Jump to content

Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 143: Line 143:
*'''Support''' an update to the exiting entry. [[User:Mtking|<span style="color:Green;text-shadow:lightgreen 0.110em 0.110em 0.110em;">Mt</span>]][[User talk:Mtking|<span style="color:gold;">king</span>]]<sup>[[Special:Contributions/Mtking|<font color="gold"> (edits) </font>]]</sup> 07:16, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
*'''Support''' an update to the exiting entry. [[User:Mtking|<span style="color:Green;text-shadow:lightgreen 0.110em 0.110em 0.110em;">Mt</span>]][[User talk:Mtking|<span style="color:gold;">king</span>]]<sup>[[Special:Contributions/Mtking|<font color="gold"> (edits) </font>]]</sup> 07:16, 21 January 2012 (UTC)


====Death of [[Etta James]]====
====[Ready] Death of [[Etta James]]====
{{ITN candidate
{{ITN candidate
| article = Etta James
| article = Etta James
Line 175: Line 175:
*'''Strong support''' as an undeniable legend, had a huge role in her era of Popular Music, was an icon to a generation of young women, helped break racial boundaries. Her most popular song is certainly one of the most recognizable songs of that genre and era and is used extensively by the media. - '''[[User:Floydian|<font color="#5A5AC5">ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ</font>]]'''&nbsp;<sup>[[User_talk:Floydian|<font color="#3AAA3A">τ</font>]]</sup> <sub>[[Special:Contributions/Floydian|<font color="#3AAA3A">¢</font>]]</sub> 16:59, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
*'''Strong support''' as an undeniable legend, had a huge role in her era of Popular Music, was an icon to a generation of young women, helped break racial boundaries. Her most popular song is certainly one of the most recognizable songs of that genre and era and is used extensively by the media. - '''[[User:Floydian|<font color="#5A5AC5">ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ</font>]]'''&nbsp;<sup>[[User_talk:Floydian|<font color="#3AAA3A">τ</font>]]</sup> <sub>[[Special:Contributions/Floydian|<font color="#3AAA3A">¢</font>]]</sub> 16:59, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
*'''Support''' great singer <span style=font-family: 'Comic Sans MS'><font color=orange>[[User:GreatOrangePumpkin|♫GoP♫]]</font></span><sub>[[User talk:GreatOrangePumpkin|<font color=red>T</font>]]</sub><sup>[[Special:Contributions/GreatOrangePumpkin|<font color=red>C</font>]]</sup><sub>[[Special:NewPages|<font color=red>N</font>]]</sup> 17:02, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
*'''Support''' great singer <span style=font-family: 'Comic Sans MS'><font color=orange>[[User:GreatOrangePumpkin|♫GoP♫]]</font></span><sub>[[User talk:GreatOrangePumpkin|<font color=red>T</font>]]</sub><sup>[[Special:Contributions/GreatOrangePumpkin|<font color=red>C</font>]]</sup><sub>[[Special:NewPages|<font color=red>N</font>]]</sup> 17:02, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
:'''comment''' only 1-line on her death, can we get more. reaction perhas?[[User:Lihaas|Lihaas]] ([[User talk:Lihaas|talk]]) 19:01, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
:'''comment''' only 1-line on her death, can we get more. reaction perhas?[[User:Lihaas|Lihaas]] ([[User talk:Lihaas|talk]]) 19:01, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
::...<span style=font-family: 'Comic Sans MS'><font color=orange>[[User:GreatOrangePumpkin|♫GoP♫]]</font></span><sub>[[User talk:GreatOrangePumpkin|<font color=red>T</font>]]</sub><sup>[[Special:Contributions/GreatOrangePumpkin|<font color=red>C</font>]]</sup><sub>[[Special:NewPages|<font color=red>N</font>]]</sup> 20:03, 21 January 2012 (UTC)


====Obama turns down Keystone XL Pipeline====
====Obama turns down Keystone XL Pipeline====

Revision as of 20:03, 21 January 2012

This page provides a place to discuss new items for inclusion on In the news (ITN), a protected template on the Main Page (see past items in the ITN archives). Do not report errors in ITN items that are already on the Main Page here— discuss those at the relevant section of WP:ERRORS.

This candidates page is integrated with the daily pages of Portal:Current events. A light green header appears under each daily section – it includes transcluded Portal:Current events items for that day. You can discuss ITN candidates under the header.

