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).
Rebel commander Igor Girkin confirms that Ukrainian government forces have recaptured control of the strategic town of Krasnyi Luch from pro-Russian insurgents, effectively closing in the Donetsk People's Republic rebellion. (BBC)
Azerbaijan's President Ilham Aliyev declares a ‘state of war’ with Armenia on Twitter saying “We are not living in peace, we are living in a state of war". (The Independent)
Hamas rejects the continuation of a 72-hour ceasefire and has shot over 60 rockets since 8:00 into southern Israel. Israel launches air strikes in response. (AP)(CNN)
The DotA 2 tournament, "The International 4" begins, the biggest e-sports event of all time with a prize pool of $10,930,698 [1]
Business and economy
Ukraine’s government picks 172 individuals and 65 companies that will face sanctions for "support and financing of terrorism" or responsible for crimes on country’s territory during the pro-Russian unrest. (Kyiv Post)
The Italian senate votes in favor of a dramatic reduction of its own size and powers to challenge laws proposed in the lower house, and for turning itself into an unelected body. (BBC)
Nominator's comments: Obama just went on TV and said he is launching airstrikes on ISIS. Should that be on the In the news? Or should we just add "Iraq conflict" in with Gaza and Ukraine and Libya. ----Bellerophon5685 (talk) 05:31, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment if you'd like this as a blurb, please suggest one, including a suitable target article, indicate some reliable sources and tell us whether the article(s) in question have been updated. We can't possibly support or oppose beforehand. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:47, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I've added the template, possible target articles and Sca's sources because I'm a good guy. I left the blurb for someone else because I'm lazy. --Bongwarrior (talk) 05:43, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support as ongoing, not as a blurb. This is another chapter in the conflict, with the U.S. engaging in military retaliation (albeit in the form of surgical strikes). More news will be sure to follow as the conflict continues to escalate.--WaltCip (talk) 15:29, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I would be happier posting more Syria-Iraqi blurbs. E.g. the Taiwan item currently ITN with 30 would be a quiet friday in Iraq. Thue (talk) 17:35, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes it is weird that there is no Iraq ongoing item. Abductive (reasoning) 16:08, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - The target article probably should be Battle of Sinjar, as the Iraqi offensive article is about the Islamic State's operations in June. Hello32020 (talk) 22:11, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb Foreign intervention in the conflict is a significant development that warrants a blurb. It can be transferred to "Ongoing" afterwards, but an "Ongoing" listing at the moment would not communicate this important development to our readers. Neljack (talk) 23:22, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
My support would be purely hypothetical based on the fact that this is a top news item right now, but I don't see any target article we are, or should be, highlighting as yet. If we can get a good Wikipedia article updated on the topic sufficiently, I'd be all for putting this up, but we've got nothing yet... --Jayron32 12:15, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support these sanctions are actually bigger than those by the West. Nergaal (talk) 13:36, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support The economic consequences looks to be large. Thue (talk) 17:25, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I've expanded and updated the article so that it is something approaching postable. Further help would be appreciated. Formerip (talk) 22:57, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – Meanwhile, could someone please change the "ongoing" blurb to match the article it links to? The ongoing conflict is the War in Donbass, and the ongoing blurb links to Timeline of the War in Donbass, but the blurb says "Ukrainian unrest", which seems like a euphemism. I recommend changing the "unrest" to "War in Donbass", or something similar, to match the article. RGloucester — ☎ 15:10, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW, the phrase "War in Donbass" gets 34,000 ghits, while "War in Ukraine" gets 6,180,000 ghits. Donbass, Ukraine. Media seems to broadly agree that the conflict is named for Ukraine and not Donbass... --Jayron32 18:09, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
And if we do want to improve specificity, "War in Eastern Ukraine" gets 270,000 ghits. --Jayron32 18:10, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You can use "War in Ukraine" for ITN purposes, but it fails all of our article title criteria. Do you know how many wars there have been in Ukraine? There is no war in Lviv, either, if you've not noticed. It is limited to the Donbass region. We've just closed a long RM to get to War in Donbass, and there are good reasons for its placement there. We don't use journalistic shorthand. We adopted a WP:NDESC title. Regardless, for ITN purposes, "War in Ukraine" would work, since it doesn't have to stand up to the tests of time. RGloucester — ☎ 19:39, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No, absolutely. The use of a name for an article title is (and should be) distinct (as needed) than the words used in a piped link on the main page. The purpose of the title should be to reflect both accuracy and verifiability, whereas the purpose of an Ongoing link is to direct readers to articles about topics they would recognize from the news. The "Donbass" name serves its purpose well as an article title, but would have poor recognition for people coming here to find out more about a subject they are reading about in the news. Since the news is using the word "Ukraine" or "Eastern Ukraine" to describe the conflict to an overwhelming degree, our link should be piped with that wording, though the article title is clearly appropriate as Donbass... --Jayron32 04:18, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral leaning to oppose. With respect to Canada and Russia, at least, this is merely an incremental update as the two nations have been playing tit for tat for months now. I suspect it is similar with other nations. Resolute 15:14, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support- A lot bigger than any of the sanctions being imposed the other way, so worthy of its own blurb. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 20:20, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose we might as well have posted that over 100,000 Americans petitioned the White House to deport Justin Bieber. But if we do post this, a shirtless picture of Putin will be necessary. μηδείς (talk) 02:01, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's comments: Significant notable conclusion of this tribunal. Apologies if I've made a mistake with the article in the template (first time!). CaptRik (talk) 11:32, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Definitely notable conclusion and sentences.