October 2, 2013 (2013-10-02) (Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
- Iraqi insurgency (post-U.S. withdrawal):
- Gunmen shoot down a military helicopter in northern Iraq killing all four crew members. (Reuters)
- The Russian embassy in Libya's capital Tripoli came under fire after an attempted attack by gunmen who tried to force their way into the compound. One of the attackers was killed and four others were injured according to Libyan authorities. (Reuters)
Arts and culture
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
RD: Tom Clancy
Nominator's comments: Someone clearly notable in the field of writing. Well-known best seller and recognized for his work. Article has been updated with basic death info but might need more details. --331dot (talk) 14:52, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support One of the most well-known in his field. Ryan Vesey 14:58, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support, along with John le Carré and Ian Fleming, one of the biggest names in spy novelists. Also, died at 66, which is rather young. Abductive (reasoning) 15:04, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support but think he should get an actual blurb. Best selling novel of the 1980s, one of the authors to have first print of book exceed 2 millions, 4 box off successes based on his numerous books, tv series, co-owner of the Baltimore Orioles Major League Baseball team.50.201.228.200 (talk) 15:06, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- At this point we don't even know what he died from. Abductive (reasoning) 15:09, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Why would knowing cause of death be needed? The blurb could be something along the lines of "Tom Clancy the author of numerous books, movies, and co-owner of the Baltimore Orioles dies at the age of 66" Or "Tom Clancy the author of numerous books and movies including 'The Hunt For Red October,' 'Patriot Games,' 'Clear and Present Danger' died at a Baltimore area hospital."38.100.76.235 (talk) 15:57, 2 October 2013 (UTC){Full disclosure: I am the author of both comments by the IPs, it seems to change from moment to moment.}50.201.228.200 (talk) 17:12, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Very important in his field. Might even deserve a full blurb. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 15:17, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- support blurb One of the few writers that deserve it. Known worldwide and made more famous by the chain of video games like Ghost recon and Splinter Cell and many movies as well. I would put him up there with Stan Lee (ok maybe a step below) but i think he deserves a blurb. -- Ashish-g55 15:22, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support RD (only) as above, but the bar for blurbs (blurps?) is very high - this is an obituary item. --LukeSurl t c 15:51, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support RD, oppose blurb ('blurp' isn't a word). Significant and well-known author, so suitable for an RD listing, but the death itself does not have the impact required for a full blurb. Modest Genius talk 16:07, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support RD obviously notable enough for RD. As for a blurb, as much as I personally would like to see it happen, my wiki- conscious is saying no...--Somchai Sun (talk) 16:28, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support RD Per others; only really because the bar for the a blurb is high. Miyagawa (talk) 16:57, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose full blurp, that's only necessary if he means of death itself was notable, like a ricin poisoning--otherwise obvious top of field for RD. μηδείς (talk) 16:59, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
October 1
|
|
October 1, 2013 (2013-10-01) (Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
International relations
Politics and elections
Business and Video games
Law and crime
International relations
|
|
September 30, 2013 (2013-09-30) (Monday)
Armed conflict and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
[Posted] United States federal government shutdown of 2013
Nominator's comments: Ok, ok, ok, this hasn't actually happened yet, but it's possibly a few hours away. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:08, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The 1994 shutdown was called a shutdown, all the American sources refer to this as a shutdown. The Democrats and Republicans call it a shutdown. Is there some reason why we should not call it a shutdown beside your spellchecker? μηδείς (talk) 21:50, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- President Obama also called it a shutdown about an hour ago. 331dot (talk) 22:16, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Call it a shutdown if you must, although my spell checker problem suggests that it's not a good word for a global encyclopaedia. More importantly, tell the world what it means. Do you really think it's obvious to someone not hearing the daily news inside America? Simply, WHAT would be shut down? Prisons? The Military? Unemployment services? Tax collection? (Woohoo!), Etc? HiLo48 (talk) 22:21, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Everything not vital to public safety or national defense will be shut down- and even they won't get paid until the shutdown is over. Federal museums(Smithsonian), National Parks/Monuments/Etc., passport processing, National Archives, etc. etc. 331dot (talk) 22:27, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you. I understand better now. So how about we amend the blurb to "Non-vital government services are shut down in the US after the Senate rejects a House of Representatives budget bill."? HiLo48 (talk) 22:35, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't oppose that blurb, but I think the nominated blurb would be better, as details about the shutdown would (I assume) be in the article. 331dot (talk) 22:50, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Perhaps: Much of the United States Federal..." 2.102.187.114 (talk) 00:27, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, we must do better than a simple "shutdown". I can't understand any objection. "Much of" is OK, but not very precise. 