Jump to content

Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎First Iceland Police shooting death: still two unreferenced sections
Line 158: Line 158:
{{cob}}
{{cob}}
----
----
==== [Ready] First Iceland Police shooting death ====
==== First Iceland Police shooting death ====
{{ITN candidate
{{ITN candidate
| article = National Police of Iceland<!-- Do not wikilink -->
| article = National Police of Iceland<!-- Do not wikilink -->
Line 237: Line 237:
::[[User:3142|3142]], comparing this to other countries is irrelevant and also is essentially [[WP:IDONTLIKEIT]]. It is notable in Iceland, and around the world as it is in worldwide media. This sort of event (the first ever for a nation- which has had police for hundreds of years even if they haven't been independent that long) does not happen every day. Comparing this to shooting rates of other countries misses the point. We are missing the forest for the trees here and forgetting what ITN is supposed to be for. [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot|talk]]) 14:17, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
::[[User:3142|3142]], comparing this to other countries is irrelevant and also is essentially [[WP:IDONTLIKEIT]]. It is notable in Iceland, and around the world as it is in worldwide media. This sort of event (the first ever for a nation- which has had police for hundreds of years even if they haven't been independent that long) does not happen every day. Comparing this to shooting rates of other countries misses the point. We are missing the forest for the trees here and forgetting what ITN is supposed to be for. [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot|talk]]) 14:17, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
::Plus thats a logical fallacy. Anyhoow there is not ''orange'' level target (which is the reasons for holds) so remarked ready.[[User:Lihaas|Lihaas]] ([[User talk:Lihaas|talk]]) 14:34, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
::Plus thats a logical fallacy. Anyhoow there is not ''orange'' level target (which is the reasons for holds) so remarked ready.[[User:Lihaas|Lihaas]] ([[User talk:Lihaas|talk]]) 14:34, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
:::Actually, yes, we have an entirely unreferenced section "ranks", and a section "equipment" of five subsections with one lone citation. Those parts of the article are not up to snuff. [[User:Medeis|μηδείς]] ([[User talk:Medeis|talk]]) 21:19, 4 December 2013 (UTC)


==== Turner Prize ====
==== Turner Prize ====

Revision as of 21:19, 4 December 2013

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.

Willie Mays in 1961
Willie Mays in 1961

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

December 4

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Politics and elections

Science and technology

Libyan law

Article: Law of Libya (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Libyan General National Congress votes to make sharia the basis of all law in the country. (Post)
News source(s): Al Jazeera
Credits:

Article needs updating
Nominator's comments: Well its a landmark jurisprudence change just short of a new constitution. Not to mention perhaps the highest change since 2011. --Lihaas (talk) 19:11, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. An Islamic country voting to use Islam as the basis of its laws is not news. It'd be news if they voted to be more secular. I also appreciate the news source given, but I'm finding little coverage of this at this point. 331dot (talk) 19:24, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Contra 331dot, this is significant news. Only a minority of Muslim countries have sharia as the basis of their whole legal system. More commonly, it only applies in certain contexts, generally relating to family and personal status matters. See this article: [1] Neljack (talk) 21:05, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

December 3

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

Health and medicine

2012 PISA Results

Article: PISA 2012 Tests (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: OECD presents the results of the PISA 2012 Tests in mathematics, science and reading. (Post)
News source(s): Politico
Credits:

Article needs updating
Nominator's comments: Truly international news. Covered in many national medias with reactions from politicans etc. Wikipedia has a very fine table over results (table updated by an IP;) *IMPORTANT UPDATE I do see we need a a special article for the 2012 tests, so I have started one and am in the process of expanding it. Everybody invited to participate in the article writing (including correcting language errors). Also changed the blurb. --Iselilja (talk) 23:25, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Yes, a good nomination. This is the headline article on the website of Australia's national broadcaster right now. (Perhaps because Australia has gone downhill in the assessment, and this is dramatic news.) HiLo48 (talk) 00:36, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support in principle, but "and East Asian countries" is a bit vague and probably not uniformly true. Suggest a just-the-facts-ma'am approach focusing on Shanghai. It should be noted that there are a few other regular surveys of education systems and PISA is not without its critics. Formerip (talk) 01:19, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose unless there is more of a hook to this story than just "students take test". I just don't see much meat here; it seems to be confirming that the smart countries are smart, and the dumb countries are dumb. Not really trying to be flippant here, but I'm looking hard at this and I don't see what makes it ITN-worthy. --Bongwarrior (talk) 02:06, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Did you read my post? It's in the news. HiLo48 (talk) 03:16, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Almost everything that is nominated here is in the news. --Bongwarrior (talk) 03:32, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Just some test results. 331dot (talk) 03:13, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Did you read my post? It's in the news. HiLo48 (talk) 03:16, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I did. And when that's enough to post a story here, let me know, since I have a few suggestions. 331dot (talk) 03:22, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for discounting the judgement of Australia's national broadcaster like that. It's good to know that you know better. HiLo48 (talk) 03:35, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I was not referring to any particular broadcaster; but an event merely being in the news has, rightly or wrongly, never been enough on its own to post a story. 331dot (talk) 03:43, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose While the article is updated, the purpose of ITN is to feature "articles that have been substantially updated." Basically every year, the PISA article is just updated with a new chart showing which nation has the highest scores. Realistically, unless there was an in depth article about 2013 PISA results, marginal updates to the PISA article every year are not sufficient to indicate that these events are sufficiently notable. SpencerT♦C 05:36, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The tests are only held every third year (and presented the year after). (I see the lead needs to be updated.) I fully agree it’s unfortunate we don’t have a sub-article for 2012 (and previous test years); there is certainly enough sources and notability for it. Maybe these shortcomings of Wikipedia makes we can’t have it on the mainpage; but it’s a shame because the tests themselves are surely of great notability; there are a lot of media buzz when they are presented; and they have long-time impact; influencing the educational system and political debates in many countries. Sweden's result for instance continues to fall, causing the media and politicians to use phrases like "Black Tuesday", "National catastrophe" (Opposition leader) etc.; it will be a dominating theme in the upcoming Swedish election. The bad results for Sweden also influences the educational policies in Norway, because the current right-wing government were inclined to support a similar privatization of schools that Sweden have had; but due to the horrible Pisa results Sweden has had, they are more reluctant to do so. The Norwegian Minister of Education has instead already been on the phone with his Polish colleague because Poland did surprisingly well and he will now go to Poland to study the Polish system, as well as focusing on the Dutch system since the Netherlands also did well. You will find similar mechanism in other countries. But Wikipedia's coverage might not fully well show the importance given to these tests. Iselilja (talk) 09:26, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
So now your personal ignorance of aphorisms is an ITN criterion, TRM? Perhaps you should go unilaterally insinuate that in a policy somewhere. μηδείς (talk) 21:14, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Central African Republic

Article: Central African Republic conflict under the Djotodia administration (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Amidst civil conflict, the international community warns of "genocide" in the Central African Republic. (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Things are getting worse in CAR. We've had this article on ITN twice already, the latest in March, but it seems there has been some new development. The article is full of tags, though. --Tone 09:18, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Is there a specific event here to hang our hat on? (i.e. to have a blurb about) The BBC article seems to just be a general article about the poor situation there. 331dot (talk) 12:33, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yeah, probably this was not the best link. France is sending more troops.[2] This is a relevant development. Otherwise, it's a very ongoing story. --Tone 12:56, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) strong support/sticky there is a lot happening down there (and I was looking for an article...Would like to seperate the Seleka conflict article from the conflict under the Djotodia administration). It is often off the news, but in the last few weeks a bunch of stuff is crawling into the headlines. The law and order problem, the ethno-religious violence, sexual violence too.Lihaas (talk) 12:59, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
After prodding, I've not created the new page and added a potential blurb. But the article needs work.Lihaas (talk) 13:23, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This seems to be very important. Agree with the above comments about the blurb. My offering is something connected to this story - [3] - The UN, for the first time ever, uses drone surveillance in the DR Congo Conflict - but this might detract from Tone's original suggested story, so feel free to ignore it. CaptRik (talk) 13:22, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Different conflict, a long, long way away from the CAR! Brigade Piron (talk) 13:24, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Whoops, it's been a very long day! CaptRik (talk) 21:48, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support; maybe we can combine the genocide claim and France's deployment of troops? Though I don't want the blurb too long. 331dot (talk) 13:27, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait So far no indication that it actually happened (and I hope it will not). Bad news, of course, but currently the article contains a speculation with no casualties. Brandmeistertalk 13:55, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well I did put a note on the article [4] and above that it needs more work.
However, thre has been masive instability and violence. I was trying to work a blurb per the lack fo an original one. Feek free to suggest others instead of just refuting one.Lihaas (talk) 14:33, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think the warnings by foreign politicians of the risk of genocide warrant posting. Actual evidence of genocide or crimes against humanity would. If we did have that in the blurb then, in the interests of fairness and neutrality, we would need to also include the response of the CAR government strongly disputing the suggestions (which would probably make the blurb too long). The deployment of French troops is a better candidate, but there are already international peacekeepers there, so I'm not convinced it is sufficiently significant either. Neljack (talk) 14:30, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Similar to others above, I think this story is important and should be posted, but it would be better to have a specific significant even to list rather than, essentially, 'the conflict in CAR is still happening and gradually getting worse.' GoldenRing (talk) 14:37, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
ethno-religious conflict?
Alsthough a google news search is dominated by French troops (as in the news) and calls for itnerventions. Still I think the former is more neutralLihaas (talk) 14:50, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
comment for anyone with the time/interest, see the talk page where i aded a bunch of stuff. Im very busy this week to add and sort it.Lihaas (talk) 15:43, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose the quotes around genocide as they may be misinterpreted as scare quotes. Support if they are removed. Gamaliel (talk) 19:31, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Clarify a clearer rationale would help. The "international community" "warning" is very vague at best. μηδείς (talk) 23:16, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Warnings of genocide, not an actual genocide.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 17:46, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
changed blubrb keyword.Lihaas (talk) 17:49, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
note UNSC resolution should pass tomorrow giving a mandate tol a force. That should be blurb worthyLihaas (talk) 19:26, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[Recent Deaths] Ahmed Fouad Negm

Article: Ahmed Fouad Negm (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Al Jazeera, Al Ahram
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Famous Egyptian poet whose songs were popular during the 2011 Revolution. Al Ahram described him as "one of Egypt’s most renowned vernacular poets of the second half of the 20th century". Mohamed CJ (talk) 08:40, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support when updated. Seems to have been one of the most high profile Egyptian poets. Currently there is no mention of his death in the prose at all. Thryduulf (talk) 09:46, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support upon update with death information per Thryduulf. 331dot (talk) 12:31, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Death info now present; I fully support posting. 331dot (talk) 14:18, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Seems to qualify for RD. A writer who made a significant impact not just on literature but also on his country. Neljack (talk) 14:14, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've updated the article (2 lines and 3 sources for those who count). There is however an orange tag added about an hour ago as two sections of the article are without references to back them up. Mohamed CJ (talk) 14:21, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - for ITN.--BabbaQ (talk) 14:45, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
WHY? ITN needs reasons, we dont vote count..Lihaas (talk) 14:55, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose When a poet is awarded for being an ambassador for the poor, one gets the impression his poetry is not what he's actually known for. μηδείς (talk) 23:14, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't that an indication that he had a substantial impact? Neljack (talk) 00:08, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not as a poet. μηδείς (talk) 01:14, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well some of the political impact does seem to have been through his poetry, which was quite political. Anyway, what would matter if most of his impact was as an activist? Surely we assess people just the same, whatever field their impact was in. Neljack (talk) 02:23, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would have posted this, were it not for the fact that the article is comprised of two sections without a single reference between them. Stephen 02:06, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