Kasia Niewiadoma
Kasia Niewiadoma

Glossary

  • Blurbs are one-sentence summaries of the news story.
    • Altblurbs, labelled alt1, alt2, etc., are alternative suggestions to cover the same story.
    • A target article, bolded in text, is the focus of the story. Each blurb must have at least one such article, but you may also link non-target articles.
  • Articles in the Ongoing line describe events getting continuous coverage.
  • The Recent deaths (RD) line includes any living thing whose death was recently announced. Consensus may decide to create a blurb for a recent death.

All articles linked in the ITN template must pass our standards of review. They should be up-to-date, demonstrate relevance via good sourcing and have at least an acceptable quality.

Nomination steps

  • Make sure the item you want to nominate has an article that meets our minimum requirements and contains reliable coverage of a current event you want to create a blurb about. We will not post about events described in an article that fails our quality standards.
  • Find the correct section below for the date of the event (not the date nominated). Do not add sections for new dates manually – a bot does that for us each day at midnight (UTC).
  • Create a level 4 header with the article name (==== Your article here ====). Add (RD) or (Ongoing) if appropriate.
Then paste the {{ITN candidate}} template with its parameters and fill them in. The news source should be reliable, support your nomination and be in the article. Write your blurb in simple present tense. Below the template, briefly explain why we should post that event. After that, save your edit. Your nomination is ready!
  • You may add {{ITN note}} to the target article's talk page to let editors know about your nomination.

The better your article's quality, the better it covers the event and the wider its perceived significance (see WP:ITNSIGNIF for details), the better your chances of getting the blurb posted.

Purge this page to update the cache

Headers

  • When the article is ready, updated and there is consensus to post, you can mark the item as (Ready). Remove that wording if you feel the article fails any of these necessary criteria.
  • Admins should always separately verify whether these criteria are met before posting blurbs marked (Ready). For more guidance, check WP:ITN/A.
    • If satisfied, change the header to (Posted).
    • Where there is no consensus, or the article's quality remains poor, change the header to (Closed) or (Not posted).
    • Sometimes, editors ask to retract an already-posted nomination because of a fundamental error or because consensus changed. If you feel the community supports this, remove the item and mark the item as (Pulled).

Voicing an opinion on an item

Format your comment to contain "support" or "oppose", and include a rationale for your choice. In particular, address the notability of the event, the quality of the article, and whether it has been updated.

Please do...

  1. Pick an older item to review near the bottom of this page, before the eligibility runs out and the item scrolls off the page and gets abandoned in the archive, unused and forgotten.
  2. Review an item even if it has already been reviewed by another user. You may be the first to spot a problem, or the first to confirm that an identified problem was fixed. Piling on the list of "support!" votes will help administrators see what is ready to be posted on the Main Page.
  3. Tell about problems in articles if you see them. Be bold and fix them yourself if you know how, or tell others if it's not possible.

Please do not...

  1. Add simple "support!" or "oppose!" votes without including your reasons. Similarly, curt replies such as "who?", "meh", or "duh!" are not helpful. A vote without reasoning means little for us, please elaborate yourself.
  2. Oppose an item just because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. We post a lot of such content, so these comments are generally unproductive.
  3. Accuse other editors of supporting, opposing or nominating due to a personal bias (such as ethnocentrism). We at ITN do not handle conflicts of interest.
  4. Comment on a story without first reading the relevant article(s).
  5. Oppose a recurring item here because you disagree with the recurring items criteria. Discuss them here.
  6. Use ITN as a forum for your own political or personal beliefs. Such comments are irrelevant to the outcome and are potentially disruptive.

Suggesting updates

There are two places where you can request corrections to posted items:

  • Anything that does not change the intent of the blurb (spelling, grammar, markup issues, updating death tolls etc.) should be discussed at WP:Errors.
  • Discuss major changes in the blurb's intent or very complex updates as part of the current ITNC nomination.