331dot explained the situation above pretty well by using the words "not vital". That at least gives an indication of what kinds of services are being shut down. Not qualifying "shutdown" at all would be very sloppy. HiLo48 (talk) 02:48, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't object per se, just feel its not necessary. To clarify my explanation, a bill was passed to pay members of the military only, so they will still get paid. 331dot (talk) 10:20, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Surely it's bloody obvious. HiLo48 (talk) 02:48, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- No, it isn't obvious, and it isn't neutral. The suggested blurb places blame on the Senate, when technically it appears the House will fail to pass the re-amended bill sent back to it by midnight EDT. (And various partisan analyses place blame on one side or the other, e.g. blaming the House for not passing a "clean" bill, or blaming the Senate since budget bills must originate in the House.) A better wording would be something like "Non-essential government services are shut down in the U.S. after the House of Representatives and Senate fail to agree on a budget bill." Of course, it's way too early to post this in any case. Odg2vcLR (talk) 03:02, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose At the time of typing this comment, an article has not been created for the subject. As Tóraí noted earlier, "ITN is not here to report the news. ITN is here to highlight content. No content. No ITN." Gfcvoice (talk) 03:05, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose The article for the subject has only just been created and only contains a few sentences. Also it is still only 11.19pm on 30 September on the east coast of the US, and nothing much has happened as yet. I suggest we wait for at least 24 hours before considering this as an ITN candidate. Gfcvoice (talk) 03:18, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Agree with HiLo48 that the blurb needs to consider non-US audiences and provide a better explanation of what a "shutdown" is. Gfcvoice (talk) 03:05, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Seriously support - it's the #1 trending story in Twitter worldwide, you hit Google News, it's almost every article on the page. It's got a rapidly developing article, it should be ITN -- Tawker (talk) 04:15, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support - Much of the opposition was because there was no article and it was before deadline. There is now an article and it's after the deadline. I suggest we fast-track this. People come to Wikipedia for the latest info. Why are we delayting 12-24 hours for no good reason? BE BOLD. Don't be Nupedia. -- Fuzheado | Talk 04:19, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support - First shutdown of a sovereign country's government's executive functions in 17 years. Certainly newsworthy. Harej (talk) 04:21, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I also support fast-tracking this to put it on the main page as soon as possible. Harej (talk) 04:22, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support upon condition that the article gets some more beef. Background from the United States debt-ceiling debate of 2013 and related articles should make for something meaty. --Natural RX 04:25, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Update is still insufficient. The way to have something "fast-tracked" is to expand the article to meet the update criterion. In this case, that may mean expanding the article to include more information about what the shutdown means; readers not intimately familiar with U.S. politics would not have a good idea of what this shutdown means by looking at the article. -- tariqabjotu 04:30, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The article has five paragraphs and 10 references. It's clearly substantial and worthy of highlighting, and abides by the guidelines you mention. -- Fuzheado | Talk 05:03, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- This is what the article looked like at the time of posting, which is definitely not enough. One could barely even discern what Congress's role was in the affair. There's no rush, and your insistence that this is in the news so it must be added now, immediately, is misplaced. All breaking news stories are expected to fulfill update criteria first -- as ITN is not meant to be a news source -- and this story is no different. -- tariqabjotu 05:23, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Posted I believe that there is consensus that this is worthy of In the News, and I do not believe that "not now" is a sufficient reason to not post it. Keegan (talk) 04:50, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- @Keegan: I give up. Did you even read the two comments just prior to yours? -- tariqabjotu 04:53, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I did, and I don't consider that the article needs beefing up to trump its' importance. The article covers the topic and is sourced; I am quite confident that it will be expanded rather rapidly. I know that there is no deadline, but why wait other than to make sure that there is a wonderful piece of prose to show off? As I recall, this is Wikipedia we're running here. It's always a work in progress. Keegan (talk) 05:08, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- We are not a news source, so, yes, "a wonderful piece of prose" is desirable (minus any sarcasm intended). And, let me just say, this will feed into the impression that ITN suffers from a systemic U.S. bias. This story will have no discernible effect for several more hours; I can't imagine any reason why this needs to be posted now. By comparison, the Westgate shopping mall shooting was posted seven hours after it began, largely because the article took a bit of time to get up to snuff. Especially because it would have taken no more than half an hour to bring the article up to the required standard (with all the information, background and prospective, out there), there is nothing special here. -- tariqabjotu 05:23, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- And your very welcome for that. Praise from you. WOW! im in 7th heaven ;)Lihaas (talk) 14:42, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Systemic U.S. bias? Yes, obviously, blatantly. And the fact that some can't see it just proves it. I've been behind a couple of significant Australian items recently. They failed because of poor articles. I was very busy at the time and unable to put in the necessary work, and there aren't enough other Australian players here. I supported this all the way for ONCE IT WAS READY, but posting it when it was posted just proves our systemic bias. Some people here just don't pay attention, or just don't care. HiLo48 (talk) 06:06, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The way to address that is for you to go out and get your fellow Australians on Wikipedia, work on articles, and persuade others to support them, not to restrict what else is posted. 