Jump to content

Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates/August 2012

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is an archive and its contents should be preserved in their current form;
any comments regarding this page should be directed to Wikipedia talk:In the news. Thanks.

August 29

[edit]
Article: Lopota Gorge hostage crisis (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ 14 people are reported killed in a clash between Georgian special forces and an unknown armed group. (Post)
News source(s): RFE/RL
Credits:

 --Niemti (talk) 09:17, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

August 31

[edit]
August 31, 2012 (2012-08-31) (Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Disasters

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Philippine earthquake and tsunami panic

[edit]
Article: 2012 Philippines earthquake (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A magnitude 7.6 earthuake has stricken off the Philippine coast killing one, triggering a tsunami alert. (Post)
News source(s): Reuters India, Zee News, NDTV
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: The tremor caused widespread panic in Eastern Visayas, where many inhabitants exited their homes. --Anirudh Emani (talk) 07:20, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That, i dont agree with. It is notable. The earthquake caused widespread panic across the Pacific. People fled. How can you not call that significant...!? --Anirudh Emani (talk) 11:59, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Because I try to emphasize its global effect, not personal one. I think we should be neutral in regard to the events even such events happen near us. On the other hand, instead of being angry at me you might put your support vote here. Thanks,Egeymi (talk) 12:16, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
But he already !voted as he's the nominator. Mohamed CJ (talk) 13:56, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You are right, I noticed late. However, the nom may refer to the rules of DO NOT, stating "Do not accuse other editors of supporting, opposing or nominating due a to personal bias (such as ethnocentrism). Conflicts of interest are not handled at ITN." Thanks, Egeymi (talk) 14:46, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
He didn't do that, but you did. -- tariqabjotu 15:29, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
How did I do that? Can you please show me my accusation of nominating this blurb? Very odd. I just put my vote, then the nom wrote smth. Then I tried to justify my vote, although there is no rule asking the justification of votes.Egeymi (talk) 16:08, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You said "Because I try to emphasize its global effect, not personal one," implying that Anirudh found the event notable because of personal effect. -- tariqabjotu 16:23, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I did not really mean it. I am sorry if my words are understood in this way. But, it was not an accusation. Thanks,Egeymi (talk) 16:32, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral leaning support A very powerful earthquake. The effects section talks about destroyed bridges, but that's citing CSM, which is citing a text message. If the quake caused significant damage, I would support. We're not a death ticker after all, so "not enough deaths" is a pretty weak oppose. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IP98 (talk • contribs) 12:03, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support. A powerful earthquake, while not many have died, the impact is still large. Weak because it didn't make headlines (or at least I didn't see it there on CNN, BBC and AJE). Mohamed CJ (talk) 13:56, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Meh is about the best that can be said. If there is sufficient reader interest I am for it, but checkviews isn't supporting that. It may actually have saved net lives, given the people who weren't killed in crimes and car accidents that were avoided because people were otherwise occupied. μηδείς (talk) 19:46, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support - something new, a powerful earthquake which has had an impact on the region. --Activism1234 00:21, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

August 30

[edit]
August 30, 2012 (2012-08-30) (Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters

International relations

Law and crime
  • Russian investigators find the bodies of two murdered women in an apartment in Kazan and the shout "Free! Pussy Riot" written on the wall. The perpetrator is as of yet unknown. Observers warn against radicalism and false flags. (The Guardian)
  • Three journalists jailed in Eritrea for over a decade have died in prison, according to prison guards who fled the country. (IOL)

Politics

Science and technology
  • Sky News shows a study where it is claimed that the polygraph helps reduce crime. The device is being presented as "about 85% accurate" and sufficient legal evidence in combination with "other information". (Sky News)
  • The Belgian Army assigns 16 sapping instructors to a train-the-trainer program in Katanga, DR Congo, from Saturday until year's end. (Het Laatste Nieuws)

16th Summit of the Non-Aligned Movement

[edit]
Articles: 16th Summit of the Non Aligned Movement (talk · history · tag) and Non-Aligned Movement (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Heads of state meet at the 16th Summit of the Non-Aligned Movement in Tehran, Iran, on 30 and 31 August. (Post)
News source(s): Bloomberg[1], Nation [2]
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Consisting of 120 member states, and 21 observer countries which represent nearly two-thirds of the United Nations's members and contain 55% of the world population, it is the most important gathering of the Developing Countries. It is the international framework for South-South cooperation. --Seyyed(t-c) 02:07, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. As you can see at the end of the debate we concluded to wait until the main part of the event starts and the article become more complete. This was my last comment:Due to the fact that the main days of summits are 30 and 31 August and the major decisions will made at that time, the subject is per-mature now. Therefor I accept that it is not a good decision to put the article on the main page before 30th.--Seyyed(t-c) 03:47, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
--Seyyed(t-c) 04:02, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Leaning support. Interactions between these countries at this sort of level are significant, particularly given the number of major oil producers and in the context of the Syria situation. The lack of direct EU and US representation, as well as their stances towards Iran, will have an obvious effect on the level of coverage, so the inevitable "the New York Times are doing this, the BBC are doing that" arguments should be given less weight than they usually warrant. —WFC— 04:28, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment* The issue has covered well by English media of south Asia very well. I we consider people of India as English speakers, then it has a lot of significance.--Seyyed(t-c) 04:55, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
India has historically been a leading figure of the NAM. The Times of India doesn't display it on the first main section of its website, only as a link below in "world" and only 1 article. --Activism1234 05:02, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose until someone can tell me anything that's actually happened of any significance. Hot Stop 05:01, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support because the event is significant from the view of Middle East politics: it includes important diplomacy on the Syrian civil war, Nuclear proliferation (including the Iranian Nuclear Program and sanctions against Iran), Palestinian statehood and UN reform.Bless sins (talk) 06:34, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment - It includes rhetoric on some of that. The latter one, for example, is primarly Iran's supreme leader blasting the U.N. as "undemocratic" and a defunct relic of the past that is "bullied" and controlled by the West, although serves as a great example of the glaring POV issues in the article by certain editors. Another example - for Palestinian statehood, there isn't any diplomacy on that - just Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas saying again that they're not delaying their statehood bid. Syrian civil war - comments by Egyptian President Morsi supporting the opposition. Etc... Rhetoric and speeches isn't diplomacy, saying otherwise is misleading. --Activism1234 06:48, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose That a junket was held is not news. If something actually newsworthy came of it that should be mentioned. Until then, huge oppose. μηδείς (talk) 06:58, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - expanding on Medeis and Hot Stop. There are many meetings and summits with world leaders, ranging from the environment to weapons control, and some of them even have more delegates than this one, but we don't post them all. Yes, world leaders meet. This is a regular summit regularly held. Minimal news coverage on top headlines - see BBC, Reuters, etc. Even on leading countries of the NAM, such as India (historically known for its leadership of the NAM) it's not getting much coverage (see Times of India). The IAEA report on Iran that Iran has doubled its centrifuges at Fordow has been getting more coverage on these websites. Although not a requirement for posting, I think it's useful when assessing the importance of this summit. There's also glaring POV issues in this article that don't make it suitable for the front page, and attempts to create neutrality just get changed by a few editors with a bias in an attempt to minimize anything that can be perceived as criticism of the Iranian government, even in a speech by the United Nations Secretary General. I noticed yesterday a conspiracy theory being reported as a fact ("Iran condemned the Western world's equipping of Israel with nuclear weapons" was one thing that remained on the page for a while). Iranian-government owned references are used throughout the article to change sentences or use as reference - problematic when you consider that Iran has censored its media outlets to be biased on reporting the NAM. As long as these editors will keep on doing this, the problem won't be remedied. Nothing major has come out of this, other than a few speeches and a photo-op. A lot of speeches, but that's rhetoric. We can condemn people or rhetoric all we want, but it's still just words, and previous nominations regarding rhetoric on other topics such as Syria were rejected for this. --Activism1234 07:06, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment You were an active editor of the article and we improved the article with cooperation. I agree that Iran's media censor some criticism but we refered to non-Iranian media as the resource in every case which could be controversial. So please write your ideas in the talk page of the article, if you think it is not neutral.--Seyyed(t-c) 09:26, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, per Hot Stop, Medeis, and Activism1234, and there has been no significant outcome of the discussions at the summit. So, its closing statement will cover just known stances and approach.Egeymi (talk) 07:19, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Even NAM countries doesn't consider this as important. I don't think that this will be able to make to ITN for the next some years, because Cold War II and Unification of Soviet Union will be red links till then, I guess. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 07:46, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. I do not agree this is merely another run-of-the-mill international summit meeting. I also find it particularly important to present this forum at a time when other international forums are unanimously giving support to the western-orchestrated campaign against to government of Syria. __meco (talk) 14:52, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Nothing substantial yielded at the summit. Nor was expected from it. Also, no major agenda discussed widely in mainstream media. The group, as claimed, is losing its appeal.Regards, theTigerKing  17:31, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - run of the mill.--BabbaQ (talk) 21:10, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Opposed to all summits, marches, protests, riots, conferences, and all other sorts of press releases and street theater, etc., unless a major substantive breakthrough which itself is newsworthy occurs. μηδείς (talk) 01:12, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Not convinced by the significance of the meeting or its decision making. doktorb wordsdeeds 07:57, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Cholera outbreak in Sierra Leone

[edit]
Article: 2012 Sierra Leonian cholera outbreak (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ an outbreak of cholera in Sierra Leone kills 327 people, its worst cholera outbreak in 15 years, causing the government to declare a national emergency. (Post)
News source(s): Telegraph, Times, AFP, BBC
Credits:

Article needs updating

 --Activism1234 20:18, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I had originally suggested this as notable, though i think a seperate 2012 Sierra Leonian cholera outbreak akin to 2010-2011 Haitian cholera outbreak would be more suited as its NOTNEWS to the cholera page.
Update was rather poor and misplaced.Lihaas (talk) 03:05, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
2010–2011 Haiti cholera outbreak is a really great article, but I don't see this article getting that long, although it could definitely if editors paid attention on the media for this, but I don't know if this an issue that it can happen again with. Feel free to move it into a new article, I won't oppose though. --Activism1234 03:56, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have created 2012 Sierra Leonian cholera outbreak. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 10:19, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. --Activism1234 17:05, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Posting. --Tone 19:56, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Blurb incorrect A cholera outbreak in Sierra Leone is declared a national emergency following the deaths of more than 300 people. Incorrect use of English, highlighted by bolder part. It could be: A cholera outbreak in Sierra Leone causes a national emergency to be declared following the death of atleast 300 people.Regards, theTigerKing  03:33, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Hurricane Isaac/Issac (2012)

[edit]
Article: Hurricane Isaac (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ At least 36 people are feared dead after Hurricane Isaac strikes the Gulf Coast of the United States, Lesser Antilles, Gulf of Mexico, Greater Antilles and The Bahamas. (Post)
News source(s): Making top headlines around the world for a few days now. The article is replete with enough, upto date and reliable sources.
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Making headlines around the world. Loss of life, thousands affected and the economic damage. Regards, theTigerKing  15:47, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Update: Previously nominated by — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.23.19.244 (talk • contribs) 21:18, 27 August 2012 here. Please vote there and not here, if needed.Regards, theTigerKing  16:04, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I did not see it. Thanks :)Regards, theTigerKing  16:04, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Nearly all of the deaths happened last week when the storm hit Haiti (i.e. before the last, failed nomination). If they weren't important enough then, they're not important enough now. Formerip (talk) 16:39, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It wasn't a failed nomination. Just it was put on hold. Also, federal emergency declared in the US today. Weather analysts announced today that the effect from Isaac would be more pronounced than Katrina in the US.Regards, theTigerKing  17:00, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A federal declaration of emergency is a political no-brainer two months before a general election and in the wake of Katrina. And who cares what the weather analysts say if Isaac pales to Katrina's death and property toll?--Chaser (talk) 18:01, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: It meets all of the requirements for an ITN item: It's a good, updated article and it has clearly been making news all over. --Jayron32 17:14, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, we've got one editor's POV on the storm, but not an ITN-criteria rationale as to why a good article at the top of the news should be rejected. We have an overwhelming majority of waits and supports from the previous nomination--and the "wait" period is now over. I don't know the mechanics of how the dup noms should be handled, but this article should go up without delay. μηδείς (talk) 18:08, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think "wait" votes meant "wait until it happens". But it never did. Formerip (talk) 18:14, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ask the million or so people who are without power today, or the hundreds of thousands whose homes and property are damaged, if it didn't happen. ANd that's just the U.S. The dead people in the Carribean and those whose homes were damaged there also would be surprised that the Hurricane didn't happen. --Jayron32 18:30, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
OK. We can post this if we also post when it snows in the UK this December. Formerip (talk) 18:36, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
When it does, nominate it, and we'll probably post it. -- Anc516 (Talk ▪ Contribs) 22:21, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Readiness and support !votes are totally different issues: this comment makes no sense. Kevin McE (talk) 19:03, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Posting. Someone upload the photo, please. --Tone 18:32, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Picture added. --Jayron32 18:48, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting comment: Less than 2½ hours between nomination and posting on a challenged nomination seems undue haste on a non-news ticker. I'll just put on record that I find the rapid posting after US impact, and the previous silence after its more deadly impact on the Caribbean islands an indictment on the systemic bias in this project. And that is without the comparison between monsoons and hurricanes. Kevin McE (talk) 19:03, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • It wasn't 2 1/2 hours after posting. This is a mis-done second nomination. See below; the posting was done based on the prior support of the previous nomination. Though I understand and agree with your point that the damage to the Carribean should have been sufficient to post this, this venue is unlikely to generate the change you wish to see. May I suggest that the discussion happens at WT:ITN instead of here, because complaining one-by-one on each example of systemic bias is a futile exercise, doubly so for an item that you seem to think should have been posted earlier. The points you raise are important, but this venue will ensure that nothing at all will be done about them. Best to carefully consider how to frame the problem, and the correct location to have the discussion, in such a way that it will affect the change you seek. --Jayron32 19:10, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • It was rapidly posted after it faded into a tropical depression in the US, and there was consensus to post it, not because it simply reached the US. Claims of Bias on ITN drive me crazy. If it's newsworthy, and the consensus says post it (which there was consensus to post this), then it gets posted. If more newsworthy events come out of the US then other countries, and consensus says "post it", then they get posted. If it was the UK instead of the US that has more headlines in the media, they would get posted, just the same. ITN is not bias, it's the way news works. -- Anc516 (Talk ▪ Contribs) 22:07, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nah, this is just a plain bad post. The previous vote was clearly in favour of "wait, we do not post media predictions of Armageddon", rather than "wait and then post as soon as it passes more-or-less without incident". Plus the blurb is far too concise. We need to list the individual towns and, if possible, locations of upended garbage pails. Formerip (talk) 19:22, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The consensus on the first nomination was clearly "Wait and see how much damage it does". At least 36 people are dead, Haiti was hit bad, flooding is widespread in the Caribbean, and it left 900,000 people without power and $1.5 billion in damages in the US alone. That seems to be consensus enough for posting. -- Anc516 (Talk ▪ Contribs) 22:17, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You're objections were noted above. Continued snide remarks are also unlikely to generate change; the only conceivable result of them is to piss people off. Sometimes, people don't agree with you. Belittling them with remarks like this doesn't bring those that disagree onto your side. --Jayron32 19:58, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's not correct. Bad posts tend to get pulled if there are enough snide comments. You're right that I won't be able to do it on my own, of course. Formerip (talk) 20:14, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The previous nomination did muddy the waters a bit. However, I do think we we look at the discussion below we can see a swing in consensus as storm upgraded to hurricane and the damage became a bit more clear. The current blurb does reflect its impact on the whole Caribbean region. Currently ITN has a bus crash in China with a similar death toll, riots in Kenya, a sports event in the UK, and the death of the first person to walk on the moon. I don't think the current state of ITN is a high water mark of systemic bias, though certainly the fact that this storm eventually hit the US did help this nomination along.--Johnsemlak (talk) 20:19, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Did an editor just say that said editor makes snide comments in order that ITN nominations won't get posted, rather than simple vote with reason explained?? Not sure how much this should be tolerated here... But that's pretty sad. --Activism1234 20:32, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting Support - per those that observed that this item was proposed days ago. I was an early supporter of the previous proposal, though with reservations about the previous blurb. Agree with Jayron32 that WT:ITN is the place for those with issues to go, and that this ITN blurb is worthy of the front page per ITN's intended function. In my view, those accusing others of "bias" and making virtually every ITN nomination a drawn-out battle have gradually reached the point of serious disruption of ITN. We either solve this festering issue inside our ITN community, or we will have to call for other eyes. I for one am about out of patience, but still hopeful that we won't have to appear like a bunch of squabbling children to the wider community. Jusdafax 20:13, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Belated oppose a small storm at the height of hurricane season. Tragically people die in almost every storm in Haiti, and though we're not a death counter, the number was relatively small. See no reason to pull now that it's up, but it really should have not gone up. Same as monsoon rain deaths. PS: It hit us here in south florida too, how come we don't get a mention in the blurb? --IP98 (talk) 20:51, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Replace "feared" with "suspected". "Feared" carries too much emotional baggage. Brightgalrs (/braɪtˈɡæl.ərˌɛs/)[1] 08:04, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

New World Discovered

[edit]
Article: Kepler-47 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ NASA's Kepler spaceship discovers a pair of planets orbiting two suns in Kepler-47 - the first multiple planet arrangement in such a star system. (Post)
News source(s): International Business Times, [3], [4]
Credits:

 --Activism1234 01:14, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose. Not the first binary star system (we have actually found three-star systems) and not the first system with multiple exoplanets. So this is really just another one of those abstract and unnecessary "firsts". EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 02:47, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You have not touched on the point being made. This is the first system in which the two suns are close and the planets orbit about the paired stars rather than the stars being far apart with the planets only orbiting around one of the suns. μηδείς (talk) 02:55, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If I understand this correctly, it's a binary binary, or two planets orbiting around the center of mass of two stars. That's really not that impressive of a first considering the scant distance between the stars. In fact, it's no more impressive than Kepler-16b, which was a DYK.--Chaser (talk) 03:06, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not arguing one way or the other on posting, I just thought the issue should be made clear. If they determine the Kessel run can be made in fewer than 12 parsecs from that system, I will support. μηδείς (talk) 03:32, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. For the record, I oppose posting.--Chaser (talk) 18:03, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. While this is very interesting, it doesn't seem like news to me. It's one of those fascinating snippets I appreciate reading about but its landmark-ness is really just a case of being the first of a very specific type of arrangement; would we then post the first three-planet–two-star arrangement, etc? A good DYK hook could easily be gained instead, as a new article is obviously a viable option. GRAPPLE X 03:13, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose We have to stop treating these discoveries with unbridled reverence. As Grapple X suggests, this could be bumped to DYK, which is less high profile but more suited to these minor bits of trivial interest. Not sure ITN suits this kind of thing to be honest. doktorb wordsdeeds 06:03, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Much more suitable to DYK. Fascinating though exoplanets are, their discovery just isn't headline news any more. Perhaps if one is found to have signs of life on it some day? AlexTiefling (talk) 11:24, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

China Coal Mine Explosion

[edit]
Article: Xiaojiawan coal mine disaster (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Forty-one miners are killed and five are still trapped in a coal mine explosion in China. (Post)
News source(s): 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 8, 9
Credits:

Article needs updating
Death toll up to 26. [5] Beagel (talk) 16:22, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
37 is killed, 10 is still missing. [6] Beagel (talk) 04:55, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
41 is killed, five is still missing. [7] Beagel (talk) 16:52, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am not very experienced with adding pictures (in this case a map) to articles but I did find one which may be a good picture for the article. The picture I think would be good for the article is: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Panzhihua.png Andise1 (talk) 22:53, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am added the infobox for mine, including location map (showing location in China) Beagel (talk) 16:53, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Mexican elections: Enrique Peña Nieto

[edit]

In the next few days, Mexico's electoral court will confirm the victory of Enrique Peña Nieto. They have until September 6, 2012 but they might confirm it earlier (probably Thursday or Friday of this week). [8]

Article: Enrique Peña Nieto (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ After the contested 2012 presidential elections, the Mexican electoral court confirms that Enrique Peña Nieto is the president-elect of Mexico. (Post)
News source(s): [9]
Credits:

Nominator's comments: It is not official yet, but let's be ready. I'm not sure if the vote-buying allegations should be included in the blurb. It can POV pushing, and especially because nothing has been confirmed by the Tribunal. BTW, feel free to fix the blurb. ComputerJA (talk) 00:42, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: moved to Aug 30 to avoid confusing the bot. Oppose a ridiculously early nomination which anticipates the outcome. If it can be anticipated so definitively that doesn't really say much for the notability of the nomination: it's a simple formality. Crispmuncher (talk) 01:06, 30 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]
  • Support when confirmed - it wasn't a few votes in dispute, it was alleged that 5 million votes were stolen. This should confirm once and for all who the president of Mexico is. --Activism1234 01:14, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

*Support, notable, since the election appeal of Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador was rejected by the highest election court.Egeymi (talk) 08:27, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, it was not posted. It was yet another, 'wait until the story is irrelevant vote. μηδείς (talk) 03:24, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

August 29

[edit]
August 29, 2012 (2012-08-29) (Wednesday)
Armed conflict and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters

International relations

Law and crime

Science and technology

Sports

Leistungsschutzrecht

[edit]
Article: Leistungsschutzrecht (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Cabinet of Germany decides on Leistungsschutzrecht. (Post)
News source(s): Spiegel Online - Netzwelt
Credits:

Both articles need updating

Nominator's comments: Could have potential influence on the web and Wikipedia in particular. ---- Toshio Yamaguchi (tlk−ctb) 08:45, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Very difficult to oppose or support on substance of a story with no English language sources provided, and an article that is scarcely a stub, so no choice but to tentatively oppose on basis of little or no news coverage (on neither technology nor Europe section of BBC news site). Kevin McE (talk) 10:35, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted]Summer Paralympics opening ceremony

[edit]
Article: 2012 Summer Paralympics opening ceremony (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The 2012 Summer Paralympics opening ceremony takes place in London, UK (Post)
News source(s): http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19411225
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: I expect I have got this all wrong as I don't really understand how to do this. Can the Paralympics opening ceremony be added to ITN please in two hours' time please? It is part of the second largest sporting event in the world. The opening ceremony starts at 8.30pm UK time. --86.134.91.171 (talk) 17:25, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I did check, on the 29th entries, and there was nothing. What was I to think? I have spent the day bringing the article up to scratch so that it is good enough to be featured in ITN. I don't just nominate, I do. 86.134.50.42 (talk) 21:33, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You only checked one days entries though. Sometimes entries are posted a few days before they are going to happen on ITN (such as the 2012 London Paralympics) which is why I suggest for the future to check each days nominations (or look at the top where it lists the nominations for the past few days and see if an event has already been nominated about the event you were planning to nominate).Andise1 (talk) 21:43, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Theoretically there's a place for nominating future events (nobody uses it though). LukeSurl t c 22:07, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • comment - I marked the nomination about the Paralympics below as "ready" because it was nominated first.
Posting (I'll mark this one as posted as it's on the top). --Tone 22:00, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Could you please mark both nominations as posted? Andise1 (talk) 22:03, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done --Activism1234 23:06, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Summer Paralympics sticky
[edit]

We seemed to have consensus to post a stick as with the Olympics. The chronology page is there (though can we get someone to whitlink the ticketmaster link that wont enable it to show up?)Lihaas (talk) 01:26, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • oppose sticky. No such consensus was reached. It is (and should be) very rare that we have a sticky for a sports event.--24.90.93.13 (talk) 01:46, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - As sad as it is, I don't see the Paralympics getting as much coverage as the Olympics, and that includes on Wikipedia. I'm all for posting the opening and closing ceremonies, and any exciting records or events at the Paralympics, but not a sticky. --Activism1234 02:02, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose As mentioned above, no consensus was made for a sticky for the Paralympics. There is/was a discussion in the original first nomination about a sticky. If you read the discussion you will see that a few people oppose a sticky with their reasons for why they think a sticky is not neccessary. Andise1 (talk) 02:07, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. It's the world's second largest sporting event so, unless stickies are reserved only for the Olympics, this should get one. Also, we need to take a worldwide view. My impression is that the Paralympics have a particularly low profile in the US, where most events are not even being broadcast live. But in the UK (OK, we are hosting them, fair point) they are getting blanket coverage. Formerip (talk) 10:50, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's only getting a high profile in the UK because it's being hosted there. It's not just in the US that it gets a low profile. It gets about an our a day of coverage on Russian tv during the middle of the day (i.e. filler time) and low profile headlines. On the French paper Lequipe there is some coverage but much less than the US Open and there's a poll with a question 'Will you follow the Paralympic games in London" and 63 percent answered 'No'. The UK isn't a 'worldwide view'. To say the Paralympics are garnering the worldwide interest of the Olympic games or the World Cup is a severe lack of a worldwide view.--Johnsemlak (talk) 11:50, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Never trust online polls, buy if 37% of French people are following the paralmypics, that doesn't sound too bad. I doubt that many are following the Syrian Civil War or the obituary columns. In terms of media coverage, we may not really know until things get going, but the Paralympics are the main news right now in Australia (link may be time-sensitve) and German Wikipedia seems to think they are important enough for a sticky. Formerip (talk) 13:22, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I agree online polls are dodgy, but I'll point out that the poll doesn't indicate that 37 percent of its readers are following the games (let alone french people in general). There are a number of options besides 'no'. Actually French wikipedia also has a sticky. However, it also has a sticky for the US Open while German Wikipedia has a sticky for Hurricane Issac. All of this evidence is adding up to the fact that on English Wikipedia the Paralympics are worthy of a mention but not worthy of a sticky, which we reserve for vary rare cases.--Johnsemlak (talk) 14:00, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - I agree with FormerIP. The USA is unusual in giving such a low profile to this event. I understand that NBC is limiting its coverage to a single highlights show after it's all over. This is not the pattern generally - here in Europe, it's a very prominent event. AlexTiefling (talk) 11:28, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, we use sticky links for Olympics and for FIFA World Cup (arguably the two biggest sport events in the world). And I believe this is enough regarding sport events. Besides, we're running Syria sticky at the moment already and it's not a good idea to have more than one at a time. --Tone 12:53, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, at least until there is some sense of the purpose and timeliness of this sticky. I doubt that there is the will and interest to maintain a timely, encyclopaedic, prose driven update on every event. At least two world rcords were broken on the first morning of competition (I don't trust the flagwavers on BBC news to bring our attention to potential other records acheived by non-GB (sic) athletes), but they are not mentioned anywhere that would be suitable for a sticky link. Kevin McE (talk) 13:18, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Second Indian court ruling

