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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Comment on a story without first reading the relevant article(s).
Nominator's comments: A new bird species. Kind of rare story, especially if the bird is found in a densely populated area. The article needs some work, though. --Tone13:14, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Haha :) Well, there's Bird species new to science described in the 2010s that says that there are around five new species discovered per year, some of those extinct. However, this one had a particular interesting backstory, I thought it could be a nice science story on ITN again. Also, TFP regularly features birds :P --Tone15:29, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That table doesn't look very reliable - the numbers are completely unsourced. Even if it is accurate, it says 22 new species of bird have been discovered so far this year. 22! Formerip (talk) 16:07, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support - A discovered of a new living bird species is rare. (The above discussion largely missing that most newly named bird species are extinct.) The discovery of a new animal species of any kind within a major city is very rare. Combining the two, this is an extremely rare situation well worth ITN coverage (when the article is built up beyond a micro stub). --ThaddeusB-public (talk) 17:02, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
For goodness sake. I wouldn't tell you it's not rare if it was rare. Here's a few more examples of it happening in June 2013, which I just Googled in about 20 seconds: [1][2][3][4]. Formerip (talk) 17:14, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Rare is a relative term. Looking at the last 15 years, the average seems to be in the 4-6 range, which is rare in my book. In any case, how many species can you find that were discovered living in a city of 2 million people form the last 15 years? That is the basis I am supporting on - "just" being a new species alone wouldn't do it for me. Finding a new bird in the Amazon jungle and finding a new bird in a densely populated area are quite different situations (IMO). --ThaddeusB-public (talk) 17:20, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
BTW, link [2] is a fossil species and link [4] doesn't refer to a new species at all, but rather someone seeing a bird they personally had never seen before. --ThaddeusB-public (talk) 17:26, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
OK, well, like I said, about 20 seconds. It still means that this is, at the very least, the SEVENTEENTH new species of living bird to be announced so far this month. But where TF are you getting a 4-6 range from? It seems to be at least one every few weeks. And there also doesn't seem to be anything particularly rare about finding a new species in the city: [5][6][7][8][9]. Formerip (talk) 17:49, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
As the article on the 15 new Amazon birds makes clear, that itself was quite an exceptional event ("It’s been 140 years since as many new Brazilian bird species were described at one time."). The 35,000+ entry (include subspecies) IOC World Bird list shows 3 extant new (full) species for 2012, 4 for 2011, 4 for 2010, 9 for 2009, 7 for 2008, 7 for 2007, 6 for 2006, 5 for 2005, etc. Looks like 1998 was the most recent year with more than 10 (11). I went back to 1980 eyeballing it and didn't see a single year where there were 15+ new species (a couple years had more than 15 new subspecies though).
As to the city examples, you list a bee (hardly the same thing as a new vertebrate), a NYC frog (which was posted on ITN I believe), a dolphin (obviously not found living within the city), a shark (ditto), and an ant (like the bee, not as surprising as a vertebrate). --ThaddeusB-public (talk) 19:19, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support significant new bird and mammal species discoveries are infrequent enough to be notable. The article is woefully undersized, for the three paragraph minimum however. μηδείς (talk) 18:23, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Wait - it's not 100% clear that Rudd will be the next Prime Minister. It's probable, but there's also a chance that the independents will back Tony Abbott. Constitutional crisis looms.... The Age. So wait until we actually have a new Prime Minister to add. Worldwide readers don't care who the leader of the Australian Labor Party is, but once we get a new PM, then it's front-page-worthy. Adpete (talk) 10:21, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: p.s. whether or not he becomes PM tomorrow, he is the 26th PM of Australia. Australian convention is to count them only once. Adpete (talk) 10:29, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, you're right. Thanks for that. I'll just remove "the," in that case. To the larger issue, I suppose we can place it on hold for 12-24 hours, then? International news sources seem to be reporting Rudd's return as a given, but you're right to point out that it's a bit more complicated than that. Evanh2008(talk|contribs)10:33, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support posting now, minus the bit about him becoming PM (until he is sworn in). A sitting PM getting axed by her own party is newsworthy enough to post right now. The blurb can be updated if (and, I assume, when), Rudd is sworn in. We should definitely not do nothing until Rudd is sworn in. It would be silly to wait with the ticker blank given that the wait could be almost 24 hours. --Mkativerata (talk) 10:36, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Way too premature at this stage. He has simply won a leadership challenge within the party. He still must go through a confidence motion and win support of independents, as the party does not carry a majority in parliament. There's a chance, remote as it may be, that he may not become PM. --DorsalAxe10:45, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Question - Just curious, since this is my first time ITN'ing anything, but what happens if I change the blurb to cut out the PM bit?