331dot (talk) 09:06, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- No, it's absolutely not, because that would be pushing the rules on canvassing, and POV, and several other Wikipedia sins. Everyone should care about articles from EVERY country. We shouldn't be specifically pushing those from our own country. YOU should care about Australian stories, and Irish ones, and Moroccan ones, just as much if not more than you care about stories from your own country. That's one of the major issues here. Too many discussions are no more than popularity polls. HiLo48 (talk) 09:52, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- There is a difference between lobbying for support for an issue on Wikipedia and encouraging people on the street to come and take a look around and maybe make a few edits to Wikipedia, without encouraging them to support or oppose anything in particular. I don't care about stories from the US in particular and am willing to support any story regardless of location (you don't have to believe me, examine my edit history), I care about stories that are covered in the news in at least a few locations around the world, and I treat all such stories equally. It is precisely because of my belief in equal treatment that I oppose efforts to restrict stories just because they are from a nation with a good chunk of Wikipedia editors and somehow give favoritism to stories that aren't. 331dot (talk) 10:12, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- To clarify, I am not suggesting this be removed from ITN now, but the eagerness to post poor-quality articles under the idea that "that's all there is to say" or "it'll get updated once it's on the Main Page" or "this is really important" undermines the mission (or at the least the original mission) of ITN, which is to highlight decent-quality content. ITN already has the lowest quality standards of the Main Page sections; we don't need to begin undercutting them, especially when -- in the process -- we reflect a systemic bias. -- tariqabjotu 05:30, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Sob. Actually, Featured Pictures is by far the worst part of the main page, frequently bold-linking to articles plastered with maintenance tags. Oh, and then there's DYK which is virtually a permanent laughing stock. ITN is half decent compared to that lot. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:30, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Half decent? Maybe around that level, I agree. Should we not aim higher? HiLo48 (talk) 06:43, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I think it's a really good idea to have ITN articles that have potential for improvement. A user may see the article and think, "Hey, I can make that better," and they start editing, which is exactly what we want most of all. Jehochman Talk 13:22, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- This is key (and why we should be featuring topics on the main page, not just ITN), but particularly for ITN, the article should have a stable structure/core that makes it easy to new readers-cum-editors add in new information to improve it. When this was posted last night, this article was not in that shape. --MASEM (t) 14:47, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Post-posting Support per Keegan, but Tariq's concerns about article quality are valid as are HiLo's about the blurb. Article is upgrading quickly however, and as to the blurb it could be discussed further. Point being, it is up, so let's NOT pull it, let's fix it. I did a bit of work to bring the article talk page up to snuff. Jusdafax 05:36, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Minor quibble - "Non-essential" sounds like a value judgement. Perhaps "non-core" would be more neutral? --LukeSurl t c 10:30, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- A quick search shows "non-essential" is by far the more common way of referring to it. -- KTC (talk) 12:15, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Post-posting support. Many many readers in the US will be interested in Wikipedia's treatment of this topic, as will a subset of readers outside the US. Abductive (reasoning) 14:21, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support the topic for posting, but really this didn't need to be posted that fast with the article in the shape it was. Since this happened overnight, it will take a bit of time for core sources to explain everything (which are likely out now) to get the new article to a reasonably better state for ITN referencing. --MASEM (t) 14:37, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Chicago train crash
Nominator's comments: Train collisions are rare and notable. --Alex (talk) 16:37, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm seeing a bit more discussion regarding "hijacking" or the idea that an empty train had been "deliberately set in motion" [1], but even if this is found to be terrorism (which does not seem to be the case), I would not support it unless there's some crazy response. Ryan Vesey 16:50, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
|
|
September 29, 2013 (2013-09-29) (Sunday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
- Syrian civil war:
- Activists fighting Syrian government forces say that at least 16 people, most of them students, were killed in an air strike from Syrian government warplanes that hit a secondary school in the rebel-held Syrian city of Raqqa. (Reuters)
Arts and culture
Disasters and accidents
Politics and elections
[Attention needed] [Posted] Gujba college massacre
Nominator's comments: Attacks on schools are not exactly rare in Nigeria, but an attack on college students while they were sleeping appears to be uncommon and newsworthy enough to be in the ITN section. Andise1 (talk) 20:31, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Students are killed? As if it were their fault, like they touched power cables in their sleep? Who killed them, and why are we not identifying the killers? μηδείς (talk) 22:17, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I've added an alt blurb. Ryan Vesey 22:24, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. The massacre got worldwide coverage and is likely to attract many readers. Over 50 students killed is definitely notable for ITN. The section on the attack needs to be updated, however. ComputerJA (☎ • ✎) 22:50, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- oppose these are all too frequent in the region and such an attack is better at the list of terrorist incidetns apage.(Lihaas (talk) 23:48, 29 September 2013 (UTC)).[reply]