[edit]
'Article: 2002 Gujarat violence (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ An Indian court convicts 32 people, including former state minister Maya Kodnani and the Bajrang Dal leader Babu Bajrangi, for their roles in the 2002 Gujarat riots. (Post)
News source(s): Yahoo, Washington Post
Credits:

Article needs updating

Nominator's comments: As explained in the sources, the case has major political implications. It is also India's highest-profile conviction in a case, and acknowledges for the first time the role of a politician in inciting Hindu mobs. The Gujarat riots killed over 1000 people. --Activism1234 01:45, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

note 2 sentences is not a sufficient update.
Also NPOV the title of the convictee and removed trivia frm blurbLihaas (talk) 01:00, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What exactly was POV in the blurb? Can you please discuss this before changing it? I just took it from the article and paraphrased it... The current wording "Bajrang Deal" is not good - most people don't know what that is, and it's a red link... I'll update the article more, that's not an issue. --Activism1234 01:16, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Just th eminor point of the ":Hindu nationalist" leader, which is more accurate as his actual title of whi he leads. Hindu Nationalist is vague, which is also why content should not be taken straight off the media reports. He is he leader of the BD which is wikilinked.Lihaas (talk) 03:10, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I expanded the passage, it's longer than 5 lines now. --Activism1234 01:29, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
hmm I tried tweaking the blurb (adding the comma before the 'and') but that made it look like it might have been 33 people - but leaving the comma out I had to reread the sentence to grasp the meaning. So something needs reworking there. Perhaps the order of the people need swapping round.EdwardLane (talk) 11:21, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Indian court ruling

[edit]
Article: 2008 Mumbai attacks (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ India's Supreme Court upholds the death sentence for Ajmal Kasab, the lone surviving gunamn responsible for the 2008 Mumbai attacks. (Post)
News source(s): Times of India, NDTV, CNN
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: I made this nomination considering that we posted something similar for Breivik, and the 2008 Mumbai attacks were also extremely horrific - over 200 killed (not to compare terrorist attacks, but that's more than Breivik), and over 300 injured. Unlike Norway, however, this is a matter of life and death for Kasab - not just jail. --Activism1234 01:45, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Question: did we report Kasab's conviction? If so, I would oppose this on the grounds that we don't need to chronicle every legal action that ends in "the status quo remains". NW (Talk) 05:52, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • In February 2011, the most recent court verdict, we did not post anything about it. The only Indian court-related post was "An Indian court convicts thirty-one people of perpetrating the 2002 Godhra train burning, which led to rioting in Gujarat."
    • We did, however, post a ruling from a lower court in May 2010 about it, but that was over two years ago and was not the highest court (this Supreme Court ruling means there can't be any more appeals I believe, it's certain). --Activism1234 06:02, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I'd say wait till he is actually executed (if at all). There are no more appeals, but he can make a mercy petition to the president who may then conveniently just sit on it for several years. The joke that's been doing the rounds in India was that Microsoft should name their next OS after Kasab or Afzal Guru (they will never hang). Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 07:02, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The Breivik post was the actual sentence. This proposal is simply that the sentence already handed down was upheld. If it was overturned or changed in some other significant way then I would have supported. As it is, there is no change. --RA (talk) 08:14, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The supreme court in its ruling has said that it is the most significant of the rarest of the rare of case that has come before it since India became republic in 1950. The upholding of the sentencing is a significant event in the life of "26/11" attacks. The victims were not only Indians, but Americans and Israelis. So there would be international scrutiny to it. Let's not comment on when he would be executed or that the article should be considered only when he is executed. But yes, the response has been positive on his execution from across the political spectrum. The only option left for him is the presidential mercy, if he asks one, the response of which would be highly negative for the "butcher", considering the gravity of the attacks. So, we all can hope for the best. And, it is making headlines around the world.Regards, theTigerKing  15:48, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, notable since the verdict (a dilemma for "modern" world) is being discussed and the attack was very shocking.Egeymi (talk) 16:12, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Addition, "Kasab" means "butcher" in Turkic languages. An odd coincidence.Egeymi (talk) 16:24, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note - it's a busy day for Indian courts. A state minister was just convicted for murder in one of India's worst religious riots in 2002, when 2,500 people, mostly Muslims, were hacked, beaten, or burned to death. Sourcs - Yahoo, Washington Post. Does anyone feel we should merge this with the blurb? Or leave the blurb, and open a new ITN nomination (or do neither)? --Activism1234 16:56, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • That doesn't impresses me much. Its not in fact a much big news in India, so forget about world. As of the death sentence uphold, I will be neutral on this as the sentence was given yeeeears ago, but it was not executed due to vote-bank politics. I believe that this can be a major news once the sentence is executed, but just a simple uphold is not worthy of coming on ITN. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 17:29, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
To be fair, Kasab's case was going through the whole judicial process and reached the SC only now. It's Afzal whose execution has been okayed twice by the SC and not carried out yet. As for the Gujarat riots decision - it is unrelated and should not be clubbed. Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 17:44, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Would you recommend a new ITN nomination, or like Vibhijain, do you think it shouldn't be nominated at all? Thanks. --Activism1234 17:50, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
what is going on here? WHy is the same user commenting twice on this thread from/with 2 different signatures. Isnt their a rule gainst using 2 caccounts this way? There certainly should be?Lihaas (talk) 01:08, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Can you please clarify who you're referring to? It's impossible to know who you think is abusing two accounts... For all I know, you can be thinking I'm using two different accounts here. --Activism1234 01:44, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Activism1234 here. Lihaas, what and who are you talking about? AlexTiefling (talk) 11:29, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There's no WP policy on the use of two caccounts.--Johnsemlak (talk) 12:14, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ukrainian high court ruling

[edit]
Article: Yulia Tymoshenko (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A Ukrainian high court rejects an appeal by jailed ex-Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko, straining Ukraine's ties with Western nations. (Post)
News source(s): Reuters, [Wall Street Journal http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443864204577619120814530212.html], Reuters, Yahoo, Chicago Tribune
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: We're talking about a prime minister in court here, not the most common thing in the world. This is the high court, so I presume it's the final verdict in the case. Also, the case itself has led to an international response, as it has strained relations with the West. The case was high-profile, and attended by President Aleksander Kwasniewski and former president of the European Parliament Patrick Cox. --Activism1234 01:45, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support when the verdict comes through, but I am not a big fan of the current blurb. Could definitely be worded better somehow, I just don't know how. Cheers, Zaldax (talk) 04:44, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

note we posted her sentencing to prison. This would be the appeal.Lihaas (talk) 12:31, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
oppose;; as the first comment after the result, its just an appeal that was rejected. NOthing to look at here. Its not even near the top of the news.Lihaas (talk) 01:10, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
We don't need a nomination to be top news to post it, that's not what ITN is for. I think that it's plenty to see - a prime minister in court, the final verdict in a case, and the political implications that have followed and will followed, so I wouldn't exactly say there's "nothing" to see here... Feel free to oppose it, as Crispmuncher did below (although not sure what pro-Western POV pushing he's seeing here...) but it'd be wrong to say there's nothing to see. --Activism1234 01:35, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It is "nothing" here as the case already yielded a result and an unprecedented jailing. This is a rejection of appeal.Lihaas (talk) 08:02, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose This is simply a confirmation of the status quo and has been noted, we've already posted it once. It's not the kind of story that warrants multiple mentions IMHO. Most of the time similar cases would be thrown out on those very grounds. We need to be especially careful about this since it has been portrayed as an East vs. West thing: pro-Western POV pushing is still POV pushing. Crispmuncher (talk) 01:24, 30 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]
  • Oppose - This seems not to change anything. AlexTiefling (talk) 11:31, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yasser Arafat assassination inquiry

[edit]
Article: Death of Yasser Arafat (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A murder inquiry is opened into the 2004 death in France of Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat. (Post)
News source(s): [13]
Credits:

Article needs updating

Nominator's comments: Seems like pretty big news. True, it's "only" a murder enquiry being opened, but what comparable figure on the world stage has been bestowed that particular honour in recent times? Formerip (talk) 00:59, 29 August 2012 (UTC) (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose If it's concluded that he was assassinated, I'd reconsider, but an inquiry is insufficient for me. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:10, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - it's just an inquiry, it's not even known whose suspected of killing him (some Palestinians have blamed Israel, some Palestinians have blamed other Palestinians), and it either way contradicts the official French medical report about his death (died of a massive hemmorhage). The murder inquiry comes in the wake of allegations that he was poisoned by polonium, based on clothing that his wife left around for 8 years and decided one day to test, and abnormally high levels of polonium came back, although some people have pointed out that they should've been very tiny had he been poisoned 8 years ago. But I digress, it's a murder inquiry due to the possibility of a murder, but that possibility is very unclear and the result can very likely turn up to be nothing, so not for ITN in my opinion. --Activism1234 01:18, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That all sounds really intriguing and potentially good content for the article - but isn't it the exact opposite of a good "oppose" vote? Formerip (talk) 01:27, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I explained the oppose part in the beginning and after the "But I digress" :) Pretty much same as Muboshgu, except with the part I included as more reasons why I don't find it that notable or important. --Activism1234 01:28, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You seem to be saying you oppose it because there are lots of ins and outs and controversy and different views people might take and it's impossible to know what actually happened. But shouldn't all that add up to "interesting" rather than "oppose"? Formerip (talk) 01:31, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No I would've supported posting the allegation that he was poisoned by polonium when it was released a few months ago due to that "interesting" stuff (not sure whether it was posted or not, I wasn't around on ITN). But the police inquiry, which was expected at the time as well, isn't that notable to me, doesn't change any facts on the ground, and doesn't change the theory. The result, on the other hand, may be interesting, but the inquiry itself I don't recommend posting. --Activism1234 01:38, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Btw, on the side, the appropriate article would be Death of Yasser Arafat (yes, there are tons of rumors and theories on how he died, other than the official medical record!) --Activism1234 01:40, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Who is conducting the investigation? Is Yassassination the only PLOsibility? Are they looking into whether he might have committed Jewicide? μηδείς (talk) 04:08, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm so tempted to make a joke about PLOnium... --Activism1234 04:11, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support only because I am sick and tired of people voting wait to mean they will oppose it even when it is finally resolved. I happen to hope 'they' killed the bastard, but will admit it is news, even if they didn't. Let me make merself perfectly clear: even if the investigation is against our wishes, the investigation itself is notable. μηδείς (talk) 23:01, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - This could quite easily come to nothing. And I find the tone of some of the 'support' votes to be distasteful, to say the least. AlexTiefling (talk) 11:33, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
At lease some of those support votes seem to have taken your concern into account by never having been posted. Formerip (talk) 15:58, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
All right. Let's be specific and say that I don't like Medeis' introduction of political vitriol and the charming term 'Jewicide' into this discussion. AlexTiefling (talk) 16:03, 30 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Feel free to hat or delete the joke. I am not sure what political vitriol you are referring to--especially since I have supported the nomination. I still think this should go up. μηδείς (talk) 01:20, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

August 28

[edit]
August 28, 2012 (2012-08-28) (Tuesday)
Armed conflict and attacks

Arts and culture

Disasters

Law and crime

Politics

Science and technology

Sports

Romney nominated

[edit]
Articles: Mitt Romney (talk · history · tag) and Mitt Romney presidential campaign, 2012 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Republicans formally nominate Mitt Romney and running-mate Paul Ryan at the Republican National Convention as the Republican presidential nominee. (Post)
News source(s): Reuters, BBC, Yahoo Yahoo, CBS News, ABC
Credits:

Both articles updated

Nominator's comments: Obviously not unexpected, but still a symbolic and important move, enough to gain the #1 headline on various outlets. --Activism1234 04:21, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If he'd been yassassinated after he'd been rominated it would be worth an ITN Obamination. μηδείς (talk) 02:49, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It wouldn't be a yassassination in his case. It would be first degree romnicide. Formerip (talk) 15:54, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Only if the yassassination was more notable than the Salvador Shake.--WaltCip (talk) 12:53, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't record your sighs. I don't record my farts. μηδείς (talk) 23:00, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Kenya Riots

[edit]
Article: Aboud Rogo (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Over 2,000Kenyans riot and protest following the killing of Muslim cleric Aboud Rogo, causing the government to order an investigation. (Post)
News source(s): Reuters, The Telegraph, Sky News, Christian Science Monitor, The Guardian
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Hundreds of protestors, two days of violence, looting, pandemonium in Kenya's capital, and some have been killed. --Activism1234 04:21, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

oppose riots that involved no fatalities or anything are not notable. Theres also no article, please cite an article when nominating Activism1234, not just anything thats in the news. [14]Lihaas (talk) 23:45, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Feel free to find an article and post that here. I wanted to check that it'd be good with a few editors first, based on the votes here, as I am a busy person. Also, there were fatalities involved...... --Activism1234 23:49, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
We have Aboud Rogo, the "radical" cleric who was killed. --BorgQueen (talk) 00:01, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks I'll take a look, Egeymi notified me about that before but didn't get a chance. Also, if you feel that radical should be in quotes, by all means go ahead, I based this nomination on the Portal Current Events. --Activism1234 00:07, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've updated the article significantly. --Activism1234 00:31, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks but the article is still a little too short. --BorgQueen (talk) 00:34, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ok I'll expand it some more (infobox, more info, etc), and let you know when I'm done. --Activism1234 00:39, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
How is it now? I added a few sections and other passages, and more refs. --Activism1234 01:14, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Looks great! Now we need some supports from others. --BorgQueen (talk) 01:40, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The article has been updated very well, it's not a subject I know much about (or a story getting much coverage here beyond the World Service), but it looks as though Wikipedia has done its job effectively enough to put this on the front page doktorb wordsdeeds 03:38, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I'd much rather post bus accidents, which actually are news, than riots by the usual suspects. μηδείς (talk) 03:47, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • I've posted a bus accident a few hours ago and yet you don't seem to be happy with it. Please clarify your reasoning or I will have to disregard your comments. You can't expect busy admins to decypher them. And as for "usual suspects", are you suggesting that such riots are common in Kenya? You may be right, but can you provide a source for your claim? --BorgQueen (talk) 09:56, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • It seems rather clear; I like this nomination even less than the bus accident one. As for the usual suspects, I have no like for printing news items about publicity seekers, whether they are politicians or protestors, unless something else is notable. I don't think the murder of a midlevel thug and advocate himself of violence is newsworthy. μηδείς (talk) 01:27, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support A riot involving two thousand people is clearly notable. Additionally, the subject is interesting and suitable for ITN on an encyclopedia. --RA (talk) 08:11, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Occupy Nairobi is nothing more than a self generated bother. --IP98 (talk) 09:08, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Marked readyLihaas (talk) 12:34, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Posted article contention
[edit]

Why the article has been posted when the no of supports outweigh no of oppositions just by one (Not considering Lihaas vote, if it is considered then they are equal)?Regards, theTigerKing  16:22, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a vote count. Admin's have to evaluate arguments placed to determine consensus. Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 17:46, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What is this? THe user is allowed to vengeance monger here "not counintg my enemies vote"? Are you serious? Lihaas (talk) 03:09, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pull, Tiger King, is what you should be voting. Wikipedia admins are second to none in their magisterial arrogance, the College of Cardinals included. Yes, it's "not votes", it's the mystērium custōdum that determines what gets censored and what gets promoted. Can you say "self-perpetuating oligarchy"? μηδείς (talk) 19:55, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Colombia-Farc talks

[edit]
Articles: FARC (talk · history · tag) and Juan Manuel Santos (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos announces the commencement of peace talks with the rebel group FARC. (Post)
News source(s): BBC, Yahoo, Al Jazeera, France 24, Christian Science Monitor, Telegraph
Credits:

Both articles updated

Nominator's comments: Very significant world event in a contentious conflict. I'm posting it now, becuase peace talks can take weeks, months, even years, in case anyone says we should wait until the talks are over, and the fact that they're holding talks to begin with is significant. --Activism1234 04:21, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I just updated the FARC article about this a little while ago, considered nominating here, but by precedence these things wait for resolution to get posted. Also FARC havent indicated acceptance. The ref i added siad that during the talks the army would still maintain its position, so its seemingly tenuosu at the momentLihaas (talk) 04:37, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
FARC has accepted. See BBC and France 24. It could take weeks, months, or even years until a final peace treaty is hammered out, but the fact that they've agreed to hold them is, at least to me, significant, which is why I nominated it now. --Activism1234 04:41, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, dint see that yet. Should be interesting. We could have a separate article on the talks (As it is that page is a little disorganised) and DYK it. Id still wait on the posting though. One should also add it to Santos' page as its a big event in his goals for personal legacy. Unlieke Uribe, he wanted the "peace at all costs"
BTW- ive tweaked the blurb as suchLihaas (talk) 04:56, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Marked as ready...only pending consensus.Lihaas (talk) 05:06, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't thinks this is ready at all. No one has even voted for it yet (feel free to cast the first vote). After some votes, we can decide whether the tag belongs. --Activism1234 05:12, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ready is based on the article not the support. I already said "pending consensus"Lihaas (talk) 08:41, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, when the article is ready you mark it as updated. [Ready] is for consensus hence it says above "Items can also be marked as [Ready] when they are ready to be posted, but the posting admin should always judge the consensus to post themselves.". Mohamed CJ (talk) 12:27, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm... I learn new stuff everyday. Sorry about that Lihaas! Anyone may feel free to put it back in, I can't do it myself because I nominated it and I think that's another rule. --Activism1234 15:40, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No: [Ready] refers to the update status of the article: consensus is a different judgement that an admin makes. But these tabs are entirely arbitrary, were introduced with no discussion, and are added and deleted at whim, so should probably be ignored anyway. Kevin McE (talk) 13:43, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Corrie verdict

[edit]
Article: Rachel Corrie (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ An Israeli court rules that the Israel Defense Forces and the Ministry of Defense were not responsible for the death of Rachel Corrie in the Gaza Strip in 2003. (Post)
Credits:

Article updated
  • Support. Interesting story on a heated conflict. I've already read about this in BBC yesterday and AJE have a video about it in their main page. Mohamed CJ (talk) 02:53, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait See what the ruling is. It may be a non-matter, thus just a news blip. It may be something bigger too, but I don't think we can assure it would be either way the ruling could go. --MASEM (t) 02:55, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose - Given the verdict puts the fault on her, while there may be longer-range ramifications, there's no major short-term aspects here (a decision against the nations would have been something significant). --MASEM (t) 13:40, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait until verdict - Wait until what the verdict is, then update, and I'll cast a vote based on surprise factor/notability/coverage. --Activism1234 03:34, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
ons of verdicts each day in controversial issues? Where? As high-profile?Lihaas (talk) 04:48, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I still don't necessarily agree about that, but I'm changing my vote. --Activism1234 06:43, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
bloomberg said the rulign was "unintentional" (basically the same that there was no responsibility), lets use that wording. Or better yet, can we get the original first hand wording (and translated from hebrew), though at this level i imagine tehre are official translations.Lihaas (talk) 08:40, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
note reworded blurb to be accurae. the state was nt a litigant in the case.Lihaas (talk) 09:34, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If you don't mind, I tweaked it again, just to spell out in full "MoD" as many people not realize what it's referring to at first. --Activism1234 15:42, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Samsung .v. Apple has recourse to appeal and thats posted..Lihaas (talk) 23:49, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This story is very important and seems to have received quite a lot of coverage across a number of outlets. I respect Chripmuncher's view that this is the 'absence of a development', though I'm convinced that it's just on the right side of important to be put onto the front page. That said, it is something of a 'time sensitive' story, by which I mean any further delay in posting might do for it quicker than any oppose votes. doktorb wordsdeeds 03:41, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Interesting How every single one of the waits went to opposes once she was found liable. Are we to assume that those saying "wait" for the supreme court appeal will support when that verdict is upheld? Why do I doubt that? Once again what is inherently notable becomes fodder for the memory hole once the court decides some way we do not like. μηδείς (talk) 04:02, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Obvious support after US pressure, Israel gave entry visas to four ISM witnesses so that they could testify. However it refused entry permission to the Palestinian physician from Gaza who had examined Corrie's wounds on the scene. They investigated themselves and found themselves not guilty. Still getting press in The Guardian, The Australian and Time. --IP98 (talk) 20:45, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • You're an expert in law now? Remember, Wikipedia is NOT a soapbox to complain against a court's own democratic decision, explained in detail in a 62 page report that I doubt you read (if you did, you'd probably realize their testimony would've had little impact anyway)... Just saying. --Activism1234 21:21, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • It was right there at the top of the section and I thought it was interesting. That fact that it's still making news means this story is not only relevant, but has generated more coverage than a Chinese traffic accident. --IP98 (talk) 21:29, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Marking as [Ready] - Suggest we post, as the opposes are unconvincing. This is an internationally reported story with a fine article and blurb that is of interest to a wide readership at Wikipedia-en. While POV statements on both sides somewhat cloud the issues presented, I believe that we have reasonable consensus to post this as an ITN item. Jusdafax 21:39, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

August 27

[edit]
August 27, 2012 (2012-08-27) (Monday)
Armed conflict and attacks

Business and economics

Disasters

Politics

Sports

Science and technology

[Posted]2012 Summer Paralympics

[edit]
Article: 2012 Summer Paralympics (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The 2012 Summer Paralympics begin in London. (Post)
News source(s): 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 8, 9
Credits:

Article needs updating
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
  • Support on 29 August - and I don't think there's a need for a sticky. Sadly, I don't see it getting as much coverage as the regular Olympics. --Activism1234 22:45, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Premature It is ITN/R, so only issues are timeliness and readiness. Post after Opening Ceremony, but the only obvious omission from the article at the moment is much about that ceremony. Oppose sticky: enthusiasm for it ran out very quickly during the Olympics, and by early in week 2 it was just a list of gold medallists (sterling work on it since though). Kevin McE (talk) 23:19, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    What happened to avoiding systematic bias? -- tariqabjotu 23:23, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What? Is this meant to be a contribution to the discussion? Kevin McE (talk) 23:29, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm highlighting the issue with throwing around the term "systematic bias". We all know that the Paralympics are covered to a lesser degree than the Olympics, and there's no reason for us to treat the events precisely the same in the interest of righting some wrong. The same applies with Tropical Storm Isaac vs. South Asian monsoons. -- tariqabjotu 00:06, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sticky wouldn't have to be the same sort of page, though. It could be the main page for the event or any page that can be expected to get updated regularly. I'm not sure either way on a sticky, but the main purpose applies in the same way - without it we may get constant nominations for individual events, and world records are still ITNR. Formerip (talk) 23:25, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on 29 August. The article starts off in good shape, and this is the sort of article where a quick update is a given. Neutral on a sticky – on the one hand I understand where Tariq is coming from, but on the other it is sadly a fact that the Paralympics receive significantly less global attention. —WFC— 23:55, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
support on first day of games (i believe thats 30). Opening ceremony can go up tomorrow. For the same reason as accessibility during the ongoing global games.
notwe Ive broken the stick link Chronological summary of the 2012 Summer Paralympics from a redirect. However, it still needs some work and should be ready, hopefully, by tomorrow/day after.Lihaas (talk) 02:17, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support story and sticky - While the Paralympics get less coverage than the Olympics, this year's Paralympics are a bigger deal than ever before, and participants like Oscar Pistorius are likely to make the headlines. Let's go with it. AlexTiefling (talk) 09:08, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on 29 August, International. Regards, Sun Creator(talk) 09:52, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Blurb, Oppose Sticky Very notable sporting event, and ITN/R. Definitely notable to post this blurb when the Opening Ceremony is over. Unfortunately the Paralympics don't garner the attention that the Olympics gets, so I feel as though that the sticky would be fairly useless to post, since the main reason for the sticky is to combat Paralympic ITN blurbs from taking over ITN, but I don't see a lot of other ITN blurbs coming out of these games, except for the Closing ceremonies, and maybe something to do with Oscar Pistorius, since he has been getting a lot of media attention. -- Anc516 (Talk ▪ Contribs) 18:32, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
New world records will be ITNR, though. If there's no sticky, then they're hard to oppose, even if there are a lot of them. Formerip (talk) 22:03, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That is false. INT/R suggests some criteria for high profile world records that could have been considered as ITN/R, and it would be hard to argue that any paralympic record is of such status, and how that imprecisely phrased entry is still at ITN/R when a discussion fvoured removal by a !vote of 7 to 1 is a testament to our failure to wrap up and act upon discussions. Kevin McE (talk) 23:23, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Strictly speaking, yes, ITNR gives criteria not an automatic right, but I think you're wrong to say it would be hard to argue that paralympic records qualify. Particularly for aquatics and athletics events it may be, to the contrary, hard to argue for very long that they do not qualify as "an event such as aquatics or athletics". Formerip (talk) 23:36, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Problem solved: consensus acted upon and no longer ITN/R. People are welcome to propose specific results: I can't foresee any that I personally would support. Kevin McE (talk) 08:17, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. FWIW, DYK will have content about the Paralympics (generally, two hooks per each set of eight hooks) throughout the 11-day period of the Paralympics. Paralympics hooks have been running (at most, one at a time) for the last few days. --Orlady (talk) 23:30, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support (but wait until actually opened) Support blurb and sticky akin to Olympics as an ideal event for ITN on an encyclopedia, but will oppose suggestions for record breaking times, etc. However, just like the Olympics, wait until the event is actually officially opened. --RA (talk) 08:20, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - please see above on 29th. Simply south...... flapping wings into buildings for just 6 years 19:30, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a reason as to why you nominated this event after it was already nominated by someone else? It appears you saw this nomination but still went and nominated this event again, instead of commenting on this nomination with your thoughts/suggestions. (I am not fully sure you saw this before you made your nomination, but seeing as you commented on this nomination suggesting users look at your nomination makes me believe you already saw this nomination before making your nomination of the same event). Andise1 (talk) 21:44, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Actually I am not related to the IP that nominated it above. I added the title but did not add the nomination. Simply south...... flapping wings into buildings for just 6 years
Oh, I thought you may have been the same person. I see that you were the "updater" of the above nomination. Sorry about the confusion/mistake. Andise1 (talk) 22:08, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. I'm not the only updater. Simply south...... flapping wings into buildings for just 6 years 22:11, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The blurb should be updated to reflect the opening ceremony has occurred (or will finish hours after this comment :P). Simply south...... flapping wings into buildings for just 6 years 22:00, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Posted. --Tone 22:04, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tropical Storm Isaac (Hurricane Isaac)