Wait. The BBC News article says "Ms Gillard must write to Governor General Quentin Bryce stating that she is resigning as prime minister before Mr Rudd can be sworn in." and implies that she has not dome so yet [10]. If so then she is technically still PM and it's just a change of party leadership, which is not ITN-worthy. A change of Prime Minister on the other hand certainly is. Thryduulf (talk) 11:33, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I will support a blurb announcing Julia Gillard's resignation as PM following the leadership challenge. However it is still not 100% clear who will succeed her. --DorsalAxe12:34, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support, once we have confirmation that he's been commissioned by the GG. From what was said at Gillard and Rudd's press conferences tonight it can certainly be inferred that Rudd has been given the official big tick, and the press is reporting it this way, but it won't hurt to be sure. Lankiveil(speak to me)13:08, 26 June 2013 (UTC).[reply]
Support on significance for posting the resignation now, with an update when a successor is named. There's no reason I can think of why we can't do it that way. The resignation has been confirmed reliably, though information is a bit light in the Julia Gillard article. Is there a better bolded article or can we get that one a bit more expanded? If we do that, we can go with the alt-blurb now and expand as needed later. --Jayron3213:34, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Wait I think I remarked something similar before when it came to something in Israel a long time ago. Julia Gillard losing the leadership vote is not significant enough for ITN nor her resigning as PM as a consequence. A new Australian PM would be, but that hasn't happened yet and it is unclear precisely who it will be or whether it's even going to really happen now as it's also possible that an early election will be called (for example, if sufficient independents demand it both leaders and the GG will have no choice, or even if they support Abbot he may just ask the GG to dissolve parliament) and I don't think the calling of an election even in these circumstances (not that far from the elections being expected and one of the reasons formthe challenge is to improve their chances or at least try to mitigate their losses in the election) is significant enough for ITN. This isn't 1975, yet whatever some random articles may say but a resonable reality of a minority government. Nil Einne (talk) 13:38, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support alternative blurb. Resignation as PM and losing party support while in office is significant in governance of a country. Rwos (talk) 14:26, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support altblurb. This could be Australia's only shot at a posting all summer and a prime minister resigning is enough. We don't need to wait to see what happens next and, as has been pointed out already, what happens next may turn out not to be ITN-worthy. Formerip (talk) 16:39, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's comments: Nearly any way this is ruled will be important in the US, even if there are a number of subtleties or even a partial decision. It is possible that the decision is determined to do effectively nothing, but this seems very very unlikely. --MASEM (t) 15:53, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. For better or worse (and, quite possibly, for for richer or poorer), we've developed a pattern of rejecting stories about gay marriage that do not represent a first in international terms, which we should hold to. If there's a significant way in which this turns out to be a world first, then I'll reconsider my vote. Formerip (talk) 17:14, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Wait. The significance of this really depends on how widely the court rules. However unless it makes very large changes to the federal situation (i.e. more than simply the apportionment of federal benfits) I can't see this being significant enough for posting. --LukeSurltc17:22, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per FormerIP's comments, and given that repeal of the law would actually have very limited effects. It would not actually establish or institute gay marriage where it does not exist. The Voting Rights Act decision will have much greater real world impact. μηδείς (talk) 18:16, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. If SCOTUS came down with a decision that gay marriage is a constitutional right, then maybe that would be worthy of posting, but that is unlikely. The limited scope of any likely decision(there should also be one on Prop 8) means that it probably isn't ITN worthy. 331dot (talk) 20:13, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment DOMA declared unconstitutional under equal protection of the constitution. Tehre's another case still pending now... --MASEM (t) 14:07, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Making it clear that not all of DOMA was determined unconstitutional, more direct that parts regarding federal benefits were. --MASEM (t) 15:37, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment BBC source: [11] -- 14:10, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
Comment The other case, whether the lower court's decision on California's Prop 8 (state constitutional ban on same-sex marriage) which declared it unconstitutional, was held in no standing by SCOTUS (in light of the above) leaving the lower court ruling in place. --MASEM (t) 14:40, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support. This ruling has created a precedent that will make it impossible to stop gay marriage from becoming legal everywhere in the US. While the game isn't over, it is now just a formality to go to checkmate in a few moves. Count Iblis (talk) 15:19, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support: BBC News and The Guardian describe it as "historic " on their respective front pages. Although it'd be nice to somehow include all SCOTUS rulings from this week in one blurb - if anyone can manage that. SPattalk15:53, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Just to make it clear for non-USians that are considering this for ITN: the ruling basically strikes language from DOMA that would have denied federal benefits to legally-recognized same-sex couples as long as their marriage was done in a locale (including a foreign country) where such is legal. That itself is appearing less important than the fact that the DOMA parts were rejected on the basis of the US Constitutional clause of "equal protection" and thus limiting rights to just the opposite-sex couples was unconstitutional. This decision does not explicit makes same-sex marriage legal across the US, but makes it federally recognized under Constitutional protection. As such, the next major action that most analysis are saying is that any state that block same-sex marriages will see their laws challenged on the basis of this SCOTUS ruling that is based on the equal protection clause in the Constitution. Nothing has made these state-level laws unconstitutional directly, but these legal challenges will likely set out to show that. --MASEM (t) 16:03, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Losing financial benefits because of civil status is newsworthy how again? It's not like we're talking about SCOTUS legalizing gay marriage across the US. Documenting every single precedent along the way diminishes it IMO. Save the LGBT advocacy for when it actually happens. 31.220.250.57 (talk) 17:17, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per most of the reasons already outlined above. Much more significant events on this issue i.e, France, were voted down here. Hard to say why this deserves special treatment.--85.210.109.22 (talk) 17:25, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support - A "historic ruling" in the headlines around the world. Opposers reasoning lacks weight and fails to convince me. An ITN-worthy blurb with mention of DOMA and Prop 8 should be posted asap as vital... and putting up a new species of bird in Cambodia instead makes a mockery of the very function ITN has on the Main page. Jusdafax18:51, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Initially i was unsure about this but this is getting more attention than i would have expected. The ruling may not be legalizing same sex marriages country wide but it might as well could have... ill support it. -- Ashish-g5519:05, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Doesn't make it legal everywhere, but it really paves the way for federal recognition. A major international news item per Spat. A larger federal ruling than anything before. 72.130.52.73 (talk) 19:21, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Italian police search more than thirty Italian football clubs including SS Lazio and Juventus FC searching for evidence of criminal conspiracy, international tax evasion, money laundering and invoice falsification. (Reuters)