- Support High death toll and plenty of international coverage. Neljack (talk) 00:28, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I'll just reiterate again that there still isn't enough length. I'll also note that the background section is lifted (in an appropriate manner) from Yobe State school shooting. Ryan Vesey 00:29, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose based on article quality only. What I can find in reliable news sources is MUCH more than what is in our article. There's very little there about the actual event. If someone can expand this article to the point where Wikipedia's coverage reflects the depth of coverage in reliable news sources, you can consider this a support instead. --Jayron32 01:42, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support, civilian target and high death toll. Mikael Häggström (talk) 06:31, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support notable story, oppose current article state. More detail required on the attack itself. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:24, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Alt blurb--this is being covered as a new strategy for Al_Qaeda. μηδείς (talk) 21:34, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Posted alt blurb, which has better specifics. Jehochman Talk 01:54, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Why on earth was this posted? It's nowhere near a proper update. Did you actually read the discussion? Why was this article posted in it's current state? The article doesn't have a proper update. Specifically, the bulk of the article is copied from another, and there is little information on the attack itself. Ryan Vesey- Indeed. This is not an article we should be proud of putting on the main page. There's plenty of news sources that could be used to expand the article, and yet no one who seems to care about highlighting good Wikipedia content on the main page ITN section seems all that interested in creating that content in the first place. Sad. --Jayron32 02:49, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- If we post an article that's underway, editors will quickly improve it. We might even retain a few new editors. I don't think we should be so fussy, especially with news. Old news is about as useful as old bread. Jehochman Talk 11:36, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Agreed. Wikipedia is a work in progress, articles about new events are often underdeveloped but it shouldn't prevent them to be posted on main page. It's in my opinion better than displaying one week old "news". --Vejvančický (talk / contribs) 13:56, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- PULL for god sake Jehochman, ITN has a standard (and please get consensus for your view that posting anythign to get an update is acceptable, taht waSW NEVER policy), there is only 1 line of the attack and this is not notable!
- IDONTLIKEIT (or ILIKEIT) is not a readon to postLihaas (talk) 14:43, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Please leave deities out of it, and please stop yelling. There is a discussion about with pretty strong support.
Who is the anonymous party who pulled the item? Perhaps they could leave a note here explaining their action. Jehochman Talk 16:40, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- not yelling, thats the policy title at WP.Lihaas (talk) 16:41, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Okay, then please check your prior post and clean up typos, and maybe apply WP:WOTTA. The article has received substantial updates and expansion and is looking pretty good at present. Please look once more and see if the issue is resolved. Jehochman Talk 16:48, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- My problem with this is the word "Over", wouldn't "More than" sound much better? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.173.212.21 (talk) 10:37, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
UCI Road World Championships
Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 16:46, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
-
-
-
- A quick search on news.google.com:
Australia,
Austria,
Belgium,
Brazil,
Canada,
Croatia,
Czech Republic,
Finland,
France,
Germany,
Great Britain,
Hungary,
India,
Ireland,
Italy,
Middle East,
Netherlands,
New Zealand,
Pakistan,
Poland,
Portugal,
Serbia,
South Africa,
Slovenia,
Slovakia,
Spain,
United States Sander.v.Ginkel (talk) 09:45, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. I know little of cycling, but this seems to be a significant event in the sport and is getting news coverage. 331dot (talk) 10:17, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose. In response to Nergaal's comments, cycling did not die off with Lance Armstrong's appearance on Oprah. That said, I can't support a sporting article which has more prose about school closures than about the event itself. —WFC— FL wishlist 10:39, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Berthing of Cygnus
Nominator's comments: I did not put this mission as candidate for the launch because it was the second launch of Antares but I think that the first berthing of a new commercial cargo vehicle to the ISS is a good candidate. Hektor (talk)
Austria election
Lihaas (talk) 11:26, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Austria has a smaller population than New Jersey or North Carolina, whose governor's races we would not post unless maybe the Communists or the Pirate Party won unexpectedly. Do we have a link to the discussion that established the consensus to add this to ITNR? μηδείς (talk) 16:16, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- This tired old discusion everytime. If you want to challenge it discuss it at ITNR (and we did start a conversation but no one wants to partake in that, just bitch and whine at ITNC). As of right now it IS ITNR.Lihaas (talk) 16:21, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- If this is going to be marked here as ITNR then a link here showing when it was added is entirely appropriate. The burden is on the one making the claim. μηδείς (talk) 16:54, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- If you want to revive Wikipedia_talk:In_the_news/Recurring_items/Elections go ahead. From what I can remember, no option which would have excluded excluding sovereign states as large as Austria ever had even minority support. --LukeSurl t c 17:00, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually the only burden is to show that it IS in ITNR. You are welcome to challenge that, but its a can of worms...Lihaas (talk) 18:36, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- It's already been demonstrated multiple times that things listed on ITNR have not necessarily been discussed, and unless there's a diff shown there of such a discussion there is no such proof. μηδείς (talk) 21:46, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- If you really want to assert that general elections of sovereign states wasn't validly put on the ITNR list, shouldn't be on the list at all, should have an arbitrary cutoff of some kind, or something in between, then go to the ITNR talk page and do it. 331dot (talk) 22:37, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support, but someone should come up with a nice blurp...