[edit]
Article: Tropical Storm Isaac (2012) (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Tropical Storm Isaac is expected to reach New Orleans one day short of the seventh anniversary of Hurricane Katrina. (Post)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.23.19.244 (talk • contribs) 21:18, 27 August 2012

  • Strong oppose and speedy close- Good faith nomination, but this is a useless peace of trivia. Close this. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 22:01, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for now The current blurb does not show the importance/significance of Tropical Storm Isaac. If Tropical Storm Isaac does a large amount of damage to New Orleans or any state then I will reconsider my thoughts. Also, the current blurb is very US centric, with no mention of the areas that Tropical Storm Isaac has already gone through (Cuba, Haiti, etc.) Andise1 (talk) 22:04, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait Let's see what the impact of the storm is. If it has anywhere close to Katrina's impact, it's a definite post. If it's significantly less, it could still be worth posting. If it fizzles out, then it doesn't belong in ITN. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:05, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose until there is any significant damage/fatalities. The coincidence of being near Katrina is somewhat POV (it's hurricane season, I'm sure we can find lots of comparable events but that doesn't make the strike any more newsworthy.) --MASEM (t) 22:15, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Using the WP:ATHLETE mentality, Tropical Storm Isaac has not played at the highest level of his sport (Hurricane). Pretty sure we don't post hurricanes unless they are potential retired names. --12.41.124.2 (talk) 22:34, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • I think there have been tropical storms before at ITN; it's not so much if its a hurricane or tropical storm, but the amount of damage and human fatalities that it causes. I can't immediately tell if this was an ITN, but last year's Tropical Storm Arlene (2011) never got to a hurricane but did 100s of millions of dollars of damage and deaths along Mexico's coast. At the same time, just being a hurricane doesn't assure ITN-ness, if it just gets up to speed then veres away from land with no landfall, simply making some nice surfing waves for beachgoers. --MASEM (t) 22:47, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait - see what happens during the hurricane, any deaths, damage, how bad it is, etc. Then change the blurb to match that, and I'll cast a vote. --Activism1234 22:17, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose It will disappear to the archive in <2 hours, but a nomination below was rejected with "It shouldn't be trivialised, but basically the blurb could be re-written as It's monsoon season in India and Pakistan, just like it is this time every year. If there's a major landslide or something that passes the look-at-all-these-dead-people-how-can-we-not-post-that test, then maybe that incident should be posted." Replace monsoon with hurricane, and India-Pakistan with Caribbean-Gulf, and we have exactly the same thing. Let's see how that stands up to our resolve to avoid systemic bias. Kevin McE (talk) 22:22, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait - The anniversary itself isn't the story. Isaac may well prove to be a story in its own right. Let's give it 24 hours and see what happens. AlexTiefling (talk) 09:06, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait - as per many above, especially AlexTiefling. Re-nominate with new blurb if major news story emerges. LukeSurl t c 12:42, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Let me add my voice to those saying to wait. The story, if there is one, will need to be about this storm, and the blurb will need to stand on its own based on what this storm does. Coincidental connection to the same date and place of Katrina is not the story here, and if it is the story, that isn't enough to hang an ITN item on. --Jayron32 14:01, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait and See I would say hold off on this until after it has faded out, so that we have all the facts straight before posting it. Otherwise, we will just have to keep updating it and updating it. I would support posting it at that time, especially if the death count rises, which unfortunately looks like it will be the case. -- Anc516 (Talk ▪ Contribs) 18:25, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment As of 0442 here in the UK, so whatever time that is in Louisiana, Isaac is a slow moving hurricane approaching 80mph moving at 8mph towards the west/northwest of New Orleans. There's nothing yet to suggest it will cause the sort of damage or deaths which would satisfy our criteria for front page inclusion doktorb wordsdeeds 03:46, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's not the wind that's the only issue. Heavy Rain has a chance of flooding New Orleans. Massive flooding in a city below sea level will either cause deaths and/or displace thousands of people. Either of these scenarios would make this postable, in my opinion. -- Anc516 (Talk ▪ Contribs) 04:45, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Very good point well made. I'd find it difficult to oppose if there's devastation by flooding doktorb wordsdeeds 08:54, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Taliban

[edit]
Article: Taliban insurgency (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ 17 civilians who attended a party, along with 10 Afghan soldier in a separate incident, are killed by the Taliban, while an Afghan soldier kills 2 NATO soldiers. (Post)
News source(s): BBC, Business Week, Washington Post, The Guardian
Credits:

Article needs updating

 --Activism1234 20:10, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment- "Brutally" and "for attending a party" are strongly POV. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 20:13, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • I used that wording because reports suggested they were either beheaded or were killed by stabbing their throats, not because of any POV. But I changed it now, should be better. --Activism1234 20:21, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • C: The first bit you pointed out Bzweebl goes without saying, but the second part is what a large array of sources are reporting as being the truth. Most certainly could be re-worded, however. --Τασουλα (talk) 20:20, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose There have been 42 "green on blue" killings this year: no apparent reason to post these ones rather than all the others. The "party" story is a rather sensationalist presentation of an uncertain story: it is also suggested that they were local government workers, and therefore at political enmity with the Taliban. Opposed parties in a war kill each other is not , sadly, remarkable, but is open to propaganda manipulation. Although the sources given above are "reliable sources", they have this information very much third hand from anonymous "local officials" who are scarcely disinterested parties. All we can really say is that there are reports of such deaths Kevin McE (talk) 21:13, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support. Weak because I thought it would be too much for my edit history to contain Taliban: support. This does seem like a significant story. However, are we sure that we have clear certain facts about it? Formerip (talk) 21:21, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • I agree that we should wait a bit before posting it just to ascertain that the story is 100% correct. The refs above are all reliable references, but Al Jazeera seems to be saying another possible version, whereby Taliban commanders had a feud over 2 girls at the party and thus killed all the rest over them... However, anyone who is fine with both versions or opposes both version can feel free to add their vote here in the meantime. --Activism1234 21:40, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support- This does have some significance in it, but we should wait for a consensus amongst sources over what happened. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 22:03, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I think this is important enough to justify a front page inclusion. The details are horrific but without the POV implied in that sentence, there's more than just a footnote about this many people dying in such circumstances. doktorb wordsdeeds 22:12, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I can't support or oppose anything as I have no article to judge. Could we get an article or an update to peruse before we decide if this is main page appropriate? --Jayron32 23:27, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note - I updated the blurb to include another attack by the Taliban today. I feel it could use some tweaking though, if anyone feels the same I'm open to suggestions. --Activism1234 23:55, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Ugh. WP:PROSELINE much? No one has dropped a cleanup tag on it yet, but there's any number that could apply that would keep it off the main page. It looks like the news is good and the update is there, but I can't in good conscience yet support an article that ugly. If you could give it a rudimentary clean-up I would feel much more comfortable giving this my full support. After all, this ITN stuff is supposed to be supporting the mission of the encyclopedia in making better articles. ITN stuff doesn't have to be FA or even GA quality, but that article is pretty sketchy... --Jayron32 23:57, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • I know I don't like it either. An alternative would be to create a new article just for these three attacks today, which I'd do if I get enough support here (even just 2 people supporting). I've begun working on the Taliban Insurgency article in the meantime, and I'll give an update soon. --Activism1234 00:03, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • I've given the page a bit of an overhaul in terms of aesthetics, prose, date format, references, etc. Hopefully it's better now. There are similar articles on Wikipedia that are lists - proseline is an essay, not a policy. Any other editors can feel free to edit it as well. --Activism1234 00:46, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You cant put your own nomination as ready, i suppose its COI that way in needing a second pair of eyes. But raead the instructions on the top, nominators cant mark their own nominations as eready.Lihaas (talk) 04:52, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks didn't know about that. --Activism1234 05:11, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, no, no. The blurb was about one story, then it was about, two then about three. Why not throw in Meanwhile, Tropical Storm Isaac is expected to reach New Orleans? Blurbs are not really meant to give a roundup of tragic but routine deaths in a warzone. Formerip (talk) 16:28, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't mind removing the latter part and just focusing on what the Taliban did. --Activism1234 16:32, 28 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

El Salvador quake

[edit]
Article: No article specified
Blurb: ​ El Salvador is struck by a strong, magnitude 7.3 earthquake and a magnitude 5.4 aftershock, triggering tsunami warnings for the coasts of Costa Rica, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Honduras, Guatemala, Panama and Mexico. (Post)
News source(s): ABC News, Fox News, Reuters
Credits:

Article needs updating

Nominator's comments: 7.3..? WOW.. well that seems a little bit too strong. It hasnt claimed any lives yet but more reports are to come. And forgive me if the blurb is way too long. I guess it needs some work. --Anirudh Emani (talk) 15:44, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose unless the tsunamis occur and actually cause damage. Per the ABC news article, "There were no immediate reports of damages or injuries" (as well as other reports), so if it was just the quake, we'd not report it. Same if there are actual tsunamis but do no damage. Heck, I'm watching TS Isaac which is said to be ready to hit the US coast down there for an ITN item, but as yet its only caused a few deaths (4?) and minimal damage so it's not yet ITN. --MASEM (t) 15:54, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait as per Masem. The tsunami warnings element in particular is news tickerish: we'll know whether they amount to anything in a few hours, so why post potentially spurious warnings now? In either event this strikes me as speculative until the full significance of the event can be assessed. Crispmuncher (talk) 16:44, 27 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]

August 26

[edit]
August 26, 2012 (2012-08-26) (Sunday)
Armed conflict and attacks

Disasters

Environment and health

International relations

Politics and elections

Sports

Indian protests

[edit]
Article: No article specified
Blurb: ​ Police forcefully suppress protests by hundreds of Indians against Prime Minister Manmohan Singh following a coal scandal in India. (Post)
News source(s): 1, 2, 3, 4,
Credits:

Article needs updating

Nominator's comments: Hundreds protesting against PM due to scandal, protests forcefully quelled . --Activism1234 15:48, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also, some of the articles in the nom and the deaths are regarding the Assam disturbance which is unrelated (we posted that last mont, not too much of an increment to report) - not aware of any deaths during the anti-corruption protest. Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 16:02, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support- There is a very interesting issue; significant in many aspects. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 15:58, 26 August 2012 (UTC) Sorry, that has to be the worst rationale I've ever had. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 22:04, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. I'm not denying the significance of the scandal, but a demonstration with hundreds of protesters is surely notable only for being a damp squib. Formerip (talk) 16:00, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Why the references of the coal gate scam have been mixed up with the 2012 Assam violence?Regards, theTigerKing  16:23, 26 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]
  • Strongest possible Oppose (For coal gate scam as mentioned in the blurb) : No one was killed in today's protests. Leave alone, no one was injured. And such protests happen everywhere in a democracy. No doubt that CAG reports $180 billion(approx) loss to the exchequer, but they are presumptive losses only. Has the world, particularly India changed after the protests. The answer is No. Also, the blurb is violating NPOV. Why only Indian PM has been mentioned in the blurb? Meanwhile, Team Anna's movement also didn't figure in ITN. So, why this one??Regards, theTigerKing  16:13, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral leaning oppose. The story is interesting and further reactions could develop as a part of the so called Coalgate, but it is just hundreds of protesters with no reported deaths and didn't hit top news in BBC or AJE. Mohamed CJ (talk) 06:22, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait - I think we just need to wait until the chocolate melts and becomes more silkier and tastier. You know what im saying. This issue is developing. It could get much more interesting in the future. So just wait. --Anirudh Emani (talk) 13:46, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

2012 ICC Under-19 Cricket World Cup

[edit]
Article: 2012 ICC Under-19 Cricket World Cup (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ India beat Australia by six wickets in the finals to win the 2012 ICC Under-19 Cricket World Cup (Post)
News source(s): The Hindustan Times, The Economic Times
Credits:

Article needs updating

 --—Vensatry (Ping me) 08:40, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I thought of nominating it but recalled that when South Africa 2 became No.1 in August 2011, it was nominated but didnt go through. Now that I check, the nomination was not posted despite having unanimous support. But I guess this is too stale now. Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 13:03, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think with test cricket it makes more sense to post results of key tests that actually determine the rankings. The rankings themselves are somewhat dubious anyway. Thus I think I would have supported the above result had it been nominated. After the last Ashes series, I noted that the number one and number two ICC teams were also playing at the time and we didn't post that despite posting the less significant (rankings wise) Ashes series. The England / India whitewash perhaps should have been posted.--Johnsemlak (talk) 13:27, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, cheap shot! Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 12:55, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
BabbaQ is somewhat correct. Cricket is big in a handful of countries, but those countries are HUGE: India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, etc. For example, the there are 106 ICC members while FIBA has 213; the FIBA Basketball World Cup has seen 54 national teams qualify, while the Cricket World Cup has seen 19 teams qualify; heck even EuroBasket has more teams. The I don't think a typical man on the street in either Guangzhou or Buenos Aires ever watched a cricket match. –HTD 14:20, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Cricket is definitely "less global" than basketball. But apart from football, volleyball and basketball which are played pretty much everywhere, most other team sports are pretty much in the same league: rugby, field hockey, cricket, etc.
Volleyball is one of those sports that everyone plays but no one really cares about. The opposite is true for the likes of rugby and American football. Basketball is somewhere in the middle; in fact basketball is much like the Liberal Democrats as its followers is spread out thinly on many countries, with only relatively few and either insignificant, or small, or both "strongholds". –HTD 16:06, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What football? Because American Football is certainly less global than Cricket. It certainly is not a "Minority" sport. --Τασουλα (talk) 17:52, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think anyone suggested US football is more notable than cricket. Though HTD's point is sound--there are large parts of the world where cricket has almost zero penetration. I lived in three countries where cricket has virtually no existence--Russia, S Korea, and France.--Johnsemlak (talk) 00:37, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

16th Summit of the Non Aligned Movement

[edit]
Article: 16th Summit of the Non-Aligned Movement (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The 16th Summit of the Non-Aligned Movement is held from 26 to 31 August 2012 in Tehran, Iran. (Post)
News source(s): [16][17][18]
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Consisting of 120 member states, and 21 observer countries which represent nearly two-thirds of the United Nations's members and contain 55% of the world population, it is the most important gathering of the Developing Countries. --Seyyed(t-c) 03:45, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak oppose - yes, an important summit, and has many of the world's officials (although many are low level representatives). But it seems like nearly every month or so there's another world summit with most of the world attending, whether it's on the environment, nuclear weapons, or terrorism, and this one doesn't seem to have a specific agenda that makes it stand out so much. Also isn't making top headlines right now. --Activism1234 06:04, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Obvious support: Notability is already satisfied as it is an ITNR item. Have fixed the nom to indicate this. The article is way above minimum threshold required, so no argument there as well. Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 06:11, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Apologies, looks like it was only recently added to ITNR by User:Wakari07 and while a discussion has been opened, it hasnt been conlcuded. So here are the reasons why it is notable despite NAM having lost relevance in international relations: (1.) 50 countries participating, almost all represented by heads of state. (2.) Highly notable as it is being hosted by Axis of Evil member Iran who has invited both the Hamas PM and the PLO leader to represent Palestine and had initially cancelled the invitation to Saudi Arabia, but now their Sy. Foreign Minister is attending. (3.) UN Secretary General attending summit despite call from US and Israel to boycott and is expected to discuss Iran's nuclear program. (4.) Indian and Pak PM are expected to meet at sidelines. Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 06:34, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support, since the conclusions of this summit are more significant.Egeymi (talk) 06:33, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment, the article should be much more neutral without exclusively focusing on Iran (See "Importance" section of the article). It is a summit of fifty countries, not only of Iran.Egeymi (talk) 06:49, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment According to a spokesman of the Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, of the Non-Aligned Movement's 120 member and 17 observer state body, some 50 nations will participate. Attendance at the highest level includes 27 presidents, 2 kings and emirs, 7 prime ministers, 9 vice presidents, 2 parliament spokesmen and 5 special envoys. I think it is not usual that too many leaders gather during the year. There are few gathering which can be compared with this one. In addition, if death of one of these leaders is deserved enough to be mentioned in the main page page, it is strange not to mention their gathering while they are alive. --Seyyed(t-c) 07:13, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, important multinational conference. However, it might be worth waiting until announcing the end of the conference, when either major announcements mightt be worth incorporating into the blurb, or at least the reader following the link will have substantive information about what has been discussed/resolved. Kevin McE (talk) 11:47, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support posting the conclusion, where eventual important decisions can be incorporated into the blurb. --Tone 12:46, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Very minimal news coverage (e.g. nowhere on the BBC website). Just seems to be a bunch of leaders getting together for some photo ops and speeches without real policy. Would change if there's a significant development at the conference.--Johnsemlak (talk) 12:58, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in principle but agree with Tone. This is a postable summit, but we only want to post it once, which we should do if something earth-shattering comes out of it. If that doesn't happen, then we can post the fact that it has wrapped up. Formerip (talk) 13:37, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The main part of the event is 30 and 31 August, when the leaders will gather. So we can postpone this debate to 30 August.--Seyyed(t-c) 14:05, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose wake me up when one of these summits actually accomplishes something. Hot Stop 14:52, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support- The only thing that makes this summit any less notable than other big ones is the US opposition to it, but detracting from the summit because of that would be POV. This is far more notable than G20, which is ITNR but has far less attendees. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 15:31, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support The interactions between these countries is significant, particularly given the presecence of a number of major oil producers. "Weak" because while a lack of interest from the US, EU and China does not automatically make something non-notable, there is an obvious effect on the level of coverage. —WFC— 19:50, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose this and almost all summits unless there is some notable event other than room service. μηδείς (talk) 02:26, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Due to the fact that the main days of summits are 30 and 31 August and the major decisions will made at that time, the subject is per-mature now. Therefor I accept that it is not a good decision to put the article on the main page before 30th.--Seyyed(t-c) 03:47, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Marked ready, min. update met.Lihaas (talk) 05:06, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Feel free to disagree, but I don't see it's ready, as we have 4 opposing and 5 supporting, and 3 others saying we should wait until a notable decision is made at the conference. Not something I'm going to relentlessly pursue further, but just felt that I should mention this. --Activism1234 05:09, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Don't worry, I don't think any admin is going to post this right away. --BorgQueen (talk) 05:13, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for now. Wait to see if anything concrete comes of this. If not we can post the closing. I don't see the point in posting the opening: if the summit is significant enough for an ITN posting it will be as a result of concrete actions or resolutions being agreed, not simply by virtue of having taken place. Crispmuncher (talk) 06:18, 27 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]

[Posted] China bus and tanker collision

[edit]
Article: 2012 Chinese bus-tanker crash (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A bus crashes into a tanker carrying methanol, killing 36 people in Shaanxi, China. (Post)
News source(s): 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 8
Credits:

Article updated
  • Reply I didn't oppose this because the western media didn't give it any attention. In fact, "front page of BBC.com" was used as a grounds for support, which I was challenging. How is this incident any different from monsoon floods? --IP98 (talk) 21:30, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"False", eh? The bus crash article peaked at 447 views three days ago [19] while the article on Phyllis Diller got over 6,000 views yesterday and got ~250,000 on each of the two days after her death was announced. μηδείς (talk) 03:57, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Regardless of where it happened, it's a high death toll for a single accident, and it's pretty rare. We've posted at least one accident like these before, and we posted the 39 deaths in the Colombian refinery, so we're not out of line if we post it. The article is in good shape and is entirely sourced, so we should be okay to post. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 21:30, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted per consensus. --BorgQueen (talk) 04:21, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Consensus"? In other words, in spite of the evidence just given? μηδείς (talk) 04:32, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but with all due respect, I see 6 support votes (7 if you count Chocolate) and only 2 oppose votes. I think Borg was right to post this. I'm sure that the number of readers will peak significantly when this is posted as well. --Activism1234 04:38, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Don't apologize, it's no skin off my ass. But we've had plenty of other bus accidents that weren't posted, and had a train crash in Belgium that killed two people be posted. It will be interesting to see what kind of boost this will give the stub after 3 days in a row of less than 250 views on average. I think BorgQueen's "consensus" speaks volumes. In other words all the rationales besides votes (actual reader interest, an actually good article) have failed. μηδείς (talk) 04:46, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fail The article is a few paragraphs and will never be anything more. It had it's 15 minutes of fame, but the investigation won't. Neither will the findings. This was a totally mundane transportation accident, and a day of front page wikipedia coverage has not generated any significant interest in the article. Wikiproject China has not even bothered to give it an importance or quality rating. I support BorgQueen posting, since there was consensus to post, but I can't for the life of me understand why. I hope this nom serves as a reminder for years to come that traffic accidents are not news. --IP98 (talk) 20:38, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

August 25

[edit]
August 25, 2012 (2012-08-25) (Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture

Disasters

Law and crime
  • Thirty-seven Chinese nationals, arrested in Angola due to their alleged involvement in criminal acts, are extradited and due to be tried in China. (BBC)

Politics

Science and technology

  • The Voyager 1 space probe becomes the first human-made object to successfully exit the Solar System and enter Interstellar space, and to an extent, becoming the first Interstellar probe, pioneering Interstellar exploration. (NASA)

Sports

[Posted] Neil Armstrong

[edit]
Article: Neil Armstrong (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ American astronaut Neil Armstrong, the first man to walk on the moon, dies at age 82. (Post)
News source(s): [20] [21] [22][23]
Credits:

Article updated
Lance or Neil? Formerip (talk) 19:27, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
PULL Not updated. I've just gone through a sequence of three edit conflicts attempting to point that out and strip the ready tag. In our excitement to get this posted we've forgotten what ITN is for. Is a single sentence really highlighting updated content or has this simply devolved to a news ticker? Hell, according to the criteria information present in the blurb does not count towards the update requirement when repeated in the article. Therefore we are talking about no update. Crispmuncher (talk) 20:03, 25 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]
"The decision as to when an article is updated enough is subjective, but a five-sentence update (with at minimum three references, not counting duplicates) is generally more than sufficient, while a one-sentence update is highly questionable". You're entitled to your shouty-vote, of course, but I think this subjective call was a good one. Khazar2 (talk) 20:12, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What about a zero sentence update: simply reporting the fact of his death is mentioned in the blurb so does not count. I don't see any reason for fudging the update criteria for stories like this: waiting on a good update encourages a good update to be made. Too many times in the past we have seen early posts on the ground that the article will naturally be expanded in due course, only that never comes to pass. The comment above isn't a vote, my vote was actually in support if you have missed that. This is commenting on a breach of policy. Crispmuncher (talk) 20:21, 25 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]
I added more content myself after posting so there is more than a single sentence now. SpencerT♦C 20:13, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
In any case, calling the previous form a "zero sentence update" was some rather creative counting; the two sentences explaining the causes and place of Armstrong's death self-evidently entailed more information than was in the blurb. I won't object further if others want to pull, but this seems well within our very subjective rules. Khazar2 (talk) 20:35, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sorry, there are a couple things you have to do related to images so it takes a bit more time to get it up. Which image of Armstrong do we want? A recent one, or one from the moon landing era? SpencerT♦C 20:24, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's sometimes looks so bizarrely amateurish that I'd even delay posting until it could be sorted. It's a joke. (Would suggest same as appears at top of his article, but current looks fine). 86.171.12.229 (talk) 21:36, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe just ENGVAR. I feel like that's a standard phrase in US newspapers. Khazar2 (talk) 20:29, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Changed to "at the age of 82". SpencerT♦C 20:30, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
or "aged 82"Lihaas (talk) 01:57, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral - (e/c) It's obvious that Neil Armstrong has notability for walking on the moon, there is no doubt about that. However, as someone else pointed out, he has not done anything notable since then, and he did die at an old age - according to our current DC standards, that's not normally sufficient to warrant a posting, and certainly not at this rate (less than an hour!). Bearing that in mind, there's no point in pulling the blurb now, I just think it would be worth noting that we ought to have a minimum discussion time to make sure issues with updates and blurb clarity are sorted out and reviewed prior to committing to the front page.--WaltCip (talk) 20:32, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support — That's one small edit for a man; one sad day for mankind. RIP Neil. =( Kurtis (talk) 22:38, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
comment once again the update was not there when posted (it is now). Please stop bhlindly posting Lihaas (talk) 01:57, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
'Once again'? It's not like it happens all the time. This was a unique case. It was absolutely clear this was sufficiently notable, and it was absolutely certain that the article would be updated sufficiently in due course. Furthermore it was a Good Article. Waiting in this case makes ITN slow. Yes we're not a new ticker but this was a special case. There was also a consensus for immediate posting, which overrules our normal procedures.--Johnsemlak (talk) 02:28, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Also, right after I posted, I went and added more to the section. It wasn't just a post-and-dump. SpencerT♦C 03:23, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with Johnsemlak and Spenser. Sometimes a quick post is OK. Also it is a fine article and worthy of having a pointer to on our front page. Jusdafax 03:39, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A quick-post in the case of straightforward deaths of someone highly notable is usually not a bad thing indeed. I would of supported this nom...but you know, being in the UK I was in bed at the time XD --Τασουλα (talk) 20:43, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Venezuela refinery blast

[edit]
Article: Paraguaná Refinery Complex (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A blast at the Paraguaná Refinery Complex in north Venezuela kills at least 26 people and injured more than 80 others. (Post)
News source(s): [24], [25], [[26]], [27]
Credits:

Article updated
I'd suggest going to WP:AN/3RR. The editor appears to be on their eighth or ninth attempt to delete this material. Khazar2 (talk) 15:53, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