--BabbaQ (talk) 11:38, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, thanks for spotting that, I've added an altblurb for review. CaptRik (talk) 11:47, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support original blurb over alt-blurb. The articles on the convicted men actually has a better update IMHO, and it's easier to follow the recent news in those articles than in the Tribunal article. None of the articles is bad, but the original blurb highlights the articles which cover this item in better detail. --Jayron32 11:50, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Jayfron and supports the original blurb.--BabbaQ (talk) 11:53, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support Agree that their names should be bolded, as the updates are are better there. Also, would it be possible to incorporate the fact that they were sentenced to life imprisonment into the blurb without making it unacceptably long? That seems a rather significant aspect of the story. Neljack (talk) 11:59, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very notable, Samphan is the former head of state of Cambodia. As such, I support bolding the names. Maybe there can be a compromise by wikilinking "a UN-backed tribunal" to Khmer Rouge Tribunal in the first blurb? --Pudeo' 14:05, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Neither man's article is adequately referenced. Espresso Addict (talk) 16:47, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see that both personal articles are inadequately referenced. There was only one unreferenced section in Nuon Chea, which I fixed with 2 citations. Khieu Samphan has a long history section that is unreferenced, but the relevant arrest and trial is well-referenced. --Pudeo' 18:18, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Despite what other's may think, we look for citations where appropriate, not just in the section of interest to the story. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:42, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I added further 11 citation marks to Khieu Samphan's article (and removed some sentences). Both articles should be acceptable now, although everyone should feel free to improve. --Pudeo' 00:32, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Posted. I've Frankensteined a blurb together that I hope works for everyone, although I didn't see a good way to add the life sentences without making it a little too wordy. --Bongwarrior (talk) 03:23, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It was when I originally posted it; after some consideration, I unlinked it because the blurb had too many links and that one was the most obvious candidate to be removed. --Bongwarrior (talk) 18:33, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Saudi Arabia grants Lebanon US$1 billion to help the country in its conflict with self-declared jihadist fighters on the border with Syria. (Al Jazeera)
Russia bans all United States agricultural products, European Union fruit and vegetable imports in response to Western sanctions imposed on Russia over the Ukrainian crisis. (RT)(BBC News)
Officials in Karamay in Xinjiang, western China, places a temporary ban on Islamic headscarves, clothing and those with beards from using public transport, following violence in the region. (BBC News)
Two medical students Neil Dalton, 23 and Aidan Brunger completing their exchange from Newcastle University to a hospital in Malaysian Borneo were murdered after four men followed them after an argument over singing in a bar and stabbed them from behind. (The Telegraph)
Nominator's comments: Largest wildfire in Swedish history, death confirmed. International attention by media, and also help from other countries sent. --BabbaQ (talk) 10:43, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Significant fire that is news worthy!--Doug Coldwell (talk) 15:14, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose no sign of this being widely reported, i.e. not "in the news". Article is weak stub. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:23, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose. I agree with TRM that this doesn't seen to be widely reported. 331dot (talk) 19:32, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose "largest wildfire in modern Swedish history" is quite the exaggeration considering multiple sources[4][5][6] say "largest forest fire in more than 40 years" instead. WinterWall (talk) 21:29, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Norwegian newspapers report it as the biggest in scandinavia in 200 years. [7]. Which is consisten with largest in modern history. I have not found any swedish newspapers that compare it with historic wildfires. 85.19.71.131 (talk) 10:03, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support. This is a newsworthy wildfire IMO and it is the first of its kind. Adjö! Jonny Nixon - (Talk) 09:47, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The Russian consumer protection agency, Rospotrebnadzor, adds Kentucky Gentleman to a growing list of imports banned, saying that this Bourbon whiskey includes "additives that can cause functional and eventually organic changes in the central and peripheral nervous systems, the endocrine system, as well as cause cancer and problems with infertility in men and women." (Los Angeles Times)
Renowned Japanese scientist Yoshiki Sasai commits suicide, after the discrediting of certain experimental results he supervised, regarding stem cells. (Reuters)
No consensus to post, so closing before we all get dragged before arbcom for discussing the importance and relevance of this individual's actions to an international audience. Stephen 00:23, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Oppose Minor politician tries to make a point. And fails. Pointless act of throwing toys, would have been better to stay and do something. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:15, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose If the UK had tried to engineer a peace deal, and the Foreign Minister had failed and resigned, with the Prime Minister teetering, it would be a big deal. As it is, this is a political stunt, and I remain opposed to playing into the hands of those looking to make a small story into a big one. Is there an article for this with lots of fascinating detail to make it worthwhile for a reader to click through? --Pete (talk) 19:21, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I agree that this story does not reach the threshold for ITN, but this is not a forum for disparaging the article subject, or any article subject. Newyorkbrad (talk) 20:14, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't see it that way. The ministry is not relevant to the issue. That's a disconnect right there. It's like the Pensions Minister resigning over the World Series. Though that might make for a better story. --Pete (talk) 20:30, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