--FoxyOrange (talk) 17:46, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support (when the result is declared and article updated) - ITN/R states for an election to qualify as ITN it has to be results of general elections of a sovereign state. The article is on the legislative election (which is a general election) of Austria (which is a sovereign country). So I guess it qualifies for ITN once the article is suitably updated. LegalEagle (talk) 20:07, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Beyond the fact that we've omitted the elections of various sovereign countries over the last year, we still need a link to a discussion, whether of Austria alone or of all 200+ sovereign countries. μηδείς (talk) 21:46, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- This discussion achieved consensus that all sovereign nations' general elections should be on ITN/R. Previous omissions have been for want of an update (or perhaps a nomination) rather than notability. Elections in nations which garner little coverage in English-speaking media sometimes fail to reach ITN, though these are due to deficiency in updates rather than inconsistent notability judgements. --LukeSurl t c 23:27, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. The first discussion I can find on elections is this one in 2008. As far as I can determine it was actually put on the list in 2009. This page gives an overview of this subject and some links to other discussions over time on this subject; basically there have been attempts to somehow limit which elections are put, either by population, limiting posting to the G20 nations, posting supranational elections only, and many other ideas, but none seem to gain traction. 331dot (talk) 22:48, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Post upon update. Until (and if) we somehow establish stricter limits on which elections are posted, this one should be posted once updated. 331dot (talk) 22:53, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support* - Elections to a major European country are automatically notable, ITNR or not. doktorb wordsdeeds 06:37, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- And non-European ones are less notable? And if Austria is a major European country then most countries in the world are major countries in their respective continents. Nonetheless, support. Neljack (talk) 03:08, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
[Consensus and Update ready] Philippine conflict ends
Nominator's comments: Its been highlynotable and lasted some 3 weeks, we dint post the poutbreak like we did for others such as Mali, so this is a good moment to post I t as its freshly announced to have finally ended.. Lihaas (talk) 11:26, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Informative? It speaks of 20-30 rebels and "several" people killed. Let's have a few solid facts, please. Otherwise this sounds like an infomercial.μηδείς (talk) 22:20, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Eh, what article are you reading? –HTD 18:40, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
[Posted] New Marathon world record
Nominator's comments: New world record at a World Marathon Majors event, noteworthy per ITN/R. FoxyOrange (talk) 08:57, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Posting. The update is not exceptionally long but the relevant info is there. --Tone 18:24, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
|
|
September 28, 2013 (2013-09-28) (Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Sports
Italy's government coalition collapses
Nominator's comments: This news might not qualify for ITN if it was another country (eg Belgium, which seems to run fine without government), but the shakiness of Italy both politically and economically makes the collapse of a government coalition significant. Thue (talk) 19:32, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I do not object to posting it now but I wonder if it would be better to wait until the new government is formed (one way or the other). I don't recall what we have done in similar situations before. 331dot (talk) 19:40, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I'd say this is premature. ONe party withdrew its five ministers; and there is "crisis"; this Dutch site says the coalition "wankelt" (let's say: is limping), so it's hard to see where this is going. In a politically unstable country like Italy, there are probably several of these events newsworthy; so it might be better to wait for something more definite (resignation of the government; new elections; a new composition of the government)… L.tak (talk) 21:35, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Wait. If new elections are called that's almost certainly newsworthy. If a new coalition is formed that's probably newsworthy. A minority party withdrawing from a coalition is not, in itself, newsworthy I don't think. Thryduulf (talk) 21:58, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Wait. As per source, this nomination is premature. Gov' has not yet collapsed and the critical vote of confidence is next week, according to BBC. Most likely support if gov fails the vote of confidence and has to resign. --hydrox (talk) 08:45, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- As it happened, the coalition survived its vote of confidence after all. --hydrox (talk) 14:09, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not sure. I think maybe the coalition has still collapsed, but the Prime Minister has survived. Given that we are struggling to post at the moment, this could still count as a story, I think. Formerip (talk) 14:16, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Miss World
Nominator's comments: No idea if this is ITNR, but its always posted. Just got over so I'm not sure of online sources yet. Articel needs sources though and a prose update. Lihaas (talk) 15:11, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I've definately seen pageant postings. (odd its not on ITNR, should be in arts, etc as an annu7al posting).Lihaas (talk) 16:01, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- It looks like we posted Miss Universe 2009. But even there, I'm not sure "we did it once" means the same thing as "it is a good idea". Formerip (talk) 16:03, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I guess well leave it to a consensus discussion to see how noteworthy it is. I would support as nom as an important global event and outside the4 usual. Nice to have arts/"cultur"Lihaas (talk) 16:11, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- In terms of pageant i would support Miss Universe... and Miss world only based on quality of article which sucks right now -- Ashish-g55 17:56, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Miss World is among Big Four international beauty pageants, is there any reason to single out this one (although it seems to me that only Miss World and Miss Universe are frequently mentioned)? Brandmeistertalk 18:39, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support: Quite a widely acclaimed pageant and many news sources keep covering it for it's popularity. Also the article is good; its boring to have so many lists in it, but that how all Miss World YYYY articles are. (I would also support ITNR entry for this.) §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 19:11, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak support. I am skeptical of posting purely subjective beauty pageants but this does seem to be getting decent coverage in the news. 331dot (talk) 19:42, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose based on purely article quality. 