Suggestions


January 21

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science

Sports

Powerful cyclone hits offshore Mozambique

Article: 2011–12 South-West Indian Ocean cyclone season (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Tropical Cyclone Funso stalls near central Mozambique, sinking a passenger ship, killing at least 15 and leaving dozens missing. (Post)
News source(s): [1], [2], [3]
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: The cyclone struck days after another tropical disturbance hit southern Mozambique (the first storm to do so since 1984), and its path potentially puts that same area at risk of further flooding. Recent floods in the past week are almost reminiscent of 2000. ~AH1 (discuss!) 19:33, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Finnish presidential election

Article: Finnish presidential election, 2012 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ X is elected president of Finland. (Post)
Credits:

Article needs updating
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: Election takes place tomorrow, results should be out soon after.Lihaas (talk) 18:14, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Egyptian parliamentary election

Article: Egyptian parliamentary election, 2011–2012 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Freedom and Justice Party wins a plurality in Egypt following a revolution (Post)
Credits:

Article needs updating
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.

Nigeria attacks

Article: January 2012 Nigeria attacks (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Boko Haram claim responsibility for a series of attacks in northern Nigeria that killed at least 150 people. (Post)
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: I lost the source i was copying it from and a bit tired to find it now, should be easy if someone can just add that merged from newly created 1-l;ine pageLihaas (talk) 18:14, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Håkan Juholt resigns

Article: Håkan Juholt (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Håkan Juholt resigns as head of the Swedish Social Democratic Party after less then a year at the post. (Post)
News source(s): [4]
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: The head of Swedens main opposition party resigns after a number of "scandals" less than a year after being appointed. Feel free to change the blurb. --BabbaQ (talk) 15:51, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
obvious oppose in opposition and not ruling. he also only resigns as HEAD not from the party/parliament (if hes sitting)Lihaas (talk) 17:33, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

January 20

Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

International relations

Politics and elections

Television

SOPA and PIPA postponed due to Internet blackout

Article: Protests against SOPA and PIPA (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ As a result of the response from the Internet blackout on January 18, both the Stop Online Piracy Act and Protect IP Act have been halted in the US Congress for revisions (Post)
News source(s): CNN
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: I do recognize that this may be a bit of navel-gazing (even after de-Wikipedia-ifying the blurb), though this still remains a hot topic in the news. But this has shown that the Internet protest was effective (and while it is about US politics, it was a global participation and with potential global impacts). --MASEM (t) 17:20, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support You beat me to it, I was coming here to post. The blurb isn't ideal, I was thinking "In response to opposition from (the internet?), SOPA and PIPA are put on hold indefinitely". Either update the existing post and move it back to #1 or make a new one. --76.18.43.253 (talk) 17:31, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Regretful oppose at the moment, for two reasons. Firstly because if we are going to post this, the article would *have* to be renamed first. It's one thing to link to English Wikipedia blackout for the current blurb, quite another to claim sole credit for this achievement. Secondly pending evidence that media organisations more widely are concluding that there was a causal link between the protests and these decisions (although I consider that likely to happen). —WFC18:26, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I do support an update of sorts, I'm just very uncomfortable with the blurb drawing an explicit connection between the protests and the bills being postponed, however obvious it seems that one led to the other. I could get on board with a weaker statement to the same effect, such as "Following protests on January 18,..." —WFC07:24, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. Also, is there a 2012 SOPA Blackout article yet to link to? Google, Craigslist, Reddit, many heavies participated in some way. --76.18.43.253 (talk) 22:17, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[Ready] Death of Etta James

Article: Etta James (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Soul singer Etta James (pictured) dies at the age of 73. (Post)
News source(s): New York Times The Guardian CNN
Credits:

Notable singer dies at age of 73. - EugεnS¡m¡on(14) ® 16:58, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested blurb: "Soul singer Etta James (pictured) dies at the age of 73." (or a variation that meets our exhaustive guidance). —WFC11:02, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
comment only 1-line on her death, can we get more. reaction perhas?Lihaas (talk) 19:01, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
...♫GoP♫TCN 20:03, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Obama turns down Keystone XL Pipeline

Article: Keystone Pipeline (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ U.S. President Barack Obama rejects the construction of the Keystone Pipeline. (Post)
News source(s): USA Today New York Times
Credits:

Article updated
 --Colipon+(Talk) 14:46, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Anonymous Attacks / Megaupload shutdown

Article: Megaupload#Legal case (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The United States Department of Justice has seized and shut down the file hosting site Megaupload.com and commenced criminal cases against its owners and others. (Post)
News source(s): NY Times, USA Today, BBC
Credits:

Article updated
 --Richard-of-Earth (talk) 08:41, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Anonymous takes down quite a large number of sites with DDos attacks in response to Megaupload/Megavideo shutdown by FBI. The sites include MPAA, FBI, EMI and many others. This is one of the biggest coordinated attacks ever and is becoming major news... keep an eye out. -- Ashish-g55 02:04, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

here, and i know they do this often. i wouldnt have posted this if i didnt think that these are indeed one of the biggest attacks. just the shutdown of all Mega sites is a fairly big news -- Ashish-g55 02:27, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Support - While the retaliation is not so much of a big deal, the takedown of Megaupload is very much so. It has even greater ramifications than closing down Piratebay since Megaupload was considered a legitimate filesharing website. This is not news to be sneezed at.--WaltCip (talk) 02:58, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support MU shutdown news, oppose attacks news: The shutdown of MU is quite notable, since MU was a significant "file sharing" website, and that this action by the feds took a lot of people by surprise, it's currently hot news all over the internet. As for these "Anonymous" attacks, they really aren't that significant, because when isn't there some site being DDoSed by people claiming to be Anonymous? -- 李博杰  | Talk contribs email 03:22, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support shutdown, oppose attacks. The shutdown is notable, and we posted The Pirate Bay. One of the top news stories, while the attacks were secondary coverage that was a footnote of what happened. Secret account 06:12, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support shutdown news, oppose attacks, I added the ITN box and a blurb. Richard-of-Earth (talk) 08:44, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support as per above but I don't think any file-sharing websites/hosts such as MegaUpload can (now) be considered legitimate for the obvious reason that most of the content isn't checked or filter, torrents were probably once legitimate too. Will be very interested in hearing the results of this case, it could be a revolutionary trial that may affect the future of the internet. YuMaNuMa Contrib 13:01, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Megaupload seizure story, this represents a pathetic attempt by the "government" to pacify Hollywood/RIAA after their humiliating defeat over SOPA/PIPA on Wednesday. Speciate (talk) 13:07, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The Mega-Upload story is real, real big. Mythic Writerlord (talk) 13:09, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I hope this "support" isn't included in the decision making process. These arrests took months of planning and co-operation with international governments. This had absolutely nothing to do with the "SOPA blackout". --76.18.43.253 (talk) 15:44, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Oppose I would drop the strong if the comment from "anonymous" is dropped from the lead. How the hell does a group called "anonymous" issue an official statement? Seriously. The oppose still stands, it's just a shut down warez site, happens all the time. RIP megaupload, mininova, torrentspy, et al. --76.18.43.253 (talk) 13:18, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This isnt just some warez site. It was meant to be legal and FBI took them down without SOPA a day after protests. Attacks may not be newsworthy but at the time they did seem big and if they keep happening they might just be. -- Ashish-g55 13:58, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Script kiddies with a botnet isn't news, ever. As for the arrests, "SOPA" wasn't needed. The authorities in New Zealand legally arrested Kim and the others based on a request by the DOJ. There will be an extradition hearing before they're sent to the United States. The FBI has no authority in NZ, so for the arrests to be made, the DOJ and State must have made a pretty compelling argument that these individuals were deliberately and intentionally facilitating online piracy. The basis of this nomination is that it's somehow news that some international criminals were arrests by the mechanism of international law enforcement, and that simply isn't the case. Not news. --76.18.43.253 (talk) 14:05, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Anonymous with an uppercase A. It's a group of hacktivists, not random people. Beyond495 (talk) 14:44, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
And they have an official spokesperson who took credit for attacking websites with a DDoS net? --76.18.43.253 (talk) 15:55, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You do realize that this had absolutely nothing to do with the SOPA protest right? --76.18.43.253 (talk) 15:38, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I see consensus enough that I'm comfortable posting the shutdown, but what blurb should I use? Suggestions? Ks0stm (TCGE) 15:33, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose because the blurb should also acknowledge the retaliatory action. While Megaupload is pretty big, such closures are relatively routine. The retaliation was the amplifying factor that made the media take more than a passing notice. —WFC18:31, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Please support conditionally then instead of opposing... -- Ashish-g55 23:48, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I do not support conditionally; I oppose the Megaupload story alone as routine by itself, but consider the retaliation to take the entire event over the threshold. Please stop badgering every opposer. —WFC03:25, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I havent badgered anyone... considering i nominated the item i have every right to refute opposes. And your comment sounds like you support if both were posted which you restated again. So i dont see how you dont support conditionally. -- Ashish-g55 17:23, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support without mention of "retaliatory action". The "retaliation" did not come from Megaupload, but rather a few kids with botnets. You may or may not feel that their action is commendable, but I think it should be pretty obvious to anyone with a little bit of common sense that this is far from significant enough to be posted on ITN. JimSukwutput 20:15, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • I respectfully disagree, but you're entitled to your view. I'm responding to protest the implication that there might be a correlation between those who consider the action notable and those that condone it. I would not accept that on the street and I do not accept it here. I'm minded to be more vociferous in my condemnation, but appreciate the possibility that may not have been your intended meaning. —WFC03:25, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support shutdown, as Megaupload was a huge site which was actually legitimate, and the imminent legal battle is, according to several sources, set to be one of the biggest copyright infringement cases of all time. --Dorsal Axe 20:44, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support...ish... because usually I would send Anonymous nominations in the fire of FAIL. This time, though, we have a framing narractive and a context, both of which give this nomination the kudos required for front page inclusion. In ordinary circumstance this would not be trusted with a watch match: this time however, I think we are justified in awarding it ITN status.
  • Support. Megaupload was a pretty big international website, but this event is also significant in the history of internet censorship in the United States. To WFC's objection, I saw many stories that did not mention the retaliatory action at all. Shrigley (talk) 21:26, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Care to share a couple? —WFC03:25, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support to the Megaupload part because it could end up having major reprecussions to copyright law. Strong oppose to mentioning Anonymous since all they accomplished was a few hours of overloading a website's servers. --PlasmaTwa2 22:10, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The only real reason to give attention to Anonymous attacks is that they could be used by SOPA lobbyists and end up doing more harm than good. Even though the damage done to sites was minimal but the sites involved were of very high profile. Now is that good enough for ITN... maybe. But looking at comments above i would say consensus is towards posting MU shutdown only. -- Ashish-g55 23:56, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for anonymous retaliation - One of their many retaliation attacks against governments is not notable nor significant. Since their establishment, they have taken down dozens of government websites and apparently all their attacks had a message behind it. YuMaNuMa Contrib 01:20, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Really? Anonymous always respected Wikipedia and their sister projects because (and the SOPA blackout was an indicator), Wikipedia always been an example of a free Intenet. Other than a rouge hacker or two whom is more personal than political, I don't ever recall an severe hacking of the entire project. It has no substance. Secret account 04:17, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I never said I opposed anonymous' retaliation, I opposed the posting of the retaliation on ITN. Despite our subtle alliance, there have been several instances where they did attack a few of our articles but I guess that's the problem with an organisation with no leader. YuMaNuMa Contrib 07:13, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