December 2

Arts and culture

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime
  • In the New Hampshire's U.S. District Court, the former medical technician David Kwiatkowski is sentenced to 39 years in prison for infecting unknown numbers of patients in various states with hepatitis C through the reuse of his contaminated syringes. (FOX News)

Politics and elections

First Iceland Police shooting death

Article: National Police of Iceland (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Iceland has its first death due to police action in its history. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The National Police of Iceland are involved in the first fatal shooting by police in that nation's history.
News source(s): BBC News Fox News Al-Jazeera Daily Mail NBC News Zee News India NZ Herald
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: We don't often hear that a nation had its very first death due to police action ever, which is the case here. I concede this might not get posted, but it is getting coverage and I thought since I updated the article I'd give it a shot. --331dot (talk) 13:20, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support we don't often get this sort of story, and we don't often get stories about Iceland. It seems that this is very significant in Iceland and is getting coverage internationally. Thryduulf (talk) 14:11, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose While this is interesting, I don't see that a small country having its first fatal police shooting is really of sufficient importance to warrant posting. It is still one person being killed, just as unfortunately happens every day in various places around the world. Neljack (talk) 14:17, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I understand your point of view, but may be hard for us being from larger countries to understand what this exactly means to Iceland. This sort of thing never happens there, let alone not happening every day. It is also important enough to mention in media around the world, perhaps not as the top headline story, but it is there nevertheless. 331dot (talk) 14:23, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That is a fair point, though I think I have a better idea than many since I'm from a fairly small country. New Zealand's 4.5 million is obviously quite different to Iceland's 320,000, but a fatal police shooting here will always be big news throughout the country. While I'm not convinced this is sufficiently significant, I won't be upset if this is posted - it certainly is an interesting story. Neljack (talk) 02:42, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
weak support with update. It is a rare incident, a minority topic, and it does have small country repercussions (per 331dot) (in a globalised perspective that is not bias)Lihaas (talk) 14:58, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'll tend to Oppose here. The incident is currently mentioned in one short paragraph and there may not be a whole lot of meat in the story to expand it with. So far, it seems too minor for the front page; even though it's the first police shooting in the small country, it's kind of natural that it could happen there too, and there doesn't seem to be something particular scandal-like with what happened. Iselilja (talk) 15:37, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There is no requirement for lengthy updates; just an update. The guidelines state "The decision as to when an article is updated enough is subjective, but a five-sentence update (with at minimum three references, not counting duplicates) is generally more than sufficient, while a one-sentence update is highly questionable." I've met this five-sentence guideline. 331dot (talk) 16:41, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
My thinking was more that if the story can be adequately covered in a single paragraph it may be a sign that the story isn't all that much. I can easily image news stories where only a short update is needed and the story is still notable: for instance if a person wins something very notable, also somethimes deaths, resignation etc. of a major personality. But a crime story, accident, storm, etc. that doesn't have more in it than can be summarized in a paragraph or two; will seldom be notable in my view. Iselilja (talk) 16:54, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - because it is a very rare incident over the entire scandinavian area. --BabbaQ (talk) 17:02, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, truly interesting in this age of another-day-another-shooting, but the blurb needs work. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:44, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree and am open to suggestions. 331dot (talk) 18:10, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Opppose no evidence of police wrongdoing, certainly not the first death due to state action. μηδείς (talk) 18:00, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is in Iceland by the police, which is why it is in worldwide media. How many such things have happened elsewhere? 331dot (talk) 18:10, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yep, missing the point I'm afraid Medeis. There's no implication of wrong-doing, just that this is the first person to be killed by Iceland police, ever. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:08, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Fatal shootings by the police are fairly uncommon in most Western countries, so that whenever one happens it is likely to be a first for the locality. Iceland is a small place and this is a sad event, but it is unremarkable. In case this is posted, though, note that the sources seem to say this is first fatal shooting by police in Iceland, rather than "the first death due to police", which seems a lot broader and a bit open to interpretation. Formerip (talk) 18:22, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • It might be unremarkable to you and me, but we don't live in a country where this sort of thing just does not happen at all. I often hear complaints of systemic bias here, and I thought this would be a good story to work on that issue. We don't post many stories from the Nordic countries. 331dot (talk) 18:54, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agreed, FormerIP, despite opposing, sums it up perfectly, this is very common in most Western countries, but not in Iceland. That's why it's in the news. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:08, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That's not really the case. In the last 23 years, 54 people have been shot dead by British police. Using that as benchmark, and given that the population of the UK is about 200 times the size of Iceland's, you would expect one fatal shooting by Icelandic police about every 100 years. It's no more interesting an event than taking a random British case and saying "this is the first time this has happened in Coventy/Enfield/Rotherham/wherever". Formerip (talk) 19:21, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
We aren't talking about a subnational entity here, we are talking about a sovereign state. Using math to somehow diminish the importance of this ignores the fact that this is being widely reported. 331dot (talk) 19:34, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It makes no difference. Still using UK data, being shot by police seems to be about as common a way to die as being stung by an insect or hit by a cyclist, and only a bit more common than being struck by lightning. Are we supposed to post the occurrence of any unusual event if it happens in a small, young country for the first time? Formerip (talk) 20:32, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If it's in the news, then why not? Being struck by lightning is purely random, being shot dead by Icelandic police is not random and has never happened before. "Young country" etc is all fascinating, but there are no other similar stories in the news, this one is. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:41, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It isn't "no difference", it is every difference. I don't see "first death by bee sting in Iceland" or "first death by lightning in Iceland" reported in the news worldwide. And, as TRM points out, there is a difference between random occurrences and this one. 331dot (talk) 20:48, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Do you think we should post items just because they have been reported in the media, regardless of whether they are otherwise noteworthy? I can't agree with that. Formerip (talk) 20:54, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think we should post items that are in the news, that are of interest to the general public, that are certainly noteworthy in a world where police kill suspects with alarming regularity. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:00, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
C'mon. You surely know your argument is thin when you resort to bolding "in the news". If that's a good argument, it's a good argument for posting absolutely anything. I'm not sure the regularity is all that alarming outside the US, though. Which is kind of my whole point. Formerip (talk) 01:15, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support — Unfortunately, they're not uncommon in the U.S.! This event seems noteworthy for being the first ever in Iceland, which though a small country has a long history and a reputation for being unusually civic-minded. Sca (talk) 18:56, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Your statement shows an ignorance of context. Our article List of killings by law enforcement officers in the United States says there are approximately 400 "justifiable homicides" a year, which, if we compare populations, means one police shooting every two or three years in Iceland would be a comparable number. Of course, Iceland is a small, incredibly homogenous country, comparable to innumerable small cities in the US which haven't had a shooting by police since WWII, with Iceland becoming independent in 1944. Iceland has nothing comparable to the large, Democrat machine-run cities like Detroit, Camden, NJ, and Chicago which account for the bulk of US police shootings. Lucky Iceland. μηδείς (talk) 19:23, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You're missing the point. This is the first of such events. You may be well used to it in the US, but in Iceland this is a landmark event. Who cares about your little villages and their shooting incidents, frankly. This has made international news, is actually interesting and should be part of ITN. All the statistical analysis is pointless. And no, it's not "lucky Iceland", it's actually "unlucky US", quite obviously. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:55, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Significant national event with worldwide coverage. Gamaliel (talk) 19:29, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've tagged this as ready again. I respectfully submit that the opposes seem to boil down to IDONTLIKEIT. Further, opposes saying that such shooting are not rare where they come from miss the point. The update guidelines have been met, this is in the news worldwide, and it's from a nation we don't often have stories from, if ever. 331dot (talk) 20:10, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
For someone quoting ITN guidelines, it should be known you cannot tag our nm as ready.Lihaas (talk) 20:32, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Can you point out where it states that? I see it done often. 331dot (talk) 20:41, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Are you saying I can't do it as the nominator? I'd still like to see where it says that, but I accept that for the moment. 331dot (talk) 20:44, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
331dot was perfectly within his rights to tag this as [Ready]. All that does is alert any uninvolved administrators looking at the page that they should have a look to see whether it should be posted. The posting administrator still has to independently assess consensus and the adequacy of the update. Items are usually tagged by editors who have been involved in the discussion - they, for obvious reasons, are the most likely people to be paying attention to it. Neljack (talk) 20:47, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
As for not liking it. On the contrary. I am from Norway so I am almost genetically inclined to support bringing Iceland and other Nordic countries some attention in the world. I will honestly be delighted if this item is posted. It’s just that I don’t see as hard news that a notorious criminal gets shot and killed by the police (he was once expelled from Norway for having shot at the police here). It hasn’t happened previously on Iceland which may make the country seem exotic in other parts of the world which appears to be the underlying news appeal; basically this is a “Dog shot Man” kind of news story. Regards, Iselilja (talk) 21:14, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No, it's not "Dog shot Man", it's "Dog discovers that Man can be shot, and shoots one". It's very different. Regards, The Rambling Man (talk) 21:20, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Tagging as [ready] since oppose votes are all based on some bizarre statistical analysis in comparison with the US or some claim that Iceland is a "young country". Either way, it's the first time this has happened for nearly 70 years, the first time ever, has made international news and is what ITN is all about. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:51, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Don't Be Silly "man justifiedly shot by cop" has to be the least newsworthy item ever nominated here. The NYC train wreck and the Scottish copter crash blow it out of the water. Until we start posting things like "first ever police shooting in Princeton NJ" opposition to this is rational, and support is based on a fascination with gun violence that speaks to politics, not reality. μηδείς (talk) 20:58, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Princeton, NJ is not a sovereign state. There is nothing political about stating the simple fact that this occurred. 331dot (talk) 21:01, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Rare event untypical of a particular sovereign state, but otherwise highly normal, is not an ITN criterion. Nor do news stories in small states gain any more weight than news stories in NYC. Would we publish it snowing in Puerto Rico, a helicopter crash killing one in Vaduz, or a drag race in St. Peter's Square? We wouldn't publish a murder suicide of five in Reykjavik. Why we would publish a policeman using his legally sanctioned arm against one suspect is beyond comprehension--unless there's something inherent to gun violence itself, and the implied comparison with uncivilized countries to the south? But that's POV. μηδείς (talk) 23:09, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Why publish it? Because it's in the news, and not just in Iceland. I am starting to better understand systemic bias issues here, I think. I make no comparisons to other countries. I simply suggested a story widely in the news of an unusual event. You are adding your own political and social views to this discussion. 331dot (talk) 03:10, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Again, don't be silly, and stop using straw man comparisons. This is unique occasion, just because the US sees this kind of behaviour every day, and has done for decades, the fact that it's never happened before in Iceland makes it newsworthy. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:04, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly my point. You use a bizarre statistical analysis to support this. Then you resort to comparison with gun violence in the US. Not in SA or ME. But in the US. Thou dripst with POV. μηδείς (talk) 23:11, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Saying an event is "the first time this has happened in Iceland" when it is something that has never happened in Iceland ever before is not some "Bizarre statistical analysis". Posting only events that would be significant if they happened in the US is extremely biased. Thryduulf (talk) 08:17, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - There are not many countries, if any, that can say there is a first time event like this one. The unique nature of this news item is what makes it ITN-worthy, in my view. Opposers quite fail to convince. This is an interesting blurb for ITN, and I suggest we post it. Jusdafax 23:45, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Here's my problem with the item; the sources are unsure if this is the first death by police action, there could have been ones prior to WWII. Also the fact is that the story is of a single event with nothing else to say besides "for first time, lunatic shot by cops in Iceland"--might as well not wikilink to anything, that's the whole story. No lasting impact. Abductive (reasoning) 00:21, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The BBC said "It is the first time someone has been killed in an armed police operation in Iceland, officials say." Fox said "the first time armed police have shot and killed someone in the nation." Al-Jazeera's headline: "Regret over Iceland's first police shooting". NBC said "Police in Iceland killed a person for the first time in the nation’s history". Which sources are saying it might not be the first? It is also crystal ball-ish to claim there is "no lasting impact"; you have no way of knowing that yet. There is also no requirement for a story to have a "lasting impact". 331dot (talk) 03:04, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with 331dot completely. I'd go so far as to emphasize to the administrators who post that the opposes have failed utterly to present any real weight in their reasoning, and additionally that this blurb should be posted based on worldwide news coverage of a first-time national event. Jusdafax 04:29, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • marked as ready given the large support and irrelevance of much of the opposition arguments. Thryduulf (talk) 08:17, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I find it interesting that the police force of an independent nation had never before been directly responsible for a shooting death. Canuck89 (what's up?) 11:08, December 4, 2013 (UTC)
Oops. The article is tagged. Obviously that is a problem. Jusdafax 12:07, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like some of the citations need help. I'll work on it. 331dot (talk) 13:00, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've cited everything I can, but I cannot find where the list of weapons and vehicles they use comes from. 331dot (talk) 14:17, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Regardless of the legitimacy of the claim we can't simply use "Oh it's a sovereign country therefore it's notable" argument. Iceland is tiny terms of population - 300,000 or so. Police killings are generally a rare event in the developed world at least, so it stands to reason that a rare mode of death isn't going to occur frequently in a small population size. That simply the effect of statistics based on a small sample size, not some inherent notability.
To expand this point I looked up the rate of fatal police shootings in the UK and got a figure of 30 in 12 years, or 2½ a year. Correcting for population would yield an expected figure for Iceland of 0.0133 deaths a year assuming the same rate. Since the country has only been independent since 1944 that this is the firsts suggests the statistics for each are broadly similar.
Unmarked as ready - it can't be ready if the article is tagged, and in any case consensus is hardly overwhelming. The opposes have decent grounds and can't be dismissed as irrelevances. 3142 (talk) 13:33, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
3142, comparing this to other countries is irrelevant and also is essentially WP:IDONTLIKEIT. It is notable in Iceland, and around the world as it is in worldwide media. This sort of event (the first ever for a nation- which has had police for hundreds of years even if they haven't been independent that long) does not happen every day. Comparing this to shooting rates of other countries misses the point. We are missing the forest for the trees here and forgetting what ITN is supposed to be for. 331dot (talk) 14:17, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Plus thats a logical fallacy. Anyhoow there is not orange level target (which is the reasons for holds) so remarked ready.Lihaas (talk) 14:34, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, yes, we have an entirely unreferenced section "ranks", and a section "equipment" of five subsections with one lone citation. Those parts of the article are not up to snuff. μηδείς (talk) 21:19, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Turner Prize