1) Lots of the article is still in future tense. If the event is completed, then it would need to indicate that by being in the past tense. 2) Prose has problems in places. Bad purple prose, things like "Several auditions stages have taken place, with some truly wonderful performances put on by the contestants". Ugh. Plus, no substantive text about the actual competitions, just stuff like this. Rewrite the article so there is a substantive synopsis of the actual competitions instead of "truly wonderful performances" and put things in the past tense instead of the future, and you can consider this vote instead a support. --Jayron32 20:17, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong Oppose Apart from the fact the article is mainly lists and contains little prose, much of what there is is directly lifted from the Miss World site including practically the whole of the "challenges" section. (i.e. "The Miss World Top Model event is one of the most highly anticipated challenge events on the Miss World Calendar, and this year is set to be spectacular!"). Some of the rest is so badly written it's actually incomprehensible. No way. Black Kite (talk) 21:49, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
[Consensnus and update ready] Syria UN resolution
Nominator's comments: I know there is no article yet but after three attempts passing such a resolution is notable.
Incidentally theres a political issue without election or deaths.. Lihaas (talk) 15:11, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Please move: This news candidate should be placed under September 27 because nominations should be posted under the heading of "the date of the event (not the date nominated) in UTC". 184.147.52.114 (talk) 01:11, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- updated - Why cant others add content to it? Just waiting for me and then warring over minor details instead of adding content??Lihaas (talk) 12:09, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- People do what they can, when they have time and the information to do it. Most, if not all, of us aren't getting paid to edit here. 331dot (talk) 19:46, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Not really, [eople just prefer to fight andwar on their version. Like the Kenya shooting where virtually nothing was added by others.Lihaas (talk) 13:19, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- You can think what you wish, but I prefer to assume good faith without evidence of deliberate actions with poor motives. 331dot (talk) 13:32, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Golden Dawn
Formerip (talk) 14:07, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Interesting case here, but the arrest is not that notable (just a stupid move that would embolbden them), nevertheless the killing of Killah P would be more notable but thats probably stale for ITN. Perhaps the ensuing riots can be noted here.Lihaas (talk) 14:50, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hurling
Nominator's comments: Crackjack game if game 1 was anything to go by and the ref knows when to blow his whistle, cheating Clare!. Anyway, ITNR Gaelic games. --Lihaas (talk) 14:00, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Woops. but why is GAA football there and not hurling? This is in fact more unique (and fun. ;))Lihaas (talk) 14:16, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose. First, I am unable to support any nominations from Lihaas until he/she does them properly(which means including sources with the nomination per the instructions on this page). Second, I would oppose this anyway because I can find little if any news coverage outside of Ireland. To clarify I don't care that it is from Ireland if it has coverage elsewhere. 331dot (talk) 12:34, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- 1. You make decision on the content not the editor, that is not local politics and would be clearly NPA. Secondly, the game starts in 2 hours so there is NO result yet. (and plenty of users add nom's here to generate discussion beforehand)Lihaas (talk) 14:16, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I did not make my decision based on the editor themselves, but on their actions. I notified you of this and was ignored. We need sources provided in the nomination per the instructions on this page to establish that an item is "in the news" and not just updated(which we look at the article for). I further stated that I do oppose based on content as well. 331dot (talk) 14:58, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Fair enough (and good reason), how to make it ITNR as in the GAA football?Lihaas (talk) 14:16, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Propose that it be added, demonstrating that there is regularly consensus to include it when nominated. If there is conensus that it should be ITN/R it will be added, if there isn't it wont be. Thryduulf (talk) 14:48, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- It was in INT/R (this is the first year it's not, I think). Broad interest really doesn't come into it IMO. We're not a news station. --Tóraí (talk) 20:36, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The game will end in about 3 hours//...Lihaas (talk) 15:15, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Good reason to include it in on the front-page of an educational website then, no? Did you know who H. C. McNeile was before it was today's featured article. --Tóraí (talk) 20:36, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose based on article quality only. If someone were to write a prose summary of the replay, like there is for the first match, I would fully support this. There is no prose summary of the replay match, which was the deciding contest. That needs to be done in order to have a reasonable update to the article. Fix that, and I think this should be posted. --Jayron32 20:24, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support We're not a global news outlet, we're an encyclopedia. ITN is intended to promote our content and act as hooks to educational content (what we're here for). Lesser known (though not obscure) sports have an important place in remit. (Dharmadhyaksha, an article like is not suitable for DYK. See the DYK criteria.) --Tóraí (talk) 20:32, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- We are not a global news outlet, but news coverage does play a role here, and AFAIK there is little coverage of this outside of Ireland and the UK. ITN is to promote content that is 'in the news' and generally not just in a single location. 