C'mon Brad, there's a poor article on an RD for a US subject – you should be pushing it to the main page. Be consistent, if nothing else. In the meantime, don't lecture us on having and expressing opinions. Save it for the few who remain that respect Arbcom etc. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:50, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose since we rarely post ministerial resignations (except perhaps Prime Ministers). But I agree with Brad's comment. This is not a forum for discussing the merits of Lady Warsi's decision, and per BLP people should certainly not be describing her conduct in disparaging terms. Neljack (talk) 23:54, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
oppose per the position. but ;support as in the news. its all over the place. walked into the gym and this rubbish was highlighted for, well as long as I was there (and that's long enough...except im not sure when I was in the pool)Lihaas (talk) 00:54, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Too low level a position. I'm sure they also had little role in setting any Israel policy in the UK. 331dot (talk) 01:21, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Per all the other opposes. Rhodesisland (talk) 06:57, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support Baroness Warsi held two positions. One was Faith and Communities, but the other was Senior Minister of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, the second highest position in the Foreign Office, and she was in charge of all Foreign Offices matters (including Israel) in the House of Lords. She most definitely did have considerable influence on British foreign policy Smurrayinchester 07:51, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
But her resignation is hardly ITN-worthy. Even if the actual Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs had resigned, it wouldn't be ITN-worthy. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:59, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Politician resigns from a non-cabinet position doesn't cut it in terms of importance for me. I can't find any encyclopaedic content on exactly what the UK's foreign policy on the Gaza Conflict actually is. CaptRik (talk) 09:58, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose With very rare exceptions, the resignations of government ministers is not ITN-worthy. I fail to see what would make this one of those exceptions. Redverton (talk) 16:54, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
[Posted] Rosetta rendevous with a comet
Article:Rosetta (spacecraft) (talk·history·tag) Blurb: ESA's spacecraft Rosetta becomes the first manmade object to orbit a comet. (Post) Alternative blurb: The ESA spacecraft Rosetta reaches 67P/Churyumov–Gerasimenko, becoming the first manmade object to orbit a comet. News source(s):Telegraph The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: On August 6 the spacecraft will undergo orbital insertion maneuvers. Nergaal (talk) 18:43, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support significant first. And post again when (if) it lands (in November). Thue (talk) 21:00, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support: science, especially space exploration, is an underrepresented topic on In The News. It being the first is noteworthy. The article needs to be updated, however. 174.114.142.10 (talk) 21:01, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very significant, also agree that I hope we post it again if the rendezvous happens. CaptRik (talk) 21:02, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Decent article and I'd be happy to see it posted, but not twice for what is, essentially, one story. If we post now, we shouldn't post later. If we would rather post later, let's not post now. Formerip (talk) 23:16, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support, this one is a no-brainer. Formerip makes a good observation, but since the landing won't happen for a few months, I'd be in favor of posting this twice. Interesting as hell and far from routine. --Bongwarrior (talk) 03:42, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Easy call. Gamaliel (talk) 04:25, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The article needs updating and refers to the August events in the future tense. Stephen 04:42, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'd be happy with having this twice, since it's not technically Rosetta landing in November. Rosetta will remain in orbit around 67/P, but will release a separate lander spacecraft, Philae. I've suggested an altblurb with the name of the comet included. Smurrayinchester 05:22, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Wait until confirmed. According to [8], confirmation should be at 10:35 BST (09:35 UTC) this morning. It's still possible that something may go wrong. — An optimist on the run! (logged on as Pek the Penguin) 06:35, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Question. What is the mission here? To orbit or rendezvous with? I would like to see it posted when the mission has achieved its goal. Rhodesisland (talk) 07:02, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
There are two parts to the mission, which involve two separate spacecraft. Rosetta's goal is to orbit 67/P and examine it from space, Philae's goal is to land on 67/P and investigate its geology. It's comparable to the Cassini-Huygens mission - Cassini orbited Saturn, Huygens landed on Titan. Smurrayinchester 07:45, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and the altblurb is way too long. Rhodesisland (talk) 07:03, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Are ESA images free like NASA's? There is a great image here. Also you could change the blurb with "67P/C–P" to make it less daunting. Nergaal (talk) 10:20, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
According to this, we have to assume not. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:36, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Just for the record. It is notable.--BabbaQ (talk) 10:56, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
How about this ESA image (on BBC)? Sca (talk) 15:20, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That is the image I was thinking also. I've uploaded a cropped version at File:Comet 67P-Churyumov-Gerasimenko.png but hopefully someone can figure out a way to put this impressive image on the main page. Nergaal (talk) 20:20, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Picture
