is updated. Posting the fact of the referendum today would have been reasonable, but it's a moot point now. Newyorkbrad (talk) 21:57, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • The vote alone is major world news. Let's get this on the Main Page! ----Another Believer (Talk) 01:32, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
  • The official results will be in soon enough. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a news wire. Abductive (reasoning) 02:02, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support regardless of outcome. Seems obvious. Calidum Talk To Me 02:06, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support after outcome, regardless of outcome. It is news either way. Chillum Need help? Type {{ping|Chillum}} 02:08, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Post the altburb now. It's clear that the No-campaign has won, there is no point in waiting for the official result. Count Iblis (talk) 02:31, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support Pending results, irregardless of outcome (and right now with less than 1% between y/n, we're waiting until it is officially declared, not based on ongoing ballet tallies) --MASEM (t) 03:08, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support posting now; BBC have officially projected for No. Sceptre (talk) 04:16, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support posting now, per Sceptre; I can hear the fat lady warming up. Only three local authorities have not yet declared results. —Josiah Rowe (talkcontribs) 05:03, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Posted The result just in pushes the question over the line. Scotland has voted No. --Tóraí (talk) 05:11, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
It's all over but the pouting. Sca (talk) 15:07, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
It's all over, bar the trouting. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:24, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Suggest Update (Proposed as altblurb) to reflect the fact that Salmond has resigned. We don't often mention second-level leaders, but it fits well into the blurb (i.e., his resignation is not the whole story) and the circumstances of his resignation are, well, somewhat exceptional. Smurrayinchester 15:33, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
    I"d oppose that--we don't need to include details of the SNP politics in the blurb. Support blurb as is.--Johnsemlak (talk) 15:44, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

September 17[edit]

[Posted] Fijian general election, 2014[edit]

Proposed image
Updated article: Fijian general election, 2014

Blurb: The FijiFirst Party (leader Frank Bainimarama pictured) wins a majority/plurality in the first Fijian general election since the 2006 Fijian coup d'état.
Alternative blurb: The FijiFirst Party, led by Frank Bainimarama (pictured), win a majority in the Fijian general election.
The FijiFirst Party, led by Frank Bainimarama (pictured), win a majority in the Fijian general election, the first Fijian election in eight years.

Nominator and updater: NickGibson3900 (give credit)

Article updated

Nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, meaning that the recurrence of the event is generally considered important enough to post on WP:ITN subject to the quality of the article and the update to it.

Note: This nomination needs a lot of work but I am nominating it so it is here. It probably won't be posted until results are known.

Nominator's comments: If the Swedish election gets ITN so should the Fijian one. Also it is on ITN/R. ~~ NickGibson3900 Talk 06:46, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

NO prose update. Also updated te blurb to combine the alt with theunifhnished one...and added the coup partLihaas (talk) 11:50, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose article needs to be updated, there's no excuse, plus the lead is pathetically short and contravenes WP:LEAD. Look forward to seeing the supporters get involved with improvements if they have time. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:56, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
@The Rambling Man, Lihaas: I understand your concerns. TRM; I have expanded the lead and the info box. Official results are currently been announced as I type (06:59, 19 September 2014 (UTC)). I think it will be updated in the next 12-24 hours. Also - both your help would be appreciated if you have any spare time. -- NickGibson3900 Talk 06:59, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Counting is still ongoing and we should definitely get the final results (in relation to seats) in the next 5 hours even though some of the preliminary results may be out within the next hour..--Stemoc 09:28, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support. Obviously more significant (even) than "routine" general elections in most countries: official restoration of democracy after eight years of military rule. And it seems to me the article has been adequately updated. Aridd (talk) 19:13, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment should the result not be summarised in the lead of the article? The Rambling Man (talk) 08:16, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
@The Rambling Man: Done. NickGibson3900 Talk 08:35, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support per WP:ITN/R, but can you suggest an alternative blurb? Yogwi21talk 09:20, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
@Yogwi21: Suggested alt blurb -- NickGibson3900 Talk 09:28, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

@The Rambling Man: This is ready to go - NickGibson3900 Talk 02:45, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

September 16[edit]

Typhoon Kalmaegi (2014)[edit]

Article: Typhoon Kalmaegi (2014)
Blurb: Typhoon Kalmaegi kills 10 people in the Philippines.
News source(s): Weather Channel
Nominator: Jinkinson (give credit)

 --Jinkinson talk to me 14:23, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

  • Suggestion - Is this considered part of the typhoon season that hit India and other parts of Asia roughly a week ago (where there was tons of reported flooding and missing persons?) I don't think that got posted, so perhaps pushing that point again that "a series of typhoons in the SE Asia region have killed X people" or something like that. --MASEM (t) 14:38, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose a tragedy, to be sure, but frankly 10 storm- or accident- or disease- related deaths is of such frequent occurrence that the threshold really needs to be higher. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 21:11, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

September 15[edit]

Libya migrant shipwreck[edit]

Article to update: 2014 Libya migrant shipwreck
Blurb: More than 200 migrants are believed to have drowned in a sinking off the coast of Libya.
Alternative blurb: About 500 migrants drown in a shipwreck off Maltese coast and another 200 off Libyan coast.
News source(s): Daily Telegraph
Nominator: The Rambling Man (give credit)

Article needs updating

Note: Target article is a stub, needs updating and will change as news comes in.