331dot (talk) 20:36, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Grey Cup? Super League? Grand National? Stanley Cup Finals? The Ashes? AFL Grand Final? All ITN/R. I support all of these, by the way. My point is that there are more considerations than just reach or the number of countries involved. --Tóraí (talk) 21:23, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I agree, but one of those is news coverage. The popularity of the sport must also be considered. 331dot (talk) 01:06, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- This sport is very popular where it's played. Your argument says that we drop everything except baseball, American football, basketball and association football. And we won't. HiLo48 (talk) 21:31, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- That's not what I was trying to say; but fundamentally this is the "in the news" page and this sport is not widely "in the news"(or I have yet to see evidence it is). Many sports are popular where they are played, but this sport is played mostly in a nation of 5 million people and receives little coverage outside of that country. I wouldn't support a sport just played in Manhattan or Los Angeles. If this was played in a more populated country, and/or received a lot of attention outside of the country, I would support this without hesitation. But it doesn't. 331dot (talk) 08:40, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Yep, that's what you said. You told everyone that if you're not from the US, UK, or some other big country, stop wasting your time here. Pure systemic bias. And I don't think you recognise it. (This was removed for being "sniping". I submit that it's an accurate but embarrassing paraphrasing of the previous post.) HiLo48 (talk) 11:46, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Please provide a diff to back up your accusation, or else please strike your remark. I don't see where anybody said to "stop wasting your time here". Jehochman Talk 11:57, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I wouldn't say ITN has no issues with systematic bias, but we did post the GAA football final recently. Formerip (talk) 12:10, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Exactly, and ti is silly to have one ITNR and not the other./Lihaas (talk) 17:39, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- No, that isn't what I said. I treat my country of 300 million people the same as I treat a country of a billion people, or a country of 5 million, or a country of 300 people. I support posting events which have widespread coverage. That's the purpose of this page, and I do not see evidence that this has such coverage- and I have continued to await being proven wrong. I certainly did not state that people from any country should "stop wasting their time here" and I am offended by the accusation. We do not have and should not have an affirmative action program for small countries or niche sports. 331dot (talk) 19:21, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Question: Has this (and the Gaelic football one) has been reported outside ROI+UK? Reported as in they've been featured in TV news, and not just filler wire stories? A couple of examples: Bloomberg TV had reported about the State of Origin rugby in Australia, while Channel NewsAsia has reported the knockout stage of EuroBasket 2013 (basketball isn't a widely practiced sport in Singapore). The former wasn't nominated(?), while the latter was rejected. This hurling event must've escaped their radar... –HTD 19:14, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Global coverage can never be our measure. American college football hardly ever makes the news in Australia. Probably hardly mentioned outside America. But Americans still think it's important. HiLo48 (talk) 21:51, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- That's why it's not posted despite perennial nominations year after year, although it some TV time in places such as CNN International every January... –HTD 08:00, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- But we posted some paedophile who only differed from other paedophiles because of his involvement with college football. That says we treat is as something special. HiLo48 (talk) 08:19, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- If we're into high profile pedos, the Irish Roman Catholic sexual abuse scandal was posted twice: Roman Catholic Church sexual abuse scandal in Ireland and Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse. According to the latter article, there were 253 claims of sexual abuse by boys by different men from 1914 until 1999, or an average of 3 molested children by different men per year; Sandusky was found guilty on 45 counts of sexual abuse between 1994 to 2009, or an average of 3 molested children by one man, per year. Sandusky was a prolific child molester on his own, whether he was connected to American football or not. –HTD 09:10, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- So why did the case for posting his story place so much emphasis on his status in college football? It really gave the impression to an outsider that his paedophilia was seen as more significant because of that. And it wasn't. All paedophilia is equally and horribly significant. HiLo48 (talk) 10:01, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I'd imagine him being a pedophile college football coach, a sport ingrained in American culture, is possibly quite the same with pedophile priests, a religion ingrained in Irish culture? If he was say, a hurling coach in America, or the Irish kabaddi federation, molesting generations of children, it wouldn't be in the news, at least in the extent of both events. –HTD 10:09, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- It's not the only measure, but it is a factor. The stated purpose of ITN is "to direct readers to articles that have been substantially updated to reflect recent or current events of wide interest". An event is not of wide interest if it is only in one country and not mentioned elsewhere. I'm not yet convinced this is receiving a great deal of coverage in Ireland. American college football is mentioned in other countries to varying degrees. I still await evidence of the same for this sport; I would love to be proven wrong here. 331dot (talk) 22:11, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
|
|
September 27, 2013 (2013-09-27) (Friday)
Armed conflict and attacks
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Sport
[Posted] Sudan protests