Per this and this with ESA images, one "may freely use the images you find on our site, as long as it is not for commercial use. You may not modify the images. If you intend to use any of the images on a website, please acknowledge that it originates from ESA." The file is hosted on commons (see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Comet Churyumov-Gerasimenko on 3 August 2014.png) so I think it can/should be used on the main page. Nergaal (talk) 15:05, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I know that this is not uncommon in China, but is this that notable for South Africa? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nergaal (talk • contribs) 14:08, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes it is dominating the news here. We have earth tremors more regularly, this one is abnormal. HelenOnline 14:11, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Epicenter near a major population center which rarely sees activity of this nature. For comparison, I think the 2011 Virginia earthquake was featured. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.95.216.224 (talk) 15:57, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed it was, and that just resulted in damage, no deaths. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:07, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support: Rare event for South Africa that will likely see the death toll rise as the story is updated. I added some more references to the article, seeing as though it's getting a lot of news coverage. Lugia2453 (talk) 16:25, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support- Not as much for it being a tragic disaster but more as a shocking event with some cultural impact, along the lines of the 2011 Virginia Earthquake as previously mentioned. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 16:33, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Article is much too short to post. Abductive (reasoning) 17:20, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support - earthquakes of this size in this region are rare. Mjroots (talk) 20:33, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment per Abductive, this is barely a stub. It has consensus to post should the article reach the minimum required standard (or should the standards be overlooked). Would be good if someone could fix it up.... The Rambling Man (talk) 20:40, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Only one death; damage significant, but not huge. I don't think that's sufficiently significant to warrant posting. Nor do I see that frequency of earthquakes in the area as being very relevant to assessing its significance, but in any case significant earthquakes are not that rare in the area - a similar quake in the same region killed two people in 2005.[9]Neljack (talk) 22:57, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. According to Richter magnitude scale, 5.3 represents a "moderate" earthquake, of which there are 1,000-1,500 each year. Formerip (talk) 23:22, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose 5.3 is a tremor, nothing more. There's been a death but really, you'd have to place that squarely on shoddy building rather than the quake. 3142 (talk) 00:29, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
oppose per above, not notable in its effects Lihaas (talk) 00:53, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, the precedent has been set, but this isn't the US. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:28, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
We do not operate a system of precedent here. I would have opposed that one too. Just because we once made a questionable decision, it does not mean that we have to keep making such decisions if we think they are wrong. Neljack (talk) 08:57, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, as I said, this didn't happen in the US so it won't be posted, unlike the Virginia quake which was posted by .... an American admin despite questionable consensus. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:42, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. It seems to me that according to the South African earthquake chart, there have been several quakes/tremors of at least 4.0 since 2013. So it's not really that rare after all, is it? Rhodesisland (talk) 07:11, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
But this is rare as the magnitude has exceeded 5.0. Nathan121212 (talk) 10:15, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support - rare and notable event for the region.--BabbaQ (talk) 14:21, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment interesting how many opposes are based purely on the Richter scale rating, entirely ignoring the context of the quake. Now a quick glance at, say, the February 2011 Christchurch earthquake which registered 6.3, killed 184 people, yet the June 2011 Christchurch earthquake which registered 6.4 killed just one person. Just claiming that a 5.3 is a mild wobble is all very well, but if that mild wobble has taken place in a location which is hardly ever wobbled and which has killed someone, it's worth taking the context into account. But yes, it's not the US, so it's probably not in most people's "context sphere" in any case. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:47, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Whatever people's judgement in previous earthquakes I think most users are applying reasonable standards here--The Richter scale, combined with the death toll, and the news coverage in international sources. The BBC has this as a minor headline in the Africa section, for example. Currently as I view J-berg's Mail and Guardian, the entire front page does not mention the word 'earthquake' (it's the seocnd headline in the 'national' section'.)--Johnsemlak (talk) 16:11, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, but most oppose just reference the Richter scale, at least you have the courtesy to back it up with contextual evidence. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:16, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Nathan it is difficult from so far away to get a local perspective on how significant of an event this is in S Africa. Most of us rely upon international news sources like the BBC. I've checked the News24 site twice in the last 24 hours and there's very little coverage of the earthquake at all--no major headlines related. Perhaps it's because I'm viewing outside of South Africa. I imagine the coverage was more substantial a couple of days ago.--Johnsemlak (talk) 11:11, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Most of the earthquakes here are situated near fault zones: Turkey, Indonesia, Japan, Oceania region. According to the list there are no fault zones in Southern Africa, which makes this earthquake highly unexpected. Nathan121212 (talk) 17:13, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Quite. These examples are missing the point entirely. The point of context. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:58, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I can assure you I most certainly was considering the context of this event when reaching my oppose. A parallel that immediately comes to mind was a minor quake here in the UK a few years ago - 5.1 or 5.2, one death caused by a falling chimney stack if memory serves. Again, well away from any major fault zone. That was traced to a fault under the city of Hull: look at a worldwide map of the major fault lines and you won't see any such fault marked.