August 24

[edit]
August 24, 2012 (2012-08-24) (Friday)
Armed conflict and attacks

Disasters

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Sports

[Posted] Apple vs Samsung trial

[edit]
Article: Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A US jury finds that Samsung infringed on Apple's mobile patents (Post)
News source(s): [28]
Credits:

Article needs updating

Nom comment: this is a major case that could have huge impacts on mobile phone markets worldwide. Hot Stop 23:12, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also $1 billion verdict Hot Stop 23:28, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Care to elaborate? Hot Stop 23:28, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose unless there's something more significant about it. Doesn't one of these cases come to a conclusion approximately every other day? Formerip (talk) 23:24, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    The $1.05 billion in damages is the largest verdict in patent history. In fact, the jury ruled that Samsung willfully copied Apple's design which could triple the verdict. And not only does this directly affect the American market, the decision will likely be used by Apple to pressure Samsung to settle (rather than risk another defeat) in court cases around the world. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 20:32, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
oppose mentioning the US trial without the Korean one is POV. And at any rate, this doesnt have implications without synthesisLihaas (talk) 09:16, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This has important implications in the realm of software patents. For the uninitiated, imagine GM had a patent on "Turning a key in a lock to engage the ignition of an automobile". Slide to unlock baby, and Apple was awarded a billion dollars for it. It's not unexpected that immediately after, Google used their newly acquired Motorola patents to counter sue Apple. Samsung will likely appeal, so maybe we can brush this aside for now, but we can't adopt the position "waaaaa it's only a lawsuit, isn't there a fight in a cafe in the middle east somewhere". In the US, litigation is a major vehicle for establishing prescient, so this is significant. --IP98 (talk) 11:54, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Agree with IP98, but assume "precedent" was meant, not "prescient". μηδείς (talk) 18:32, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. This is major world news involving two major world companies. DillonLarson (talk) 19:24, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Outstanding, thanks. Like a well-baked cake, I'd say it's ready! Jusdafax 03:43, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted. --BorgQueen (talk) 03:48, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, belatedly. Essentially all the newscoverage that I read describes this particular lawsuit as the big one, the one that really matters and the one that will have the most significant consequences for the smartphone and tablet PC industry. E.G., quoting from a CNN piece[29]: "Chris Carani, an intellectual property attorney and design law expert at McAndrews, Held & Malloy, says the verdict could spark "a burst of creativity" in the design of future devices. Competitors won't want to risk being slapped with a design infringement lawsuit, given that it costs so much money to roll out a new smartphone or tablet." Nsk92 (talk) 11:49, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Empire State Building shooting

[edit]
Article: 2012 Empire State Building shooting (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A shooting by a disgruntled employee results in two deaths and eleven people wounded outside of New York's Empire State Building. (Post)
News source(s): 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
Credits:

Article updated
Even Prince Harry was making news. It is just a small incident that happened in a busy street of New York.Yes, unusual event in New York. Every breaking news shouldn't be considered. The death tally is low. Number of injured are less.(wrt events that were denied ITN)Regards, theTigerKing  15:55, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose Low death and injury tally, and I too feel that a continuing series of American mass shootings is getting a little redundant. Canuck89 (converse with me) 16:01, August 24, 2012 (UTC)
    • How many deaths would have been enough? Lugnuts And the horse 16:03, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Every loss of life is regrettable. Recently, an event (Regarding floods in South Asia) was denied. The figures were much higher. An elderly couple was shot dead in New Delhi this week in broad daylight. Surely, it won't figure. The event is a domestic issue of USA. The shooting has gained headlines because it happens to happen in "New York". Not notable enough for international consumption.Regards, theTigerKing  16:10, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Remember those sweet, naive days of July when some of us could still argue that the US didn't have three mass shootings a week? I'm getting the fatigue Resolute mentions, too, but this is at the moment the world's top news story: top on the New York Times (duh), BBC, Al Jazeera, and second on Xinhua. It's logical to assume that a large number of readers will be interested in its article, making it well-suited for ITN per the first statement of our purpose: "To help readers find and quickly access content they are likely to be searching for because an item is in the news". Khazar2 (talk) 16:02, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Blurb check It appears one of the two dead is the gunman himself,[30] making our phrasing either inaccurate or misleading. It's also possible some of the wounded were hit by police fire, according to the mayor (see same story). Perhaps something more like "A shooting by a disgruntled employee results in two deaths and nine people wounded outside..."? Khazar2 (talk) 16:08, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Disgruntled worker kills former colleague. Sad for those involved but not nearly notable enough. Leaky Caldron 16:05, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose While presently highly covered, the situation appears to be over. Also, the fact that 19 people were wounded by gunfire in Chicago just the night before [31] and that's being overshadowed, suggests that this is just interesting because it was at NYC. --MASEM (t) 16:07, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose Minor event. --Τασουλα (talk) 16:15, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

^^ Pure sensationalism. Same with the Prince Harry nonsense. Use common sense and stop relying other news outlets to do the job for you. This mentality is starting to piss me off. --Τασουλα (talk) 20:19, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As somebody who often uses similar logic myself, I have to say I don't get the anger. Editors sometimes talk as if we're writing a history book here, and nothing must be included unless it's "for the ages"--but ITN is just a collection of links to Wikipedia content that lasts only 3-5 days. I don't see the harm in linking something that's of high-interest for a week only, since by that point the blurb will have expired anyway. Khazar2 (talk) 20:42, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • The only reason its getting broad coverage then is because it took place at the same location as 9/11, and there was an initial rush talking about terrorism (which has been proven false). If the exact same events , fatalities and injuries, took place anywhere else but NYC, I would except it to far less covered (Again, Chicago had 19 people wounded by gunfire across the city that same night. Where's that coverage?) --MASEM (t) 16:21, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • Exactly - the fact it took place in NYC gave it that amount of notability to make the headlines. I wouldn't expect that in some other cities. --Activism1234 16:25, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
          • Exactly! Prince Harry recently was making headlines around the world. Beleive me, an article on his Las Vegas trip would make a good read. Would the article be notable enough for it to be in ITN?Regards, theTigerKing  16:43, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
          • Immediately putting a location bias, a factor we've been trying to fight against for the last 6 months here. A completely fair question to ask is "If this event took place in (minor city) instead of (major city), would it likely have the same coverage? The theater shooting? Yes. The church shooting? Yes. This? Absolutely not. Ergo, we need to dismiss the importance of NYC to the news reporting here and as an ITN item. --MASEM (t) 16:32, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Very Strong Oppose - Our standards on posting U.S. based stories have tightened and rightly so. Compared to the stories that are currently on the ITN ticker, this isolated shooting is of absolutely piddling significance. That said, it's somewhat notable that it occurred in a city with one of the strictest gun laws in the nation.--WaltCip (talk) 16:34, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose- Despite what the press thinks, not every US shooting is notable. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 16:48, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose This was temporarily the top story of the moment, but the international interest is probably fleeting and doesn't merit ITN coverage.--Chaser (talk) 16:50, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Top news is top news. "Shooting fatigue" on the part of editors isn't a valid reason not to post top news. I know it won't be posted, but it shouldn't be "snowed" either. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:44, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Just not important enough. Not enough deaths (as crass as that sounds), not an unusual context or distinctive enough set-up. The Denver shootings was a successful nomination because it was so unusual an event with many deaths; this is a good example of the opposite of that. doktorb wordsdeeds 17:58, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Two people murdered in NYC. Of course it's sad, but not ITN. --RA (talk) 18:24, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, it is very ordinary not only for NY City but also for every big city in any country. I am sure that today such cases happened all over the world. Egeymi (talk) 21:53, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Oppose -this is not a major shooting. Would not have recieved world press had it been in lets say Slovenia.--BabbaQ (talk) 23:17, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Only one victim killed (plus one non-victim killed). Nothing major. A Quest For Knowledge (talk)

[Posted] Anders Behring Breivik

[edit]
Article: Anders Behring Breivik (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Anders Behring Breivik is sentenced to at least 21 years in prison after he is charged with killing 77 people in the 2011 Norway attacks (Post)
News source(s): [32]
Credits:

Article updated

The blurb say enough.
  – HonorTheKing (talk) 08:21, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Posted (by NuclearWarfare). JonFlaune (talk) 11:52, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment So below (with Armstrong case), the consensus is that court decisions should not be posted until they are final, but in this case we post regardless? Also note that even if Breivik does not appeal, the prosecutor might. And Breivik can still change his mind until appeal period expires as part of his "media game". This is why I don't remember ever seeing ITN posting court decisions until they are FINAL. --hydrox (talk) 14:26, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • The Armstrong case is totally different; we don't even know if the organization is even allowed to issue the punishments against him, hence the wait. In this case the sentencing is very widely reported in the media as if it were final, and to be honest, I don't think anyone thinks it isn't. Besides, if we don't post now it will be stale by the time we do. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 15:54, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Agreed. At this time, both Breivik's counsel and the prosecutor have announced there will be no appeal. Very technically speaking, the sentence will be final by default in two weeks, but it will hardly be news at that time. JonFlaune (talk) 21:05, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support — What a horrific and senseless crime. I refuse to believe that such an act could be committed by somebody of a sane mindset, but at least he'll no longer be out and about. Kurtis (talk) 22:47, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Lance Armstrong

[edit]

Article: Lance Armstrong (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Lance Armstrong is banned from cycling and stripped of his seven Tour de France titles due to charges of doping.

ALT1 = Lance Armstrong announces his decision not to fight the USADA charges of doping despite their intention of stripping him of his seven Tour de France titles. (Post)
News source(s): [34], [35], [36]
Credits:

Article needs updating

Breaking news across the board, a top story on every paper you can name, really. I think I'm jumping the gun a bit because the ban won't officially be enacted until Friday, but every paper seems to already set this in stone. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 03:09, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support I think the newsworthy-ness of this is sufficient to post now. Though I wouldn't argue with waiting until Friday, I don't see the point in waiting. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:12, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support only once ban is official. Obviously notable, but the blurb phrasing is technically inaccurate at the moment: NYT reports Armstrong "will be banned", not "is banned" at the moment.[37] We shouldn't make a mistake like that with a front-page BLP. Khazar2 (talk) 03:18, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Obvious support. I agree that we could wait a tad, but in general once there's a solid update I"d post ASAP.--Johnsemlak (talk) 03:24, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait until he is banned; he will be banned. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 03:38, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Sure is sad to see some of the finest sportsmen of my generation disgrace themselves like this (much like Mark McGwire).--WaltCip (talk) 03:49, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Did you read his statement? He said that he was sick and tired of the accusations and investigations against him despite the countless doping tests, so he decided to stop defending himself in proceedings. The USADA took it as an admission of guilt and immediately issued the ban. Smells like a witch hunt and a man who's just sick and tired of it. You can read the statement here. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 04:07, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong support - very famous bicyclist, breaking and major news, haven't got stuff like this on ITN in a while, reasons above. --Activism1234 03:57, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Obvious Support Wait Not a supporter of posting sports news, but 7-time Tour de France winner is sorta big. μηδείς (talk) 04:01, 24 August 2012 (UTC) Have to agree with Ericleb01, a nolo contendere is not an admission of guilt, and not sure how an american body can strip french titles.[reply]
  • Support but losing the titles should be the lead part of the blurb, not the ban. Hot Stop 04:07, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments: Correct if it's wrong, but our article says "... although no official statement has yet been issued by USADA." Shouldn't we wait at least until they issue it? --BorgQueen (talk) 04:08, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in future, wait for now Keep in mind that there's some debate if the USADA even has the authority to strip Armstrong of his titles. The International Cycling Union has yet to comment, as well. In any case, wait until the official statement/ban goes into effect. Cheers, Zaldax (talk) 04:17, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Obvious support if the blurb remains true once the facts have settled down. The TdF is ITNR so a change in results of 7 tours must surely count as notable. However the BBC for one are reporting confusion over whether the USADA actually has the power to strip him of the victories. That needs to be clarified before this is posted. I suspect that will need Europe to wake up before a definitive statement one way or the other can be given. Crispmuncher (talk) 04:20, 24 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]
  • Support — I am quite shocked to hear the news. This is a pretty notable event, and a shoo-in for coverage on the main page. Kurtis (talk) 05:31, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait the moment he is officially stripped of his victories this should be posted. But as of now it only seems that USDA can continue to look into the allegations. It is not clear if his results can be stripped the moment he says I quit. Nergaal (talk) 06:03, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Highly significant that he is to be stripped of his titles, leaving an empty space in so many Wikipedia templates and tables of course! A very important (and from his perspective, bloody daft) story. doktorb wordsdeeds 08:04, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support shocking news.
      – HonorTheKing (talk) 08:21, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Obviously. Lugnuts And the horse 08:35, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strongest possible wait if that is not too strange a !vote position. Ban is essentially redundant: he has not been active as a professional for more than two years, and there is no clear indication from anyone other than the USADA that he is no longer considered winner of those tours. The ASO (organisers of the Tour de France) still list Bjarne Riis as winner of the 1996 Tour, albeit with an asterisk, and still have third place in the 2008 edition vacant. Kevin McE (talk) 11:44, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Impossible to support. It is complete speculation per WP:CRYSTAL until formal announcements are made. Even then, he could appeal against the stripping of titles to the Court of Arbitration for Sport. Stick to the known facts - he is no longer going to appeal against doping allegations. Leaky Caldron 11:54, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, but wait - I echo Leaky caldron's view on this. --Τασουλα (talk) 12:06, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Not your average sports story. Indeed, I predict this will be posted before the day is done in California. This is huge news and will reignite the debate about sports doping. Jusdafax 12:42, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question Does the USADA have the authority to formally strip LA of his TDF titles? Because it seems fairly established that they will do that.--Johnsemlak (talk) 12:50, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Going with everyone else by saying strong wait. No question this is notable, but the main question is if it will actually happen. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 15:50, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • BIG NEWS obvious support the debate about whether or not the USADA has the power to strip him should be in the article. The USADA has made the statement, that's news and NOT CRYSTAL. The specifics can go in the article, but this should be on the main page now. I came to WP looking for this article to see what is going on and was surprised it wasn't In the News. And for those who are saying, "Wait until its official"---by the time that is determined, this may no longer be newsworthy... when the beaucracy is done, it may not be front page news.38.100.76.228 (talk) 15:58, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Lets wait for the UCI actions. Click here for UCI and USADARegards, theTigerKing  16:57, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Most of the opposes are because of the blurb. Can someone find wording that isn't crystal but still factual and newsworthy. Regards, Sun Creator(talk) 17:02, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong wait. Lance Armstrong is 40, so his being banned from cycling is a sad fall from grace for him, but has limited obvious consequences for the sport. Being stripped of his Tour de France titles would be a bigger deal and possibly ITN-worthy. But, as noted by several editors, this looks like it may be a bit of nonsense posturing by the USADA, who are quite possibly no more entitled to do that than they are to revoke his high school diploma. We absolutely must at least wait for comment from whoever it is that actually does have authority over Tour de France titles. Formerip (talk) 17:33, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Seven-time winner of Tour de France is stripped of all his medals and banned from the sport for life? Now, that's ITN for an encyclopedia. --RA (talk) 18:27, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • SupportWait Someone being stripped of his record number of wins in the most prestigious race in the sport is a very big deal. Given that it's a breaking news in sport everywhere, there is nothing to contest its sufficiency for inclusion.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:35, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question perhaps this isn't the place for it, but I don't understand how a national body can strip a cyclist of victories from another country. It really feels to me like we should wait for the verdict from an international body because this comes off as the USADA blowing hot air. --PlasmaTwa2 00:57, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
In the simpler case of a failed drug test, the national drug testing authority that conducts the test (could be home or training base of athlete, could be determined by location of event for in-competition testing) has authority to impose a ban and annul results since proven start date of doping. This is complicated by virtue of non-lab test evidence, which according to WADA rules requires the uncovering authority to reveal evidence to sporting body involved (as WFC states below), and UCI is claiming that it has been the uncovering authority for at least some of the evidence. Kevin McE (talk) 08:58, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose any mention of Tour de France. The USADA has the ability to strip him of the titles, but only once the UCI and WADA receive and accept the USADA's reasoned decision [38].

    However, given how huge the story is right now, I support a blurb that acknowledges the story, such as Cyclist Lance Armstrong decides not to contest USADA doping charges. —WFC— 02:38, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Meh I support a blurb such as WFC's above, but I'm not too big a fan of the ALT1 blurb posted above. Cheers, Zaldax (talk) 02:49, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support WFC's blurb (I already indicated support for the nomination above). There seems to be no timeline on when the UCI will make a decision here, and from what little one can glean from the news they seem keen not to make a ruling. In any case this development has significantly changed the way LA's 7 titles are viewed, and I think it's worthy of posting. We may never get the final resolution we want.--Johnsemlak (talk) 02:11, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support WFC's blurb. It doesn't capture the full story, but will have to do, given the small space we have for the more nuanced big picture. Khazar2 (talk) 02:14, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Marked as ready. Consensus seems relatively clear for a condensed blurb, and there is a reasonable update. —WFC— 03:58, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted -- tariqabjotu 13:41, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Libyan civil war update

[edit]
Article: Aftermath of the Libyan civil war (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Libyan security forces seize more than 100 tanks from a pro-Gaddafi militia. (Post)
News source(s): [39], [40], [41], [42], [43], [44], [45]
Credits:

Article needs updating

This is fairly breaking news, so it remains to be seen just how widely this will be reported on. However, it represents a major step forward in the stabilization of the new Libya. I'd like to note that the amount of tanks seized from one militia is more than the entire arsenal of some countries! Cheers, Zaldax (talk) 02:29, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Canada or China, you tell me. μηδείς (talk) 04:07, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Such clean-up operations are to be expected. Unless there is something I am missing, these tanks were just sitting around, not patrolling the desert and terrorising the Brits whilst under El Rommel's command. μηδείς (talk) 04:07, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
These militias are possibly the greatest challenge facing the new Libya, and it doesn't look like we've run a story (aside from the elections) on them in some time. Also, the militia in question was responsible for twin car bombings in Tripoli on Sunday, so they're definitely an active threat. (or at least, they were.) Seriously, though; this militia had as many tanks as the Finnish military.Cheers, Zaldax (talk) 04:20, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Added Al Jazeera's article as another source. Cheers, Zaldax (talk) 04:42, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Great news for Libyans, as this could otherwise have developed into a pretty nasty situation. But is it a significant enough development in itself to mention on the main page? Personally, I think not. Kurtis (talk) 05:33, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose New regime forces seize arms and make arrests after civil war? That's a lot of tanks, but otherwise very normal. --RA (talk) 18:32, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

August 23

[edit]
August 23, 2012 (2012-08-23) (Thursday)
Disasters

Environment and health

International relations

Law and crime

Sport

Technology

Flooding kills

[edit]
Article: No article specified
Blurb: ​ Dozens of Pakistanis and Indians are killed in heavy flooding and monsoon rains. (Post)
News source(s): 1, 2, 3
Credits:

Article needs updating
  • Oppose. It shouldn't be trivialised, but basically the blurb could be re-written as It's monsoon season in India and Pakistan, just like it is this time every year. If there's a major landslide or something that passes the look-at-all-these-dead-people-how-can-we-not-post-that test, then maybe that incident should be posted. Formerip (talk) 23:15, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'll be honest that this wouldn't be my #1 nomination (although I do think it could make it to ITN), but there's been some inactivity here at ITN, mainly due to static world news or not interesting enough, and I sure as heck wasn't nominating this! --Activism1234 23:20, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per FormerIP, and pending an obvious article home for the information. Khazar2 (talk) 00:03, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Is there an article for the specific monsoon nominated? If it doesn't have it's own article, it's hard to judge notability. And if it doesn't have/deserve an article, then it's probably not notable enough. SpencerT♦C 00:41, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for now: This isnt really grabbing headlines here in India (Sample front pages: [46], [47], [48]) or from I can gather from Pakistani websites, in Pakistan either (Sample front pages: [49], [50], [51]. The deathtoll seems like an aggregate of various small incidents throughout the entire Indian subcontinent which is in fact experiencing drought in some areas due to lack of rainfall. None of these incidents on its own seem to make the cut. Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 02:44, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

West Nile outbreak

[edit]
Article: West Nile Virus (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ An outbreak of the West Nile Virus is the largest ever in the United States, with over 1,118 cases and 41 deaths reported. (Post)
News source(s): 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
Credits:

Article updated
comment Cholera out break in Sierra Leone has killed almost 250 p[eople so far and will perhaps go up . If someone wants to create that article...Im not doing so as i dont think its notable encycloaedically (though we have one for Haiti last year), though its quite plausibly ITN worthyLihaas (talk) 07:02, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Lebanon Clashes

[edit]
Article: 2012 conflict in Lebanon (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Sectarian clashes linked to the Syrian civil war continue in Lebanon's second largest city, Tripoli. (Post)
News source(s): [52] [53] [54] [55] [56] [57], [58]
Credits:

Article updated


Clashes between supporters of Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad (predominately Alawite neighborhoods) and opposition supporters (predominately Sunni neighborhoods) have been ongoing since the beginning of the week, but they seem to only have escalated to widespread coverage recently. Earlier today, a fragile ceasefire that was brokered yesterday by community leaders dissolved, resulting in at least one known death (Bringing the total to 12 confirmed deaths and 45 confirmed wounded so far.) The Lebanese Army has deployed tanks to the city, in an attempt to bring the situation under control. The international community considers this a serious development; to quote the BBC News article

"The UN political chief Jeffrey Feltman described the situation as "precarious". He told the UN Security Council that, as the situation in Syria deteriorated, there was a risk that it could escalate in Lebanon too."

I know we already have a Syrian Civil War sticky, but this is a big development, as if I'm not mistaken this is the first confirmed time the conflict has spilled over Syria's borders. Given Syria and Lebanon's prior history, I'd suggest we post this as soon as the article is updated. (I'd also appreciate comments on the blurb; given that this is my first ITN nomination, I'm not entirely sure what to do.) Cheers, Zaldax (talk) 15:45, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's definitely a "developing story"; Front page of BBC News I'm a little perplexed by the uneven coverage, to be honest. Cheers, Zaldax (talk) 17:28, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Aaaand they bumped it before I could get a stable URL. As of now, it's still on the front page, but it's no longer the second highest story. You have Mitt Romney to "thank" for that. Cheers, Zaldax (talk) 17:41, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)I'd venture that a "minor disturbance" wouldn't provoke a comment from a high UN official calling the situation "precarious", nor would it merit the deployment of the Lebanese military to pacify the area. See the article 2012 conflict in Lebanon; I'm surprised at how under-reported this really is. Cheers, Zaldax (talk) 19:01, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've revised the blurb, but I still don't think it's very good. Does anyone have any idea how to improve it? Cheers, Zaldax (talk) 01:34, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Update: The New York Times has finally published a story about this. Seems that the press is starting to pick up coverage. Cheers, Zaldax (talk) 02:41, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've tagged the entry as possibly ready. Cheers, Zaldax (talk) 04:30, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
comment the article is awful at the moment and ive tagged it as ssuch (which was reason to remove the Bahrain uprising last time), but the update is there. One could link to the relevant section instead OR link to the other article (which i haven seen ye)Lihaas (talk) 06:58, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Updating: I'll try and fix this thing up as best I can. While I"m at it, I'm going to update the article with the latest information, which can be found here in this BBC story. Cheers, Zaldax (talk) 15:06, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No Easy Day

[edit]
Article: No Easy Day (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Memoir by pseudonymous author announced, detailing the experience of killing al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden. (Post)
News source(s): [59], [60], [61]
Credits:

August 22

[edit]
August 22, 2012 (2012-08-22) (Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Disasters

Health

International relations

Sport

Technology
  • It becomes known that a freight train derailment, yesterday near Baltimore, caused military fiber optic cables to be cut so much that communications were quite seriously disrupted. This in turn caused to justify further delaying the start of the big-gun suspects' trial at Guantánamo Bay by two more days, to within "likely more than a year". (Huffington Post)


Ebola in DRC

[edit]
Article: Ebola virus disease (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ An outbreak of Ebola virus has flared up in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, as the outbreak in Uganda is winding down. (Post)
News source(s): [62] [63] [64] [65] [66] [67] [68]
Credits:

Article updated

[Posted] Kenya clashes

[edit]
Article: 2012 Tana River District clashes (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Ethnic clashes over grazing rights for cattle in Kenya's Tana River District between the Orma and Pokomo peoples kill at least 52 people. (Post)
News source(s): 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: This isn't the #1 headline, but it is one of the top headlines or close to #1 for a variety of notable international media outlets (The New York Times, Al Jazeera, BBC, CNN, etc), and this ethnic violence is particularly gruesome, involving machetes and killing women and children. --Activism1234 17:31, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Now that an article has been created, I'm fully behind this posting. Cheers, Zaldax (talk) 12:59, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tony Nicklinson

[edit]
Article: No article specified
Blurb: ​ Tony Nicklinson dies from pneumonia at the age of 58 after suffering locked-in syndrome which had for years paralysed him from the neck down. (Post)
News source(s): BBC Herald Sun Australia New York Times Sky News ABC News CBS News Irish Times Fox News Just saw it covered by Al Jazeera as well but can't find an online link at the moment.