Nominator's comments: Once expanded, could be combined with news from 2014 Malta migrant shipwreckThe Rambling Man (talk) 14:48, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

  • Conditional support alblurb Once the Libyan number is confirmed and both articles become fleshy. The total number (about 700) is dramatic. Brandmeistertalk 17:45, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Engvar these seem to have been one way illegal immigrants carried by human traffickers. Why would the blurb call them migrants if they are not seasonal/annual travellers with papers? Cannot we just call them Libyans who were drowned by human traffickers? μηδείς (talk) 21:45, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
See the BBC article linked in my post below - I think this is an engvar issue where anyone migrating legally or illegally are referred to as migrants. CaptRik (talk) 22:05, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
That the term is used in the British press, but not the American is precisely the issue. In the US there are legal migrant farm workers who work the season then go home. There are migrat birds that summer in one range and winter in another. We take huge pains to be Engvar neutral in sports results. I think it would make sense to say something likeX-hundred Africans/Libyans drown when human trafficker ram their vessel. μηδείς (talk) 23:42, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
'Migrant' means someone who is migrating from one place to another. It applies regardless of how long for, whether legally or illegally, how far apart those places are etc. This meaning appears in every AmE dictionary I checked [4]. I can't see how it presents ENGVAR problems. Modest Genius talk 12:27, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
There's a thing called proper usage. According you, my sister and her family were migrants when the drove across a few states to visit their cousin for his first birthday? These may be refugees or undocumented workers but they are not seasonal travellers. Likewise, they weren't euthanized by pleasure-boaters. μηδείς (talk) 19:00, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
Did they go there in order to seek work? I doubt the infant was offering employment ;) Having said that, if there is a more neutral/inclusive way to put it, we should strive for mutual comprehension. Modest Genius talk 22:31, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
"Migrant" is the correct term and is uncoloured by politics at least in an encyclopedic sense. "Immigrant" or "emigrant" are matters of perspective best avoided but ultimately we have to assume that readers of the English language Wikipedia can at least speak English. MonumentallyIncompetent (talk) 04:40, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support the new ~200 death sinking, but according to [5] the 500+ one was last week and so might be ineligible? (despite being a tragedy that's only really coming to light now). CaptRik (talk) 22:05, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
It seems as though the 500 death sinking occurred on the 10th [6] and so should be moved under that date, although as noted above it took some time for this to come to light. Jinkinson talk to me 22:59, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
óppose'' far too this rate we shoul post the Iraq/Syria/Libya /Pakistan bombingsLihaas (talk) 16:45, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
If I understand your post, we do post Iraq etc in Ongoing when the going gets hot. Sinkings like this are nowhere near as common as bombings in the Middle East, as well you know. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:51, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • the article is a mere stub. CNN is reporting that the ship was deliberately rammed by the Palestinian smugglers and most aboard were Palestinians who used their rebuilding money to pay some official agency to be smuggled. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:34, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - significant number of deaths.--BabbaQ (talk) 14:59, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose - I would only support if the articles were expanded, but it's been a few days now and nothing has happened. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 21:18, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

[Closed] Microsoft acquires Mojang[edit]

No consensus to post. Stephen 06:09, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Updated article: Mojang
Blurb: Microsoft acquires Minecraft developer Mojang for $2.5 billion.
News source(s): BBC, WSJ
Nominator: Masem (give credit)

Article updated

Note: Target article is updated with the news of the purchase, but I'm not 100% on the quality

Nominator's comments: While I fully recognize this is otherwise a small business deal in the scope of things, this is a rather huge thing in the world of video games, given the popularity and success of Minecraft. --MASEM (t) 13:33, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose regrettably. I've been paying attention to this story rather closely, but this is a small category of business news. Company acquisitions of small publishers and developrs are rather frequent, especially in the gaming world.--WaltCip (talk) 14:36, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak support while I accept it's not the largest business news in the world, it is of interest to a large portion of our readers. I think waiting for the massive business news items now means we are unlikely to post any. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:39, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose per WaltCip. Admittedly of a large interest to readers but it's too small and frequent of a story. Taylor Trescott - my talk + my edits 14:49, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
    • In terms of the video game industry, $2B is huge, and this is a rarity in that scale. Yes, in all of business, drop in the bucket, but not in this industry. --MASEM (t) 15:18, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Support I believe that this is big news. While Mojang is a small company and may only have one big game (Minecraft), that game has sold "nearly 54 million copies across all platforms" and is a big gain for Microsoft Palmtree5551 (talk) 15:13, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose Had that been Mojo, however. μηδείς (talk) 21:41, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Question: did we post Microsoft's acquisition of Nokia? Because that was a much bigger deal (both literally and figuratively). Modest Genius talk 21:21, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
It was discussed here - [7] and looks like it went stale without being posted. CaptRik (talk) 22:08, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose, minor, minor deal. No impact on the players of minecraft. Abductive (reasoning) 23:00, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Says who? Do you have proof that this won't have any effect on Minecraft players? Palmtree5551 (talk) 00:07, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose The deal may be huge in the particular industry that Mojang is involved in, but no doubt that could be said about plenty of business deals of this size. I don't see why the video games industry should get preferential treatment over other industries. Neljack (talk) 23:04, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
    • Arguably, it is almost impossible for video game news to make ITN, because some see it as too far niche despite numerous coming on part with other entertainment mediums for specific works. No, I'm not saying that we need to flood ITN with video game coverage, but it is a major development in that specific field, and since we generally try to consider stories relative to the field they are in, this would be a reason to consider inclusion. --MASEM (t) 01:02, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
      • I'd rather see those video game championships posted than business deals. Abductive (reasoning) 01:18, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Nominators often include links to external websites and other references in discussions on this page. It is usually best to provide such links using the inline URL syntax [] rather than using <ref></ref> tags, because that keeps all the relevant information in the same place as the nomination without having to jump to this section, and facilitates the archiving process.

For the times when <ref></ref> tags are being used, here are their contents:

  1. ^ "Joachim Gauck welcomes presidents to Mecklenburg to adress demographic change and commemorate the Wende". Official Presidential Website (de). Retrieved 18 September 2014.