That absence is what makes my point: high school level geography describes a relatively small number of continent-sized plates and all the action occurring between those plates. However, that is a greatly simplified abstraction: in reality each plate is itself composed of hundreds of sub-plates that have a general tendency to move as one, but minor shuffling between the plates triggers small tremors such as this well away from the major fault zones, and at a vastly greater frequency than the major quakes. This is a common occurrence: it is not unusual, nor unexpected, nor is it notable. Presenting this as some kind of freak event ignores the true complexity of the field. 3142 (talk) 22:28, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: on the basis of article quality. The argument that the 2011 Virginia earthquake was posted because of U.S.-centrism is seriously flawed; rather, the Virginia earthquake article was more developed at the time of posting compared to the current South African earthquake article and likely the reason for posting - to highlight quality articles on Wikipedia. When the admin posted the story to Template:In the news[10], the article was already well-developed [11], and the article is now considered a good article. On the other hand, this article (2014 Orkney earthquake) is still a stub and will likely never reach the breadth of the Virginia earthquake article because of a lack of sources comparatively. 174.114.142.10 (talk) 00:17, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This.^^^^^^^ Article quality should be the primary arbiter here. I could not have said it better myself. --Jayron32 00:26, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Article is no longer a stub and meets the minimum quality requirements to be posted, so opposition based on article quality is no longer valid. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:50, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
While meeting the minimum quality requirements might warrant posting for stronger magnitude earthquakes, in this case for the 2014 Orkney earthquake, meeting the minimum quality requirements just doesn't cut it. The rationale for posting the 2011 Virginia earthquake was much more compelling because the article was already well-developed at the time of posting which pushed it over the top. We want to highlight significant stories but also quality articles at the same time. 174.114.142.10 (talk) 14:43, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Just for the record, I would support the posting of this story if the article was more developed like the 2011 Virginia earthquake was at the time of posting. 174.114.142.10 (talk) 14:45, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It either meets the minimum requirements or it doesn't. It does. Nothing more to say. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:46, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I've posted several reasons above, but refrained from a !vote until now. The bottom line is this earthquake is pretty unremarkable by the main statistical measures (richter scale or death count). As far as I'm aware the death count hasn't risen has as predicted. I simply haven't seen the evidence of the substantial impact of the earthquake to warrant a posting. The only good reason so far was that another earthquake in the US was posted 3 years ago, and that isn't nearly good enough. As I have mentioned before, there have been many earthquakes nominated to ITN over the last few years--some posted and some not. We shouldn't' be dictated here by a single precedent, perhaps an outlier. I'd consider supporting if I saw substantial evidence of the impact in South Africa (damage to homes, people forced to move, etc). But I haven't seen that evidence yet.--Johnsemlak (talk) 11:17, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The Virginia earthquake had a lot of opposition, there's no reason to make the same mistake again for a relatively minor earthquake in terms of size and impact. SpencerT♦C 01:38, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ukrainian government forces recapture control of Yasynuvata from pro-Russian insurgents; government troops have now all but encircled the rebels' second-largest stronghold of Luhansk, and rebels declared a "state of siege" in Donetsk. (Reuters)
The Ukrainian military urges residents of Donetsk to evacuate amid reports of "increased rebel attacks" on civilians and to clear the way for government troops to advance on one of the insurgency’s biggest stronghold. (Washington Post)
A Palestinian drives a tractor down a crowded street into a bus in Jerusalem killing one and injuring six before being shot dead by a police officer. (Times Of Israel)
A Palestinian shoots and critically injures an Israeli soldier in Jerusalem and escapes on a motorcycle hours after a trailer terrorist attack. (Times of Israel)
The death toll from an explosion at an auto parts factory on Saturday in the Chinese city of Kunshan rises to 75 with investigators blaming faulty safety measures. (AP via Daily Mail)
Rescuers in Nepal find another two victims of Saturday's landslides bringing the official death toll to ten with none of 159 people missing expected to be found alive. (AP via The Buffalo News)
Support - We don't usually post anniversaries - nor should we - but this one has received decent news coverage, it's a highly significant event in human history, and I think that the centennial is worthy of a very rare exception. Theoretically, I would also support posting the end of WWI, the beginning and end of WWII, possibly the first lunar landing, and absolutely nothing else that I can think of. --Bongwarrior (talk) 04:36, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's comments: This is the first summit of its kind to be hosted by the US. Invitations have been extended to fifty African leaders. I believe this is a notable event in the current global business environment given the resurgence of other emerging world economies who are also competing for influence within this great continent. You may suggest an altblurb. --Ali Fazal (talk) 17:50, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. From the article, it looks like this is basically the US's response to the large amount of Chinese economic investment in Africa: they invite leaders to Washington and try to increase trade. Not as much of a substantive summit in terms of many countries working together, it's just the US and individual nations (just all at the same time), from what it looks like. If I'm mistaken, please feel free to let me know, I'm willing to reconsider my argument as well; this is just based on the article right now. SpencerT♦C 18:04, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Whilst I agree with some of the points that you've raised; the fact that almost all the African leaders will be gathering in D.C. at the same time is unprecedented (unlike New York). Plus, this summit has notable exclusions and the civil society and human rights organisatons are expected to pressure the leaders to do more for human rights in Africa. Ali Fazal (talk) 00:35, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe if something important happens because of this (human rights agreement?) I may support after the conference, but for now, still opposed. SpencerT♦C 19:19, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Tempted to support for the reason of Spencer's oppose. Why is the fact this is in US interest a reason to oppose? The US evul, or sumpin? μηδείς (talk) 02:52, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose. Being the first one, it is hard to judge its notability and significance for ITN; if this becomes an annual or otherwise regular event, it may be easier. 