Oppose SCOTUS basically told congress, go back and work out Section 4 with today's facts and figures. The act is still otherwise fully a law, and while I know in the US there is concern that party politics are going to come into play to bias voter figures, it is not too much change from the status quo. As such since it only affects the US (its voting policies do not extend to other countries), there's not really a good reason to include. (that said, depending on how the court rules on DOMA tomorrow, a combined blurb may b possible) --MASEM (t) 00:24, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Interpretation of US law in the US; the actual preclearance requirement was not struck down (though Thomas wanted to) but Congress was instructed to make a new map with new data to base the requirement on. 331dot (talk) 00:30, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support a much weightier story then the gay rights ruling, and great from an encyclopedic point of view (SCOTUS has been hinting since the 1980's that these measures would some day become unnecessary), but understandably arcane to our non-citizen readers. Actually, maybe that's a good reason to support? μηδείς (talk) 01:17, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support - It was a landmark and highly contentious ruling, which struck down the key provision of the law. It was also the top story on every U.S. network newscast today. --76.189.109.155 (talk) 02:10, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Personally I'm very interested in this, but as Masem and 331dot note the ruling is narrower than it might appear at first. It also only affects certain parts of the US; the majority of the country was not covered by the preclearance requirement. Neljack (talk) 05:12, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Big story in the news to do with civil rights and voting. This story resonates widely and has symbolic implications. Article decent for a C class. Jusdafax09:59, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Support - The ruling strikes down the key provision of one of the most well-known pieces of legislation in US history. This ruling has national implications: for one, voting changes blocked by the courts under Section 5 established precedent as to the validity of similar legislation under Section 2 of the Act and the 14th and 15th Amendments to the US Constitution, all of which are national in scope. Furthermore, although the coverage formula did not cover every state, this decision literally affects tens of thousands of counties, cities, and towns, as well as many states that were not directly covered but who had covered counties that essentially brought the state under preclearance due to a uniform state election code. As noted throughout the news, this decision will have strong political and electoral ramifications for racial minorities and thus race relations in America; now, the burden will be on private plaintiffs to challenge election policies that could have the effect of minimizing or eliminating the voting strength of racial minorities. Many of these contentious policies have already been reinstited in the formerly covered jurisdictions, such as Texas's voter ID law. Finally, the historical significance of this act is sufficient for inclusion in the news; preclearance and the Voting Rights Act itself was the culmination of decades of work by the US Civil Rights Movement to undo a century of Jim Crow laws that denied or diluted racial minorities' right to vote. This case marks the end of this chapter of US history. –Prototime (talk · contribs) 17:47, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Article needs updating 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: Lau Kar-leung was a famous Hong Kong director and Martial Arts master. According to Twitch Films, "In a career spanning more than 60 years, Lau starred in - and provided action choreography for - more than 70 films." Twitch Films also says that Lau Kar-leung "directed more than 25 feature films himself." According to The Hollywood Reporter, Lau Kar-leung is "a fourth-generation direct disciple of martial arts legend Wong Fei-Hung." He has worked with notable people such as Chang Cheh and Jackie Chan during his career. At the Hong Kong Film Awards, Lau won the award for Best Action Choreography for the film Drunken Master II in 1995. He also won the lifetime achievement award at the 2010 Hong Kong Film Awards. In 2005, he won a lifetime achievement award at the Golden Bauhinia Awards. He has won two Golden Horse Awards for his films Drunken Master II (in 1994) and Seven Swords (in 2005). Andise1 (talk) 19:28, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment not much on his death or the reaction to it, which is probably needed for someone who's not that well-known across the rest of the globe. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:09, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
RD of Richard Matheson
this is a duplicate nomination--please comment and vote in the original nomination below
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 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.
I've removed that section; there was nothing of importance in it anyway. Matheson was far more important than Herbet -- numerous novels made into major movies (most notably I Am Legend (novel), filmed three times), major life achievement awards, Science Fiction hall of fame, etc. Looie496 (talk) 18:15, 25 June 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.
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.
Cam e here to nominate. Definitely worth posting per ITNR as well. Except the page has NO update and is short of sources.Lihaas (talk) 10:04, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support per ITNR. We would unquestionably do this for a ceremonial monarch, so it makes sense to do this for a monarch who actually runs the country too. -LtNOWIS (talk) 15:36, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment the significance of this will be lost on most readers. It's not just a change of head of state, it's that an abdication of this type is rare as heck. How we sum that up in a blurb (and per Lihaas, it needs updating etc), I'm not sure, but given a reasonable shakeup and a suitable blurb, I could support. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:06, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I have updated the article to the point where I am confident it meets ITN standards, but please do let me know if article quality concerns remain. --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:11, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Support, per WP:ITNR. Prose underneath final game has been added, roster sections have been updated. Canuck89 (chat with me) 03:40, June 25, 2013 (UTC)
Clashes between the Lebanese Army and supporters of the Salafist cleric Ahmed Al-Assir continue for a second day around the Ain el-Hilweh camp near Sidon. The government reports at least 15 soldiers killed and 38 others injured in the violence, as it promises crackdown on ethnic strife across the country. (Al Jazeera)
According to reports in Catalonia, Argentinefootball star Lionel Messi has paid €10 million in Spanish back taxes for 2010 and 2011, and is looking to settle a claimed tax liability of €4.1 million for the 2007–2009 period that is the subject of a current investigation. (ESPN)
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.
Support. Reading his article, he seems to be notable enough in his field to be posted IMO. We don't see many archaeologists. 331dot (talk) 09:20, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Wait. Yes he absolutely meets the RD criteria as far as I am concerned (lifetime achievement award, almost certainly the most notable archaeologist in Britain) but there isn't enough detail about his death available yet. Thryduulf (talk) 09:21, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support It seems that exact details are not going to be immediately forthcomming, but the article has been updated (kudos to The Rambling Man), so I don't see any reason to hold off any longer. Thryduulf (talk) 22:20, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Having met him I felt compelled to come here and lend my support for this nomination. He was a staple of the British archaeological scene. --Somchai Sun (talk) 14:50, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support I appreciate that he won't be well known outside of Britain, but I would argue he's been a major player in his field and is helping bridge that to TV and his contributions to historical knowledge itself is significant. Time_Team#Other_formats shows the TV program itself has been exported abroad if anyone has regional notability concerns. CaptRik (talk) 15:01, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support for RD assuming his article is updated with a couple of sentences about his death. I can't see anything at all in the article itself (other than the past tense) to suggest he's passed away. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:47, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support. That's not a reason, Medeis. We often post significant criminal convictions and appeals are always possible (even though at least one is a racing certainty in this case), but not guaranteed to be as newsworthy. Formerip (talk) 17:58, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it is a reason, yes, there are plenty of criminal matters we have had nominated and not published because they had not reached final appeal, and no, appeals don't go on indefinitely, he has two per Italian law. There is no encyclopedic interest here. μηδείς (talk) 18:53, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support It doesnt matter if he has appeals or not. Those appeals will take years and given who he is, even after the appeals he may never see inside of a jail cell. Him getting the jail sentence is the story right now and should be posted regardless of future appeals. -- Ashish-g5519:26, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support We would never post any convictions if the fact that appeals hadn't been exhausted disqualified them. This is in the news now and is notable now. People understand that defendants have a right to appeal convictions. Neljack (talk) 21:45, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Fine, "Pending appeals, Berlusconi is sentenced..." But he's not yet been remanded to prison, has he? I'll be quite happy to support a "Berlusconi begins serving..." blurb next decade, when it happens. But a sentence in Italy is like a hurricane season forecast. In the meantime this is no where near the top of the news, nor objectively (as opposed to ideologically: ..."given who he is...getting the jail sentence is the story right now and should be posted regardless") important. μηδείς (talk) 22:25, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Um, can we change the title of the target article to something less evocative, like "2013 Silvio Berlusconi conviction"? There have been concerns over whether BLP would extend to "calling" this girl a prostitute, and why we'd need this in the title of the article I know not. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:11, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
A court has made a finding of fact; this man paid for sex with an underage girl. The abuse of public office charge stems from his browbeating the police into releasing her, so it is a consequence of the first fact. So there is no way Berlusconi can sue anybody for libel. Abductive (reasoning) 02:30, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Article needs updating 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.