Oppose Strictly domestic news, if he had died under assisted suicide (If it were ruled legal) I would support however. --Τασουλα (talk) 17:05, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Errrm, you have looked at some of the sources, haven't you? He lived and died in England. Kevin McE (talk) 21:17, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sure did, and he sure did. When I went to assisted suicide, Australia was at the top of the list and I just went with it. Oops, that was dumb and embarrassing. --IP98 (talk) 00:02, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not quite sure what you mean. Tony Nicklinson would be the obvious choice of article. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 22:40, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It just redirects to Locked-in syndrome. I'm all for posting this, but he should have his own article with a history, timeline, etc. --IP98 (talk) 00:02, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. If we've never done a story on the Right to Die debate, I may retract my opposition to posting this, but we really need a dedicated article before we put this on the Main Page. Cheers, Zaldax (talk) 13:14, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Seemingly this is being poorly reported. From many news reports, I had assumed he died of illness. It would appear that he began refusing food from last week. --RA (talk) 12:44, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nina Bawden

[edit]
Article: Nina Bawden (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Nina Bawden, writer of the influential novel Carrie's War, dies at her home in London. (Post)
News source(s): [69] [70] [71]
Em, she did. Several in fact. At least get your facts right. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.40.102.241 (talk) 16:56, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Which ones? Could you please throw light on them! The article mentions none award won.Regards, theTigerKing  17:18, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
From the article: "Carrie's War won the 1993 Phoenix Award from the Children's Literature Association (U.S.) as the best English-language children's book published twenty years earlier that did not win a major award." SpencerT♦C 22:18, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Does that mean to say that she won an award for books that didn't win an award? That reflects more negatively than positively on her. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 22:43, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This award is actually not a notable achievement. And awarded just one award even after writing so many books?Regards, theTigerKing  05:34, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Unopposed I could see this if a good case were made in its favor. Let's have some sources quoted. This would go up if my suggestion in the Phyllis Diller nom for a one line bare-link recent deaths section were supported. μηδείς (talk) 18:45, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think that "recent deaths links" is actually a really good idea. I strongly encourage you to propose that somewhere. Cheers, Zaldax (talk) 18:48, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
comment I just created a thread to discuss that here Wikipedia_talk:In_the_news#Deaths_in_last_7_days EdwardLane (talk) 09:42, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

August 21

[edit]
August 21, 2012 (2012-08-21) (Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Business and economy

Disasters

Health and environment

Politics and elections

Science

[Posted] Russia and WTO

[edit]
Articles: Economy of Russia (talk · history · tag) and World Trade Organization accession and membership (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Russia, the world's largest non-WTO economy, joins the World Trade Organization after 19 years of negotiations. (Post)
News source(s): RIA, RIA, RFE/RL, euronews, WTO PRESS RELEASE (more), Reuters, AFP, NY Times, Guardian, Bloomberg, ITAR-TASS, VOR, FT, europa.eu
Credits:

Nominator's comments: important event --TarzanASG (talk) 10:19, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just came to nominate ?(and would thus support). But saw its already up. No qualms there, but does anyone see the voting hre per CONSENSUS which says it does not vote count but assess the quality of discusion. "In Soviet Russia, world trades you" + "ofcourse" + "this nomination should be uncontroversial" + "should be in ITN" + "easily ITN" + "straight forward" + (no comment whatsoever) + "No question on notability." (it is not ITNR, so there is clearly discussion). There were but 1/2 productive commetns of support, and as WaltClip noted, it should be discussed (mre so as its not ITNR)Lihaas (talk) 21:09, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Had someone opposed it, people would have had come out with plausible defense. The framing of the blurb made it an obvious contender. Kudos to the nominator of the news-event for framing it beautifully. Even now, nobody has come-up with a reason why it should be opposed. Regards, theTigerKing  05:29, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How do you expect this to be ITNR? It's not exactly a recurring event. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 21:51, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If nobody objects, what's there to discuss? – Muboshgu (talk) 00:27, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Everybody agreed that it was notable. No-one could think of any plausible objections that may arise that needed to be pre-emptively countered. And I also want to place on record that "In Soviet Russia, world trades you" remains the best comment in this entire discussion. Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 03:13, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Seconded! Zaldax (talk) 13:51, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't realize that Yakov Smirnoff had become in vogue again. ;)--WaltCip (talk) 04:28, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Romania court

[edit]
Articles: Traian Basescu (talk · history · tag) and Romanian presidential impeachment referendum, 2012 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A Romanian constitutional court invalidates a referendum to impeach President Traian Basescu, reinstating him as president. (Post)
News source(s): 1, 2, 3, 4
Credits:

Both articles updated

Nominator's comments: Big event in Romania, follows a referundum to impeach him but he has now been reinstated and the referendum ruled invalid. Making some headlines on various international media outlets.

--Activism1234 23:10, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This was nominated on July 29. Posted and then pulled. Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 02:30, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, the impeachment was posted, then pulled because it was decided that we would wait for the court ruling to be posted. Really, one could argue that consensus for posting this already exists. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 02:42, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, makes sense. Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 04:14, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Was gonna ask if ywe posted it the first time. Since it wasnt done as such think this shuold be posted.
Whats the status of prez at the moment now?Lihaas (talk) 03:47, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think the government is going to officially approve this (confirmed that they will do it though, as they're required, it's just ceremonial) in a day or so, and then he'll be back, if they haven't already done this. --Activism1234 04:17, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose It was known at the time of the last nom that the result was not valid. I recall pointing out at the time that the lack of turnout was itself a result that had been campaigned for, and that encouraging voters not to turn up at the ballot box was a deliberate strategy. In effect this was a ballot where no matter which way you voted it had the net effect of voting the Pres out of office. That is reality, not some legal sleight of hand. Crispmuncher (talk) 04:32, 22 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]
  • Oppose. 88% votes YES so its clearly a great injustice to the Romanian people. This Turnout requirement didn't exist for 2007 impeachment Referendum. This law is totally ridiculous. The protests continue.- EugεnS¡m¡on(14) ® 05:50, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support wide international coverage, very unusual political situation in a country with a 20+ million population, and presumably a final step in the political chaos in the country. The so-called "injustice" to the people of Romania by the 9 judges makes it even more notable for ITN. Nergaal (talk) 07:32, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support (as already approved) on the basis that this had already been approved for posting in July but was pulled owing to the disputed outcome. Now that the outcome has been clarified, posting it now is no more than a re-post following a correction to something we already approved. Minor improvement to the blurb:

    The Constitutional Court of Romania invalidates a referendum to impeach President Traian Basescu, reinstating him as president.

    --RA (talk) 08:14, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, very significant event with wide coverage.Egeymi (talk) 08:24, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, per RA's comments above. Nsk92 (talk) 12:11, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Should be in ITN considering the fact that it is/was making headlines in a large pocket of Europe.Regards, theTigerKing  13:22, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted. --BorgQueen (talk) 14:02, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support support in some form. Careful with the blurb, could be more twists in the future. Regards, Sun Creator(talk) 14:31, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have no problem with this being an "In The News" blurb, but I am very frustrated at the use of the phrase "invalidates a referendum". I have posted on the Main Page Talk and on the 2012 referendum article Talk about this. Saying "invalidates a referendum" implies that the Constitutional Court of Romania has an ultra vires power to invalidate referenda, and glosses over the fact that there is a public law in Romania, on the books since 2000 and amended more recently, which establishes the rules by which referenda are considered valid or invalid. It bothers me particularly because Romania is being portrayed as a country with no concern for rule of law, despite the fact that the law has been followed at every instance, both by those defending Băsescu and those opposing him. Please note also that the headlines of the articles originally used above to justify the blurb's adoption for use on the Main Page are: "Romanian court rules impeachment vote invalid", "Traian Basescu: Romanian impeachment vote ruled invalid", "Basescu reinstated as Romanian president", and "Romania's Rulers Cry Out against Basescu Return". Two of these headlines say "rules invalid" rather than "invalidates", and the other two do not use "invalidate" in the headline. Furthermore, those last two articles say this in the next few paragraphs: "Traian Basescu is set to return as Romania’s president after the Constitutional Court ruled that last month’s impeachment referendum was invalid", "Tuesday the Constitutional Court declared void the July 29 impeachment referendum against Basescu, based on finding that it is in fact true that less 50% of voters had participated." So none of these articles make the claim that the referendum was "invalidated" by the court! Three of them state that the court "ruled" it was invalid, and the remaining one references the terms of the actual law that was the basis of its judgment. Yet I was told when I raised this point on the 2012 referendum talk page that it was generally the case that this "invalidated" phrase is the phrase generally being used by the media. That appears to be false. Please change the wording of this blurb to read "declared invalid" in place of "invalidated", to make it clear that Romania is a country "of laws not men". Zachary Klaas (talk) 14:50, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I find that to be quite the well-reasoned, considered, argument; I'd support that change. It's fairly minor change in wording, but as Zachary Klaas suggests, it drastically changes the meaning to more accurately convey the facts. Cheers, Zaldax (talk) 15:26, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Just saw that the change has been made - much appreciated, thanks. Zachary Klaas (talk) 20:02, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Apple Inc.

[edit]
Article: Apple Inc. (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Apple Inc. becomes the most valuable company in history as their market value reaches $623 billion. (Post)
News source(s): Washington Post

 --61.245.25.10 (talk) 07:28, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted]Ethiopian PM dies

[edit]
Article: Meles Zenawi (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ After weeks of speculation about his death, Ethiopian Prime Minister Meles Zenawi dies at age 57. (Post)
News source(s): 1, 2, 3
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Top headline for BBC, Yahoo, and Al Jazeera, and will soon likely be for other outlets as well.

Have clubbed the illness and death sections. Have also expanded the lead and removed the yellow tag. The orange tag for neutrality remains. Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 07:17, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Are there any glaring POV issues? If not I'd suggest removing the neutrality tag. It's 4 years old and there's no discussion of it on the talk page.--Johnsemlak (talk) 07:33, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah. Cant spot any glaring POV issues but I wont claim to be entirely familiar with all of the sub-topics covered in the page and its a pretty big article. I've opened a discussion in the article talk page. Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 07:54, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm removing the tag. It's over 4 years old and there's been no discussion of POV on the talk page since. If we look at the article when the tag was placed, it was in a very different state.--Johnsemlak (talk) 08:08, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ready to post when the tags are dealt with. --Tone 07:53, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Very well, posting. --Tone 08:57, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Postmortem support — Holy hell, this is a bolt from the blue! I was definitely not expecting the main page to announce Zenawi's death this morning. Very obvious posting, as he was the strongman of a country with over 80,000,000 people for at least a decade. Kurtis (talk) 11:47, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
ROFL on the pun...but it asnt really a "bolt from the blue", the news reported as such with the church leaders death that he was near.
Anyways, can we merge this with the head of the church as both died in the smae week? And both are evidently notable, and more so in such close succession?
comment; having just read the page, there is one sentence on his death and another on his replacment. That is no where NEAR a sufficient up[date. Im in the process of reviewing.adding more. But these updates need to be seen BEFORE postingLihaas (talk) 03:50, 22 August 2012 (UTC)Lihaas (talk) 07:26, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
coment ive gone and done an update thats significant now.Lihaas (talk) 09:19, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Lihaas, you're an angel! x --BorgQueen (talk) 13:44, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Mali forms new unity government

[edit]
Article: 2012 Malian coup d'état (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Following a military coup, Mali forms a national unity government in an effort to restore stability and solve a political crisis. (Post)
News source(s): 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Not sure if the article I linked to should be updated or a different one. It needs updating. Also, this is a pretty prominent event in Mali after its coup, which garnered much international attention. It is a top story on the BBC.

--Activism1234 03:50, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak support On the BBC's front page, and minor mentions deep in the subsections for the New York Times, Al Jazeera, and Xinhua. A notable development in the ongoing struggle to keep Mali from becoming the next Somalia. Khazar2 (talk) 09:51, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support — I think it's an important milestone for Mali as it recovers from a political crisis. Kurtis (talk) 11:50, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Support A significant story for surebut it seems that coverage stopped rather quickly. It seems to be buried in subsections in most major news sources now. Update: I've changed my mind on this one; after digging deeper, this story's still receiving a good bit of attention. Cheers, Zaldax (talk) 15:00, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, this should not be a problem, ITN stories often take some time to get on the Main page. However, I see no update in the coup's article, maybe somewhere else? --Tone 15:05, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to update it right now, thanks for reminding me! --Activism1234 16:06, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Updated. --Activism1234 16:12, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
cAN THE link got o the relevant section instead o f the page?Lihaas (talk) 03:53, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dom Mintoff

[edit]
Article: Dom Mintoff (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Former Prime Minister of Malta Dom Mintoff dies in Tarxien at the age of ninety-six. (Post)
News source(s): [72] [73] [74] [75] [76] [77] [78] [79]
Article updated

Nominator's comments: Dom Mintoff, who was a well known prime minister among many has passed away at the age of ninety-six. I know that he died of "old age" but from the news websites and other stories about him, it seems he was well liked by a lot of people. Oh, and it's even updated.

You've managed to overlook the more relevant #2. Also #3 - in Malta anyway. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.40.102.241 (talk) 04:51, 21 August 2012
Why don't you read about him instead of dismissing him because you're "not familar" with him? I was not familiar with him either. But he seems to have done a lot for his country. He has his own nickname and everything. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.40.102.241 (talk) 04:06, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Support: I'm going against the tide here but from what I can read, he is considered the architect of Malta's freedom from British rule and was PM from 1955 to 1958 and then from 1971 to 1984. Thats a pretty long tenure. He's been given a state funeral by Malta - which has been done only for Guido de Marco so far. Malta remains a tiny country of only 400k people but he seems to be a top guy there. Second headline on the BBC Europe page. But I agree that valid concerns of ITN becoming more like an obituary weighs against this nomination. Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 07:43, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose due to lack of prominent international coverage. In the BBC, but on a first pass, I couldn't find it in the New York Times, Al Jazeera, or Xinhua at all. Khazar2 (talk) 09:47, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • New York Times[80] was included in original nom showing you didn't look through the facts presented: "To admirers he was the father of modern Malta" ... "he sought to integrate Malta into Britain, with a status like Northern Ireland's — having a legislature of its own but electing members to Parliament in Westminster and gaining access to British economic aid, military defense and other benefits. When Britain refused, Mr. Mintoff resigned as prime minister and began advocating full independence for Malta." Tripoli Post "Malta Mourns Its Greatest Ever Politician" ... "Malta is mourning the death of its best known statesman and politician" ... "The man described as a giant", "Malta's longest serving politician and one of its most controversial", "one of the founding fathers of the island" From the news coverage of his death he sounds like Malta's George Washington or James Madison. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.40.102.241 (talk) 19:21, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I too am going to go against the tide and support this nomination. The man has been described as "The Father of modern Malta"; Malta might not be the biggest of countries, but an accolade like that certainly deserves a mention. The arguments by the above ip and C.H. have swayed me. ITN may not be an obituary, but people responsible for a nation's independence (as well as two-time prime ministers) probably deserve a note. Cheers, Zaldax (talk) 19:27, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • SupportFor the fact mentioned above. Let's not consider how he died. A prominent figure of the tiny nation. Regards, theTigerKing  17:24, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Per comments above, the death of a one of the most important figures in a European Union country history is extremely notable. A much better encyclopedic topic many celebrities deaths and other other events that had little global impact like protests or flooding in a random country. I hope the opposers reconsider. Secret account 01:59, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. Can we give this another look? Cheers, Zaldax (talk) 13:53, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

August 20

[edit]
August 20, 2012 (2012-08-20) (Monday)
Armed conflict and attacks

Arts and culture

Disasters and accidents

Health

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Sports

[Posted] Iran Female University Restrictions

[edit]
Article: Iranian restrictions on female university students (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ 36 Iranian universities place restrictions on female university students, making 77 fields of study male-only. (Post)
News source(s): New York Times
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: This is a rather drastic, unexpected event by the Iranian government that backpedals from the direction the country was going, affecting the entire female population. This is the first time i've ever nominated anything for ITN, so please let me know if I messed something up. --SilverserenC 03:40, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Done. And it's a backtrack because, as some of the sources state, Iran has actually been slowly getting more inclusive toward women and allowing them rights. Slowly, yes, but steadily. SilverserenC 04:03, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I find opposes/supports on the bases that an item is/isn't on media outlets particularly irrelevant. If you want a news ticker then go visit news sites.. Regards, Sun Creator(talk) 14:23, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's an imperfect way to determine "relevance", for sure, but still beats the off-the-cuff rankings of 5-10 non-professionals. Khazar2 (talk) 14:45, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
SunCreator, please read the details, Iranian women will not attend such departments as English literature, translation, hotel management in addition to many other technical ones. Don't you think it is significant in 2012? Cheers,Egeymi (talk) 14:45, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I find the details less significant then the headline. The topic could be seen as pro American/anti Iranian. There is no US student voting restrictions article nor was it ITN and in 2011/2012 I find the latter coming from the US more significant then a restriction in Iran. Perhaps both topics could of been ITN worthy, so I'm somewhat in two minds. Why does the nomination say it affects the entire female population? it's only the students? Regards, Sun Creator(talk) 15:14, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Seems some disconnect here. Is it all Iranian universities or the 36 in the article? Regards, Sun Creator(talk) 01:51, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose- I feel that this is only significant for Americans who want to vent their anger at Iran for a lack of woman's rights, as opposed to an actually significant event. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 16:25, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Can you back these accusations up? Which other country starts banning women from what they could learn in a university. This isn't "Americanism" stating Iran is evil and look what they do. I don't really see much American sources on this so your argument doesn't add up, but this is clearly notable from an "encyclopedic perspective". 'Support Secret account 21:57, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support — Very bad news, but significant. I hope their regime gets toppled; they belong in the Stone Age with all the other misogynists. Kurtis (talk) 22:12, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I marking this as ready. Consensus seems for posting and there seems to be a decent update. Secret account 01:53, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It doesnt appear from the comments that there is enough consensus to post this. Given that almost all other Islamic countries have far worse records with gender equality (except for may be Pakistan), and given further that 52% of university graduates and 68% of science degree graduates in Iran are women, this appears to be a rather myopic view and I'm inclined to say that this appears to be in the news primarily thanks to the Iran = bad guy fixation. At the same time, I'm not dismissing this as entirely non-notable but just that its being hyped up a lot. Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 04:34, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
How much is needed for consensus? There are five supports and one oppose. The Venezuela prison riots blurb below that was posted had only five supports. SilverserenC 09:52, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. I don't know whether CH's comment about Iran having a generally good record on women's education is true or not, but if it is, this makes the story more noteworthy, not less. Banning women from subjects like maths and engineering seems extraordinary, no? I don't think that's the case in any other country in the world (correct me if you know differently). Even in Saudi Arabia, according to this article, 58% of people in higher education are no-tails. Formerip (talk) 11:31, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, this can be posted if an admin thinks there is enough consensus ... I dont have too much of an opinion on this just gave my two bits on why I thought it was making news. Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 15:39, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

US-Korea war drills

[edit]
Article: Ulchi-Freedom Guardian (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The United States and South Korea carry out a joint military drill against the will of protestors and the North Korean government. (Post)
News source(s): Herald Sun
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: This comes at a particularly tricky time for the Korean Peninsula with the Northern rocket and such, and North Korea will bolster its military further because of this. --Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 04:11, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Against the will of protestors"? How many divisions does the pope have? μηδείς (talk) 05:17, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Two more than you'd imagine he needs, although no ICBMs. Formerip (talk) 08:36, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, they said the last military US-South Korean exercise (and use of DPRK flag as target) was equivalent to a declaration of war on them .. so this comment is natural and hardly surprising. Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 04:17, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Venezuela prison riots

[edit]
Article: August 2012 Venezuela prison riot (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A Venezuelan prison riot leaves 25 people dead and 43 injured, setting off a political debate in Venezuela. (Post)
News source(s): Reuters
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Just saw it on the news, and this would be a good test of whether and where the so-called "casualty line"- as I would call it- exists. --Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 02:29, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So the nomination is explicitly and intentionally pointy, to test us contributors? μηδείς (talk) 03:26, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No. That's a side thing. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 03:33, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good to me. Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 04:18, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm down (support) for it. --Activism1234 04:22, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Phyllis Diller

[edit]
Article: Phyllis Diller (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Comedian Phyllis Diller dies at the age of ninety five. (Post)
News source(s): [83], [84], [85], [86], [87], [88], [89],[90]
Credits:
  • Comment Phyllis Diller, who was a well known comedian among many has passed away at the age of ninety five. Her death is the top story on a few news websites currently. It seems a lot of people liked her overall. --Andise1 (talk) 00:02, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - I can honestly say that I would be lying if I said I hadn't heard of her. But I would also be lying if I said she was one of America's most notable/exceptional comedians, she simply wasn't - she became more well known in her later career for her plastic surgery and longevity. And let me not even get started on how world-famous she was...that would be near-non existent. Wasn't the top of her field, only notable in recent times for non-ITN worthy reasons and died aged 95. Nothing more to say. --Τασουλα (talk) 01:07, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. I can't believe Phyllis Diller has died without me ever having any idea who she was. So sad. Formerip (talk) 02:33, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • SupportGroundbreaking comedian for women (although she never crashed Augusta). "I am too young to..." is rather a tired reason for opposing posting ITN noms. Bet she'll outdraw most of the articles on ITN now even if not posted. μηδείς (talk) 02:37, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Unsure if that was @me, but I have no idea if I am too young. I am probably too "international", though. Formerip (talk) 02:42, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I assume you have read a different verision of the Times and Guardian articles linked below, Muboshgu, (I could list a few dozen more) than the rest of us? μηδείς (talk) 06:45, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Surprise, surprise. I am doing something about it.

New York Times[91]:"Ms. Diller...was far from the first woman to do stand-up comedy. But she was one of the most influential." "But Ms. Diller’s hard-hitting approach ... was something new for a woman. Her success proved that female comedians could be as aggressive or unconventional as their male counterparts, and leave an audience just as devastated. She cleared the way for the likes of Joan Rivers, Roseanne Barr, Whoopi Goldberg, Ellen DeGeneres and numerous others." Add TV, Film, Stand-Up headliner, Broadway, Concert Pianist, Author, Singer, and "one of the first celebrities not just to have plastic surgery but also to acknowledge and even publicize" it. μηδείς (talk) 15:56, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Guardian Phyllis Diller, zany humorist and comedy trailblazer, dies aged 95 "an influential figure for women in comedy" "Time magazine ... the poor man's Auntie Mame, only successful female among the New Wave comedians" "a field she had largely to herself because female comics weren't widely accepted" (I assume everyone who voted for Augusta has voted yes for this real woman pioneer.) μηδείς (talk) 06:41, 22 August 2012 (UTC) Phyllis versus Meles: 250,000 hits on each of the last two days for Phyllis, not on the front page: 70,000 hits for Meles, on the front page. μηδείς (talk) 06:52, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

3,110 recent Google News Hits for "Phyllis Diller Groundbreaking" μηδείς (talk) 07:00, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have no comment to offer on the notability of Phyllis Diller but just to caution against using page views as the determining critieria, here's this list of Most visited on English Wikipedia pages of this week: [92]. Go by page views alone, Tony Scott appears to be a no-brainer yes for ITNR. As would be the case for the releases of the Hindi film Ek Tha Tiger, the English film The Expendables 2 and the sale of Robin van Persie to ManU. Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 07:33, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
And going by the trends of article views like Ryan Holle (127,021 views today), Gandhism (95,565 views) ... I think the a link making the front page of reddit is all it takes to shoot the views up. Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 07:56, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The google page views are offered as a source, not a raw number. And it is page views for her plus "groundbreaking" The wikipedia page view comparison is quite clear, meles vs phyllis. Of course other pages like bird will outpull her. She only averaged 1,000 hits a day preposthuomously. The point is that we have a bunch of young editors saying "i never heard of her, she's old, she's not groundbreaking" all based on their own ignorance of the topic, when any simple research would prove otherwise. Recentism is one bias here. Another is a patronising exoticism, the notion that merit accrues to supporting the nomination of non-anglophone functionaries (treated as exotic pets) but not domestic celebrities, as if human interest stories that actually appeal to our readership are inferior to tedious homework lessons. Frankly, I think a solution would be a one-line section below ITN and the stickies for Recent Deaths with 5-6 bare links to notable passings after it. This should please those who want all celebrity deaths off ITN. μηδείς (talk) 08:20, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I fully agree that recentism is definitely an issue but I think you are contradicting yourself (at least partially) when you say 1. that people should read up about the article they are not familiar with and 2. that Meles Zenawi's nomination is some sort of patronising exoticism and that we should be posting articles about domestic (I'm guessing from thats "domestic" from your perspective) celebrities whom the readership is more familiar with. You are comparing an in-office Prime Minister of a country of 84 million to an actress and comedian. As I said before I did not want to comment regarding her notability as I am not familiar with Western culture except for mainstream movies and tv shows. But for ascertaining notability within the concerned field, based on what I am able to read about Phyllis Diller, I unable to conclude that she has had more of an impact on American culture and American people in general than Meles Zenawi has had on Ethiopian politics and Ethiopian people. I think you have certainly chosen a very poor example to showcase "recentism", or "patronising exoticism" for that matter. Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 08:56, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't mean to imply that Zenawi's death shouldn't be reported on ITN, I think it is perfectly valid, and that Diller's nom is just as valid. It was a more general issue that there seems to be an active prejudice here against popular interest (which often deals with anglophone celebrity deaths) and a prejudice in favor of what is viewed as the exotic, a sort of perverse Orientalist slumming in the sense of Edward Said. μηδείς (talk) 19:13, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mild Oppose Diller was a trailblazer in her field don't get me wrong, but barely passes our death criteria and we need to change how we treat obituaries here, and her death isn't a good example as it was noted above, she really haven't been active in her field recently and her health was poor for years, to the point of tabloid fodder. Secret account 02:03, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Obama warns Syria

[edit]
Article: International reactions to the Syrian civil war (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ President Barack Obama warns Syrian President Bashar al-Assad over using chemical and biological weapons against Syrians. (Post)
News source(s): 1, 2, 3
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Making top headline or close to top headline on Reuters, BBC, The Guardian, etc. --Activism1234 22:46, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

2012 Gaziantep bombing

[edit]
Article: 2012 Gaziantep bombing (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ 9 people were killed after a bomb attack in the city of Gaziantep, Turkey. (Post)
News source(s): [93]
Credits:

Article needs updating

Nominator's comments: 9 people were killed after a bomb attack in the city of Gaziantep, Turkey. - EugεnS¡m¡on(14) ® 19:29, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

oppose 8 deaths in a ME bombing is tragically not that notable. The article was also presuming (though i removed PKK) and needs a bigger update (at this point an addition to th elist of 2012 bombing would mre than suffice). Lets wait and see what the political games say with SyriaLihaas (talk) 20:54, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Augusta National Golf Club admits women

[edit]
Article: Augusta National Golf Club (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Augusta National Golf Club has admitted the first female members in the club's history. (Post)
News source(s): Reuters
Credits:

Article needs updating

Nominator's comments: This is a slightly weird one but anyone who knows golf also knows how prestigious Augusta membership is considered. Well they have finally decided to admit women (2 atleast). worth nominating atleast -- Ashish-g55 17:48, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

While it is within their right to not allow women to join because they are a private organization, their reasons for not allowing women appear to come down to Gender bias. When a club associated with one of the most famous golf courses in the world has ties to not only not allowing women, but also not allowing African-Americans to become members until 1990, and a former policy to have all black caddies, they have come under fire. This is significant for women's rights because after decades of protesting and public outcry (at least once a year it is always brought up in the media during press conferences and interviews for the Masters) on whether women should be allowed to join, 2 female members are finally admitted. -- Anc516 (Talk ▪ Contribs) 20:05, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Put the lid back on your sandwich box and walk away slowly. Formerip (talk) 20:10, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Relaxation of Burmese censorship

[edit]
Article: Censorship in Burma (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Burma announces an end to pre-publication censorship of print media. (Post)
News source(s): [94], [95]
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Described by the Associated Press as "the most dramatic move yet toward allowing freedom of expression in the long-repressed nation" [96]. Briefly the second-highest story on the BBC (now slid down to sixth); 6th on Al Jazeera; 10th on New York Times. --Khazar2 (talk) 12:02, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's a country going through a period of rapid change. It's...what's the phrase...ah, yes, it's in the news a lot. Formerip (talk) 20:47, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tony Scott suicide

[edit]
Article: Tony Scott (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ British film director Tony Scott commits suicide in Los Angeles. (Post)
News source(s): [97]
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Relatively famous director, brother to an even more famous director, still working their field, in a rather stunning suicide. --MASEM (t) 05:11, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Article is NOT updated, and it lacks citations.Lihaas (talk) 06:03, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Whilst the article requires some tidying up, I can see no reason why this nomination shouldn't pass on notability grounds. A well known director, with a good track record in making very famous, very successful films, and a death which, for ITN, is unusual. doktorb wordsdeeds 06:59, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, I think all his qualities and his death are suitable to be posted. Egeymi (talk) 07:05, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - I don't think he's notable enough. Some of his films made money, but he wasn't anywhere near the top of his field, hasn't won many awards, and I doubt many people even know who he is. Sure, the circumstances are unusual, but you could say the same about Junior Seau's death, which (wisely) wasn't even nominated. --Bongwarrior (talk) 07:17, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Bleh, how can we objectively determine whether people are likely to have heard of so-and-so or not? i wasn't very aware of Nora Ephron or Marvin Hamlisch, for instance, although I did know of Ephron's When Harry Met Sally and Hamlisch's A Chorus Line, and I recognize their achievements carry more weight than Tony Scott's. Seau's death would have been probably dismissed as sports and/or regional U.S material not befitting ITN so I don't like the comparison. hbdragon88 (talk) 07:53, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • They were from different backgrounds, certainly, but they're both mid-level celebrities I wouldn't expect to find on ITN. I don't see which of the death criteria he meets - he's not even the most important or well-known director in his own family. If he had died of a heart attack, this wouldn't even be a discussion. --Bongwarrior (talk) 08:19, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe, but manner of death is a relevant consideration in terms of whether this should be posted. Also, Bobby Kennedy wan'ts the most well known politician is his family... Formerip (talk) 15:11, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I would have supported Seau death, and I probably will support the findings if Seau had when he killed himself chronic traumatic encephalopathy, as that would have a significant and unpredictable impact against a popular sport. Also apparently Scott committed suicide because of terminal brain cancer, which makes a sudden death a bit less sudden as he was going to die soon anyways. Secret account 21:31, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support with article improvement - I wouldn't have thought this would make this sort of international news, but Scott is at the top of the New York Times, the Guardian, BBC, and Xinhua for his suicide. Article needs a lot of work with citations, though, before it can be posted. -- Khazar2 (talk) 07:27, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I think the article has some neutrality issues. It reads in places like he was total failure, which is obviously not the case. And a lot of it is just "and then he did this film, and then he did this film, and then he did this film". Really not sure about it in terms of article quality. Formerip (talk) 11:22, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm responsible for the career summary in the lead, and I agree that it's a little harsh; it was more intended as a temporary measure until something better can be found. Feel free to balance (or even replace) with some sort of adulation, which given the popularity of his films, shouldn't be too hard to find. Khazar2 (talk) 12:05, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The death is notable but (sadly) he doesn't meet the death criteria. While being a well-known director and having directed many well known films, he was not a "very important figure in his or her field". --RA (talk) 12:07, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per RA. -Zanhe (talk) 16:40, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support - I don't feel that his death is that major news for ITN, but I just checked the BBC and it's their top headline, so it seems to me to be pretty important. --Activism1234 16:57, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Not one of the top twenty or so directors that would naturally warrant an ITN listing. Suicide does add some notability but it is not a highly unusual form of celebrity death and not enough in my view to raise this over the threshold. Crispmuncher (talk) 18:15, 20 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]
  • Weak Oppose He wouldn't be considered on the merits, only the suicide is driving the story. Phyllis Diller would be a much better nomination. μηδείς (talk) 19:37, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    1. Oppose Death was sudden, but doesn't meet criteria 2, I agree that Diller despite her old age and health problems would be a better nomination as she was "the" trailblazer with female comedians. Secret account 21:21, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - not a very major figure, and his cause of death shouldn't be relevant. Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:51, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support- Everyone always complains that the person is notable but the death isn't. This is a clear case of a notable death. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 21:51, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Well known and notable director of some extremely well known films (Top Gun, True Romance, Beverly Hills Cop II, etc) and a death in tragic circumstances.Torqueing (talk) 23:41, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral, leaning oppose: Suicides happen all the time. I can't see the suicide being notable on its own as it just seems to be a tragic incident without much "baggage" so to speak. Pretty straightforward...as for his notability as a film director...er no. I HATE to say this but if it were his brother...? No problem in supporting if it were >_< Oh daaaamnnn I feel terrible for saying that :S --Τασουλα (talk) 01:10, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Don't—Tony was one of those film-makers who might have produced successful films but could never really be called a star in their own right; if you asked the layman to name the director of Top Gun, The Last Boy Scout or Man on Fire I'm pretty sure they'd draw blanks all the way. Ridley is a director whose name sells films; Tony is a director whose films sell his name. GRAPPLE X 01:13, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, not even a top guy in his own field. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 05:35, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. We've had some similar nominations (moderately notable sports/entertainment personalities committing suicide). There was a German national team goalkeeper who committed suicide last year; there was no consensus to post for that (opinion was rather divided). I think there was another one more recently but I don't remember.--Johnsemlak (talk) 13:32, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Gu Kailai jailed

[edit]
Article: Gu Kailai (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Gu Kailai, the wife of Chinese politician Bo Xilai, has been given a suspended death sentence for the murder of British businessman Neil Heywood. (Post)
News source(s): 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Top or near the top (second to top) headline for BBC, Al Jazeera, CBS, Yahoo News, CNN, etc. Significant end of a major political scandal, and huge implications for her ambitious husband and his political career. --Activism1234 04:39, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Philippine air crash

[edit]
Article: 2012 Philippine Piper Seneca PA 34-200 crash (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Three people, including Department of the Interior and Local Government Secretary Jesse Robredo, died in an air crash off Masbate City, Philippines. (Post)
Credits:

Both articles updated

Nominator's comments: Suggest adding this to the blurb about Sudan below as both have notable passengers and its better than 2 different air crash postings. Notability together would add to it, also Robredo is higher in his government post --Lihaas (talk) 01:59, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose Minor official in small crash with no foreseeable reader interest. 02:31, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
note posted by μηδείς, who said below itself that hes inherently opposed to non-american (united tsates?) nominations.
I was going to add: This is the Interior Secretary, one of the most powerful and high ranking jobs in the country. It owould be akin to Gibbs/Clinton/Geither dying.Lihaas (talk) 02:40, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's bad enough that you are irony-blind. At least you could post diffs. This nom isn't going anywhere just because I have opposed it. μηδείς (talk) 02:52, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose Unlike the Sudan situation, only 3 dead; more importantly, though, very thin coverage in international news. Fifth headline on Al Jazeera, but not on Xinhua or BBC's front page (it's as low as the 8th story in BBC's "Asia" section), and doesn't seem to be in the New York Times or CNN at all. Khazar2 (talk)
But notability is not just the macabre thght of number of deaths, its also the individual. (bearing in mind that president aquino personally went on the dsearch party)
note this is listed several notches higher on Al Jazeera than the sudan incidentLihaas (talk) 03:08, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What the fuck? Spellcheck, please. Hot Stop 04:32, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There are way to speak without letting the tongue run loose. And thats not CIVILLihaas (talk) 06:01, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, higher on Al Jazeera. But also much lower, or nonexistent, on every other site I checked. Khazar2 (talk) 09:26, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
its not about the death count, its the notabilityf of the person who died.
Not a celebrity death tiker, i agree...but then how does scott get support for his death?Lihaas (talk) 19:07, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Support: More than the plane crash, the possible death of the interior minister seems to be the major news topic from what I can gather from Philippine news sources. An interior minister of a country dying in harness is certainly notable. But as I understand they are still searching for him. If confirmed dead or declared missing, then it certainly would be newsworthy. The story isn't receiving much coverage in non-Philippine media though. Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 10:04, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I'm switching to support. It's been reported by news agencies of Malaysia, India, UAE, USA, Singapore, Qatar, France, etc ... Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 10:16, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, it has received increase coverage - top in the BBC Asia page now. Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 06:46, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Notable person in Asia - Ramon Magsaysay Awardee; Interior Secretary/ Minister of the Philippines; Sudden interest by the public due to (1) difficulty of the retrieval operations - one of the deepest seabeds in the Philippines (2) Conspiracy theory - conflict in the narration of the lone survivor with the diver's account on the actual seating position of the secretary. (3) Most notable air crash since the death of Philippine President Ramon Magsaysay 55 years ago. --Exec8 (talk) 14:37, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted. --BorgQueen (talk) 21:18, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

End of TFG

[edit]
Article: Somali presidential election, 2012 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Following the expiry of the Transitional Federal Government's mandate, a new presidential election is held with X being elected. (Post)
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: This is pretty big news (surprised there wasnt an article/updae) as the structure of government in Somlai has/will change (its more a "recolution" then Yemen, or even Egypt, in some sense). TFG is over and election should occur in the next 18 hours. --Lihaas (talk) 00:34, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note the TFG officially ended today (see the page), though th eelection has been put off by a week or so. Still the ending of such a governing institution is newsworthyLihaas (talk) 20:26, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose- Wait until an actual the presidential election. However, the blurb doesn't even say Somalia. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 21:53, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - An awful blurb that doesn't even say what nation or region is affected. Nomination is poorly-written, full of spelling mistakes, and (much as I hate to make this personal) typical of Lihaas' rushed, poorly-considered style. As Bzweebl says, let's wait until a full election takes place. AlexTiefling (talk) 11:54, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

August 19

[edit]
August 19, 2012 (2012-08-19) (Sunday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Disasters

Environment and health

International relations

Politics

Sports
Video Games

[Posted] Sudan helicopter crash

[edit]
Article: 2012 Sudan helicopter crash (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ 32 people are killed in a plane crash in Sudan, including members of the government, military, and a television crew. (Post)
News source(s): 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
Credits:

Both articles updated

Nominator's comments: The crash has made international news at Reuters, The Huffington Post, NBC, BBC, CNN, etc. It's a pretty significant crash that killed many important members of Sudan's government and military. --Activism1234 21:37, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comments: I am not sure what the "background" section has to do with this particular incident. Is it supposed to show that air crashes are common in Sudan? --BorgQueen (talk) 22:59, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral for now, leaning support I'd support this for notability--the crash included national and state ministers, and was on BBC, Al Jazeera, and Xinhua front pages, for example--but I think it remains to be seen when the coverage will be detailed enough to support a real article. So far very little seems to be known about it, with most reporters forced to fill their articles out with material about past Sudanese air crashes. (There even seems to be confusion as to whether it was a heli or plane, with different sources giving different answers). Khazar2 (talk) 23:13, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Even if only because if the same thing happened in a European or American state it would be an instant ITN. --RA (talk) 00:11, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
hmm, havent read up on it , but it seems to be akin to the polish crash that we posted.Lihaas (talk) 00:27, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, part of that is because if this happened in Europe or the US, we'd have sourced telling us what had actually happened. Khazar2 (talk) 00:38, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
comment would suggest adding 2012 Philippines air crash. (added to blurb)Lihaas (talk) 01:28, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Lihaas, please don't make radical blurb changes without consensus once a discussion is underway. If we were to add a second unrelated aircrash, how is a posting admin supposed to know whether the support votes above still stand? Formerip (talk) 01:38, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Okey, seperate nom above, but theres no reason to be pedantic. As such, the reason above suggests merging it. Hope thats a better way to nom it?
Also suggested blurb: "Members of the government, military, and a television crew are killed in a helicopter crash in Sudan."
Also marked ready (As is the Philippines ones)Lihaas (talk) 02:01, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Isnt this an inherent admission of bias (and thus not AGF)...elucidating also why further supports are laden with bad fiaith (And really ought to be voided)Lihaas (talk) 02:36, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sarcasm, Lihaas. The intended message is that Medeis supports all note-worthy nominations and does not have any bias whatsoever. Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 05:03, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait a bit I won't undo the "ready" tag, but given that it's still not even clear if the crashed vehicle was a helicopter or a plane yet, I feel like this one's being a bit rushed. Let's verify the blurb and article title first, or at least find a neutral way to phrase them ("aircraft crash"?). Khazar2 (talk) 03:03, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Be BOLD i the changeLihaas (talk) 03:09, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There's a discussion on the talk page about this. Input from anyone would be welcome so we can make a decision quickly and post. Thanks. --Activism1234 03:57, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, since we are presenting encyclopedic content as opposed to reporting news here ... it wont hurt to wait for some more time to get the correct picture. Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 05:28, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
OK based on the user input and new sources, I moved it to 2012 Sudan plane crash and updated the blurb as well. Should be good now. --Activism1234 05:32, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
OK, looks like we have enough sources to tentatively resolve the issue. I'd say ready, too. Khazar2 (talk) 08:17, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, the reference to the helicopter in the heading was thanks to certain earlier conflicting reports. Most recent sources have now confirmed its either an Antonov 24/26, so that issue seems resolved in the article and this looks ready to post. Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 09:29, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

August 18

[edit]
August 18, 2012 (2012-08-18) (Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters

Environment

International relations

Law and crime

Sport

[Posted] Senkaku Islands dispute

[edit]
Article: Senkaku Islands dispute (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Japanese and Chinese activists stage protests around the disputed Senkaku islands. (Post)
News source(s): [98]
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Japan and China's dispute continues to escalate, with Chinese activists (from Japan's perspective) illegally entering the islands, and Japanese activists approaching by boat. In July, Japan recalled its ambassador over argument. As for prominence, currently the top headline on the BBC, and has been on the BBC's front page in the US for days. Also covered, though not as prominently, in the New York Times and on the front page of Al Jazeera. (And, obviously, a top headline in Japan and China.) --Khazar2 (talk) 23:45, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment I'm wary of driving traffic to an article as controversial as this while there are tags on the page relating to sourcing. I'm leaning towards posting the story if this can be sorted out. —WFC— 01:01, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Given that the "citation needed" tags on this page are nearly two years old, I'm planning to just delete the occasional unsourced claims and then work my way back from there. Whoever inserted that information initially has had plenty of opportunity to properly source if they chose. Khazar2 (talk) 01:16, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I would like to support this, but it seems like we have a bit of a dilemma with blurbing, since the Japanese call the islands one thing and the Chinese another. The page was moved earlier this year, but it doesn't look to me like the discussion was particularly thorough. I don't have particular knowledge or a view, but I'd be nervous about putting it on the front page. Formerip (talk) 01:14, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Good point. The Japanese currently control them, which would indicate to me that they have an edge for the name. Perhaps we could indicate the Chinese name in the blurb as well, however. Khazar2 (talk) 01:18, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
As another possibility, perhaps the blurb could be modified to something like "Chinese and Japanese activists stage protests over a disputed island chain in the East China Sea." As for the article title itself, there's nothing we can do about that end of it; the article title is considered binding until Jan 1 2013 per ArbCom. Khazar2 (talk) 01:31, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I like your suggested blurb. As for the naming dispute, NuclearWarfare's otherwise sensible discretionary sanction would need to be modified while the article is on the main page. The principle stands, but we cannot put an article onto the Main Page whilst refusing to allow readers to even discuss its most controversial element. I'll drop a note at the user's talk page now. —WFC— 01:58, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I cringe slightly at that proposal - I have seen a good deal of news reports today that performed gymnastics to avoid the words "Pussy Riot" in their titles - but I also can't think of a better way of doing it. I promise to answer at least one of the inevitable complaints to mainpage talk. Lifting the moratorium would be good if we can. Part of the point of ITN is to bring new input to articles, after all. Formerip (talk) 02:13, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Given that our article on the topic is called Senkaku Islands, that seems to be the title to use. I presume that the name of the article has been extensively discussed, so not using it would be to, in effect, not support the process which lead to the current name. I'd note that the article is currently under heavy duty discretionary sanctions as a result of an arbitration case, so linking to this from the main page is likely to lead to (more) trouble. Nick-D (talk) 10:58, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Why do you presume that the name of the article has been extensively discussed? That doesn't look to be the case. Formerip (talk) 12:52, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A reality of Wikipedia is that if there is no common neutral title then we will inevitably end up with a name that is perceived as non-neutral by some. So I'm relaxed about using Senkaku in the blurb. What's problematic is doing so while the current Arbcom sanction is in effect. The combined effect might give some readers the impression that we aren't welcoming to newbies and/or don't permit divergent opinions. —WFC— 14:47, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Or use the English language name, Pinnacle Islands. Kevin McE (talk) 09:05, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support either Japanese name, or English Name, or no name. --IP98 (talk) 10:57, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not sure about using the English name. I haven't seen it used in the media. It seems pretty obsolete.--Johnsemlak (talk) 12:38, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree, but using it would at least limit the claims of favoritism on the main page. --IP98 (talk) 14:02, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, this is definitely building up as a significant international row. I have no particular opinion on which name to use in the blurb (e.g. using no name is fine, just something like disputed islands in the East China Sea, with a wikilink to the article). I do think that the current wording of the blurb sounds a little weak and something more concrete is preferable. In the last several days there were actual landings on the islands by rival groups of Chinese and Japanese activists. The wording "stage protests around" is somewhat ambiguous and may be read to mean that the protests are occurring elsewhere. Nsk92 (talk) 12:52, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that mentioning the landings is the way to go. My understanding is that both groups of activists had several members successfully reach the shore. Khazar2 (talk) 14:52, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: Major international news. Agree with using "disputed islands" phrasing. Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 13:48, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Leaning to oppose The wider dispute may have a lot of notability but this latest episode strikes me as ultimately small time stuff. A few private citizens landed on a disputed island without the permission of their national government. Big deal. Crispmuncher (talk) 13:57, 19 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]
    • As usual with such things, the significance of the story lies not in the objective nature of the actions themselves but needs to be understood in context of how these actions are perceived by the affected sides. In both China and Japan these kinds of landing actions, even when done by groups of private citizens, are perceived as highly symbolic. That is why there has been such passionate and immediate reaction on both sides, with escalating diplomatic protests on both sides, with reports of significant protests in several cities in China[99],[100], protests in Japan etc. So these events are definitely viewed as "big deal" in both China and Japan. Korea and Russia are also affected, given their ongoing territorial disputes with Japan, as are some other regional countries having ongoing territorial disputes with China. Nsk92 (talk) 14:16, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - sorry didn't get to post my comment last night. I've been working on adding some content and formatting the bullets on the article, and it's pretty big news regarding the South China Seas dispute, something which we haven't got on ITN in a while. --Activism1234 15:13, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support- I have a been following this story for a bit now, and this seems like the right time to post it. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 15:16, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted. --BorgQueen (talk) 15:24, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

August 17

[edit]
August 17, 2012 (2012-08-17) (Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Environment

International relations

Law and crime

[Posted] Pussy Riot

[edit]
Article: Pussy Riot (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Three members of the protest group Pussy Riot are convicted of "hooliganism" in Moscow. (Post)
Credits:

Article updated

 Formerip (talk) 11:26, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Guarded support: this is similar in many respects to the Assange and Rajab cases. I see no reason not to post provided we are careful to stick to the facts and avoid editorializing or veering off into commentary or original research. For that reason I don't see why "hooliganism" needs to be quoted, and equally, since it appears that the religious hatred element actually forms part of the charges filed there is no reason not to cover that either. The inevitable links to Putin are more speculative and better left to the article than trying to force into the blurb. Crispmuncher (talk) 11:42, 17 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]
  • Support as this trial has long been major international news. But I do agree that the quotation marks around Hooliganism should be removed, since it's the technical name of the charge. Khazar2 (talk) 11:54, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If anyone can think of better wording to propose that would be great, but I think "hooliganism" without the quotes might be a bit confusing for people not already familiar with the case. It's a surprising thing to read as being a criminal charge and the quotes help to reassure that that's the official wording, not just Wikipedia being weird. Formerip (talk) 11:56, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What would you think of a wikilink per RA's suggestion? Khazar2 (talk) 12:33, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That actually looks a bit worse, since it links to an article mainly about street gangs and football. Nothing about taking guitars into a church. Formerip (talk) 13:21, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. I think it's straightfoward enough to state the case was essentially a show trial, most print media I've seen has been calling it that way (The Guardian especially). GRAPPLE X 12:01, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Straightforward but highly POV. NPOV means we can't simply take the usual Western line, especially not one particular line adopted by what is the most left wing of the mainstream British press. Crispmuncher (talk) 13:04, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've yet to see this case described as impartial by anyone, anywhere, not just in the left-wing press. The reason this is international, not domestic, news is due to how heavy-handed and corrupt the trial has been reported as being, and leaving that out colours the story as much as inserting it does. GRAPPLE X 13:14, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Applying liberal vlaues (or even Western values generally) is still POV-pushing, and something we need to be careful of because of systemic bias. If this had happened in a mosque in much or the Arab world it is likely the women would be facing death penalties by now. Even in the West these kind of things occur and are prosecuted. What is the substantive difference between this and Peter Tatchell's conviction for taking to the pulpit of Canterbury Cathedral? Crispmuncher (talk) 13:49, 17 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]
Broadly? That we weren't hammering out wordings for ITN blurbs in 1998. More specifically, that Tatchell's trial was, unlike his actual indictment, conducted in a relatively tame and fair manner by a judge who wasn't outspokenly hostile towards the defendant in the case he was trying. If his had happened in a mosque in the Arab world we'd likely be in agreement that the case was too harsh and injust, as would, likely, English peers. GRAPPLE X 14:30, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
They are clearly more a protest group than an "art collective". They are not professional artists or musicians. All their fame comes from protests and hooliganism, not from their "art" from aesthetics point of view. GreyHood Talk 13:09, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I believe some of them are professional artists, although I prefer "protest group" in any case. Everything they have done seems to be a public protest. Formerip (talk) 13:17, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Admins obviously don't care what either of us think. They're a feminist punk-rock collective, apparently. Formerip (talk) 13:33, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've followed the definition given in the Pussy Riot article. If you think they should be defined as a protest group, please suggest rewording in the article first. --BorgQueen (talk) 16:10, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
As noted, its slightly complicated by the need for translations and the unfamiliarity of the legal processes in question, but it appears the actual conviction is for "hooliganism motivated by religious hatred" - the religious hatred element forms part of the charge as opposed to further description. I imagine the situation is comparable to that here in the UK with charges of "assault" and "racially aggravated assault" - they are distinct offences, the latter is not a variation on the former. Crispmuncher (talk) 12:45, 17 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]
Indeed. If this has to be posted, it is very important to mention that the convinction is for "hooliganism motivated by religious hatred". The members of the group were not arrested and charged for numerous other acts of hooliganism they previously committed, it was their action in the cathedral which crossed the line. GreyHood Talk 13:09, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe it would be better if the blurb not only mention the full statement of conviction (this religious hatred part) but also the Cathedral of Christ the Saviour as to implore the significance of it. --MASEM (t) 13:25, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Actually I agree. Garry Kasparov should be the bolded article. We are giving entirely the wrong perspective at the moment. Formerip (talk) 15:51, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Borgqueen, Kasparov is a highly notable individual in his own right; his arrest among the protestors is a useful way of highlighting that this is a controversial verdict, and ultimately, a notable verdict.--Johnsemlak (talk) 16:08, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with BorgQueen--best to keep the blurb concise. Khazar2 (talk) 16:10, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Theres large amount of international support as well so i dont think singling out one person would be the right way to go. even though kasparov getting arrested is big but unless he gets charged for something i suggest just keep as is -- Ashish-g55 22:28, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Though I don't agree with adding any specific protesters, Kasparov's relevance would be greater due to his significance within anti-Putin protests and opposition, a movement which has resulted in this kangaroo debacle. GRAPPLE X 22:39, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support historically significant event showing the status of free speech in Russia while being watched internationally.. Regards, Sun Creator(talk) 16:35, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Essentially all the media outside of Russia describes the conviction as resulting from an anti-Putin stunt. I think the blurb should mention something about that and not just about hooliganism and religious hatred. Perhaps something like "Three members of Pussy Riot, a Russian punk band, are convicted of "hooliganism motivated by religious hatred" resulting from an anti-Putin stunt". Nsk92 (talk) 22:42, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Putting in scare quotes and openly siding with the view that they were convicted because they spoke out against Putin? We might as well go all the way and call them heroic martyrs. As I said at WP:ERRORS, what they were convicted of is not in dispute: whether they should have been convicted of that offence is the question, one which is for the reader of the article to determine. —WFC— 13:46, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Essentially all the press coverage I read about the trial characterizes it as highly biased and unfair and even as a kangaroo court, so the actual formulation of the verdict is not the only relevant consideration here. Quoting the verdict without putting it in some kind of minimal context gives extra credence to the verdict which is, in and of itself, a WP:NPOV problem. Mentioning that the conduct in question involved an anti-Putin stunt is hardly making them into martyrs; and also the fact that an anti-Putin stunt is involved is not actually something that is factually in dispute and is mentioned by basically all the sources covering the story. Nsk92 (talk) 14:03, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • The best way to add some context is to provide some mention of the protests of the verdict. After all, it's the widespread outrage at the verdict that's notable, not the verdict in and of itself. As was pointed out above the blurb is already pretty long though. Still I think some mention of resulting protests would be helpful--though it's difficult to come up with a concise wording other than the dreaded amid widespread protests.--Johnsemlak (talk) 14:20, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
          • @Nsk92: I agree with most of that press coverage with the caveat that Putin has made some relevant comments which haven't really been picked up on. But it is not Wikipedia's place to knowingly reflect any POV, not even the majority one. As I said before, no-one is disputing that they were convicted of hooliganism motivated by religious hatred. I don't like or agree with that verdict, but it's a fact that they were convicted on that charge. The majority view is that they weren't actually guilty, or that there was an ulterior motive behind the length of sentence, but unfortunately that merely a POV.