Article: Laure Prouvost (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ French artist Laure Prouvost wins the 2013 Turner Prize. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ French artist Laure Prouvost wins the 2013 Turner Prize
News source(s): [5]
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Art is not important enough for ITNR, but the Turner Prize has been posted in the past. Formerip (talk) 21:20, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I'm certain this won't be accepted as it's dominated by Europeans, but for what it's worth, there's a half-decent winners article here for the blurb. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:08, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
My impression is that the disdain is for the rich-man's pointy prize, not for Europe. μηδείς (talk) 22:17, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not according to this discussion: Wikipedia talk:In the news/Recurring items/Archive 9#Add Turner Prize. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:21, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Considering the winner is Canadian, French-Canadian, an Alien French...And yes, it is a rather snooty prize, one that isn't paid much attention to over here in truth. --Somchai Sun (talk) 22:25, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like you need to update her article, she's French, born in Lille and lives in London. Perhaps that odd combination makes her Canadian? The Rambling Man (talk) 22:31, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well, her article is a stub, not even meeting the minimum ITN requirements, regardless of whether she sings God Save the Queen, the Hockey Song, or the Marseillaise. μηδείς (talk) 22:44, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It isn't necessarily the bold article (the proposed blurb doesn't even have one, hence why I suggested a half-decent article above), so while that's interesting, along with the red link, it's not really important. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:48, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: Maybe we should replace the link to Laure Provost with one to the Derry/Londonderry name dispute, on grounds that Channel4's ads for their show about the Prize always told us it was to be awarded in 'Derry-Londonderry', and when we had finished a long and meaningless argument on the pros and cons of this suggestion, as an act of artistic homage to 'Fountain' (which, you ignorant philistines, was simultaneously a factory-made urinal and a famous artwork by Marcel Duchamp), we could submit a printout of our argument as a work of Visual Conceptual Art that fully deserved to win the 2014 Turner Prize, due to having at least as much artistic merit as some of the previous winners, while adding that anybody who failed to appreciate the undoubted universal importance of our work was obviously just a philistine and thus clearly not worth listening to :) Tlhslobus (talk) 10:47, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
In case anybody doesn't understand what I'm trying to illustrate with the above, my point is that, at least in my view, the Turner Prize doesn't belong in ITN because it is at best of highly doubtful significance even to the British art world, let alone to the rest of us, and all too often it seems to many (and probably most) people to be just an overhyped absurdity.Tlhslobus (talk) 11:28, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Regardless of the demographics of the winners, this is perhaps the world's best known art prize. Gamaliel (talk) 19:32, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[Withdrawn] Croatian voters reject same-sex marriage

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.


Nominator's comments: It seems an important development in the debate over same-sex marriage. My own country (Ireland, a 90%+ Catholic EU country, as is Croatia) is due to have a referendum to legalize that in 2015, so it is especially interesting to me, but perhaps less so to other people. --Tlhslobus (talk) 13:05, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as it is a vote to enshrine the status quo in their constitution(it was already illegal in law). 331dot (talk) 13:58, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Opppose Per 331dot (this reminds me strongly of the Falklands referendum, Religious flavor VS Nationalist flavor essentially, predictable result, no surprises at all). --Somchai Sun (talk) 16:26, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The precedent has already been set that we are not posting every gay marriage development, even with its legalization in France. The status quo continues in Croatia is a far smaller story than that. μηδείς (talk) 16:56, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Another EU country officially legalizing gay marriage. These stories aren't that distinctive anymore; the only type of item I'd really consider supporting is if a majority Muslim nation like Saudi Arabia legalizes gay marriage. Then we have a major story. SpencerT♦C 23:38, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Actually it's not legalizing it, but banning it, thus bucking the EU trend. Also I could be wrong but as far as I know it's the first time ordinary voters have had a say on the issue in the EU, and shows a gap between politicians and voters on the issue. To some extent, it also seems to highlight a new development in the division between Donald Rumsfeld's Old Europe and New Europe. But I suspect that nobody here will think any of that makes it newsworthy, even if any of that were mentioned in the article, which it probably isn't. (Plus once again I'm foolishly getting involved in a discussion which I want to avoid). Tlhslobus (talk) 08:22, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Correction: Oops, sorry, there was a similar referendum and similar result in neighbouring Slovenia last year, so it's not really bucking an EU trend but merely confirming an existing 'New Europe' trend, thus strengthening the case for omitting it from ITN.Tlhslobus (talk) 09:36, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Withdraw: In view of the lack of support, and the above Correction by me, I now withdraw this proposal.Tlhslobus (talk) 09:36, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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.

December 1

Armed conflict and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Politics and elections

Science and technology

Sport

[Posted] Jade Rabbit

Article: Chang'e 3 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ China's first lunar rover mission Chang'e 3 launches successfully. (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: China's first moon lander.... The Rambling Man (talk) 12:26, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support but would like to see something about the launch in the main article rather than the single sentence in the lede (or am I missing something?) GoldenRing (talk) 12:36, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support though I am not a massive fan of the current lede either Brigade Piron (talk) 12:46, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait. The probe will land on the Moon in a couple of weeks (16 Dec). It makes more sense to post it then, when we know whether it successfully lands or not. That point will qualify under WP:ITNR, but the launch does not. It also gives some time for the article to be improved, now that many more sources have suddenly become available (the Chinese have been a bit secretive about the details before now). Modest Genius talk 14:04, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Per nom.--Somchai Sun (talk) 14:09, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Missions to land on other celestial bodies are notable, especially if a first for China. If this wasn't their first effort to do so I would support waiting for the landing or failure(to post per ITNR). 331dot (talk) 14:20, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I will also go with wait (I was thinking to nominate it myself). Successful landing is more significant than the launch and they are weeks apart so this does not really qualify for two blurbs (as opposed to, say, New Horizons that take years to reach the goal. Moon is near.) --Tone 14:32, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't outright oppose waiting, though I don't think this would require two separate blurbs; you could replace this one with the next one. 331dot (talk) 14:48, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait per Tone. Although, when I saw "Jade Rabbit" on my watchlist, I came here all prepared to oppose RD for a porn star... Formerip (talk) 14:34, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I'm cool with waiting. Just a quick question, did we post the launch of the Mars Science Laboratory prior to the successful landing of Curiosity? The Rambling Man (talk) 16:08, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • We posted it both times but there were 10 months in between. Here it's 2 weeks. --Tone 16:13, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Thanks, so there's a defined minimum then? And hey, it might not make it, so posting the successful launch seems worthy enough. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:56, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • If it does fail, that would probably still be ITN-worthy. --W. D. Graham 19:24, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - definitly for ITN.--BabbaQ (talk) 16:39, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support posting twice, now and at landing, per TRM. This is a first-ever for China, and the launch and landing are separate accomplishments. μηδείς (talk) 17:01, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support posting twice per TRM, Medeis, & 331dot. Ryan Vesey 17:04, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ready this is at least minimally updated with text and sources, and well supported for listing now.
  • Support Successful launch (also would support the actual landing if/when it happens). CaptRik (talk) 19:03, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait landing is just two weeks away and far more significant. --W. D. Graham 19:23, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There's plenty of precedent for listing such launches and arrivals, such as the Dawn Spacecraft visiting Vesta and Ceres. First launches are also listed at ITN/R, not that I support an automatic listing based on ITN/R for anything--but it does show precedent. Given the wide coverage and reader interest this should go up now, rather than later. I think it is absurd toassume we wouldn't, for example, publish the first launch of a moon lander if it were the US or Britain doing it now. μηδείς (talk) 19:47, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The fallacy with that precedent is that it is based on events which occured many months or years apart, not two weeks which is the case here. The ITNR for first launches is for the very first launch made by a country, something which China acheived in 1970 - in fact they're pretty close to number 200. Arrival at the moon is ITNR. --W. D. Graham 20:32, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
All of those 'precedents' took many months or years to reach their destination, not less time than it takes an item to cycle off ITN! Modest Genius talk 20:54, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
But much like the collapse of the building in Latvia followed by the resignation of the government, both of which were posted in quick succession at ITN, there's no good reason to delay posting one ITN event for one that may happen a week or two later. Or is that in a guideline that I missed? The Rambling Man (talk) 21:22, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Could the government's collapse have been predicted at the time of the building collapsing, though? --W. D. Graham 22:01, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think the point is that it's not a massive problem at all to have two blurbs a few weeks apart relating to the same subject. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:07, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Simply launching for the moon is a rather major accomplishment, and the consensus is 8 for posting and 3 for waiting, so further argument and delay are unnecessary. μηδείς (talk) 23:00, 2 December 2013 (UTC) [I know it's moot, but I missed Tone's wait vote, so it was actually 4 waits. μηδείς (talk) 02:48, 3 December 2013 (UTC)][reply]
  • Support - Let's post it now. We have consensus and the opposers, in my view, don't make a good case for a delay. Jusdafax 01:37, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Stephen 02:20, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] Metro-North Railroad crash