January 19

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science

Sports

Freestyle skier Sarah Burke dies

Article: Sarah Burke (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Canadian freestyle skier Sarah Burke dies from injuries she received in a skiing accident nine days earlier. (Post)
News source(s): (BBC)
Article updated
 --Johnsemlak (talk) 01:04, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support A sportsperson dying effectively in competition is big news. HiLo48 (talk) 01:58, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment To help the blurb (space permitting), it is also worth noting that she was a pioneer of her sport, helped get it into the Olympics, and was a medal favourite for Sochi. Resolute 02:12, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support at least in Toronto it has been in the news almost constantly over the past week and a half, so there is certainly some significance here. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ τ ¢ 02:13, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Tragic, but far from being notable. Death of an active sportsperson in freestyle skiing with decent regard and conspicuous silence outside the sport does not suffice inclusion. Freestyle skiing is a sport with wide variety of disciples, but superpipe is even not among the most popular in broader terms. In addition, the news was announced as a secondary sports news.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 02:22, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. @ Kiril: "Death of an active sportsperson in freestyle skiing with decent regard and conspicuous silence outside the sport does not suffice inclusion." Why doesn't it? An Olympic athlete killed in a sports-related accident is not notable? What if she died from some rare event, like lightening or something? Very notable individual killed at a very early age supported by wide-spread international coverage. Seems to meet the threshold for inclusion. And considering the slow week it has been outside of the SOPA drama this would appear to be a solid posting. WikifanBe nice 02:21, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think she's not so notable. It's true that she did a lot for the fast-growing popularity of the sport and the death came suddenly, but the notability is limited to a sports circle that is hardly popular among the other sports. On the other hand we used to be strict regarding the deaths of sportspeople in the past and other notable sportspeople in more popular sports, such like Kamila Skolimowska and Pavel Karelin were not included, so I don't see a reason why to do it right now.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 02:41, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Who? (Simply making the point that I have heard of Burke, but not the others. Popularity of sports is obviously a matter of perspective.) Also, unlike the others, Burke's death came from competing. The others, while tragic, didn't. HiLo48 (talk) 02:45, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. That's what I mean. It's only a matter of perspective, as everybody has own opinion. For me her death is not something very notable that meets the threshold and I provided my opinion for that, while for others it is and they provided their opinions as well. I don't accuse anybody for being right or not.:)--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 02:53, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Eastman Kodak files for bankruptcy protection