            @Johnsemlak: I'd be happy to see a mention of the protest in the blurb, provided care is taken with the wording. —WFC— 14:29, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

            • I am not talking about guilt or innocence here for the moment but about the factual content regarding the underlying conduct involved in the incident for which they were convicted. All the newscoverage, including the coverage by the pro-government media in Russia, prominently mentions the fact that the incident that led to their arrest and trial involved an anti-Putin prank. (The same is true even for the court verdict itself) This is a big - in fact central - factual part of the story. I don't think that by mentioning this fact in the hook we are reflecting any POV at all. Nsk92 (talk) 15:03, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
              • That's a good point, but whether or not we are reflecting a POV depends on how we mention Putin. To mention him in a way which implies that this is why they were convicted would reflect a POV (admittedly one that I hold, but a POV nonetheless). On the other hand, it's a matter of fact that the conviction led to anti-Putin protests – as you say, even the likes of RT are open about this. —WFC— 15:42, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                • I do not see why mentioning Putin reflects any kind of a POV. It is a basic factual part of the story that the act for which they were arrested involved an anti-Putin stunt. This fact itself is not in dispute: it has been reported by every media outlet that has covered the story, both inside Russia and abroad. I really don't see a problem here. Nsk92 (talk) 15:56, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                  • There is a very big difference between saying that Pussy Riot's protest in the church was anti-Putin (or that their supporters are anti-Putin), and saying that Pussy Riot have been sentenced to two years in jail because of an anti-Putin stunt. If you can't see the distinction I'm afraid I'm not sure that I can help any further. I have no objection to mentioning Putin in the blurb, but accurately communicating what they were convicted of takes precedence. —WFC— 17:15, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                    • Please do not patronize me. I have been here a lot longer than you have and I know a thing or two about the proper meaning of WP:NPOV. There is absolutely no problem with saying that they were arrested for an anti-Putin stunt (or if you like, for an anti-Putin stunt in a chuch). Not only because this is exactly what happened and every single source says so, but also because this is what made the story notable and made the newsmedia follow it. If they were simply arrested for some religiously offensive stunt in a church, the story would never have made it front page news and we would not be talking about it here now. Ignoring a key factual aspect of the story in the blurb is, in and of itself, a WP:NPOV violation. Nsk92 (talk) 21:36, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                      • With respect, I am speaking to you in simple terms because you are showing little understanding of how this site works. single-purpose accounts aside, we do not discriminate based on how long people have been here – it is never acceptable to pull rank based on when you first started editing. And repeatedly asserting that a POV is not a POV does not make it true, regardless of what organisations hold that POV. If we can't find a concise way of mentioning Putin without inferring that the verdict was political, then we won't. If we can, then we probably will. —WFC— 23:22, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                      • Like I said, stop throwing your patronising nonsense at me. I understand perfect well how this website works and have been here long enough to know what WP:NPOV means. Nsk92 (talk) 23:27, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                        • Currently the wording being used is exactly what the court found them guilty of. ITN should only use that wording and not what media outside russia is using. people can decide for themselves after reading the article if the demonstrations were anti-putin. ITN asserting that it was anti-putin will not be right as the russian court didnt give a crap (even though we all know that probably isnt the case). they seem to be more unhappy that it was in a church -- Ashish-g55 23:47, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
              • The Putin element is a side stroy here. Yes, they were critical of Putin. They were also creating a pop video. Neither of these is what they have been convicted of. According to Russian law they are guilty because they did what they did in a church. We can't fully explain each and every facet of a complex case in a one or two sentence blurb. The actual substantive story here is the conviction which is a matter of fact. Elevating accusation and speculation to the same level as that is always going to be POV no matter how it is presented. Leave the surrounding controversy to the article. Crispmuncher (talk) 15:51, 18 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]
  • Support - Just for the record... I think Pussy Riot have ITN worthyness for the reactions concerning their political actions.--BabbaQ (talk) 20:15, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Because this is a great nom and I'm proud to support it. μηδείς (talk) 19:45, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

August 16

[edit]
August 16, 2012 (2012-08-16) (Thursday)
Armed conflict and attacks

Environment and health

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

UN mission in Syria ends

[edit]
Article: United Nations Supervision Mission in Syria (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The United Nations Security Council votes to end the United Nations Supervision Mission in Syria. (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

Article needs updating

Nominator's comments: Obviously the most significant (but not greatest) milestone for the mission thus far, and the best time to add a UN related story on Syria, which I don't think has been done yet unless Annan's resignation was posted. --Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 02:01, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - In regards to your comment about Annan, see this. I would support this, but I'm not sure what the point is of the sticky then, or how it works really (maybe someone can direct me to an article with an answer?) Also perhaps we can include the part about the Algerian diplomat taking over from Annan in this. --Activism1234 02:32, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Like the Olympics, the sticky does not prevent the inclusion of individual stories. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 02:44, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Where would it be possible for me to read up more on stickies? --Activism1234 04:46, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's just practice over time.--Chaser (talk) 05:43, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
True, but we don't need to push marginal ones when we have a sticky. I largely agree with Mohamed (below) and oppose. I don't see that the UN has had a major role here--it was just an observer mission.--Chaser (talk) 05:43, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose. I don't think this event is prominent/important enough to be posted while still having the sticky. This will probably change nothing on ground; those weren't able to do/change much, if anything during the months they were active. As far as I know, their best work was to document/prove that some killings happened there or there, but they couldn't stop it, in fact violence escalated to civil war status "on their watch". Mohamed CJ (talk) 04:26, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
'comment ' consider adding Lakhdar Brahimi as the new envoy..Lihaas (talk) 10:52, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] South African mining deaths

[edit]
Article: Marikana miners' strike (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ South African police shoot dead 34 striking miners and wound 78 during an industrial dispute near Rustenburg. (Post)
News source(s): [102], [103], [104], [105], [106], [107], [108], [109], [110]
Credits:

Article needs updating

Nominator's comments: This is a tragic event which has gained coverage on numerous news websites. With thousands of miners striking, and the protesters being armed, the police used their own weapons to try and get the protesters attention (or try and calm the protesters down a bit) since the protesters would not negotiate a truce with the police. --Andise1 (talk) (UTC)

Well, it seems like they succeeded in calming them down a bit. Some of them, at least. Formerip (talk) 23:41, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support A rare event. --Τασουλα (talk) 22:38, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment This may have been a result of me messing up the whole page when posting this nomination (did not intend to mess up the page, just messed up somehow when making the nomination) but this nomination does not appear in the contents list on the top of this page (under August 16th). If anyone is able to add this nomination to the contents list...that would be nice. --Andise1 (talk) 22:36, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support when good article is found Was planning to nom this myself tonight. Prominent international coverage--Al Jazeera's top story, BBC's second, etc.--, high death toll, likely political repercussions. I'd suggest this be linked to an article specifically about the strikes and today's violence, though. This is a prominent event that it seems like it would support one. Khazar2 (talk) 23:28, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question is 12 past the minimum threshold of deaths? --IP98 (talk) 23:31, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Do we have a minimum threshold of deaths? I'm not sure I understand your question. Khazar2 (talk) 23:46, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A recent shooting in America got "Oppose - not enough deaths" --IP98 (talk) 00:43, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Was that shooting carried out by the police? Formerip (talk) 00:46, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Murder is a crime! Unless of course it is done by a police man... Lugnuts And the horse 08:45, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The articel was very poorly written, i just reworded some parts, but another pair of eyes from ana english speaker is reuired. Also brear in mind SOuth Africa's ENGVAR.Lihaas (talk) 09:11, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Pleas e read CONSEUNSUS we dont vote count...that said theres plenty of support with this irrelevant commentLihaas (talk) 08:56, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You seem to be writing contradictory statements but are not aware of, it seems. A quick look and hopefully you will realize. I believe you are still suffering from hangover of your past mistake which you were unwilling to accept. Sorry everyone for posting this comment here but Lihaas provoked me to post one!! Cheers Lihaas :)Regards, theTigerKing  10:54, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That you need a reason for support is a wrong statement? Kindly take your vengeance mongering NPAs OFF this pagev and WP!Lihaas (talk) 00:50, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I thought your comments on the Talk page were enough. Seriously, you are not letting your ego-go off.Cant help for that!Regards, theTigerKing  16:04, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This also seems to me to be getting personal. Let's try to stay focused on the topic at hand... Khazar2 (talk) 16:06, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
IAfter being told not to NPA and focus on content he comes back to say only an attack. What is that if not ABF? Then he claims i aited him when i mentioned not a lick to do with him but the comment itself.Lihaas (talk) 19:07, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Serious and ITV in the same statement?! Lugnuts And the horse 11:51, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What was it you said to me, "shush, the grown ups are talking"? The Rambling Man (talk) 12:15, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It was in reference to you using the childlike retort of "whatever". I'm amazed you don't remember. Lugnuts And the horse 13:07, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Same applies to you here then. Oh and I do remember you calling me an idiot. Read this. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:08, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's super! Lugnuts And the horse 13:16, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, you should try to avoid making personal attacks on people. That's a WP:POLICY by the way. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:17, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Pot. Kettle. Black! Hidden this because you have something to hide yourself? Lugnuts And the horse 13:51, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, you win. Back to personal attacks you go. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:54, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Death of Abune Paulos

[edit]
Article: Abune Paulos (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Patriarch of the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church Abune Paulos dies at the age of 76. (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: He was an important figure in Eastern Christianity and patriarch of more than 40 million people in Ethiopia since 1992.

support pre precedence, important religious figure, in the interests of globalised coverage not limited to western scope and western christianity. Several reasons.Lihaas (talk) 19:00, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Precedence is not a good reason. Shenouda was a bit of a dodgy posting, IMO. Formerip (talk)
  • Comment. I'm neutral notability wise, but if this is to be posted then sourcing could use some work. —WFC— 19:04, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Section si updated with sources. The other section need sources (which im working on), but the relevant ITN bit is sourced and of substantial size per min. requirements.Lihaas (talk) 19:48, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have unmarked as [Ready], pending completion of this work. An article with eight appropriately placed [citation needed] tags, covering vast swathes of the subject's life and work, is not ready to go on the Main Page. —WFC— 20:08, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Not to mention, Lihaas, that you frequently complain when items are posted after only a few hours' discussion, yet in this case we've had barely an hour, and you happen to be the updater, so it should be posted asap? —Strange Passerby (t × c) 20:19, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
When did i say it should be posted. I clarly mentioned that the update was ready. Which was the notification is for NOT for consensus.Lihaas (talk) 22:55, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Marking it [Ready] means that it is ready to be posted. --BorgQueen (talk) 13:55, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support, pending completion Sourcing could be improved, but from a global perspective this is a fairly significant event. Given precedent, I feel this should get the nod as well. Cheers, Zaldax (talk) 20:10, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose not a significant enough figure in Christianity as a whole. I'd only consider the Pope and Archbishop of Canterbury notable enough. Hot Stop 20:51, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'm also skeptical here. Precedence is not enough, and this person seems to lack international significance.--Johnsemlak (talk) 20:57, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
But no one nominated it. If it was, there would have been a strong chance of supporting it in the interests of diversity and equity. (We posted Sai Baba's death and Shenouda and Fadlallah). Should probs be ITNR for deaths of religious leaders of any such (whatstheword) sect/institutionLihaas (talk) 23:00, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I would have nominated him, but was on Wikibreak. It was one of my biggest regrets of my break. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 23:22, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Btw- i would have supported and expanded the relvant sectionLihaas (talk) 08:55, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral, leaning support. The BBC's top Africa story at the moment, so a reasonable nom for notability, but I'd also like to see the high number of citation needed tags reduced. Khazar2 (talk) 03:48, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
We can do a John Atta Mills again?Lihaas (talk) 08:55, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Dunno that I'll have time--I've got a fussy baby and some friends coming over today. Might try to swing by the article later, though. Khazar2 (talk) 12:44, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers to BorgQueen for unmarking it as such. I only noticed later in the edit summaries I missed doing it, which was actually the whole point of my post. Crispmuncher (talk) 13:54, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
REmarkign ready Pleasee see Senkaku Islands. The update is there and wholly sourced, despite concerns for a lack of sourcing in the rest of the article (As mentioned here). Ready is based on the update, conesnsus is adjudged by posting admins. This ihas been said before.Lihaas (talk) 23:03, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Weynay Ghebresilasie

[edit]
Article: Weynay Ghebresilasie (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Eritrean steeplechase runner and Olympic flag-bearer Weynay Ghebresilasie seeks political asylum in the United Kingdom (Post)
News source(s): Guardian
Credits:

Article needs updating
oppose non notable individual, a harem of Cmeroonians apparently did so too. Ohther options include, 1. DYK, 2. post this at the controverises page f the Games.Lihaas (talk) 19:50, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Nabeel Rajab sentenced to three years

[edit]
Article: Nabeel Rajab (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Bahraini human rights activist Nabeel Rajab is sentenced to three years for instigating and participating in "unauthorised protests". (Post)
News source(s): Reuters, AFP, AP, BBC
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: He's "one of the world's most prominent activists"[111]. The sentence was described as unexpectedly and stiff by AP and it drew sharp criticism from rights groups as such as HRF (USA), FIDH (France) and Amnesty (UK). The latter said this was 'Dark day for justice' in Bahrain [112]. Just last week nineteen U.S. congressman demanded his release.[113]. Also we haven't covered the situation in Bahrain much lately. Mohamed CJ (talk) 15:40, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

comment;;; because "my father met this guy" is not a reason to support for notability. Im sure hes met lots of fathers.Lihaas (talk) 19:02, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
True, but this time I just didn't feel like giving a detailed reason for my support. But I can assure you I have good reasons too ^_^ --Τασουλα (talk) 19:40, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You can't "assure" you have a good reason without saying so, if you do then cite it. Consensus is NOT vote counting. Basically all youve said here is "support" with not reasonLihaas (talk) 19:58, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's a funny story...he was overseeing the environmental side of a project out there for a Korean company and just got swept up in one of his protests on his way back to the hotel...--Τασουλα (talk) 17:20, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support- One of the major figures of the events of Bahrain, a situation we have not covered much. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 17:08, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article needs severe attention before main page posting. Govt actions in inverted commas are not a neutral presentation. One person's "harassment" is another's protection of the interests of the state. BCHR website is not a neutral source for describing his dealings with the police. I would not want to be an apologist for the Bahraini government, but wikipedia should not be taking sides on such disputes, even if our sympathies are fairly unanimous. His sentence is only newsworthy in so far as one considers it objectionable, so while I'm very happy for readers to write to their governments and Amnesty International and encourage any agencies they can to bring what pressure they can to bear on the Bahraini authorities, that is not the job of Wikipedia. On that basis, and given that it is only the third Middle Easrt story on BBC News site therefore only marginally in the news, mild oppose. Kevin McE (talk) 17:16, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree with Kevin's points to an extent. Generally the international community appears supportive of Rajab, so I believe a "pro-Rajab version" will emerge as the majority viewpoint. Still, it'll be important to rewrite the lead and other sections to include the important viewpoint of the Bahraini govt. I'll add a neutrality tag myself and try to help with this review over the next 12 hours or so. Khazar2 (talk) 17:33, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support but agree that some work is needed on the content. Even the sub-heading makes it seem like there was a "legal crackdown" on him personally (er, which maybe there was, but you get my drift). Formerip (talk) 19:08, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
WHY basically all youve said is the update requirement (which is a given before posting)Lihaas (talk) 20:02, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Correct, we shouldn't post magnitude 3 earthquakes from in Flinn-Engdahl regions, and we shouldn't post the mayoral election in Denpasar, and we definitely shouldn't post this. --IP98 (talk) 00:49, 17 August 2012 (UTC)--IP98 (talk) 00:49, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
But we did post about Iran's magnitude 6 earthquake. Rajab might not be Great East Japan Earthquake, but he also isn't Ali Hasan. Mohamed CJ (talk) 04:41, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If it helps, I am planning to nominate the Pussy Riot verdict tomorrow whether innocent or guilty. Khazar2 (talk) 01:11, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Rajab is a key Bahraini figure in the uprising, and this move is especially prominent and may lead to a more intense uprising. Notable and interesting news as well. --Activism1234 00:32, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note As the one who put the tag there, I removed the POV tag from the article, as no one else has yet expressed concerns about the content on its talk page. (I'll also ping Kevin, who originally expressed these concerns above.) Could use another pair of eyes before marked ready, though. Khazar2 (talk) 02:29, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What is with the inverted commas around the charge? That is clearly a way of expressing cynicism over the charges. As already said, that cynicism might be well placed, but is not POV. We simply post a translation of the charge on which he was convicted, and post that without editoialising. Kevin McE (talk) 09:20, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, we could lose the quotes. There's little doubt that he was involved in protests which were unauthorised. Formerip (talk) 10:11, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Kevin McE and FormerIP--better without the quotes, unless there's a strong case for keeping them that I'm overlooking. Marking attention needed. Khazar2 (talk) 12:00, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed by another admin. --BorgQueen (talk) 12:30, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Julian Assange

[edit]
Article: Julian_Assange#Request_for_political_asylum (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The government of Ecuador grants political asylum to Julian Assange, who is living in its London embassy. (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: The discussion below is too confusing, because it is not clear that all editors are voting on the blurb proposed. Formerip (talk) 14:05, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support. Putting aside the whole Wikilinks saga, questions as to Sweden's motives etc, this is a high-profile diplomatic standoff between two countries not known for the sort of brinkmanship on display. Having followed this over the last couple of hours (primarily on the BBC, RT and NY Times), I'm coming to the view that this decision and the implications are significant in their own right, regardless of what follows. —WFC— 14:23, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. The granting of asylum is a more significant event than the threat of entering by the UK police in the Ecuador embassy, that was suggested in an earlier nomination below. The story has significant international implications, directly affecting several countries (UK, Ecuador, U.S., Sweden). Plus the entire Wikileaks story is, by its nature, global and concerns the issue of global free distribution of information and the extent to which individual governments can control it, both within their borders and internationally. This is also related to Wikipedia's mission, so there is, perhaps, a small IAR aspect here apart from regular considerations Nsk92 (talk) 14:26, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support once updated per ramifications for multiple countries and per prominence of international coverage. Top headline on NYT and BBC, 5th on Al Jazeera. Khazar2 (talk) 14:34, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - much better blurb. Regards, Sun Creator(talk) 14:43, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - I suspect this may be the first of few blurbs on this topic in the coming days. Around The Globeसत्यमेव जयते 14:53, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, the granting of asylum is alone notable whether or not he will be given permission to leave the UK.Egeymi (talk) 14:58, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ready - article is now updated, nom appears supported so far; but please note the split discussion between here and below. Khazar2 (talk) 14:59, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - If we are being consistent with previous nominations, this is far from the end of the events of Wikilinks, and likely won't be the end of this being in the news in the next few days. Comparing this with other past ITN candidates where there are trials or on-going investigations, the metric has always been to wait until a definitive conclusion has been made. This is not it. --MASEM (t) 15:08, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    That is not how we handled Chen Guangcheng [118].

    More importantly and relevantly, I'm unsure what exactly it is that we would be waiting for. Being deported on a routine European arrest warrant would not in itself be as significant a story as this – it would make massive headlines, but the as-yet-undetermined risk of him not being treated fairly would be the story there. The UK and Ecuador reaching an agreement for him to leave London would not be as big a story as this, and nor would Assange staying at the embassy indefinitely. The remote possibility of an embassy storming does not strike me as good cause not to post this. —WFC— 15:26, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

    • If it actual was or will be the case that UK forcibly entered the embassy to collect Assange, that's a huge news and would be ITN. As no action has been done besides some sharp words, this is simply a small piece of the larger case, and no more of interest as if he was actually arrested (outside the embassy) or the like. More important, in nearly all past cases where we are talking long-term civil/criminal court cases (take for example the Penn State stuff), the only ITN highlight is typically when a sentence is determined, even if a lot of "interesting" things happen along the way. --MASEM (t) 18:34, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Quite an important move. Mixed with the widely reported threats by the UK to storm the embassy a day or two ago, many readers will be looking for information on the Assange/Ecuador/UK happenings. Canadian Spring (talk) 15:18, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose. This is not significant enough, it concerns a single individual wanted for rape. When the election of the Prime Minister of an 8-million country doesn't make it to ITN, this is trivial in comparison. I understand that the tabloid press likes news like this, but this is an encyclopedia. Besides, this soap opera is far from finished, we can't cover every detail of it. Josh Gorand (talk) 15:52, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • That's about as relevant as dismissing a story concerning Obama on the grounds that he is a married individual who lives in a big house. —WFC— 15:55, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • That makes absolutely no sense. What are you trying to say? Assange is a private individual (not the President of any country) who happens to be wanted for rape, and who tries to evade justice. That's not really significant in ITN terms where 10 dead people are not considered important enough, where the election of an 8-million country Prime Minister is not considered important enough etc. ITN is for significant world news. Josh Gorand (talk) 15:57, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Whichever prime minister you're speaking of, I find it hard to believe they compete with Assange in terms of popular notability (crudely measured by Google results and Wikipedia page views), media notability (measured by Google News results), or subject of academic interest (measured by Google Scholar results). Not many people in the last 2-3 years of news could. Khazar2 (talk) 16:06, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • PULL What a joke that this has been posted! What a farce this has created. This isn't NEWS, for the love of all things holy. I'm mounting my opposition here in the most uncertain terms. BorgQueen - this decision is a stain on your otherwise perfect character. How regrettable a decision!— Preceding unsigned comment added by Doktorbuk (talk • contribs) 16:31, 16 August 2012‎
Do you have any grounds for requesting this is pulled? "I don't like it" simply isn't a reason. You can argue that consensus isn't clear, it is factually wrong, or that it breaks some other policy in some manner but you haven't done any of that. Instead you've simply demanded that it is pulled without reasoning. This soap opera descended into farce months ago, but across the two discussions there does appear to be a good consensus for posting. Crispmuncher (talk) 16:43, 16 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]
I'd also be curious to hear the reason for all the shouting. While there's obviously room to disagree on the importance of this development in the saga, the saga itself is the subject of sustained attention from popular, media, and scholarly sources. Hardly a joke or a farce for ITN to post one of the world's top news stories, much less a "stain" on BQ's character. Khazar2 (talk) 17:25, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, don't knock this "experienced" editor of 7 years! It certainly doesn't sound like a toys-out-of-pram situation. Oh no. How he can say it isn't news is beyond me. Lugnuts (talk) 19:08, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's not actually true. He's making use of the asylum right now. If it had been declined, he would have been handed over. Formerip (talk) 21:10, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • That is a sensible point. At the very least, a prefix such as "Amidst British opposition" (Newyorkbrad's suggestion below) would give the story more context. Given that the British government is openly opposed to this decision, I don't think there are POV issues there. —WFC— 20:13, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • WP:BLP applies everywhere on Wikipedia. Assange is wanted for questioning in an ongoing case and has not been charged with any offense. I suggest somebody redact the statements that say otherwise. Thank you. 64.40.54.3 (talk) 00:51, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Re-blurb
[edit]
I'm not necessarily against re-wording, but on a point of fact, at this stage Assange is only wanted for questioning in relation to allegations. Formerip (talk) 12:44, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"Wanted for rape" means that he has been charged and an arrest warrant has been issued already. That is not true; Assange has never been charged with any crime yet. --BorgQueen (talk) 15:55, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Assage is very definitely wanted for rape (wanted for: "to hunt or seek someone as a criminal suspect").
A European Arrest Warrant was issued for Assange in December 2010. An EAW can only be issued in order to (a) conduct a criminal prosecution; (b) execute a custodial sentence; or (c) execute a detention order (ref).
Example media report: "WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange wanted in Sweden for rape", News Limited (also carried on Hearld Sun and and on France24). See the prosecutor's quote: "Julian Assange is wanted for two different issues, one of them is that he's suspected of rape in Sweden."
In Sweden, as in other places, Assage is innocent until proven guilty. --RA (talk) 15:18, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Syria sticky

[edit]

There are periodic blurbs on the civil war in Syria and frequent nominations here (see below). Often there is interest in a sticky. There's enough interest that we should probably have a discussion about it. I have no opinion.--Chaser (talk) 05:26, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There may be some relationship between the two, but no. We'll basically be waiting for the TV to get bored, or at least a little distracted. Formerip (talk) 00:05, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

U.K. threathens to raid Ecuadorian embassy unless Assange is handed over

[edit]
Article: Julian_Assange#Request_for_political_asylum (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The U.K. threatens to raid the Ecuadorian embassy unless Julian Assange is handed over. (Post)
News source(s): Reuters BBC
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: I believe a threat to raid another country's embassy is quite extraordinary, given the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. Compare what happened when Chen Guangcheng hid in the US embassy in China. And Assange has not even been formally accused of anything. The Swedish government only want to talk to him before deciding whether to press rape charges, which are quite dubious. Thue (talk) 10:06, 16 August 2012 (UTC) [reply]