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: Spuyten Duyvil derailment (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Metro-North Railroad derails in the Bronx killing at least four people. (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Currently reporting at least four fatalities and dozens of injuries. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:29, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'd suggest waiting for the situation to develop and the article to be fleshed out enough.--Johnsemlak (talk) 15:16, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Nah. If four deaths is approximately near the total fatalities, I don't see this as significant enough; especially as it doesn't seem to have happened under very particular og extraordinary circumstances. Iselilja (talk) 15:21, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • But in one of the biggest city train systems in the world, in a area not known for these disasters? Support Secret account 15:50, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Just to clarify, Metro-North is a commuter train system that connects the upstate communities of the lower Hudson River Valley (Poughkeepsie and south) to the Bronx and then Manhattan at 125th Street and Grand Central Station. It is separate from the NYC Subway system, Amtrak, the Long Island Railroad, New Jersey Transit, and various other lines that service the city, but does run some small joint lines into NJ and Connecticut partnered with New Jersey Transit and ConnDOT. μηδείς (talk) 23:08, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose this is very close to home for me, but in the scope of things, 4 dead in a transportation accident is...four dead in a transportation accident. Unless something more notable develops, like evidence of criminal activity, it is just a very local local news story. μηδείς (talk) 16:19, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • As it stands i would say wait, its a train crash with 4 deaths which is not uncommon as we all know. If something more comes out of it then we will look at it -- Ashish-g55 16:55, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Would be interesting on comparing how people voted on this that killed 4 and injured 63 vs. the Scottish pub helicopter that killed 8 and injured 32... –HTD 18:25, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
So, which of the five nom/commenting editors above you do you mean to insult by that implication, Howard? Get back to us when you've posted a study on the hypocrisy here in your user space. μηδείς (talk) 18:45, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not meant to insult, TBH. Just interested. I haven't actually cross-referenced... –HTD 19:01, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - sad story. but national story.--BabbaQ (talk) 20:11, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Small incident in the overall scheme of transport accidents. And if this ever does go any further, please change the location in the blurb to New York, rather than just a suburb. That's a perfect example of our systemic bias. HiLo48 (talk) 20:38, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Fair enough. I posted the nomination out of pure interest, nothing more. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:40, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per reasons above. 331dot (talk) 21:20, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. It's the busiest railway line in the country, plus fatal train crashes are rather rare in major American cities. — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 23:20, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nonsense. Metro North as a whole is the fourth largest commuter rail in the country, not even including subway systems, such as the NYC subways, which average over 20 times the ridership daily, and the fact that the line involved is only one of Metro North's lines. It's nowhere near the busiest railway line in the country. μηδείς (talk) 23:28, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Medeis, HiLo, et al. That it happened in New York does not magically make it more significant that if it happened in, say, India. Neljack (talk) 23:43, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - per above. Train accidents occur almost on a daily basis, many of which involve fatalities unfortunately. Unless this accident leads to major national ramifications or breaks any records (hopefully it doesn't), it shouldn't be posted. YuMaNuMa Contrib 06:16, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
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] Thai protests

Article: 2013 Thai protests (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Thai protesters claim the seizure of several government buildings, including Thai Public Broadcasting Service and six television channels. (Post)
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Now looks like a significant development there (and the nation shows how to protest correctly). Brandmeistertalk 12:47, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support --Vejvančický (talk / contribs) 13:01, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Not sure about the blurb. The seizure of government buildings have been serially occurring since last Monday. Yesterday four people died as a result of fighting between anti- and pro-government groups, and today has seen (so far) non-violent clashes between protesters and the police.[6] Either should probably be mentioned in the blurb. A body has also been discovered in a bus fire near a pro-government protest site, though the details on this are still unclear.[7] Also, thanks to Brandmeister for helping update the article (though I don't necessarily agree with the "protesting correctly" comment). --Paul_012 (talk) 14:00, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, but prefer different blurb. Suggest something along the lines of
  • Support - definitly a story for ITN. --BabbaQ (talk) 20:17, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • obvious support as I mntioned in the Ukraine one. But remove the tv building from blurb as a lot more important buidlings were udner siege (the finance or foreign ministry was first). Pperhaps add the update from today where the protest leaders met Sinawatra and said they would only stop on her resignationLihaas (talk) 01:54, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, protest leader Suthep Thaugsuban said that he would not stop even with her resignation. (They're demanding something called a "People's Council".) --Paul_012 (talk) 09:59, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Major protests causing significant political and economic instability, as well as getting widespread international media attention. Neljack (talk) 07:54, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Important and significant news story. Article appears to be in decent shape. Tweak the blurb and post it. Jusdafax 08:10, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posting. --Tone 09:12, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment: I would still prefer a different blurb (and two other editors appear to agree above). I've suggested two alternatives above. --Paul_012 (talk) 09:45, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Ok, I'll change to the second altblurb. --Tone 09:58, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted to RD] Recent Deaths: Paul Walker

Article: Paul Walker (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): US Magazine ABC News Australia Daily Mail The Guardian Times of India Le Monde Ceylon Today
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: He was an actor best known for starring in The Fast and Furious film series. Andise1 (talk) 03:16, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ironic? yes. Encyclopedic? Influential? No. μηδείς (talk) 04:27, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I agree with Medeis here. I think it would be difficult to argue that he was widely regarded as a very important figure in his field. He was hardly in the top rank of actors, either in terms of acclaim or of fame. Neljack (talk) 04:59, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Wide news coverage worldwide. The actor was in the middle of filming Fast & Furious 7, while Fast & Furious 6 has just been released. And as is always the case when an actor passes away, TV stations worldwide end up broadcasting tons of films in tribute. Wes Mᴥuse 05:30, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Even Indian and Chinese TV stations? (That's a third of the world's population.) How about middle eastern ones? HiLo48 (talk) 06:04, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I can't say how it's hitting news media in China, but the death sure made it to [Chinese], not forgetting [Spanish]. Anyway, who says [English] is world-wiki? It's the page for speakers and readers of English and need only reflect the broad interests of those people.Ridiculus mus (talk) 07:51, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
To flesh out remarks by Wes, F&F 4 was a big hit worldwide: "As of 27 July 2011 the film had grossed a total of $155,064,265 in the United States and $363,164,265 worldwide (making it the third most successful film in the franchise behind Fast & Furious 6 and Fast Five) and is the fourth highest-grossing film in the car genre, behind Fast & Furious 6, Fast Five and Cars". Ridiculus mus (talk) 08:03, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
LOL. What does "worldwide" mean? How much of the world never saw it? China? India? That's a third of it. HiLo48 (talk) 10:08, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
LOL? F&F was massive in India, I'm not sure how it worked in China, but "worldwide" in this context means that it covered more than just the US.... The Rambling Man (talk) 22:13, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose A big celebrity but far from a leader in the field; his death would have gotten significant news coverage but its being more on the irony of his death that is being used to propagate the story. --MASEM (t) 05:51, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. My first reaction was no. But then I remember we posted Cory Monteith, who was famous for a single American television show, so fair is fair. Those shitty racing movies have done a lot of worldwide box office. Gamaliel (talk) 06:30, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Which posting has been acknowledged as a mistake and one we are trying to avoid. --MASEM (t) 06:41, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • According to WP:ITND a death article needs to meet one of the 3 criterion. 1: The deceased was in a high-ranking office of power at the time of death and/or had a significant contribution/impact on the country/region? No. 2: The deceased was widely regarded as a very important figure in his or her field? Debatable. What one sees as an important figure, may not be see by another as such importance. 3: The death has a major international impact that affects current events. The modification or creation of multiple articles to take into account the ramifications of a death is a sign that it meets the third criterion? Questionable. The actor was in the middle of filming 'Fast 7', and also starred in 'Fast 6' which has only just been released worldwide. His death will in fact have some impact on the filming of 'Fast 7' as he is no longer alive. So of the 3 criteria, 1 has failed, but 2 are 50/50 depending on which side of the coin you wish to view. Although wouldn't this get mentioned in the deaths section anyway? If so, then I would reconsider my "support!" option. Wes Mᴥuse 07:50, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per Gamaliel. Jonno - (Wanna talk?) 07:51, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, Never been given any awards for acting, known for a single role, no impact outside of a single movie series. Abductive (reasoning) 08:06, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Never been given any awards for acting? Ha, for real? So the 5 he won between 2000 - 2003 are not awards for acting are they? I must have dreamt him receiving those then. Wes Mᴥuse 09:13, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Yes, ironic and interesting, but not enyclopedic.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 09:50, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If he has an article here, it's "encyclopedic". If you don't feel he should have an article here, then propose its deletion. The point of ITN is to highlight articles about events that are in the news. 331dot (talk) 10:34, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting take. I will say that if Death of Paul Walker is created, I certainly will propose its deletion.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 10:44, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It's not my "take", it's what ITN is for. (From the WP:ITN page: The In the news (ITN) section on the main page serves to direct readers to articles that have been substantially updated to reflect recent or current events of wide interest.) I further was not proposing a new article, the suggested article is Walker's article. 331dot (talk) 10:48, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Then our views differ simply on what's meant by "substantially" and "wide".--Gibson Flying V (talk) 10:51, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I guess so; I think that worldwide coverage suggests substantial and wide interest. 331dot (talk) 11:07, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. This is the top headline story on NBC News and near the top on CNN, and also being mentioned in media around the world(France, Spain, China, India, even Sri Lanka). Part of the role of ITN is to highlight articles about events that are in the news, which this clearly is. It isn't for us to judge the reasons that media gives coverage to an event- but it is for us to help readers find information. I never watched a F and F movie and did not hear of this man- until I saw this nomination and viewed the article. That should be what we want for most articles. 331dot (talk) 10:34, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Further, One can debate his influence and any interest in this event, but saying that this is "unencyclopedic" is just WP:IDONTLIKEIT. If he has an article, it is encyclopedic. 331dot (talk) 11:11, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • OpposeI am torned about this one, on one side he has done some huge films but on the other side he was never a "academy award winning actor" or if to be honest a truly outstanding actor within is genre. I think this unfortunatly is a case of Americanism. I have to oppose this one.--BabbaQ (talk) 10:52, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This is not just being covered in America, but around the world. Even if it is "Americanism", objections relating to an event being from a single country are not valid. 331dot (talk) 11:07, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your input, but you are in my opinion wrong if you claim that if Paul had been Swedish this would have been place at ITN. It is Americanised-centrism. Anyway, sad case.--BabbaQ (talk) 11:21, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Is the Swedish movie industry on par with the Hollywood movie industry? It's not America's fault that Hollywood is in America, or that its movie industry gets more attention than others. It's the people's fault(for watching American movies). 331dot (talk) 11:26, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Whether you like it or not, Walker has become a pretty big deal. He is the primary star of a multi-billion-dollar media franchise, and not just in America. I think it deserves listing in RD. This is from someone who is not an F&F fan. --Kitch (Talk : Contrib) 10:58, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I don't imagine many people care for the Fast and Furious series, but you're kidding yourself if you think this is not in the news. Taylor Trescott - my talk + my edits 11:05, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Unquestionably in the news, and his death will have a significant impact on a major Hollywood film currently production so imho criteria 3 is met. Thryduulf (talk) 11:19, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • That's not what's meant by "a major international impact that affects current events". Page says that the film is in post, which would mean he finished filming his scenes. It's a movie sequel, not an international peace conference, or what have you. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:26, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support – The death is covered by the world media, including Indian and Chinese. — Bill william comptonTalk 11:30, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Marking ready. Hot Stop talk-contribs 11:36, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support the problem with the film industry is that it is basically impossible to agree on whether 90% of actors are "important figures in their field." He might not be Jack Nicholson, but he was the star of a blockbuster film series and definitely died in an unexpected fashion. --PlasmaTwa2 14:06, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not going to oppose or support but I will side with the argument that he's not 'important in his field'. There are simply too many actors who were stars of a reasonably popular tv/movie series of a similar prominance to Walker. The argument for posting surely hinges on the early unexpected death (and this has long been considered a factor for deaths at ITN) and the impact his death will have on upcoming films.--Johnsemlak (talk) 15:21, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I wanna use the Walt Bellamy/Bill Sharman argument I used: he's not even the most famous actor from the series, but unlike those two whose news of their respective deaths were very largely confined to NBA media, Walker's death was covered in mainstream media in several other countries. So to deny that this isn't "news" (YADDA YADDA WE'RE NOT A NEWS SERVICE) is like denying UCI Road World Championships is news in the mainstream media. With that said, this is NOT your textbook RD. RD wasn't made for people who weren't anyone that isn't one of the three criteria -- Walker wasn't -- so RD's out of the question in this case. –HTD 15:59, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as not noteworthy and encyclopedic enough, especially as the death of internationally acclaimed director Nagisa Oshima wasn't posted. If an actor that died yesterday was to be featured on RD, Jean Kent is the better candidate. Prolog (talk) 16:14, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Does not meet the death criteria. Period, end of story. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:23, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - I find it nearly laughable to suggest Walker is not on par with Arik Einstein. Period, get it done.—John Cline (talk) 16:35, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support for RD. I am with 331 on this one.. calling it unencyclopedic doesnt make sense since it has an article which i dont think is up for deletion. Is it in the news? Yes. The death was unexpected as well. He is well known actor too. Nobody is saying put a blurb but for RD this should be good to go -- Ashish-g55 16:47, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD "Important" is not necessarily synonymous with "critically acclaimed". Teemu08 (talk) 17:33, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose does not meet criteria. SeraV (talk) 17:47, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Press Release the comments above that this is getting worldwide coverage are not very helpful. The worldwide coverage consists of 'stories' based on AP reports and photos available from prior press releases for highly marketed but not critically respected movies. It is almost like a character from Grand Theft Auto 'died'. μηδείς (talk) 18:39, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Sorry, that's rubbish. Major independent news outlets are publishing this story. Try again. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:44, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • The sloppy use of "worldwide" in this discussion isn't helpful. And if this guy had died of something boring like, say, kidney failure, this would be making far less news. It's only heading to RD if anywhere, so cause of death shouldn't matter, but it's "big" news because it was a car smash. Some objectivity here, please. HiLo48 (talk) 20:48, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support but only per the Cory Monteith precedent. SpencerT♦C 20:00, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per Spencer, the precedent has been set. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:31, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posting per the Glee precedent and suitable consensus here. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:47, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Because you are involved in this discussion and have expressed your support for this nomination, I have pulled this for now. It should be left to an uninvolved administrator to judge consensus. --Bongwarrior (talk) 21:09, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • (ec) I concede TRM has been involved with this nomination(obviously), but recently there has been a shortage of admins around(or at least uninvolved admins) to post things. 331dot (talk) 21:18, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • (edit conflict)Rambler - That's a bad faith posting, coming immediately after failing to understand that a post of mine was a response to one of yours. You should not have re-indented mine AND posted this in the same action. You took a guess, and were wrong. That invalidates the posting! And are you trying to be pointy with the Glee reference? Do you care at all about our systemic bias? Do we all now just run with the Glee precedent for deciding all future nominations? HiLo48 (talk) 21:17, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Okay everyone, slow hand clap to you all. Just waiting for User:Bongwarrior to do something pro-active rather than just whinge (like you guys). Can anyone tell me that there's no consensus to post here? Are we really going to wait another six hours for these 11 characters to be posted to the main page, despite the consensus here? Really bad call from User:Bongwarrior who suddenly declares that he'll do whatever he wants. Pathetic call and bad for Wikipedia. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:05, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posting based on consensus to post, and to support the primary goal of ITN, being to "direct readers to articles that have been substantially updated to reflect recent or current events of wide interest". Stephen 22:59, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted to RD] Tabu Ley Rochereau