Article: Eastman Kodak (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Eastman Kodak files for bankruptcy protection. (Post)
News source(s): (Reuters) (BBC)
Article needs updating
 --Johnsemlak (talk) 00:47, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Updated blurb. Not sure if it meets ITN standards. Feel free to revert. WikifanBe nice 10:12, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
amended blurb, details are on the page. at any rate, anyone whos lived before the digital camera age knows kodak (and Fuji Films). They were like Xerox, a proper noun that entered hte normal lexiconLihaas (talk) 13:08, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong strong strong oppose the company has not stopped operating. Per the lead of the article: "On January 19, 2012, Kodak filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection and obtained a $950 million, 18-month credit facility from Citigroup to enable it to continue trading.". If they go up for liquidation then sure, but not now. This exactly the same as American Airlines. --76.18.43.253 (talk) 13:24, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Chapter 11 allows reorganization and protection from creditors during the process. Kodak now has 18 months to work out a deal to repay it's debt and become a profitable company. This is a fairly routine corporate maneuver in the US. --76.18.43.253 (talk) 14:09, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Article looks good and support is solid. Any reason for the delay?--Johnsemlak (talk) 07:43, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

January 18

Disasters

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science

January 17

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Politics

Science

Kazakhstan election

Article: Kazakhstani legislative election, 2012 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The incumbent Nur Otan wins a legislative election in Kazakhstan that for the first time had more than one party represented. (Post)
Credits:

Article updated
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
 Lihaas (talk) 17:42, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] SOPA blackout

Given the particular problems that the blackout will pose for ITN, which generally takes a day to make up its mind, I have started this section now for discussion on whether/what we will post about SOPA action by Wikipedia and other sites. By getting ready now, we have 24 hours to ensure that we have a good, neutrally worded draft with broad support behind it. It would thus be ready to post when the blackout ends, provided that it receives significant coverage; in my opinion that is a foregone conclusion, as is the fact that the article will be significantly updated. For the avoidance of any doubt, I'm not suggesting that we post before the blackout, merely that we prepare now. —WFC01:29, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]