Nominator's comments: High casualty count in growing protests and instability in the region. --Lihaas (talk) 14:00, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Thx, but you dint/AGF forgot to give your support reason?v Lihaas (talk) 15:37, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Standoff ongoingLihaas (talk) 12:46, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Its not updates though...Lihaas (talk) 18:10, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Please update the article. Better forwards than backwards. There's a link above to a good source. Jehochman Talk 03:49, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Updates shuold come BEFORE postingLihaas (talk) 08:51, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Posting might also motivate others to update the article, as they might not see it otherwise. This is your nomination- if you want it updated by a certain time, then do it. 331dot (talk) 08:54, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The admin needs to note if its updatged or not. The ITNC nom is for consensus discussionLihaas (talk) 17:38, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- True, the article will get more visibility when posted, but the posting admin should ensure that the quality of the update is commensurate with the length and breadth of the article. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:41, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, thank you. Now enforcing this?Lihaas (talk) 14:55, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
[Posted] IPCC Fifth Assessment Report
Nominator's comments: News with truly global relevance for science and public policy. This part is Working Group I's part, The Physical Science Basis, which is the bit that is generally most high profile. --LukeSurl t c 07:30, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Don't be absurd. Formerip (talk) 13:20, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Interesting, you should edit Scientific opinion on climate change --DrLee (talk) 13:33, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Even if it is true that this is a "political body", this is still being widely covered. It's still news if you agree with their conclusions or not. 331dot (talk) 13:47, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Which is just about the only reason why I'm not joining Medeis in opposing. The UN is a corrupt body, and every single thing it does is tainted as a result. Resolute 14:06, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Dang! where yu been hiding,? haven't seen yu here in eons..;)Lihaas (talk) 01:01, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- He was busy stealing all of the letter "o"s from your writing. --Jayron32 04:24, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
September 26
|
|
September 26, 2013 (2013-09-26) (Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
International relations
Law and crime
|
|
September 25, 2013 (2013-09-25) (Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Sports
[Posted] 2013 America's Cup
Nominator's comments: In what could be the greatest comeback in the history of sport (needing 9 wins to win the cup, Oracle Team USA was down −2-6 (that's "negative 2") and 1-8), a loss by TNZ could mean $37 million of New Zealand public money gone to waste. Also, race might be suspended to another day. –HTD 16:35, 25 September 2013 (UTC) --–HTD 16:35, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Oooh, dramatic. And lots of lovely prose in the article. Good work. --LukeSurl t c 16:44, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Small comment - If we say Oracle Team USA should we also say Emirates Team New Zealand for consistency? Also perhaps the scoreline 9-8 should be mentioned? AIRcorn (talk) 21:11, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Today's racing has narrative now. Could use an aftermath section, which I don't have time to write at the moment. I'd also prefer to call it the 34th America's Cup, as that's what it's being called by everyone except Wikipedia. I think one of the reasons we say Oracle way more than we say Emirates, is that's the name of USA's boat as well.JoltColaOfEvil (talk) 21:26, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Article looks good, but speaking as a New Zealander - damn, damn, damn!!! That was painful to watch! Neljack (talk) 21:53, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Updated Have done all I can for now as I need to go back to work. AIRcorn (talk) 22:08, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. Ready to post now. A quality article, well referenced. ITN/R and a fascinating story. --LukeSurl t c 22:39, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. Looks ready. Formerip (talk) 22:46, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Posted -- tariqabjotu 00:27, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
[Posted] Recent death: David H. Hubel
Nominator's comments: Nobel Prize winner in medicine 1981. Iselilja (talk) 08:36, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support RD The Hubel & Wiesel experiments, for which he won the award, were fundamental to our understanding of the mechanics of vision. They also provided some of the first evidence of critical periods. Teemu08 (talk) 16:52, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak Oppose This is one of those cases where a Nobel alone is not a shoe-in. I would be in favor of posting this, however, if doing so doesn't push any other listings off the queue. μηδείς (talk) 18:33, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak oppose. Rightly or wrongly, precedent here seems to be that merely winning a Nobel Prize is not a ticket onto RD. 331dot (talk) 18:46, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support RD. Consensus can change. Gamaliel (talk) 18:50, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- 'Weak support RD I think this is a more borderline case for Nobel = RD, but RD space is free right now. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 00:52, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support He is more than just a generic Nobel prize winner, every neuroscientist knows his name and what he did. Looie496 (talk) 01:41, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support. The section about the research he did is reasonably complete and well-formed, compared to other previous Nobel winners that we had with shakier articles. SpencerT♦C 02:04, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Support The news articles (and particularly the quotations from other scientists) on his death testify to the profound impact of his research. Neljack (talk) 07:35, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Posted to RD section. --Bongwarrior (talk) 19:59, 26 September 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:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In the news toolbox.jpg)