Article: Tabu Ley Rochereau (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Tabu Ley Rochereau, king of Congolese rumba dies (France 24); Décès du roi de la rumba congolaise Tabu Ley Rochereau (La Libre Belgique); RDC: Tabu Ley Rochereau, monstre sacré de la rumba, est mort (Radio France); Le chanteur Tabu Ley est mort (BBC)
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Tabu Ley was an extremely culturally influential musician and one of the last figures from the "Glory Days" of African Rumba (itself a major genre) in the 1950s and 60s. He was dubbed the "King of Congolese Rumba" and was probably one of the leading figures in the Democratic Republic of Congo. His music was amazingly popular in (particularly Francophone) Africa, and was also known internationally. His death is currently circulating on all African news outlets as a major event, with his state funeral planned soon. --Brigade Piron (talk) 00:25, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I might could support this, but the article needs a little work. The worst part is it lacks a list of works and awards. It is hard to make a judgment just because someone is prolific. μηδείς (talk) 01:51, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not so sure that lists of works and awards are good - a lot of articles about popular musicians become bloated with them. And if you want evidence that he was more than just prolific, have a look at this article.[8] He played a major role in popularising Congolese rumba and was huge throughout Africa. Neljack (talk) 02:03, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose then, Neljack, because if he has no works or awards worth noting he has no notability worth ITN. μηδείς (talk) 04:28, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You misunderstand me, μηδείς. All I was saying was that lists are not necessarily the best way to cover awards and works. Certainly any important awards and works should be covered in the article. And the articles does refer to some of his songs, as well as containing a short list of awards, though I agree that it still needs more work. Neljack (talk) 04:51, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'd also just say that music "Awards" are primarily awarded in Europe and the US. Not in Africa, and certainly not in the DRC. He does have medals, if that helps? Brigade Piron (talk) 10:01, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Should be a no-brainer for Recent Deaths - he was clearly a very important figure in his field. One of Africa's most popular and celebrated musicians. Neljack (talk) 01:56, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Based on what evidence, Neljack? It's not in the article, and you've just said such evidence is not even necessary or a good thing to have. μηδείς (talk) 04:30, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
As I have explained above, I haven't said that. Regarding the evidence, please see the AFP story I linked to above and other news stories. Neljack (talk) 04:54, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Also μηδείς, have a glance at some of these articles from the Los Angeles Times about his career [1]. Brigade Piron (talk) 10:06, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
As I said, I don't oppose this per se. I just think the above cited material should be added to the article, per the ITN guidelines and as good wikipediing. μηδείς (talk) 19:08, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per Neljack. Jonno - (Wanna talk?) 07:53, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, massively influential figure in his field, not just anyone gets a state funeral. Also per Neljack. Thryduulf (talk) 11:22, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support- It is very rare for a musician in his genre to be internationally renowned. Bzweebl (talkcontribs) 15:51, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted to RD. --Tone 16:57, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

November 30

Attacks and conflicts

Arts and culture

Disasters and accidents

Sports

Mali ceasefire ended

Article: MNLA (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Following protests over the visit of Malian Prime Minister Oumar Tatam Ly, the MNLA declares an end to the ceasefire and that it would be militarize. (Post)
News source(s): [9]
Credits:

Article needs updating
Nominator's comments: After a long-running conflict and intervention a ceasefire was signed, and now it looks like war will return. As a note, we posted FARC's ceasefire talks, here there is a result. The ABOLISHMENT of the agreement. --Lihaas (talk) 20:45, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose the blurb doesn't even make sense. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:00, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This is obviously a important development in a notable conflict. Thue (talk) 21:54, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in principle. A declared end to a formal ceasefire is notable, but the current blurb is not acceptable. 331dot (talk) 23:04, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question: has violence resumed? Or is this just talk at the moment? Also, yes the blurb is terrible. Modest Genius talk 23:28, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment was the announcement of the ceasefire posted? If not, the blurb should remind it, I think. Egeymi (talk) 00:04, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
comment yes I agree the blurb sux and I was struggling with it too. Any alternative suggestions? That's what we can cdo instead of merely complaining..Lihaas (talk) 02:47, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Opppose as it stands. Seriously? One sentence? Someone needs to spank Lihaas for dishonestly claiming this article is updated. He's been here long enough to know such crap is beyond the bounds of good faith. μηδείς (talk) 19:04, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well it weas 2 sentences originally and more of an update then plenty of stuff we post (sports for eg). Anyways, you dint give a reason for support/oppose. You coiuld then just add "pending further update".Lihaas (talk) 20:23, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That's just what "oppose as it stands" does means--without further update. μηδείς (talk) 19:51, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] Junior Eurovision Song Contest

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: Junior Eurovision Song Contest 2013 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Gaia Cauchi representing Malta wins the Junior Eurovision Song Contest 2013 in Kiev with the song "The Start". (Post)
News source(s): European Broadcasting Union
Credits:

Article updated
 --BabbaQ (talk) 20:13, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose. Many countries did not participate in this contest according to the article, so I would have to wonder if this has the level of importance and/or prestige to be posted. I realize the adult contest is ITNR but this one doesn't seem to be at that level, though I am willing to be persuaded otherwise. 331dot (talk) 23:15, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'll also add that the only news source given is by the organization which sponsors the contest. 331dot (talk) 10:40, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Sorry, but a youth TV contest with little outside interest isn't significant enough. Modest Genius talk 23:27, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose not so notable and DYK has a related item. So, it would be overemphasize of an event with little significance. Egeymi (talk) 00:06, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • oppose only 12 countries participated --Երևանցի talk 01:08, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Where is this related DYK item, as I cannot find anything recent connected to Junior Eurovision. I understand that this contest relatively small compared to its senior counterpart. But from what I gather this is the first time Malta has won any EBU organized contest (whether it be Eurovision or Junior). Perhaps submitting a DYK for this fact would be a better option then a ITN segment? Wes Mᴥuse 01:23, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - I was undecided on this. But with some thought, I think we should allow our future generation share the same spotlight and news recognition as the current generation. There's so much sorrow happening in the world at the minute, that it would be nice to provide a bit of happier news, and especially giving the kids a chance to have their 5 minutes of fame. Wes Mᴥuse 03:43, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I do not know how this event was covered by Maltese media, but due to last night's event Ukrainian media hardly covered Junior Eurovision Song Contest in Kyiv (although Junior Eurovision Song Contest 2009, also held in Ukraine, was very well covered by the national media). Probably iy is worth DYK item for Maltese victory, but this is definitely not a hot news topic — NickK (talk) 04:00, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Senior version is quite enough. What other competitions' junior versions could we also double up with?--Gibson Flying V (talk) 10:09, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, previous consensus has been against youth competitions of any kind being posted. Abductive (reasoning) 16:21, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose contests like this have to have a winner by definition. That doesn't make the result itself notable. μηδείς (talk) 18:58, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: impressive page view stats for this event, even without a Main Page appearance; even the Grey Cup failed to surpass 10k views, even with the assistance of appearing in the Main Page. –HTD 19:54, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
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] Rugby League World Cup