331dot (talk) 08:26, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Nno, it required discussion to place it there. As a new and meaningless summit with a handful of the 50+ African states its unlikely to get ethereLihaas (talk) 16:34, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for clarifying. I was under the impression that all major(?) economic summits are covered; my bad! Meaningless? lol. There are media reports that more than 45 leaders will attend. If the HOSs can't make it, they will definitely send a representative. Ali Fazal (talk) 19:49, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
np. if that's the case then our article didn't indicate it as suchLihaas (talk) 23:37, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: 2 – If the article needs to be updated in order to meet your (personal) standard(s) so as to be notable, then I request you to please enhance it. I strived to compile it under WP:NPOV. I don't know if this helps, but I'd like to present the following statistics:
The article has received more than 11,000 hits since its creation, with about 1200 only yesterday
When one searches for the four key words: "us africa leaders summit"; you'll find its on the top 10 [Google].
I assure you the major world media houses will be covering this summit. Ali Fazal (talk) 19:49, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Question and conditional support. Has the summit actually begun? All the press I read say, will be held/will attend/etc. I will support this once the summit has actually begun. I think it has encyclopedic interest because it is the first and as such has "notability and significance". Perhaps, the subsequent summits might not carry such importance but certainly the first one does. But again, all I see is "will occur" notifications in the news right now. Let's wait until it actually occurs. Rhodesisland (talk) 02:20, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
So, to answer my own question; I find that the summit is to begin on 8/4. That's today here, but still tomorrow for most of the world. I say we re-word the blurb to show that the summit has begun, once it has, and then update the article. Rhodesisland (talk) 03:17, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support wholeheartedly. An international effort to do something positive is extremely newsworthy. The outcome can be published as another news story of its own. Currently "In The News" section has too many stories of death and destruction, this story will be a positive story and a breath of fresh air. Wikipedia does not need to read like the 10 o'clock news full of horror and sensationalism. Just because that's what we're used to seeing on TV, doesn't mean that's news. Evening news has to sell advertising space, so that's why they do it. We need to hold ourselves to a higher standard on Wikipedia. (Getting off the soapbox now.) USchick (talk) 17:03, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose' at this point. The sources I have seen do not claim this is the first of a recurring series, the claim that this is the "first" seems to be based more on the fact it has never happened before. It also differs from the summits usually covered in that it is essentially bilateral in nature - i.e. the US on one hand and the African countries collectively on the other. It's possible that this might produce something significant but it is equally possible this is simply a goodwill exercise or simple politicking - being seen to do something. Possibly worth evaluating again at end of summit if there have been some concrete developments of real importance, but the current significance of this seems more imagined or hoped for than real and present. 3142 (talk) 21:05, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The significance of this summit is that someone recognized that at least some new roads in Africa need to benefit Africans, not just building new roads from the mines to the sea port. Whether or not they follow up on this idea is a different story. Just the fact that someone had this realization is revolutionary. USchick (talk) 23:53, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If this was article space that'd right for tag bombing. Who is someone? How does building better sea links not benefit the local economy? What is "this idea"? How is an unstated "realization" revolutionary? Do you have anything to back up your argument beyond feel good sentiment? 3142 (talk) 07:16, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Did you read the article? Obama (who used to live in Africa) made a statement that foreign development should also benefit local Africans. Roads built by foreigners have traditionally went from the mines to the sea port, and any financial benefit went straight out of the country. The idea that foreign investment should also make a contribution to the local economy in Africa, and not just benefit foreign interest is a REVOLUTIONARY idea. There's a conference to discuss it. I don't care if it ever happens again. The fact that it happened once is extremely newsworthy because I'm not aware of this ever happening before and I doubt it will ever happen again. USchick (talk) 09:25, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
When did Obama live in Africa? Our article on his early life only lists him as living in the USA and Indonesia. AlexTiefling (talk) 11:04, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I guess Indonesia is in Africa for some folks.... The Rambling Man (talk) 11:43, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
he was born in a Africa!?!? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.231.170.97 (talk) 17:46, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ha ha ha, I think I just completely discredited myself! He does understand what's going on in Africa, and he's hosting it in the US to bring attention to the problem (and for security reasons). The summit was on Charlie Rose last night, so it's a big deal. USchick (talk) 16:57, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Obama never lived in Africa but he went on pretty significant family visits that are more substantial than your average tourist safari. He has numerous relatives there. A substantial amount of his memoirs is devoted to his time in Africa. But no he never lived there.--Johnsemlak (talk) 14:06, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support- This started already so I moved it to August 4th from the really early day it was listed on. This has actually been a pretty big deal now that it started, so I have decided to support. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 16:35, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support. The importance of this meeting is that it is the first-ever, whether or not there is another one, this one has built in significance. Since it is underway and reported widely in the media, if the article is deemed worthy we should post it. 11:40, 7 August 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rhodesisland (talk • contribs)