Weak oppose. Though he created some well-known TV shows, I don't see which of the RD criteria he meets. His article doesn't give much of an indication that he was notable in his field(comments from others saying he influenced them, awards, hall of fame, etc.) 331dot (talk) 12:18, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Article needs updating 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: Bobby Bland was a blues and soul singer. He was one of the original members of the Beale Streeters. In 1981, he was inducted into the Blues Hall of Fame. He was inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in 1992. He also received the Grammy Lifetime Achievement Award in 1997. Andise1 (talk) 03:30, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Bland played a major role in the history of blues and R&B music. His numerous hits helped define an era and his distinctive voice was unforgettable. Has won all the big-ticket music honors. Jusdafax04:45, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I've never heard of him (not my era or style of music) but with two hall of fame inductions and a lifetime achievement award it's clear he was a very notable person in his field. Thryduulf (talk) 10:12, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose/not ready on article/update quality - the article is short and not well referenced. One sentence on his death is not sufficient to meet ITN update standards. If article quality is improved, I could support. --ThaddeusB (talk) 17:21, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support, per nom, Jusda, and Thryd. Contrary to IP 76, the article is much improved since ThaddeusB's qualified oppose. ThadB, has the article improved enough yet? --108.45.72.196 (talk) 01:59, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
My oppose was qualified also, which is why I said I agreed with Thaddeus. There have been some minor improvements since Thaddeus posted, but overall, the quality of the article hasn't changed much. The Biography section is significantly undersourced and one source is relied on too heavily. When this thread started there were 12 sources. Since then, just three have been added, primarily to verify the death. And the death content itself hasn't expanded much. So my concerns, like Thad's, are based on the the totality of those issues. --76.189.109.155 (talk) 03:52, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I agree - The career section is modestly improved, but remains at least half unsourced (likely closer to 2/3rds). The death material meets the bare minimum, but is insufficient in light of the overall article quality. Either the death material needs expanded substantially or the article needs to be well sourced for me to support. --ThaddeusB-public (talk) 17:10, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The death toll from the disaster soars to more than 6,500, as units of the Indian Army struggle to reach thousands of people stranded in country's northwest. (Al Jazeera)
Article needs updating 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.
Support (pending update) - A significant author whose works have been picked up on television and in the cinema. Was due to be awarded the visionary award at the Saturn Awards tomorrow. Miyagawa (talk) 11:38, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment' - article referencing is poor, with most of the career section unreferenced. I would also need to more than a single sentence on his death to support (e.g. reactions, "legacy" info, etc.) --ThaddeusB (talk) 18:21, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've removed that section; there was nothing of importance in it anyway. Matheson was far more important than Herbet -- numerous novels made into major movies (most notably I Am Legend (novel), filmed three times), major life achievement awards, Science Fiction hall of fame, etc. Looie496 (talk) 18:15, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You mean Herbert? In which case, your opinion is just that, an opinion. Can you cite "far more important"? I doubt it. (Herbert had awards, halls of fame, movies, lifetime awards etc etc etc). Please try to be neutral here. And there's nothing about his death or the reaction to it. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:19, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral - The referencing of the "career" section is still a little weak - not weak enough for me to oppose over, but also not good enough for me to support. If TRM agrees it is "good enough to post", I am willing to post. I also won't object if someone else posts it first. --ThaddeusB-public (talk) 17:17, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nik Wallenda high wire walk across the Grand Canyon
Nominator's comments: No human has ever successfully crossed the Grand Canyon via a high wire before (until Nik Wallenda did). Also, unlike his previous walk across Niagra Falls, he had no tether or safety harness or anything to protect him if he fell. Nik Wallenda's walk across Niagra Falls was [posted on ITN.] Andise1 (talk) 02:36, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Note: ThaddeusB had nominated this event in the section above, a few minutes after this nomination. I have closed ThaddeusB's nom, and I am copying his nom comments below to keep the discussion in one place. --Bongwarrior (talk) 03:22, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, different sources say different things. As I noted below, the AP (and sources that follow it such as Washington Post) say "near" --ThaddeusB (talk) 03:59, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support - duplicate nom removed and comment consoldated into a "support" --ThaddeusB (talk) 03:26, 24 June 2013 (UTC) There is some (RS) debate about whether the location qualifies as the Grand Canyon proper or not. The majority say "yes", but the AP and a few others (that don't simply repeat AP article) say otherwise. In any case, we can use an alternate wording... This is a unique accomplishment never done before in human history and a rare opportunity to get a positive story on the homepage. The event was broadcast live in 200+ countries worldwide (obviously in the middle of the night some places), so truly of international interested. We covered Wallenda's Niagara Falls walk last year and Baumgartner's skydive. Many reliable sources described this as a greater challenge than Niagara, although I would consider it roughly on the same level. --ThaddeusB (talk) 02:39, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose - Taken at face value, I was prepared to support this. But this wasn't Wallenda's longest walk, and more importantly, it wasn't actually at the Grand Canyon,[12] although it was nearby. Yes, it's a technicality, but it makes for a much less interesting story. --Bongwarrior (talk) 02:57, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Hardly. "Grand Canyon" is inaccurate. Perhaps something like this, or this or this for instance. Yes, there are media reports which say canyon, but we shouldn't allow their sloppy journalism to influence our standards. Moriori (talk) 03:19, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The USGS refers to the location as part of the "Grand Canyon area". It also states that the Grand Canyon formation includes the Little Colorado River Formation. [13] At least geologically speaking, Wallenda did cross the Grand Canyon. (But we obvious can use a different wording if wording is the only concern.) --ThaddeusB (talk) 03:38, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
CommentA bit off topic, but could someone please fix the current events portal for June 23, as it is currently a red link. The portal link is now fixed. Andise1 (talk) 03:44, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