Article: 2013 Rugby League World Cup Final (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Australia beat New Zealand 34-2 to win the 2013 Rugby League World Cup (Post)
Alternative blurb: Australia beat New Zealand 34-2 to win the 2013 Rugby League World Cup Final
News source(s): BBC
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.
Nominator's comments: ITN/R - article needs more detail on the final match itself --Bcp67 (talk) 18:07, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There's a separate article on the final at 2013 Rugby League World Cup Final. This should certainly be posted, but you're right it does need at least a few sentences of prose on the match itself. Modest Genius talk 19:09, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
2013 Rugby League World Cup Final has been updated with match summary. Genericchimera (talk) 08:16, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Have put an alternative blurb in linking to the match article. --Bcp67 (talk) 08:31, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Rugby league is a major sport in England (the country that hosted the final), Australia (the country that won the final) and New Zealand (the country that contested the final). Equivalent of, say, a World Cup final in ice hockey Hosted by Canada and contested between USA and Russia.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 09:48, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Changed the linked article to the one re the final. --Bcp67 (talk) 12:14, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • All looks good, marking [Ready]. Modest Genius talk 17:36, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • However we should use the standard ENGVAR-neutral phrasing for sporting items:

The Rugby League World Cup concludes with Australia defeating New Zealand in the final

Thank you for that - this was my first ITN nomination, apologies for not getting the phrasing quite right - thanks for sorting it out. --Bcp67 (talk) 18:52, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. That standard phrasing has been arrived at over a long period of dealing with complaints - it avoids the plural/singular issues (which annoy speakers of different versions of English), omits the score, and allows for links to both competitors, the competition and the individual game. There's no reason why you would be expected to know it! Modest Genius talk 11:45, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose can hardly support an AU vs NZ match simply because "it's on ITNR" when other matters of actual historical import like the Ukraine EU membership protests languish here for lack of attention. μηδείς (talk) 18:56, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Really epic interest. Even either of the Gaelic games in ITNR pulled bigger numbers. –HTD 19:03, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - major sporting event, ITNR. Only opposition seems POINTy --W. D. Graham 21:53, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well of course Aussie newspapers must've been pointy when most of their newspaper front pages had the NRL grand final this October while this "World Cup" was beaten by shark attacks yesterday... –HTD 12:59, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Stephen 05:08, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Pro-EU protests in Ukraine

Article: 2013 Ukraine pro-European Union protests (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Despite their demands not being met tens thousands of Ukrainians keep protesting for better European Union-Ukraine relations. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Anti-riot police forcefully break up pro-European Union protests in Kiev.
Alternative blurb (+suspension of the agreement): Following suspension of EU Association Agreement by Ukraine, anti-riot police forcefully break up pro-European Union protests in Kyiv.

News source(s): Seven News, BBC

Nominator's comments: This is big news in Europe and the article is in really good shape and being constantly updated. — Yulia Romero • Talk to me! 00:07, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's comments: breaking news related to current event, widely covered in leading European media — NickK (talk) 04:10, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that blurb by Yulia Romero is not up to date anymore: protests were broken up at 1:30 UTC — NickK (talk) 04:51, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
oppose the thai protests are more notable than this in terms of the global coverage its getting.
Although if this goes up it should also have the agreement which was nominated earlier in the blurbLihaas (talk) 18:53, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support alt blurb. Significant week-long protests, a pretty good article, and a chance to feature a long-running story which hasn't previously been posted. Modest Genius talk 19:16, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Tens of thousands marching in Kiev right now, people are calling the protest a "decisive moment" and plan a national strike. Yet it is omitted by Wikipedia editors. Strange. The situation is apparently so rapidly evolving that it is better to remain silent than change the blurb every two hours :D --Vejvančický (talk / contribs) 12:22, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment This has sufficient support to be posted, I just can't decide on the blurb. The first blurb is strange (Despite their demands not being met, people keep protesting?), police intervention is just an episode in the ongoing protests and the non-agreement was 10 days ago (though it makes sense to include it). What about "Over 100.000 people protest in Kyiv following the suspension of EU Association Agreement by Ukraine"? Some feedback on this one, please, then ready to post. --Tone 13:44, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • A better blurb was suggested by NickK (see the discussion above), but it is outdated now. I would agree with your proposal. Thank you. --Vejvančický (talk / contribs) 14:20, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, the situation is being updated daily. On 29 November people were protesting despite their demands not being met, on 30 November anti-riot policy has forcefully broken up protests, today (1 December) between 350,000 and 500,000 people are protesting in Kyiv against bascially everything... against suspension of EU Association Agreement, against use of force against demonstrators and for the resignation of the government (Kyiv Post). The first blurb was perfect as of 29 November, the alternative one was good as of 30 November, now a new one is needed. I would suggest something like Hundreds of thousands protest in largest cities of Ukraine following suspension of EU Association Agreement and forceful break up of protests in Kyiv by the police on Friday night. Please be aware that this blurb may become outdated tomorrow as well :) — NickK (talk) 14:56, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for the Kyiv Post live update link - it looks like a HUGE demonstration. Hopefully it will end up in peace. --Vejvančický (talk / contribs) 15:10, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support — With an estimated 350,000 people demonstrating in Kiev on Dec. 1, [10] this story is among those conspicuous by their absence from ITN. Sca (talk) 18:21, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support notably genuine anti-government protest with arrests in context of wider story on EU membership. μηδείς (talk) 18:54, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, large protest, especially for an arcane topic such as EU trade partnership. Abductive (reasoning) 00:18, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This should go up, it's very well updated and pretty much lacks opposition. μηδείς (talk) 00:50, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Blurb Question: Articles look good, but I'm still not sure which blurb to post (none of them are exactly great or fully correct). I was thinking about the following blurb; can someone else confirm that this is correct: Following the delay in approving an Association Agreement with the European Union by Ukraine, thousands of Ukrainians protest in favor of better pro-EU relations. Or does anyone have any better suggestions/improvements? SpencerT♦C 00:52, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think the third blurb is the most up to date: Following suspension of EU Association Agreement by Ukraine, anti-riot police forcefully break up pro-European Union protests in Kyiv. --Երևանցի talk 00:57, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
From my understanding of the article though, the Association Agreement was not in effect yet, as that blurb implies. The agreement wasn't suspended; its signing was delayed. SpencerT♦C 01:30, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The media calls it a suspension. [11] [12] [[13] Although the president has promised to sign it sometime in the near future, it's not clear if they will sign it or not. I think that's why the protests continue and grew larger after the summit. --Երևանցի talk 01:44, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. I'll just use this blurb then and it can be changed as needed. SpencerT♦C 05:14, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

November 29

Defence
Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture
  • Three previously unpublished short stories by J. D. Salinger are leaked online against the late author's wishes. (BBC)
  • Spanish channel Canal Nou cease broadcasting when the police pull the plug at 12:19 AM GMT, ending its 23 years of broadcasting.

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Politics and elections

Science and technology

[Posted] LAM Mozambique Airlines Flight 470

Article: LAM Mozambique Airlines Flight 470 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: LAM Mozambique Airlines Flight 470 crashes in Namibia, killing all 33 aboard. (Post)
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Perhaps the third deadliest aviation accident this year and reported hull loss. Brandmeistertalk 11:46, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - 34 deaths is sufficiently high enough that we should feature the accident on ITN. Mjroots (talk) 13:14, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support same reasoning. Jonno - (Wanna talk?) 14:32, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support notable event and suitable quality article. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:55, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posting. --Tone 16:43, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - notable. just for the record.--BabbaQ (talk) 20:16, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as not quite notable in number of deaths for a passenger aircraft, and with no other special circumstances given for notability. μηδείς (talk) 18:50, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

2013 Glasgow helicopter crash

Proposed image
Article: 2013 Glasgow helicopter crash (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Nine people are killed when a helicopter (pictured) crashes onto a pub in Glasgow, United Kingdom. (Post)
News source(s): BBC NBC News CNN Times of India
Credits:

Article updated
 --Mjroots (talk) 10:08, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Undecided This is a more unusual story than first glance because the crash took place in a built up area. I'd support if (sadly) the severity increases by a decent margin. Truth is, I don't know how often helicopters crash and I guess it's more comparable to light aircraft crashes which often don't make the news. I found the nomination for the last helicopter crash that I heard of (Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates/January_2013#Helicopter_crash_in_London) and that was broadly opposed. CaptRik (talk) 10:21, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I am leaning towards support now that more details are clear, but equally i'm not sure that this story and the airline crash should both be up. CaptRik (talk) 16:52, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Undecided/Wait, but this is already a little different than the prior London crash, as this was a police helicopter that apparently landed on top of a crowded pub, in which there seems to have been many casualties(more than the London crash). 331dot (talk) 10:54, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, very unusual and sad, but still rather a local incident. --Vejvančický (talk / contribs) 12:20, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, unusual incident and huge coverage in UK, but even if fatalities are in the upper estimate of what's being reported it remains globally a fairly minor story. yorkshiresky (talk) 14:37, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Info - Police press conference on Sky News now states 8 fatalities. Mjroots (talk) 16:01, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support we posted the helicopter crash in London this is similar, with more fatalities and the sad juxtaposition of a police helicopter and a busy pub. Notable. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:32, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't look like we posted the London one, per the discussion linked above (I'm not sure if there's a better way to check?). CaptRik (talk) 16:52, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yup. My mistake, there was an urgency to delete it in fact... The Rambling Man (talk) 16:58, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, but perhaps combine with the other major air crash that is in the news. "In aviation, a Mozambique jetliner crash kills 34, and a helicopter falls into a Glasgow pub, killing 8." Jehochman Talk 17:41, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - if combined with the Mozambique crash.--BabbaQ (talk) 17:46, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Jehochman's combined blurb idea. I'd probably also support it separately; police helicopters don't often crash into crowded buildings. I think we sometimes get too hung up on death tolls. Espresso Addict (talk) 18:15, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Support Rare accident, high death toll (for the particular area/incident type). Comments have been made by Scotland's first minister and the UK prime minister, and the Queen. However, the accident in the grand scheme of things is relatively small.--Somchai Sun (talk) 18:20, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
strongest possible oppose I was coming here to ask why someone hasnt created this page. Please answer what possible encypaedic worth does this have? Letys clarify that this is not a social media news sitem, nor is it wikinews, it is wikipedia "the free encyclopaedia"Lihaas (talk) 18:51, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hey? You ask why someone hasn't created the page then say "letys [sic] clarify this is not a social media news sitem [sic]". What are you trying to say? Can you please try to write in English? The Rambling Man (talk) 20:53, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I must say I am too at total loss regarding the point of the above rant by User:Lihaas. --hydrox (talk) 02:57, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It is hilarious to see news sites across the world leading with this story and the great and the good of wikipedia are debating whether it is worth a mention --nonsense ferret 23:10, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to ITN! Just wait until the US wakes up!! The Rambling Man (talk) 23:13, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
heehee, it is pure pantomime so I guess it is the right season for it. --nonsense ferret 23:16, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - now that the death toll has tragically increased to eight, it's on the front page of most international news outlets. Jamesx12345 21:57, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - The death toll is high and has been on the news and getting attention. Miszatomic (talk) 22:04, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose. We wouldn't post this if it had happened in Gdansk. Formerip (talk) 22:20, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Prove it. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:25, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • (to formerIP) I don't think that's true if we can post a supermarket collapse in Latvia(or its effects like a resignation). But, much like TRM implied, I await your nomination of such an event to prove it. 331dot (talk) 22:59, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
          • You know very well that my pilot's licence got revoked after that time I tried to prove we wouldn't have posted 9/11 if it happened in Helsinki. Formerip (talk) 23:26, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • It absolutely is true. The two deadlier helicopter crashes were not even seriously considered for ITN. -LtNOWIS (talk) 23:04, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
          • You're entirely missing the point of the context of the crash. But never mind. The Rambling Man (talk) 23:06, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
            • Comment - Articles can't be considered if editors don't nominate them. No nomination = no posting, simples. Mjroots (talk) 23:22, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Getting a lot of international coverage. Paul MacDermott (talk) 22:32, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support combined blurb per Jehochman. 331dot (talk) 22:59, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Death toll is not high enough for an air crash. -LtNOWIS (talk) 23:04, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Where is the "death toll criterion" please? The Rambling Man (talk) 23:06, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Death toll is extremely relevant to the second criterion, significance of the event.-LtNOWIS (talk) 00:33, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • But it is not the be-all-end-all. Death toll is just one of many factors(which can include location, level of news coverage, reaction from prominent people, etc.). I don't mean to criticize your reason for opposing this, just FYI. 331dot (talk) 01:13, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral on whether or not this is posted. My gut instinct is no, but there does seem to be an emerging consensus to post this, and it is a somewhat unusual incident. However, I beg of you, can we please not merge this blurb with the completely unrelated Mozambique crash? They have absolutely nothing to do with one another, other than occurring on the same day and involving things that fly. We don't have so many successful nominations that we suddenly need to start conserving space on the template. --Bongwarrior (talk) 23:29, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That seems to be the rationale for combining them (same day and things that fly). That's not enough? I don't think it's a matter of saving space so much as not bogging down ITN with the same subject matter. 331dot (talk) 23:40, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Why not also combine it with the Latvia story, since both involve a roof collapsing? Formerip (talk) 23:50, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Both, however, did not involve helicopters crashing on them. Two aircraft crashing is, well, two aircraft crashing. We don't yet know what caused the supermarket roof collapse- and it was also the largest death toll for an incident in Latvia since 1950. 331dot (talk) 00:00, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm opposed to posting this, but iff it does go up, it should be a separate blurb. There's no justification for combining them. Actually I didn't see anyone make a serious suggestion to do so... Modest Genius talk 01:41, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Jehochman did above on 17:41, 30 November 2013(and was also commended for having a fresh viewpoint). 331dot (talk) 02:00, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support separate blurb as-is Happened in an Anglophone country. Lowers the bar enough. Might or might not have been nominated and/or posted had it happened somewhere else, but I don't find that terribly relevant, as the ITN section is for items that are of particular interest to our readers. --hydrox (talk) 02:57, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Modest Genius. Contra hydrox, we should certainly not be exacerbating systemic bias by favouring items that occur in Anglophone countries. Neljack (talk) 05:30, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • We shouldn't fight systemic bias by reducing stories that are posted from such countries, but by working to post more stories from elsewhere. 331dot (talk) 10:43, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • To quote, the primary purpose of the ITN is "to help readers find and quickly access content they are likely to be searching for because an item is in the news." So considering that this happened in an Anglophone country and this is the English-language Wikipedia after all, it's likely that users might be searching for this article, right? Systematic bias is more of a content issue. --hydrox (talk) 20:12, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, posting this would be inconsistent with the not-posting of the bus crashes etc in Russia and China. Abductive (reasoning) 08:10, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Apples and oranges. A bus crash is not a helicopter crash; buses crash much more frequently than helicopters crashing on crowded pubs. 331dot (talk) 10:41, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Under the general heading of transport accident----------------not different. Abductive (reasoning) 16:22, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong support. Police helicopters typically don't crash. Helicopters typically don't crash into buildings. Aircraft typically don't crash in the centre of major cities. The last point alone makes this a very significant news item, and it would be news wherever in the world it happened so systematic bias isn't relevant here. Thryduulf (talk) 11:30, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Marking as ready - There seems to be sufficient consensus to post. As I'm the nominator, I'll allow another admin to review and decide if I've read the consensus correctly. Mjroots (talk) 11:51, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I count ten opposes and twelve supports of some sort. But with the waits and neutrals included there is certainly not a consensus to publish. μηδείς (talk) 18:32, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure I see the need for this sort of soul searching - ITN exists amongst other things to help readers find and quickly access content they are likely to be searching for because an item is in the news - we are not responsible for why the newscasters make the choices they do - ours is simply to follow what they decide to report on, not to right their wrongs. This item has been highly covered in news across the world. Readers are clearly looking for it - more than 12000 page views. It seems pretty simple. It is unquestionably encyclopedic, there will definitely be a page or two written into the history of the country to remember the dark day a police helicopter crash landed on a concert venue full of people. Really why won't that do? --nonsense ferret 22:52, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You'll forgive me if I fail to see how replacing anti-Scottish English bigotry with anti-American English bigotry is an improvement, or why I should alter a quote in the first place whose relevance is clear to anyone with the reading comprehension of a 12-year-old. Fight it out amongst yourselves if this is somehow some sort of Brit-thang. μηδείς (talk) 04:24, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
ITN has never been about proportionally matching coverage of news topics in the world; wide coverage is a necessity for inclusion at ITN, but having wide coverage does not demand being in ITN. And this is more a case because it's happening on BBC's home turf, and they have many multi-national arms to other countries, it is getting wide coverage de facto. --MASEM (t) 22:56, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Other news outlets still make the decision whether or not to run the story, it is not automatic. They run stories that they think their readers will be interested in. Wide coverage is certainly not the be-all-end-all reason to post a story, but it is an indication that it is of interest in many areas and/or that people might see it in the news and come here to learn about it. If that's not the case, then ITN should really be renamed to something else. 331dot (talk) 23:02, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
there's no requirement for us to second-guess why the international news agencies have covered this story so widely - merely we have to take into account that they did. Everything else is just gravy. --nonsense ferret 23:47, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
We're not second-guessing other news sources, we're being selectivity for what we include in an encyclopedia, stories that are going to have a larger influence on the world at large to meet WP:NOT#NEWS and WP:NEVENT. No one has said, for example, this crash is a non-story. People died, its a major news story. But it's also just an accident, a blip on the broader knowledge of mankind. Hence we should not be considering this type of story for ITN. --MASEM (t) 00:04, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Confusing two separate questions there. Those are guidelines for notability, and question whether an article should be in the encyclopedia or not. This event clearly is notable without question, as evidenced by the global, in-depth interest in the event. The question is, given it is notable, is it in the news so people will be likely looking for it? --nonsense ferret 00:15, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Given the vast array of evidence presented that this is (a) in the news, (b) an encyclopaedic event, (c) an event that we have an article about, (d) an event that people are looking for our article on, and (e) an event that has an article with no cleanup or missing references tags, it seems to be exactly the sort of event that ITN is for. If people don't want to post good quality articles about events that are in the news on ITN then the purpose and scope of ITN needs to be redefined. Thryduulf (talk) 09:25, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

November 28

Armed Conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and Technology

Comet ISON does something

Article: C/2012 S1 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Sungrazing comet ISON makes its closest approach to the Sun (Post)
Alternative blurb: Sungrazing comet ISON is destroyed during its closest approach to the Sun
News source(s): (BBC News)
Credits:
Nominator's comments: This is getting quite a large amount of attention and in a few hours the long range comet will reach perihelion. Now obviously it could get chewed up by the Sun, but there is a decent chance it will make it alive. The comet is being called "Comet of the Century" and compared to the great comet of 1680 as it is very rare comet in terms of its origins, its tail, its orbit etc etc. We post Solar eclipses and in my opinion this event is a lot rarer and much more suitable for ITN in terms of encyclopedic content. Also its got a decent article. Please adjust the blurb... Also the event will be captured by SDO for those that care. ---- Ashish-g55 15:34, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Tentative support, depending on the outcome. Falling appart will be a less attractive outcome than making it around the Sun. --Tone 15:45, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I wish we could somehow post the SDO link so people can watch the outcome Live! Its amazing that there is technology out there that can show us these things as it happens -- Ashish-g55 15:50, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Support Numerous comets are floating around in space, but being called the comet of the centuary makes it quite distinctive. As per Tone, subject to the outcomes, my vote patterns would change. Regards, theTigerKing  16:00, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Appears to be of scientific significance. --bender235 (talk) 16:03, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - fpr ITN. scientific significance.--BabbaQ (talk) 18:10, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, whatever the outcome. Appears a rare and interesting event. Has certainly been getting substantial press coverage. We should probably post an image. Espresso Addict (talk) 18:21, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Posting now for the benefit of the live link. The sort of thing that's perfect for an encyclopedia and will be of interest even if it breaks up. μηδείς (talk) 18:30, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is the live link working yet? I can't view any videos but I'm notoriously technically incompetent. Espresso Addict (talk) 18:33, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are various links you can find on line (just google ison live) the flyby is for the next two hours. The link I was watching had a British astronomer talking, since presumably the comet's on the other side of the sun now. μηδείς (talk) 18:37, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait. What we have here is:
  • Headline: "Comet of the century"
  • Paragraph 16: "Whether it really will be a comet of the century is unclear"
Formerip (talk) 18:35, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Bang, and the comet was gone. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:17, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Doesn't meet our usual criteria for comets: 'clearly visible by naked eye even to those who weren't specifically looking for it' (see WP:ITNR#Celestial_events and the several ITN/C discussions on comets referenced there). Essentially this was a case of 'it might be huge!' that turned out to be a damp squib. It disintegrated without ever being visible to anyone who wasn't already looking for it. Although it has been widely covered on social media, scientifically there isn't anything very special about it. I'm willing to reassess if the situation changes, but right now it's not significant enough. The 'comet of the century' label was wildly inappropriate hyperbole that now looks silly. Modest Genius talk 01:14, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There seems to be a bit of speculation as to whether it survived. SDO could not see it but seems like some portion of it made it around the sun as seen by SOHO. So still dont know if it got destroyed or some part of it is still alive -- Ashish-g55 18:49, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, it may have survived, but in much-reduced form. Modest Genius talk 16:09, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Now I would support posting if it becomes visible to a naked eye. --Tone 18:53, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comet Lovejoy is already visible to the naked eye, and has been for several weeks. Unless you know where to look, you'd never know. I don't think that's a sensible cut-off, even if ISON does make it. Modest Genius talk 16:06, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, if you have a source confirming that. μηδείς (talk) 21:49, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support original, strong oppose alternative - as it appears to have survived, at least partly. Simply south...... cooking letters for just 7 years 21:58, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose nothing to see here, Modest Genius makes a reasonable explanation as to why this is simply not that big a deal. Damp squib seems to fit the bill. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:42, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Usual Suspects oppose this on the grounds that this is simply not a big deal, but of course it is, being a sungrazer that just travelled a light year over 1 million years, becoming one of the brightest and earliest detected new comets. It's had huge news coverage and huge reader interest. This is the perfect place to have come to look for info on it above the tabloid pablum--perfect except for the usual naysayers who keep this off the front page. Yes, there's a huge satisfaction had in saying no, and showing how above it all one is compared to everyone else. It's not a good reason to oppose a nomination like this. μηδείς (talk) 02:40, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hardly lived up to the billing, but nice whinge. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:54, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • The Usual Suspects cry systemic bias on anything that happens within the atmosphere outside of Asia, yet are systemically biased towards documenting anything that comes within 1 AU of Earth. —WFCFL wishlist 20:49, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The sun is hot enough to melt ice... is not a news story in and of itself. It needs a bit of selling. —WFCFL wishlist 20:49, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

New Chief of Army Staff of Pakistan Army appointed

Article: Raheel Sharif (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Raheel Sharif is appointed as the new Chief of Army Staff of the Pakistan Army (Post)
News source(s): The Express Tribune
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: The COAS is the top slot in the Pakistan Army and has historically been a very influential position in Pakistan, both in terms of military history and politics. Sharif is due to replace Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, who was ranked as the world's 28th most powerful man by Forbes in 2012. --Mar4d (talk) 03:22, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Oppose As per 331dot. Posting this, does not mean that we stop posting ITNRs (appointment of President/PM of Pakistan). The army chief had been historically (since independence) an influential position in Pakistan (we never posted in the past in ITN), and most likely would continue to be (we should not post it in ITN in the future). The article should be posted only if it is Encyclopediac enough and not just on notability terms (The event would garner headlines around the world as Army chief of Pakistan is as important as PM/President of Pakistan in decision making). We do not consider ,as a valid argument, posting 1st or 28th "World's most powerful person of XXXX year" as rated by several magazines annually.Regards, theTigerKing  16:06, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Latvian Prime Minister announces resignation