Support. 37 actual heads of state meeting together is a pretty significant international meeting. There's no question this is a move by Obama to promote US interests. That doesn't make it unnotable.--Johnsemlak (talk) 14:08, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Needs attention. I would like to ask that someone check the linked article's quality (hey, The Rambling Man! Could you look at it?) I think it looks good and if it is this should be marked as ready. (and hopefully posted soon.) Rhodesisland (talk) 03:19, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Putting aside whether or not this has consensus for posting (probably a mild one, and I would certainly like to) I don't think the article is quite ready. Referencing doesn't appear to be a major problem, but I'm not a big fan of the quality and quantity of solid information being presented. A few concerns that I have are the "Agenda" section, which is still written in future tense, and the "U.S.-Africa Business Forum" section (and one or two others like it) that are dry, barely-readable lists of information compressed into chunks of "prose". In my opinion, the article currently does a poor job of demonstrating any real-world significance or impact. --Bongwarrior (talk) 03:53, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for checking it Bongwarrior! Rhodesisland (talk) 04:49, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
[Closed] WWI commemorations
SNOW per comments. Lihaas (talk) 10:14, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
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:WWI (talk·history·tag) Blurb: Ceremony at Liege to commemorate the invasion of Belgium by Germany 100 years ago (Post) News source(s):BBC Credits:
While there are numerous news articles dealing with the 100th anniversary of the start of World War I, this seems to be more a SA/OTD topic than a subject suitable for ITN. --Allen3talk 21:37, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I believe this item was stale about 100 years ago. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.95.216.223 (talk) 22:27, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. If we posted this, we would need to post every WWI battle commemoration until the anniversary of the end of the war. That's what OTD is for. 331dot (talk) 23:01, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It's an anniversary, not news. The proposed blurb is at least something that happened today but the case for this event over and above any other hasn't been made. 3142 (talk) 07:23, 5 August 2014 (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.
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 face of gun control advocacy in the United States for over three decades. A notable political figure and namesake of numerous gun control advocacy organizations and measures. The most notable figure in one of the US's continually contentious political issues. --Gamaliel (talk) 19:20, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Support - Brady is indeed a notable political figure and is indeed notable for a RD tag on the Main Page. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 20:30, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Conditional support. Meets the criteria, but it's not a brilliant article considering he is quite a significant figure in US politics. Quite short, orange tag and the "Handgun control advocate" section is incredibly brief. I think the article needs improvement to push it over the bar. Formerip (talk) 23:14, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment article needs improvement before we should post it. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:54, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support - notable political figure.--BabbaQ (talk) 17:17, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support - unique circumstance where unintended target becomes more famous for the crime than the intended target, long lasting political effects. μηδείς (talk) 14:07, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The pro-Russian separatists in Donetsk, who are now in great danger of being encircled by the Ukraine government forces, renew their calls for Russia to send troops and arms to their aid. (AP via Guardian)
A UNRWA-run school in Rafah is hit by an Israeli air strike. At least seven people are thought to have been killed, and at least 30 injured. (The Guardian). UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon condemns in strong terms the attack as 'moral outrage and criminal act'. (UN News Centre)
The Islamic State seizes the Yazidi-dominated town of Sinjar. (BBC News) It also seized control of the Mosul Dam, which is Iraq's biggest dam, the Ain Zalah oil field, and two more towns. (Reuters)
No consensus to post. SpencerT♦C 01:46, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Nominator's comments: the 2nd greatest games on earth for our great nation ;) the greatest are just over a month away... its ITNR anyhoo ----Lihaas (talk) 22:05, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
actually, as I read it anyway, only the opening ceremony is ITNR. Am I wrong? Rhodesisland (talk) 22:22, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That is correct; only the opening is ITNR. Can still be debated for posting, but it isn't ITNR. 331dot (talk) 22:24, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. IMO, mention of the opening is sufficient; no need to mention the closing. Rhodesisland (talk) 22:32, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
We didn't post the opening, though. Formerip (talk) 22:52, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Most Commonwealth nations have had a steady diet of Games coverage with occasional medals. It's been a Big Thing here. --Pete (talk) 22:59, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose- It's listed at ongoing. If we didn't post the opening which actually is ITN/R, no way we post the closing. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 23:32, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose.This event has gotten plenty of space at ITN.--Johnsemlak (talk) 02:13, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose stub article which hasn't been updated for nearly twelve hours, and not significant in the bigger scheme of the Games. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:34, 4 August 2014 (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.