We have settle the GC/not GC issue on the article. For the one sentence (lead) version, we settled on "walk across a Grand Canyon area gorge". This I suggest:
The feat is equally impressive whether he technically crossed the GC (according to the USGS he did) or a rock formation with the same properties but up river from the "real" Grand Canyon (i.e. the widest part in the National Park). --ThaddeusB (talk) 05:38, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – the LA Times article even states that he couldn't get permission from the US gov't to walk across GC proper. And doing it in an area gorge or near the site takes some of the "shine" off the feat. —Bloom6132 (talk) 07:41, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Unfortunately, I have to oppose because of the big debate about whether or not it was actually the Grand Canyon that Wallenda crossed. Without question, there are many people who mistakenly believe that it was the Grand Canyon that he crossed, rather than the nearby Navajo Tribal area at the Little Colorado 40 miles east (whether it's technically part of the GC or not). And it's undisputed that Wallenda did not receive a permit from the U.S. government to cross the Grand Canyon; park officials have been quoted in reliable sources verifying this fact. Although Thaddeus did a great job of rewording the content to address the objections to the claim that Wallenda crossed the GC, the debate will always exist. Because of all the reliable sources that say it was not the Grand Canyon he crossed, such as the Forbes story, plus the many others that strategically use the wording "near the Grand Canyon", I don't think this nomination should be supported. It was a great feat, but the dispute about the location is the pink elephant in the room. There will always be an asterisk next to the claim that Wallenda crossed the Grand Canyon. --76.189.109.155 (talk) 08:55, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
FYI... the nominator's own, one-sentence source, the Washington Post story (via the AP), actually contradicts the notion that Wallenda crossed the Grand Canyon. Both the title and body say that it was near the GC. --76.189.109.155 (talk) 19:16, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on article quality grounds; also no news sources are given above. My inkling is to think that the number of casualties is not enough in this case, though they were foreigners(to Montenegro). 331dot (talk) 20:15, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Exactly the type of article we aren't supposed to have on WP per NOTNEWS and certainly not in ITN. --MASEM (t) 20:55, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Article needs updating The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
I think the blurb should mention the winning coalition. For forming the next government, it is more important which coalition wins than which party comes first. (There is a centre-left and a centre-right bloc: according to exit polls, the centre-left bloc has won.) --RJFF (talk) 17:46, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's comments: This is the first time that foreign tourists have been attacked/shot in the province, according to Reuters. Tourists being shot and killed does not seem like an everyday thing, which is why I decided to nominate this event to ITN. Andise1 (talk) 06:19, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
strong oppose nine casualties in an attack in Pakistan is not notable by ITN standards for war torn countries such as Iraq, Syria, etc. There are no expectations of international repercussions (China being Pak's best friend are not going to escalate this)Lihaas (talk) 15:19, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support upon update. The notable thing here is not the number of casualties, but the fact that they were from other countries, giving the story an international scope; and in general attacks on tourists are rare. 331dot (talk) 15:26, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Did you try proposing these new UN sites? Other stuff does exist, and I think, right now, new UN sites will easily be promoted at ITN, as long as the articles are up to scratch. The World Heritage Site article needs some updates I think, and then we're good to go? The Rambling Man (talk) 16:08, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
TRM is correct - previous outcomes don't matter. Also the only way to change the balance of stories on ITN is to try. Lately we have posted a number of "different type" stories that may not have even been nominated in the past. --ThaddeusB (talk) 17:54, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
New world heritage sites are definitely notable. All that is needed for a successful nomination is a sufficient update. --RJFF (talk) 17:57, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Am I missing how world heritage sites are related to domestic French legislation? Post the WHS nom and see what happens. μηδείς (talk) 23:05, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe need to read more carefully what I wrote. Also thanks for all the DIY advice, but I am familiar with Wikipedia.--ELEKHHT01:08, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - terrorist attacks of this scale happen at least once a week or in Pakistan. I am uncomfortable with the idea the lives lost are somehow more important because they were foreigners. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:50, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it's that foreigners are more important, but it does provide an international scope, especially in this case where the victims were from three countries. 331dot (talk) 21:33, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support What makes this particularly notable is that the people killed were apparently climbers headed up Nanga Parbat, the ninth highest mountain in the world and considered extremely difficult -- many people have died attempting it. So these were not your ordinary tourists. (I should note, though, that it doesn't seem to be totally clear yet that the victims were climbers.) Looie496 (talk) 15:57, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
So you support because "killed were apparently climbers" although "doesn't seem to be totally clear yet that the victims were climbers". --ELEKHHT16:03, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, sorry. I would support anyway, but if it turns out to be correct that they were climbers then it becomes a strong support. Looie496 (talk) 16:32, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
100,000 workers and unemployed march against record unemployment in Rome, the first major demonstration since Enrico Letta's government took power earlier this year. (Al Jazeera)