I have deliberately omitted a blurb; my suggestion is that we draft below and put the one with the most consensus at the top later on. —WFC01:29, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Should probably be mentioned that it is not currently clear whether or not there will be front page on 18th.
That aside support. This wouldn't normally qualify for ITN (has any news source covered it yet?), but if there ever was a time when IAR applied, this is it.
No particular suggestions about the blurb, but it should be focussed on SOPA, not the (likely) Wikipedia blackout.--FormerIP (talk) 01:40, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Google shows some news hits, including the New York Times, and major news outlets. I would support the blurb added to ITN. -- Luke (Talk) 01:51, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
@FormerIP – there won't be a traditional main page on the 18th; the intention of this is to ensure that we've got our act together come the 19th. —WFC03:16, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
To follow up, now that Google itself will be part of the effort (not blacking out, but at least altering their main page for the day), I definitely think any blurb should be the coordinated effort, highlighting the WP blackout, but not solely about it. --MASEM (t) 20:00, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Recommend that if it is added, the blurb can headline Wikipedia, but it should be noted several other popular websites like Reddit are also doing this as well. --MASEM (t) 03:07, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Accusations of navel-gazing aside, there is no denying that this and other blackouts are receiving international coverage.--WaltCip (talk) 03:08, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support posting now, and specifically about Wikipedia's blackout as that is what appears to be getting the news coverage. Maybe we could consider that it's a case of WP:IAR and put up a blurb that doesn't actually link to an article (I don't think we have one relevant other than the SOPA article itself) — or even a blurb linking to the blackout notice/statement. Strange Passerby (talkcont) 03:12, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • There probably will be an article, but the breadth and depth of depth at this point is hard to tell. Just WP's SOPA blackout? The general blackout with WP's aspect being more predominate? As an ITN item, the main SOPA page seems to be the best target as to not seem biased. --MASEM (t) 04:39, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • To be fair, any discussion of SOPA/PIPA has hardly hit the news until recently, unless you follow tech news sites. Per NEVENT, that's why we generally wait until after an event's played out to assess if an article is appropriate, instead of crystal-balling the significance. --MASEM (t) 13:56, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I saw it mentioned below that Wikipedia mobile will be available. If that is true then we should post before the blackout for sure. Richard-of-Earth (talk) 22:02, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, but post on the 19th, when there will have been much more coverage and the article will have been significantly expanded by then. Mjroots (talk) 07:36, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I support the posting of a blurb and as it happens, support the blackout too. No issues here. doktorb wordsdeeds 08:13, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question Considering the fact that there's a big black banner at the top of the Main Page informing the readers about the blackout, why do we need to post the story on ITN to duplicate it? Or what exactly would the blurb be? Well, on 19th we'll see how big the thing got web-wide, we can run the story then. --Tone 08:47, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • The mobile wikipedia will be readable, as I understand, and does not have the banner either. There would therefore be some sense to posting before we go dark. —WFC09:54, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Wait to see what the media interest is, oppose any self-reference at this stage. So far this has really only made the technology pages, but that might change. Modest Genius talk 10:02, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
isnt it obvious that the blackout banner should just link to this?Lihaas (talk) 17:37, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
But that would not be reflecting the sources. Wikipedia's blackout was mentioned everywhere. The others very rarely and then only in tech pages or on specialist sites. To mention the others, even in passing, would take a fair bit of synthesis, which we shouldn't do. HiLo48 (talk) 05:21, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)

Suggested blurb

The English Wikipedia, along with many other websites, takes part in a 24-hour long shutdown of its website in protest against SOPA and PIPA. Mjroots (talk) 05:18, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is it worth mentioning that at least 6 congressmen reported changed minds on these bills as a result? --MASEM (t) 05:22, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am working on updating the article to reflect the early news. Be aware: it may change names to reflect the wider action across all websites (though giving the WP action its own section). --MASEM (t) 05:37, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I won't bold so as not to confuse the posting admin, but I support Mj's suggested blurb. —WFC05:39, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted. --slakrtalk / 05:52, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Misleading and frankly both the blurb and article are rushed. The current blurb makes it sound like Wikipedia was the ringleader of the blackout movement, and even if it didn't, the focus should be on the blackout, not on Wikipedia's participation. Something less self-involved would be better, like "Several high profile websites take part in a campaign to protest against SOPA and PIPA", and expand the target article to cover the whole protest, not just Wikipedia's action. Wikipedia is not the primary focus of the majority of news articles I've read, nor should its participation in a larger event be the centrepiece of our own coverage. There were a number of high profile participants in the protests, of which Wikipedia was just one. TechnoSymbiosis (talk) 06:45, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Just to clarify my position, this blurb should be pulled until the article is in a decent (and less self-focused) state. We're not a newswire, we don't need to rush items to the front page when they're not ready. TechnoSymbiosis (talk) 06:53, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
@TechnoSymbiosis: the blurb, itself, was somewhat rushed, and I was waiting for more consensus, but seeing as how it's also a minority topic on several fronts (despite it being a majority topic for Wikipedians), I combined the strong consensus prior to the blackout with the emerging consensus from the blurb. Furthermore, ITN was woefully outdated, even accounting for the blackout period. No worries, however; if a couple more people agree with your change, I/we can implement it. --slakrtalk / 07:18, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No problem at all, Slakr. I grudgingly accept that consensus is against me here, I just wish we'd considered the problems of self-reporting before pushing for an ITN appearance. I don't expect my suggestion to get much more support, to be honest, but I can dream =) TechnoSymbiosis (talk) 08:53, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

References

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 [http://example.com] 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.


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