Nominator's comments: Article is currently a stub, but the effects seem plenty notable. ----Bongwarrior (talk) 16:46, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support- Death toll now up to 367 with 1,800 injuries, and 12,000 (mostly brick) homes were destroyed.[13]Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 19:33, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support Already large, growing death toll. Somchai Sun (talk) 19:31, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment- Article is not a stub anymore, plenty good enough for ITN I think. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 19:35, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support - The article needs more information but that will be added as it becomes available. A tragic disaster. Jusdafax 19:42, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Posted article in decent condition and significant story with thousands affected. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:55, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment BBC reports toll above 600. [14], would suggest a blurb update. --MASEM (t) 04:44, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The article would have to be updated first - it still says 410. --Bongwarrior (talk) 04:53, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Five more Azeri troops are killed in overnight fighting with ethnic Armenians in Nagorno-Karabakh. The casualties bring the death toll to at least 13 in a flare-up of violence over the last few days around Nagorno-Karabakh. Russia has said that any further escalation is unacceptable. (Reuters)
Israel Defense Forces declare that the Israeli soldier previously believed to have been captured by Hamas fighters in Rafah had in fact been killed in battle that day and his body taken. (CBC)
At least 68 people were killed and more than 180 injured in an early morning explosion at a factory near Shanghai that makes automobile parts for General Motors. The factory produces aluminum alloy tire rims. (LA Times)
Nominator's comments: An escalation in tension between Azerbaijan and Armenia in the last few days with a high number of deaths. --BabbaQ (talk) 16:15, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
DAMN! beat me to it. I JUST came here to nominate this. Its certainly being read as a SHARP escalation, the most since the war. Likewise international reactions ][15]Lihaas (talk) 16:31, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support - an escalation of violence indeed. Per Lihaas. --94.234.170.214 (talk) 18:07, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support - being one of the biggest and bloodiest escalations since the war was frozen, this article deserves attention. Best regards, 89.133.91.17 (talk) 20:07, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support Border clashes are much more notable than deaths from random accidents and catastrophes, because of the political context and potential for escalation. Thue (talk) 20:12, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Conditional Support. I personally would like to see the linked article built up a bit and a few more references added, particularly in the lead and second para. Rhodesisland (talk) 01:16, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Not ready, Support alt blurb The article has only 4 references. No need to rush, the clashes have been going on for some time now. I'll try to work on it a little. --Երևանցիtalk 01:20, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Update is based on support and th eminimum level of update, which this article clearly meets and is more than some other postingsLihaas (talk) 13:35, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support: It seems important for main article. 88.233.87.1 (talk) 16:20, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support the significance but the article is one half intro, one third reaction and one sixth detail on what happened. Could use some expansion. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:38, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Article seems expanded and ready for ITN.--BabbaQ (talk) 22:00, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Post please. Also 13 dates accounted for officially on the pageLihaas (talk) 10:16, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Posted. I have edited the blurb to state 'at least 15' in view of subsequent casualties. Espresso Addict (talk) 17:20, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the posting, but the one source in the infobox has no clarification per the prose. the actualy content accounts for only 13Lihaas (talk) 00:48, 6 August 2014 (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.
Nominator's comments: Yearly international (Australia / New Zealand / South Africa) domestic Rugby competition - note this item is in the Recurring Items list. --Boomshanka (talk) 22:06, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Conditional support- There is no prose on the final. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 23:30, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I've edited the blurb to reflect the fact that they are just called the "Crusaders", not the "Canterbury Crusaders" (they used to be called that - 15-odd years ago). Neljack (talk) 06:06, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I was about to do the same thing. I think the year can be removed too. --Bongwarrior (talk) 06:26, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I've tagged a section which is bereft of suitable references. Once dealt with, this is good to go. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:27, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Are you sure you're looking at the right article? Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 22:49, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That's not what I meant. I meant there's no way this is good to go, there is zero prose on the actual event. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 23:24, 5 August 2014 (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