Support either RD or Blurb is fine. Article is a bit sparse, but this is top sporting news right now, so willing to overlook article sparseness for level of coverage this is getting. --Jayron3204:26, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - his death is a big story, but he wouldn't be considered at the top of his field. Thus, only a full blurb makes sense. I would like to see a bit more expansive article (prose wise) before supporting so consider me neutral on full blurb at this time and opposed to RD. --ThaddeusB (talk) 05:09, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support full blurb. 24 Hours of Le Mans is ITN/R anyway, however running a "racing" blurb would be burying the lead. --LukeSurltc10:16, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support I was going to hang on to this until the end of the race but I am going to be off before then, but as the full blurb is 90 minutes away and I am figuring that it will be another predictable Audi win unless they suffer from a horrible mechanical failure I shall propose my version of the full blurb below. Donnie Park (talk) 11:45, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've tweaked the blurb because we use the present tense in blurbs and because I think "fatal accident of someone" reads a bit awkwardly. Formerip (talk) 19:25, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I'm pretty sure no-one ever refers to this race as "24 hours of Le Mans". It's the Le Mans 24 hours, surely? That's what the news source calls it. Formerip (talk) 21:13, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've never heard it referred to as "The Le Mans". Le Mans on its own is identifiable, but not The Le Mans. 24 Hours of Le Mans and Le Mans 24 Hours are used alternatively, both are acceptable. The359 (Talk) 22:19, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"Wins the Le Mans" has plenty of examples. "The Le Mans" is as common as "The El Nino" and "The Alhambra." But it seems this is a series, and the 24 hour race is one in the series? If it is just part of the series we probably shouldn't be publishing it. Personally. I know more about knee surgery or crochet, so I have no professional opinion here--just a bias towards being concise and unawkward in the blurb. μηδείς (talk) 22:50, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Speed Channel, ESPN using 24 Hours of Le Mans. "Le Mans" is a brand name given to three different racing series based on the 24 Hours of Le Mans - American Le Mans Series, European Le Mans Series, and Asian Le Mans Series. "24 Hours of Le Mans" avoids people confusing this for any of the three series. Most of your examples of "the Le Mans..." is actually just part of a title, such as the first example being "the Le Mans Series Manufacturers Championship", or in other examples "wins the Le Mans 24" or "wins the Le Mans 24 Hours". The359 (Talk) 22:57, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Post-posting congrats on a well done blurb. I was wondering how someone would put all that info into one blurb, and it was very well constructed. Well done. --Jayron3203:16, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's comments: A once in a century natural disaster in an area of Canada that is not particularly well known for massive flooding. In a city of over a million people, 100,000 have been evacuated, the downtown core of Calgary (a major economic centre that employs 350,000) has been flooded and effectively shut down, the NHL arena has been flooded to the tenth row and there is a real danger of the Calgary Stampede being cancelled for the first time since WWI. Outside of Calgary, smaller towns/cities like Okotoks and High River have been completely decimated and the Trans-Canada Highway has been washed out. It is also extremely likely that the flooding will carry over to neighbouring Saskatchewan. To fully express the magnitude of this event, CBC is predicting the output of the South Saskatchewan River will increase to approximately 2,000 cubic metres per second (Wikipedia says the norm is 280). This is a major national disaster hitting a major Canadian city which will likely result in billions in damages. --PlasmaTwa212:55, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Significant flood with a large displaced population, affecting a major city and the signature event of the City (the Stampede). Article seems to be in good shape to me. 331dot (talk) 13:41, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'm sure some will say "three deaths doesn't warrant a blurb" especially when the floods in India have killed more tha 500. However, the flood has impacted a significant portion of the city, Calgary is one of the largest cities in Canada and the fallout from this flood will impact the whole province for quite some time. It's also been getting front page coverage in major news sources outside Canada (ie. CNN). -- Scorpion042215:34, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support. This is a major natural disaster affecting the centre of a major city in the regional context. Featured on the BBC news as well. Thryduulf (talk) 15:57, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I've been fortunate to not really be affected, but I know many people who have. This flooding is unprecedented for our region and has been significant national news for the past several days, with widespread international coverage. Resolute16:11, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It's pretty big news here in Alberta, that's for sure. I live further north and am thus unaffected by the situation in Calgary, but I do know people who live in that city. From what I've heard, the worst has likely passed. Here's hoping they can manage things effectively from here on out. Kurtis(talk)06:06, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Latvian authorities say the overnight fire has extensively damaged Riga Castle, the medieval fortress that houses the Baltic nation's National History Museum, and presidential residence. (EuroNews)
Latvian President Andris Bērziņš describes the fire as a "national disaster" during a morning visit to inspect the damage. (Russia Today)
Nominator's comments: Important building extensively damaged by fire, a "national disaster" according to the Latvian President. --Bruzaholm (talk) 16:36, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - is there a compelling reason for a stand-alone article? From what I see, including the material in the main article would seem to be the better way to cover the fire. --ThaddeusB (talk) 17:09, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The Windsor Castle article is a very long one, also the fire article is a long one. At this point, merge is a reasonable idea, I have suggested it on the talkpage. Tentative support to post, otherwise. --Tone12:21, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've now merged the articles. The update is substantial, seems ITN material to me. Could I get more feedback before this gets stale? --Tone05:48, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment seems hard to say what the impact of this is, both in Latvia and across the world. Suggest we wait until more information is available before trying to declare judgement. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:46, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support - News coverage is extensive and the article quality is good now that the two have been combined. Will need more than just my vote to post though. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:46, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The last BBC report I could find was from a couple of days ago where it said no-one was killed and it was unclear what actual damage had been done. Can you clarify that position which may help us understand why this should be ITN? Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:51, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I supported because the fire damaged a historical building of great importance to one country and because it was one of the top few "world" stories on several websites the day it happened. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:27, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
2013 Alberta floods: Extensive flooding begins throughout southern Alberta, Canada, leading to the evacuation of more than 100,000 people, notably in the City of Calgary and Town of High River. It would become the costliest natural disaster in Canadian history.
New Zealand's South Island is lashed by wild weather. Dunedin and Christchurch have roads cut off and flights cancelled as conditions worsen. Heavy snow and flooding is reported in parts of Canterbury, Otago and Southland. (Stuff NZ)
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.