Article: Valdis Dombrovskis (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Latvian Prime Minister Valdis Dombrovskis resigns following the Riga supermarket roof collapse. (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: We often post every fall of a government and the reason in this case is relatively unusual. The story with the roof collapse was posted few days ago, but this is a different one resulting from it. --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 00:30, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
oppose 1. we just posted the fire (who would have though that would be landmark? (tinpot lil country) 2. we actually don't post most falls of government. This is not exceptional as we posted that recently.Lihaas (talk) 01:31, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Excuse me? "Tinpot lil country"? Who made you the judge of that? AlexTiefling (talk) 01:52, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
support The resignation of a head of state/government of any sovereign nation should be borderline ITNR and is definitely the sort of material that ITN seems to routinely cover, and more importantly than anything, the target article, while a bit short, contains no obvious problems.--Jayron32 03:36, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support surprised this took so long, an obvious update of the roof collapse blurb. μηδείς (talk) 03:31, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. The unexpected resignation of a head of government due to a scandal/incompetence/mismanagement is notable enough for ITN. 331dot (talk) 03:34, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. This seems a surprising development, potentially of interest to readers who followed the supermarket collapse story. Espresso Addict (talk) 03:53, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • support didn't see that coming. Seems very newsworthy to me. --Երևանցի talk 03:59, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posting. --Tone 12:33, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

November 27

Attacks and conflicts

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime
  • Three girls (two of whom eventually fled to a neighbor's house to escape their knife-wielding stepfather and notified police) held captive for several months or more in extremely dirty conditions (possibly up to two years), subjected to long barrages of loud music or static, fed only once a day and having gone up to four months without a bath, are rescued in Tucson, Arizona. (CNN)

Politics and elections

Science and Technology
  • Japan's self-driving Nissan Leaf car finishes the very first public road test on a highway in Japan. (Engadget)


Silvio Berlusconi expelled from parliament

Article: Silvio Berlusconi (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Former Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi is expelled from the Italian Parliament following a conviction for tax fraud. (Post)
News source(s): Reuters
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: While Berlusconi has been prosecuted plenty of times before, he usually gets off due to appeals, expiry, or because he changed the law to make him immune (really!). For a long time, it looked like his political influence would save his seat in parliament this time too, since he was threathening to bring down the government. This actual follow-through consequence is unusual and therefore notable. Thue (talk) 18:13, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose just another shameful chapter in the recent political history of Italy. Nothing really to report.... The Rambling Man (talk) 18:28, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I think we'd be posting because of his celebrity status rather than because of a really significant news story here. Could argue that the Latvian Prime Minister resigning on the same day is a bigger story. CaptRik (talk) 19:22, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Actually, that's far more important than tat surrounding Silvio. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:29, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • He is the very recently former President of Italy, and a (still) hugely powerful politician and media mogul. That is not just being being a celebrity!?! I am a bit at a loss at how anybody can not find this item notable. Thue (talk) 20:09, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Meh. He has been posted (I think) three times in the past year, roughly, and once or twice before that. We posted the really big stories; this one is but a ripple. --Bongwarrior (talk) 20:37, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Berlusconi was Prime Minister of Italy, not President. I have amended the blurb to reflect that. Neljack (talk) 21:22, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This is significant news, given that Berlusconi has escaped this fate on so many other occasions and that it is likely to cause further political instability in a country that is in a fragile economic position. Neljack (talk) 21:27, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • But what does the expulsion of one person mean to anyone other than the individual? It's not going to change anything. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:32, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose we already posted his August 2013 conviction. Per the article, this is a continuation of the same process, that also included a ban from public office for two years. --hydrox (talk) 22:33, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • oppose per The Rambling Man --Երևանցի talk 22:35, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
support sitting/former rime mnister getting booted out of parliament (not just office) is highly notable...and more than Latvia.Lihaas (talk) 01:28, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. We posted his conviction, as pointed out by others. Any other punishment is just gravy. 331dot (talk) 03:25, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question How often do legislatures expel -- by voting -- its members? –HTD 09:12, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not often, for sure, but this was not unexpected as a result of his conviction. 331dot (talk) 12:37, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Then the question is, how often legislators are convicted while in office, and does the rule in this case tell the legislature to expel the member once s/he's convicted no matter what or it's upon the discretion of the majority if they're expelling people. –HTD 13:49, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • It was not expected 100%. He avoided being expelled for some time by threatening to make the government fall. Thue (talk) 14:35, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

German coalition agreed

Article: German federal election, 2013 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Germany’s two largest political parties, the Conservatives and Social Democrats, conclude five weeks of negotiations by agreeing to form a “Grand Coalition" government that will introduce a national minimum wage of €8.50 ($11.55, £7.11) in 2015. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Following the German federal election on 22 September, CDU/CSU and SPD form a "grand coalition" government.
News source(s): BBC [14], Spiegel [15]
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Deal also includes “no new taxes” pledge; must be OK'd by SPD members in a poll Dec. 6. Sca (talk) 15:48, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This is big news for Europe. I'm not sure the detail about the minimum wage is appropriate, though - there was lots of guff in the coalition agreement, IIRC. GoldenRing (talk) 16:37, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There are some exceptions but they're supposed to go away by 2017. This would be Germany's first-ever national minimum wage — in itself a political milestone. (That's milestone, not millstone — ha.) Sca (talk) 16:51, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, German politics are important. I added an altblurb. Thue (talk) 16:59, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Is what's notable here the creation of the coalition, or the minimum wage? Hasn't it been known since the election in September that there would be a coalition and it was just a matter of working out the details? If it's the minimum wage then the blurb should focus on that. 331dot (talk) 17:14, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • It wasn't completely clear that this is the coalition that would form. IMO we should wait to post the minimum wage when it passes. Thue (talk) 17:17, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Thanks; I'll support the altblurb then. 331dot (talk) 17:21, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It really should include the amount of time the negotiations took, though — it's been over two months since the election. Sca (talk) 17:35, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Adding date of the election to the alt blurb. 331dot (talk) 17:38, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That doesn't spell out that talks w/SPD took five weeks, though. Sca (talk) 18:46, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
PS: NYT story says "The accord ... will introduce Germany’s first minimum wage..." (my emphasis). [16] Sca (talk) 18:56, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. This is largely of national importance, and as matter of fact, nothing has been decided yet: The leaders of these three parties have committed themselves to form a coalition government, but (in the SPD's case), there will be a referendum among all 400,000+ party members during the next weeks (the result will be known only by 15 December). If a majority votes against the proposed coalition treaty, the whole thing will be scrapped. The bit about the minimum wage is also not that important to be showcased on the Wikipedia front page (true, Germany is currently one of only a few Western states without one, but that lack is somewhat balanced by the highly developed welfare system and strong unions and works councils). And again, it's currently only a mere committment. If you really want an item for ITN, then you might want to wait for December 17: On this day, the Bundestag will (that is, must) elect a chancellor, regardless of what will happen until then (but there does not seem to be a snowball's chance in hell that the current one won't be re-elected).--FoxyOrange (talk) 19:13, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The CDUU/CSU & SPD have agreed to the minimum wage in writing — it's a done deal politically speaking — and their coalition will have an overwhelming majority in the Bundestag. Since the minimum wage was the SPD's primary condition for joining a Merkel-led gov't., it's highly unlikely that its rank and file will vote against the deal.
Disagree that it's merely a national story, since Germany is the acknowledged economic and de facto political leader of the EU. Sca (talk) 20:57, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Objections relating to an event being from a single country are not valid (see "Please do not.." section above).331dot (talk) 03:37, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: this should wait until after Chancellor Merkel and her cabinet are sworn into office. --bender235 (talk) 20:13, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Then let's change the category title from In the news to In the history books. Sca (talk) 21:03, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
May I remind you that Wikipedia is not a news publication? By no means we're in a hurry to publish this information in realtime. --bender235 (talk) 22:06, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, sorry, I forgot ... wake me up next year ... and let me know what happened last year ... ZZZZzzzzzzz.... Sca (talk) 00:27, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
We do not post inaugurations/swearing in-s, we post the results of elections when they happen, which in this case is now. 331dot (talk) 03:37, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The election was two months ago, and we did post it. --bender235 (talk) 14:05, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've made a small tweak to the blurb - changing "minimum national wage" to "national minimum wage," which is the more usual and idiomatic term. Neljack (talk) 21:31, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
support ALT blurb highly notable country and long negotations. Plus we posted aus, can, uk more than once. The grand coalition makes it more notable as all legislation will pass. Markets much be rocking
wait according to the article it will be approved.rejected 6 dec. and per the popularity of the last grand coalition on the SPD that's quite an ifLihaas (talk) 01:25, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
PPS: BBC day-after story says, "Angela Merkel will return as German chancellor for a third term under a coalition deal hammered out with her old Social Democrat (SPD) opponents" (my emphasis). [17] Sca (talk) 15:22, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted to RD] Arik Einstein

Article: Arik Einstein (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC News, Ynet, Yahoo
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Considered one of the best Israeli singers in Israel history, called the godfather of Israeli rock, published in dozen of websites outside Israel and dozens more in Israel. the Israel gov'nt including the PM and President also published statements about his death. 
  – HonorTheKing (talk) 12:48, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Seems to be an important figure in his field. Taylor Trescott - my talk + my edits 13:34, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Unsure. On the one hand, he seems to be almost at the top of the tree in terms of Israeli rock singers. But is that too narrow as a field? Is it fair to say that there are a lot of more significant rock musicians that we would reject for RD? Formerip (talk) 15:14, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I'm only aware he exists because his death is, well, In The News. But he does seem to be pretty huge in Israel and we do publish stories that are country-specific (or so the blurb at the top says) GoldenRing (talk) 16:35, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This seems to be of significant interest. Both the Prime Minister and President of Israel gave remarks on his passing, and RS citations call him "the father of Israeli rock". Teemu08 (talk) 16:43, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support given the reaction to his death; clearly he was notable in his field. 331dot (talk) 17:11, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support once again, a decent shout for the few characters that RD will allow. Please, somebody, sort the references out, they're a complete mess, but otherwise good to go. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:26, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted to RD Stephen 22:06, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Bay Psalm Book

Article: Bay Psalm Book (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A 1640 copy of the Bay Psalm Book sells for $14.2 million at auction, becoming the most expensive printed book in history. (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Making headlines worldwide. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:16, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, when updated. I'd been wondering about nominating this. Besides being interesting in its own right, this cluster of auction records forms an interesting reflection of the current economic climate. The article is in decent shape and probably doesn't want a disproportionate update on this sale of a single copy, though a little more referencing in the appropriate section would be useful, both of the new record and of the old auction prices. Espresso Addict (talk) 10:48, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Excellent, thanks. We might mention the 1640 date in the blurb. Espresso Addict (talk) 12:00, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support A very notable auction of a 350 year old book.--Johnsemlak (talk) 11:48, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Minority topic + consistency with the art record postings.Lihaas (talk) 12:08, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, Making headlines, record price. 331dot (talk) 12:18, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Culturally significant story to anyone on the globe. CaptRik (talk) 19:28, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted with a slightly terser blurb based on the article's wording. Stephen 22:00, 27 November 2013 (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, and facilitates the archiving process.

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