Yeah, so this just needs to be updated, namely with a summary of Game 7 and a clearer indication that this event has already occurred and resulted in a Miami win. -- tariqabjotu04:20, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Posting. The update is there and it's ITNR. I doubt there will be any serious opposition. Also, adding the sport. --Tone08:56, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate that Thaddeus is merely following a request, but this is not the way we normally report any sport event: the club article, not the club's season article, has always been the target, and I see no reason why it would not be in this case. The club article includes the present squad. The season articles are far inferior, with virtually no prose. Kevin McE (talk) 20:03, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Article needs updating 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: The Herald Sun refers to Jeffrey Smart as "one of Australia's greatest artists". ABC News refers to Jeffrey Smart as an "Internationally acclaimed Australian-born artist". Andise1 (talk) 02:32, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
*Oppose Not convinced that he was a very important figure in the field of cinema. Important perhaps, but not very important. The article also lacks citations and reads like a puff piece. Neljack (talk) 02:46, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Sorry, I must have missed Bongwarrior's comment. Seems to have been a very acclaimed and innovative artist. His death is getting international attention - I found this interesting article from The Guardian: [14] Our article contains a good, in-depth discussion of his art, though it may need some work regarding sources. Neljack (talk) 03:20, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose article is lame, it includes sentences such as "The following are a small random selection...." Many more references required, to be honest it's borderline sales brochure towards the end of the article. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:50, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Article needs updating 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: Kenneth Wilson is famous for his work on critical phenomena, this earned him the 1982 Nobel Prize for physics. Count Iblis (talk) 22:51, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support if updated with reaction to death\legacy information (one sentence saying he died in insufficient). For me, a Nobel Prize is sufficient to prove his was at the top of his field. --ThaddeusB (talk) 01:05, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose not notable enough, and the article would need a lot of work, including explaining the significance of his discoveries in a way that non-Physics graduate students can comprehend. μηδείς (talk) 01:19, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support pending update as ThaddeusB suggests. Several awards and recognition for his work, indicating notability in his field. 331dot (talk) 01:20, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Moot - The article states that he died on the 15th, not the 20th, which means that this is already older than the oldest blurb currently in the template, and thus stale. --Bongwarrior (talk) 02:50, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The general consensus I have observed is that merely winning a Nobel Prize is not enough by itself, though this man has won other awards. 331dot (talk) 14:38, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Blurb can be much better, picture should be of the effects of the haze (the haze map shrunk down to that size will make no sense to anyone reading). Oliverlyc07:43, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Does the west wind have anything to do with climate change? That's you know, completely the opposite of what it should be in the tropics. The winds of that whole map are messed up. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 08:25, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly note the the wind indicated is ground wind. Secondly I have done my very best to copy the wind data from here. It should not be too far off. Could you tell me any specific areas where the wind directions are messed up? Thanks. Oliverlyc08:37, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sure you did. I meant messed up compared to climate not to data issues. I once saw a wind direction probability rose of Darwin, Aus. or Cape York and the asymmetry was remarkable (it was trying to show how the prevailing wind is more reliable in the trades than the Westerlies). As slash-and-burn happens all the time in Indonesia, maybe that everything is going the wrong way now and causing is caused by global warming changing things, similar to how a warming Arctic weakened the Westerlies so much that Hurricane Sandy could cause the worst flooding in New York history? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 10:07, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - picture is nominated for speedy deletion as a copyright violation. In response to Tone, I would like to see more support before it is posted. --ThaddeusB (talk) 18:45, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
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: This event is not covered much in English news sources, but it is one of the top events in Draughts (Checkers), so I believe that it has a shot at being in In The News. If anyone has suggestions for an alternative or better worded blurb, feel free to change the blurb (if needed). Andise1 (talk) 05:32, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The 8x8 board was solved using slightly different rules than tournament play use. The Championships are played on a 10x10 board, which makes it a order of magnitude more complex to solve using brute force. (It would also be impossible for a human to memorize the solution - it took computers 10 years to solve working nonstop.) Also, the opening moves are determined by a random draw in many tournaments (not sure about the championships). --ThaddeusB (talk) 18:49, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose In principal I might consider supporting this, but the article on the world championship is simply a list of winners. There's no useful encyclopaedic information about the format of the tournament itself so I can't see how this can be considered for the main page in its current state (sorry!). CaptRik (talk) 11:25, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Regretfully, none of the articles are not up to ITN-level quality. Would be an interesting story to consider, otherwise. --Tone18:13, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose like Tone says, none of the linked articles are up to scratch, we'd need some serious work for ITN. Having said that, it's a good topic and something we perhaps should consider in the future if we can upgrade the quality of the relevant items. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:06, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The Indian Army is deployed to help rescue people in the flood-hit northern states of Uttarakhand and Himachal Pradesh, where the number of confirmed deaths has reached 130. (BBC)
A man is killed and more than 6,000 people are evacuated following an explosion at an arms depot in the Samara Oblast in central Russia. (Sky News)
Article needs updating 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: Well-known Italian/American actor, and died at 51 from a heart attack. Article needs a better update. RD only. MASEM (t) 23:38, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Overall quality is adequate, but will need a good death update. As a unexpected death of a person in their prime, his death should be notable enough to generate plenty of sourcing (i.e. on the death, not just obits). --ThaddeusB (talk) 23:55, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support: I think this deserves the full-monty when it comes to posting, so this means a blurb. CNN has practically went full boar about his death, which he won a three television Emmy's and Golden Globe's, so it is a huge deal.HotHat (talk) 00:24, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support - This actor should be ITN mentioned. Even though I realise that there are a "american famous actor"-syndrom on Wikipedia here we have actually an actor that deserves a mention.--BabbaQ (talk) 00:27, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support for RD only He was famous only for portraying Tony Soprano, for which he was given all the credits and was honoured with multiple awards. This is not enough to support it for a full blurb.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 01:43, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The reason for a full blurb is that his death was unexpected and under unusual circumstances. It has nothing to do with one's opinion of his acting, which I think was highly overrated. μηδείς (talk) 02:22, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I understand, but I don't feel he is on the same level as Margaret Thatcher (I believe the last death to get a full blurb) or Nelson Mandela (who is often also suggested as someone worthy of a full blurb), and as I understand it a full blurb is reserved for those tip-top people. 331dot (talk) 02:35, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
A full blurb can also be used for situations where the death itself is notable (not syaign that applies or does not apply here, just that it is a possibility). --ThaddeusB (talk) 03:04, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I suggested only an RD because first while a notable actor and award-winning, he wasn't a person I'd expect known across the globe, and while a stroke at 51 is unusual and tragic, it is also not unheard of. RD ticker is perfect, but I'd think a full blurb would be a lot more difficult to support. --MASEM (t) 03:09, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'd agree. His fame was narrow, all built around a single TV series. Even American TV fans who never happened to become keen on the show would not know who he was. HiLo48 (talk) 03:14, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support. For RD only, though. That should go without saying, but recentism is certainly at play. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk)03:17, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
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: Gyula Horn was a former Hungarian Prime Minister. He played a big role in the opening of the Iron Curtain. According to the ABC News article, "He was best known internationally for his announcement as foreign minister in 1989 that Hungary would allow East German refugees to leave the country for West Germany, one of the key events that helped bring an end to communism in Eastern Europe." The Telegraph refers to Gyula Horn as "the former Hungarian prime minister credited as one of the communist leaders who helped bring down the Iron Curtain in 1989." Andise1 (talk) 21:35, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The death update looks good, but the rest of the article is mostly unreferenced. For example, the "His role in 1956" section has zero refs. I can't support the article at its current state. --ThaddeusB (talk) 23:50, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
At this point the article is quite handsome and looks well-referenced. Unless there is some further defeect (in which case, please tag) I intend to mark this ready. μηδείς (talk) 03:47, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I have commented out that section. It looks like it was translated from the Hungarian article which read well enough to look for sources in. Had the section been addressed before his death it could have been removed entirely on BLP grounds and much would have been hard to restore. μηδείς (talk) 18:33, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
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: According to his Wikipedia article, Slim Whitman "was given the accolade of a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame." Also, according to his Wikipedia article, "He was inducted into the Country Music Hall of Fame and Museum's Walkway of Stars in 1968." Slim Whitman was one of Michael Jackson's ten favorite vocalists. Slim Whitman was also an early influence for George Harrison, who was the lead guitarist for The Beatles. Andise1 (talk) 19:23, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Article will need more referencing (and preferably also some reaction to his death) before I can support on quality, but notability is there. --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:05, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support pending article improvements as outlined by ThaddeusB. The nominator and Medeis make very convincing points as to notability and importance within his field. Pedro : Chat 21:16, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
At the risk of causing drama, I have pulled this. The article is in poor shape with vast unreferenced blocks. Supports above are based on notability alone, with no reference to article quality (except for me & Predo who both say it is not adequate). --ThaddeusB (talk) 04:49, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Article is in better shape now - just a few more citations in the "Biography" section and removing the orange tag (and posting) would be warranted. --ThaddeusB-public (talk) 16:04, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Although the tag has been removed and a few [citation needed]s have been fixed, the 2nd, 4th, 6th, and 7th paragraphs of the biography section are without any references. Thus, my concern about article quality remains - it is better than it was, but not good enough (IMO). However, I won't dispute it if someone else posts. As a point of reference, DYK requires a minimum of 1 citation per paragraph. To me, that is a good standard to have for "normal" stories (such as this one), which exceptions possible in exceptional circumstances. --ThaddeusB (talk) 19:04, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It's much more helpful if one actually tags the claims in the article so they can be reffed or removed rather than mentioning them here and making one guess and have to keep revisiting the issue. In any case, I have added one or two refs to the paragraphs you've mentioned, and commented out para 7 for now, since it looks interesting but easy refs were not forthcoming. μηδείς (talk) 19:57, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: There were several articles about these floods under various different titles. They've all been redirected to 2013 North India floods now, as the flooding affects multiple states. The overall death toll is at 130. Article needs some work (better use of English) and broadening to reflect the complete scope of the (obviously very notable) disaster. --ThaddeusB (talk) 05:14, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've reworked the entire article, and rewritten it in many places. A little tweaking might be all that is required, but otherwise the article seems ready. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 07:36, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support - notability is obvious; article condition is now decent - the English and scope are much improved (thanks Soni). A further copyedit and a few more sources (i.e. more information) wouldn't hurt, but there's nothing to oppose over. (P.S. I'm glad someone wrote this article so I didn't have to, as I was going to nominate this if no one else did.) --ThaddeusB (talk) 07:47, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Question Support Does anyone know how regularly this region experiences floods of this magnitude (from the linked article the geography makes it look like it could be a regular occurrence). If so, is this story different to previous years, or has it simply made bigger news this year, possibly because of the death toll? Just trying to get a feel for things before offering an opinion. CaptRik (talk) 10:31, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
From what I know/can figure out, there were floods last year in a smaller magnitude. Other than that, I dont think there were any other floods, atleast on a major/comparable scale. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 11:13, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Then the article needs to be updated. The BBC has yet to get to that total, but it may be because the last update for them was 10 hours ago. However, please make sure the article is updated correctly and then we may be able to update the ITN blurb. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:59, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I updated the blurb to read "more than 1000" earlier today. As to updater notifications, they are rarely done by most ITN admins, but if you like feel free to give them yourself: {{ITN notice}} --ThaddeusB (talk) 00:45, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I see. I was under the impression that they were always given out, and the admins updating it was the one always giving it. Thanks for the clarification. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 05:47, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This item is currently at the bottom of the ITN template; I think we may want to bump this again instead of removing it if a new item is added anytime soon. This is a huge disaster, it's still ongoing, and the article is still being updated and attracting a lot of pageviews. --Bongwarrior(talk) 03:57, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Bongwarrior. If it's likely/ possible, the news should be made a sticky at the top/bottom of the ITN thread. Relevant newsworthy items are coming up everyday for this incident. Yesterday, a chopper in the rescue crashed, killing all 20 onboard. (123) TheOriginalSoni (talk) 08:14, 26 June 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