Discussion on the same issue is above, lets keep it all in one place.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
I think their complaint is about Britain seemingly indicating its willingness to prevent them carrying out their obligations. All the same, hold. Formerip (talk) 11:11, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Leaning support. He has just been granted asylum, making an ITN story very likely whether he goes to Ecuador or is seized. But let's give it a couple of hours until the picture is a little bit clearer. It's still plausible, albeit increasingly unlikely, that Ecuador and Britain could reach a peaceful agreement r.e. the arrest warrant in Sweden. —WFC— 12:41, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: the granting of asylum seems to be the more substantive element here and is probably worthy of posting in its own right, even if it is essentially symbolic while there is no way for him to get to Ecuador without going through the UK. The "storming the embassy" thing is little more than hyperbole. The two government's accounts do differ greatly in tone but the UK position is that they have the right to strip the embassy of its status. IANAL and have no position on the legality of that position, but stripping an embassy of its status strikes me as something very different to storming an embassy from a legal standpoint. Crispmuncher (talk) 12:50, 16 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]
  • Support per WFC. I do agree it would be prudent to wait a bit to see how things shake out, but Assange being granted asylum seems to be notable to me. I certainly do not support the original blurb--Johnsemlak (talk) 12:51, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Posturing vs. doing is a world of difference. I don't think Assange's asylum merits ITN either. – Muboshgu (talk) 12:55, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose a threat alone is not worth posting. if they do it then an obvious support as it will be a huge news -- Ashish-g55 13:03, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Suggestion. There should be a new nomination for the more ITN-worthy story of Assange's asylum decision and this should be hatted. Formerip (talk) 13:06, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Agree with this suggestion. As usual, one issue is being conflated with another, thus consensus will not be clear, rows will break out over POV, etc etc. —WFC— 13:18, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in concept but oppose the current blurb 'threatens to raid' is simply a threat/speculation. Stick to facts like yahoo.co.uk headline for "WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has been granted asylum by Ecuador." In fact that wording is perfect imo. Regards, Sun Creator(talk) 13:07, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    The "raid" formulation is taken from the Reuters article, which I assumed was NPOV based on the source. Also, I considered the conflict with the Vienna Convention at least as interesting as the asylum itself. Thue (talk) 13:13, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    A comment from [119]: "I think the Foreign Office have slightly overreached themselves here," Britain's former ambassador to Moscow, Tony Brenton, told the BBC. "If we live in a world where governments can arbitrarily revoke immunity and go into embassies then the life of our diplomats and their ability to conduct normal business in places like Moscow where I was and North Korea becomes close to impossible." Thue (talk) 13:26, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The actual letter (an edited form of it at any rate) is available here. Crispmuncher (talk) 13:31, 16 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]
  • If the foreign office brought up the law in this discussion, then that counts as a threat in my book. That is a nice embassy you have there, would be a shame if something should happen to it. Thue (talk) 13:45, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thankfully, nobody cares about "your book". What matters is what reliable sources say, not your personal interpretation of it. 91.125.136.29 (talk) 15:00, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose unless the "raid" actually happens. If everything is a "peaceful" resolution where Assange ends up under asylum at the Ecuador embassy, it's just one step of a rather long process involving Wikileaks, and would be premature to post anything. Even his arrest by the UK en route would be non-ITN worthy since now you have the trail to consider. The "news" here would be if the UK actually did forcefully raid another country's embassy to retrieve Assange, setting a very bad precedent in global diplomacy. It sounds like this is not going to happen but there's still a chance. --MASEM (t) 13:46, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Suggestion: We can't have two Assange items on ITN at the same time. For now, how about adding "Over British objections," or something similar to the item that's already posted? Newyorkbrad (talk) 16:41, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That introduces problems of sourcing and possible misrepresentation. Where has it been said that the UK has opposed the right of Ecuador to come to its own determination? It seems that over the last two months the reverse has been true, they've been happy to let the matter proceed. William Hague (UK Foreign Secretary) has come out after the announcement pointing out the UK gov does not recognise diplomatic asylum but he did not actively dispute the right of Ecuador to reach the decision it has. Crispmuncher (talk) 17:01, 16 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]

August 15

[edit]
August 15, 2012 (2012-08-15) (Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Disasters

International relations

Law and crime

Sports

Félix Hernández pitches the 23rd perfect game in MLB history

[edit]
Article: Félix Hernández's perfect game (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ *Félix Hernández pitches the 23rd Perfect Game in Major League Baseball history for the Seattle Mariners at Safeco Field. (Seattle Times) (Post)
News source(s): [120]
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Well-documented and noteworthy sporting event, undoubtedly of interest to millions of people.

  • lol we just rejected one 2 months back. this is becoming frequent enough to not care about. we need a new ITN/NR page or something where we can put recurring stuff that should not be nominated. -- Ashish-g55 00:25, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I'm a big, big MLB fan, but this is just not a rare enough event the last few years for whatever reason. Even in MLB news, the Melky Cabrera suspension is arguably bigger news--but I don't think much MLB news belongs on the main page save for breaking a major all-time season record (home runs, batting avg) and the World Series winner. (I am excited for King Felix, though =)). Khazar2 (talk) 00:28, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • (let's try to avoid responding to nominations with 'lol' :)). This is the third perfect game this year; the other two were not posted. It really seems there needs to be something a bit more unique here to be notable enough for ITN.--Johnsemlak (talk) 00:30, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
well im assuming not everyone visits ITN/C often enough to know that its been rejected twice this year (but still funny to see another one). perhpas we do need a page like ITN/NR (or something) so people know whats been rejected before? -- Ashish-g55 00:34, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. These are becoming pretty routine now. Call me when someone bowls 900 or makes a 147 break. GRAPPLE X 00:37, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Also of note: source says 23rd, not 26th. GRAPPLE X 00:44, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • There have been roughly 200,000 MLB games ever, with 23 of them being perfect games. That means that ~0.013% of all MLB games are perfect games, and considering the wide popularity of the sport in the US, an ITN blurb would certainly yield a very high rate of click-throughs for the duration of its presence on the main page. Philosophically, is the point to have news there that is worthy according to an arbitrary standard, or is the point to have news there that is of interest to the maximum amount of people? The justification to oppose in this ITN candidate discussion is that the event is "just not rare enough", and yet the current ITN list includes a blurb about the closing ceremonies of the Olympics occuring in London. Every Olympics has closing ceremonies that occur in the city in which they were held, with this one being the 30th Olympic games. 23 is less than 30, yes? Of course, the Olympic closing events are given a pass due to their presence on the ITN Recurring events list, but this is still objective evidence that insufficient rarity is not a compelling rationale for rejection of this topic. Thanks for the correction on the number of perfect games, Grapple X. Fixed in blurb and candidate header.
Odd thing to compare this with. how many of those 30 olympics have been posted on ITN? Something that happens once every 4 years vs something that has happened 3 times this year can not really be compared even if you ignore the fact that olympics is a highly international event. -- Ashish-g55 01:04, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I believe that the Olympic ceremonies end up on ITN automatically due to their status as an ITN recurring event. The very fact of perfect games occuring 3 times this year is of interest to many, since this has never happened in ~100 years of MLB. Sorry for not signing my comments, I didn't really know how to do it, but I'll take a stab at it now - and thanks for the welcome :) devilnis 01:12, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)Assuming this unsigned comment is from the nominator, I sympathize with what you're saying, but to post a half-dozen events in each sport a year would be impractical and would flood ITN with sports trivia. This event does have another (and much more likely) path to the main page, though. Félix Hernández's perfect game could be nominated at Did You Know, which would get it to the main page if it's of sufficient quality. Welcome to Wikipedia, btw! You happen to have picked one of our more traditionally contentious venues to start off in, so don't let any snark you see here shape your opinion of the project too much. Khazar2 (talk) 01:07, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I guess I put my foot in it right off the bat! Although I'm not convinced that my aforementioned example of the ITN blurb regarding the Olympic ceremonies would actually get more click-throughs than my nomination, I'm willing to bow to the majority opinion, which leads me to ask - should I edit out the whole nomination and attendant discussion, or should I leave it for posterity? devilnis 01:22, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No worries--the more nominations we have here, the better off we are, even if we end up not selecting it. So thanks for the contribution! I'd say leave it here for now in case anyone has a major counterargument to deploy still, or King Felix DHs tomorrow and gets four home runs, etc. Khazar2 (talk) 01:29, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • When you make sweeping generalisations, you come across as an arrogant moron. Did you consider the millions of baseball fans in Canada, Latin America, Asia, and (granted lesser amounts) everywhere else? How about Venezuela? You don't think becoming the first Venezuelan to pitch a perfect game, one of baseball's highest possible achievements, means anything to his country of birth? I'm guessing you saw the words "perfect game", and your thought processes stopped there. 58.7.203.59 (talk) 14:50, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"I'm guessing you saw the words "perfect game", and your thought processes stopped there." That's the only thing you got right. Lugnuts (talk) 19:05, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
NPA 58.7.203.59. A certain user recently got topic banned for such behaviour. Oppose as this is not news for ITN, it is sports trivia and nothing more, and besides, as has been rightly pointed out this is the third time this year and is thus not an exceptional event. Maybe important to a few million sports fans but is it really the most important news in their life? I think not. --Τασουλα (talk) 16:48, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Lugnuts' comment was bait, though. The pitcher wasn't even American. The MLB has an established international presence elsewhere. Lugnuts' comment was ignorant to say the least, when you had hordes of Japanese reporters swarming Seattle the last few years. I don't see a similar amount of interest in Korean media when the Korean guy in Manchester United played there. –HTD 06:30, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
As someone who once lived in Korea and teaches a number of Korean students I can attest that there was a lot of Korean media interest in Park Ji-Sung. Park himself said that he found it difficult to live in Korea due to his mass-celebrity status there. There is also interest, less so, in Korean baseball players who come over to the US.--Johnsemlak (talk) 12:11, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You've misunderstood me. I was referring to presence of Korean press at Manchester as compared to Japanese reporters in Seattle. There had been reports of hordes of Japanese reporters at Seattle home games; I don't remember reading about an army of Korean reporters in Old Trafford. Maybe they stayed at home as Koreans are crazy on Park too; they even watched at a theater live on key Man Utd matches, and those matches are mostly in the wee hours of the morning in Korean time, indicating high level of interest. The point was that it wasn't only Americans who cared about this piece of news. –HTD 12:50, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation suspends Syria

[edit]
Article: Fourth Extraordinary Session of the Islamic Summit Conference (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In response to the Syrian Civil War, the Fourth Extraordinary Session of the Islamic Summit organised by the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation suspends Syria's membership. (Post)
News source(s): [121]
Credits:

Article needs updating

Nominator's comments: The OIC is the largest international organisation outside of the United Nations. Their decision appears to be significant enough, although it was opposed by Iran. BorgQueen (talk) 23:17, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support - very significant event in the Syrian uprising, perhaps more so than certain battles, as it isolates Syria from a key international Islamic organization that they were previously a part of, and shows the general attitude of the Arab world towards the Syrian government, except for Iran (at the same time, shows Iran's attitude towards Syria, which acted as its protector at the conference). There was also much talk that it could happen a few days ago, and now it has. --Activism1234 23:21, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - nominator should also add this Reuters reference to show it's made internaitonal news as well. Other international references should probably be found soon as they are created. --Activism1234 23:23, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - updated article here. --Activism1234 03:24, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support Although they are a vile organisation that a lot of people haven't even heard of, this is nonetheless significant indeed. --Τασουλα (talk) 23:26, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just curious... why do you think it is vile? :D --BorgQueen (talk) 23:30, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Probably better to take that to a user talk page, rather than hold that discussion here. --Activism1234 00:02, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. In the context of what is going on in Syria this is unsurprising and insignificant. Most of the voting countries made their position clear some time ago and some have been arming the Syrian opposition for a while. And it's a cultural club, really, not a political bloc. Plus, we already posted the similar but much more significant development of Syria's suspension from the Arab League. It remains the case, though, that we should have a sticky for Syria rather than nominating it every few days. Formerip (talk) 23:51, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak oppose This doesn't appear to be even the top Syria story of the day--I don't see in on the front pages of Al Jazeera, NYT, or BBC. (Growing spillover in Lebanon and Syrian air strikes appear to trump it). The only reason I say "weak" is I do think we should continue to feature Syrian civil war coverage based on its enormous amount of international media coverage--but whether that's through sticky, or by regular noms, I have no preference. Khazar2 (talk) 01:15, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, although the decision has only a symbolic effect, it has other indirect significant effects. Yes, the news has not been extensively covered by the leading media. However, it cannot be used to evaluate its significance due to some apparent reasons.Egeymi (talk) 03:22, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
oppose not a big change in the events in syria (the actual fighting is more noteworthy (Sticky perhaps?)), pretty unsurprising as well (lots of thinngs get mentioned across media outlets). Further, the update is very poor, take away the over mentioning of names and theres nothing left. Its an article about a summit and only mentions one NEWS event. The reactions as to who voted which way are more pertinent...Lebanon, Algeria, Iraq, Iran, etc.How the tyrannies of Saudi and Bahrain will prevent sectarianism i havent the foggiestLihaas (talk) 05:01, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I agree we should have a sticky. How do we get one passed? --Activism1234 05:12, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
See #Syria sticky, above.--Chaser (talk) 05:27, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
comment ive organised the page into section (one can note now how small the update is), so more can be added. A reactions secction will be noteworthy. Once can nom this for DYK.Lihaas (talk) 05:45, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Boeing X-51

[edit]
Article: Boeing X-51 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ NASA unmanned hypersonic jet Boeing X-51 successfully reach the speed of Mach 6, making a record breaking speed. (Post)
Credits:

Article needs updating

Nominator's comments: minutes ago NASA stated they successfully manage to get Boeing X-51 reach the speed of Mach 6. 
  – HonorTheKing (talk)

Fourth, it was being tested by the Air Force, not by NASA. --12.41.124.2 (talk) 15:05, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Second, the X-15 was rocket powered, this is a scram jet. Fourth, so what? --76.110.201.132 (talk) 20:34, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"So what?" Um, the fact that the agency that is listed in the blurb and supposedly confirmed the test's success is not the agency that owns the X51/performed the test is kind of an important detail. Or, you know, the fact that nothing in the blurb actually happened? --12.41.124.2 (talk) 14:17, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose: Because this really is not a suitable for ITN, plain and simple. --Τασουλα (talk) 21:15, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose I wanted to hold off a touch to see if the exact record/significance could be clarified, but I agree with the above comments. This is cool, but doesn't seem particularly notable in either news coverage or record-breaking. Khazar2 (talk) 02:28, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What's cool? It didn't happen. The test was a failure and the "jet" crashed without even lighting the scramjet [122] so the only jet part of this was when the B-52 carried it. I don't know which speed the booster rocket reached before the failure but fast rockets is nothing new. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:03, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

August 14

[edit]
August 14, 2012 (2012-08-14) (Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Law and crime
  • Kariem McFarlin, 35, of Alameda, California, is arrested and charged with residential burglary and selling stolen property from the Northern California home of the late Steve Jobs. (MSN)
  • Eleven bodies of individuals stabbed to death are found in the mountainous Ile Alatau national park, near Kazakh capital Almaty. (BBC)

Politics and elections

[Posted] Standard Chartered

[edit]
Article: Standard Chartered (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ British bank Standard Chartered agrees to pay a US$340 million fine to New York State to settle money laundering charges. (Post)
News source(s): [123], [124]
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Top headline in US and UK; could this herald a new era of transAtlantic ITN peace? Marked as minority topic as story about a business. -- Khazar2 (talk) 20:20, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Leaning oppose. In the era of a banking crisis, a couple of hundred million is relatively small money, so I'm not seeing the ITN-ness there. Violating a US sanction generally only makes news in countries directly affected – I'm dubious as to whether we would post this if an identical arrangement were reached involving a bank from, say, Switzerland. Unless I'm missing something, or unless someone is going to dispute something I've written up to this point, the only difference here is that this is a story in the UK, which is a pretty poor reason to post. I say "leaning" because the most recent story is from Sunday, and this is a plausible story of last resort. —WFC— 20:53, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW, despite my flip rationale above, I'd still have nominated this if it were a bank from Switzerland getting the same news coverage. Al Jazeera, for example, has written 3 stories on the week's dispute, and has a feature-length story on the argument in their front-page "Highlights" section, and it's also on the front-page of Le Monde, so it's not simply a US/UK story. I'll admit that I'm not familiar enough with international money laundering to judge the notability of the Standard Chartered story myself. My impression based on prominence of coverage, though, is that those who are familiar with such things consider this a notable story. Khazar2 (talk) 21:06, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Although Standard Chartered is based in the UK, it is really a global multi-national bank with most of its operations located in Africa, Asia and the Middle East. So what happened here is significant in terms of its affects on global banks rather than just UK as such. This was the first time that a financial settlement of this magnitude on international money-laundering charges has been extracted by a state financial regulator rather than the federal government - this is what took the financial industry by such surprise. That does change the operating environment in the U.S. for other global banks, as, for example, this story notes[125]. There is also an international relations aspect to this story, both because it involves Iran specifically, and more generally in terms of the ability of the U.S. to enforce its economic sanctions against countries like Iran internationally. Nsk92 (talk) 21:13, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Leaning support- I'd to like to see some real news posted, and this is borderline notable. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 21:11, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - would support this, as it is international news (deals with a British bank concerning U.S. $ related to Iran sanctions which also involves the Middle East as a whole), but want to first make sure that it does make international news, especially in countries like Israel or Iran or Saudi Arabia where this is very important. Right now, it's not even listed as an article on The Jerusalem Post, Yedioth Ahronot, Haaretz, The Saudi Gazette, Fars News Agency, and can't find it on Al Jazeera as an article yet, but it's written on the top as a "breaking news." So maybe in an hour these websites will have it updated (except maybe Fars News Agency, which is semi-state run by Iran). If so, I'll come back here. --Activism1234 21:12, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support. The real story is SC not losing its New York licence, which would have pretty much meant curtains for one of the world's major banks. Formerip (talk) 21:16, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, significant since Iran is also involved in the event. Does the blurb include this point too? Egeymi (talk) 21:32, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Why "no", your suggestion is what I proposed.Egeymi (talk) 21:52, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Meant it in response to your question whether the blurb includes it. That answer would be no. But I suggest including... Sorry for confusion! --Activism1234 21:58, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It is allright Activism1234, thanks for your planned suggestion. I also support it.Egeymi (talk) 22:07, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think I agree that this is a good change; the fact that the laundering was to evade international sanctions obviously adds notability. But does it make the blurb too long for the template? That was my only concern. Khazar2 (talk) 23:34, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm... Well, "British bank Standard Chartered agrees to pay a US $340 million fine to New York State to settle charges on evading international sanctions on Iran" is 25 words and 123 characters. (also on the side, note I think there should be a space between US and $340 in the blurb). The ITN post about Morsi making changes in the government is 17 words, but 131 characters. The ITN post about Olympics Jamaica and United States is 28 words, which is longer than a changed blurb here, and 123 characters, which is the same # of characters. So I think it's fine. (NOTE: I felt "money laundering charges on evading..." sounded awkward, so I changed that part... If anyone disagrees, I don't have strong objections to that).--Activism1234 23:56, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I knew British nationalism would enter somehow here. It's funny how they often blame others doing it. --62.1.19.194 (talk) 07:19, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The New York Times [127] Associated Press [128] and Reuters [129] describe them as a "British bank" in their ledes and Al Jazeera as a "UK bank" [130]; I suggest we follow their lead unless we start to see other descriptors being more commonly used. If we get it wrong, well, at least we'll be no more wrong than some of the world's greatest papers and press agencies. Khazar2 (talk) 05:51, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Caution is still advised. I recall Obama being forced to apologise to David Dave over the "British" Petroleum Gulf of Mexico thing. There were plenty of sources for that, too. Crispmuncher (talk) 06:13, 15 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]
On your head be it. Crispmuncher (talk) 07:21, 15 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]
Is that a threat? --BorgQueen (talk) 14:31, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I withdraw that. I was a bit tetchy yesterday morning and was considering taking this to AN/I, but I've got a sense of perspective now. Crispmuncher (talk) 12:42, 16 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]

Vilasrao Deshmukh

[edit]
Article: Vilasrao Deshmukh (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Former Chief Minister of Maharashtra Vilasrao Deshmukh dies at the age of 67. (Post)
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Multiple factors: was relatively young (67 is not "old age") and he presided over when the 26/11 attacks happened, that would be akin to Rudy Guilani's death, which would seemingly get him more noteworthiness for this. (just a word on context) --Lihaas (talk) 19:35, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose A provincial governor? Seriously? Fails all three of the too broad death criteria. BTW I'd oppose Giuliani's death whenever that happens, his 15 minutes are up. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:39, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Reason noted, but for the recots, he wasnt governor as thats just symbolic but more activ.eLihaas (talk) 19:42, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

August 13

[edit]
August 13, 2012 (2012-08-13) (Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Disasters

Law and crime
  • Police involved shooting in College Station, Texas results in line of duty death of Constable Brian Bachmann; gunman, as well as one civilian are also killed
  • The Vatican orders Pope Benedict XVI's former butler to stand trial for his alleged involvement in leaking allegations of corruption in the Holy See. (Reuters)
  • Two Egyptian journalists, critics of President Mohammed Mursi, are to be put on trial for their alleged incitement to murder Mursi and lead sectarian discord. (BBC)
  • Three people are found dead in a burning car in a parking lot in Maine, in the United States. (AP via ABC)

Politics and elections
  • Thousands of Tunisians, mostly women, protest in Tunis against attempts by the Islamist-led government to reduce women's rights. (BBC)

Sports

Helen Gurley Brown

[edit]
Article: Helen Gurley Brown (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Helen Gurley Brown, the longtime editor-in-chief of Cosmopolitan magazine dies at the age of 90. (Post)
News source(s): Bloomberg, USA Today Jezebel, People NBC News Wall Street Journal
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Considering my AP app broke the news all of the sudden, looking it up, it seems that she is an big influence to the women's magazine world, there are other sources that will tell you why...ladies, what do you think? --Donnie Park (talk) 20:08, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose 90 is quite old. we have got to stop posting deaths at that age unless very notable... everyone eventually does die, cant post them all. -- Ashish-g55 20:13, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question- I will judge this based on the awards she has won, found in the Awards section of the article. Do either of them represent the pinnacle of the industry, or was she just the editor-in-chief of a moderately popular magazine? Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 20:14, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Its Cosmopolitan, an internationally famous woman's magazine, like Vogue, Elle and Marie Claire; there are editions all over the world. I'm not a reader of woman's magazine, I am aware of the name well enough to nominate it. Are you going to say oppose if a blurb of Anna Wintour pop up should she die? Donnie Park (talk) 20:21, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Moderately popular? She turned the magazine's fortunes around. Have to admit, I do not work in the magazine editorial world to be knowledgeable about these awards, neither some people are going to know what the Clio Awards are either as much as they know the Grammy or the Oscar. So you are not going to expect me to be so knowledgeable about these industry awards. Donnie Park (talk) 20:52, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose , non-notable outside the US and maybe Europe.Egeymi (talk) 20:32, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • ? Does she fit the category for inclusion. Seriously why isn't this asked more? --Τασουλα (talk) 20:35, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Criterion 2 for deaths says, "The deceased was widely regarded as a very important figure in his or her field." The news headlines surrounding her death are using terms like "legendary Cosmopolitan editor" and hail her role in the feminism movement. I don't read Cosmo, and I'm not a woman, and yet I'm aware of her impact on society here in the US. Her influence has been felt outside the US as she edited 59 international editions of the magazine after her departure at the US edition. Imzadi 1979 → 20:49, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
When you think of the field of recently-deceased editors of the US edition of Cosmopolitan magazine, there's only really one name that comes up, so she definitely passes the criterion. She must have been a very dedicated worker and had a lot of pocket dictionaries in her handbag if she edited 59 editions of the magazine, BTW. Formerip (talk) 20:54, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
As a female...thing...ladyboy...wierdo... (Well more to the point I identify as female) I can possibly not comment on her being important to my gender for an altogether different reason - she wasn't of my generation - and I don't read Cosmo. And I'm not American. So all I have to go on is the facts, and well I do see her being important enough in her field so I have to give my support. --Τασουλα (talk) 01:10, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Alternate blurb
[edit]
Article: Helen Gurley Brown (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Helen Gurley Brown, author of Sex and the Single Girl and editor of Cosmopolitan magazine, dies at the age of 90 (Post)
News source(s): Bloomberg, USA Today Jezebel, People NBC News Wall Street Journal
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Helen Gurley Brown was one of the first voices of the feminist movement in the US; her book predates Betty Friedan's The Feminine Mystique. She has been credited as helping to break the glass ceiling for women in the workforce with her editorship of Cosmo, turning around a failing magazine that was ready to be shuttered and growing it to an international publication of some fame. Donnie Park's proposed blurb above omits the book, which had more impact. She was promoted from copyeditor and secretary to editor of a national (and later international) publication on the basis of that book. Leaving that out does HGB, as she was known, a disservice. Imzadi 1979 → 00:04, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support - Her book made a huge impact on Western culture, as noted by the nom. Front page news in the LA Times. Suggest that she outlived her impact, but that should not be a factor. Jusdafax 00:11, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose nomination, but support alternate blurb if posted If this were to be posted (unlikely, it appears), this would be a better blurb, I think. Khazar2 (talk) 00:14, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose the entire nomination with no reference to the composition of the blurb. I cannot realize a pity of notability in this nomination. If the only thing that makes her notable is the length of being editor-in-chief in Cosmopolitan, then the nomination should redirect for DYK. But the claim that she was notable because of the initial success of her book doesn't merit suitable inclusion either. Whatever the success of the book was, it's not even listed among the best-selling books and thereby nothing makes it something critically important for the global society. This nomination demonstrates WP:SNOWBALL in practice.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 01:44, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support She was a contemptible woman, a procuress, responsible for the rise in the divorce rate, and the coarsening of the culture. It's not surprising that an encyclopedia run by males born in the 1990's would have no idea who she is. Every anglophone woman over 40 does. I am quite happy to see her relegated to the trash here, but justice requires pointing out her best selling and very influential book and her importance in publishing and the sexual revolution. μηδείς (talk) 03:21, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    "It's not surprising that an encyclopedia run by males born in the 1990's would have no idea who she is. Every anglophone woman over 40 does." — Agree. Like the struggle involved in getting Maeve Binchy's death posted — while simultaneously Gore Vidal's death snowballed into ITN because he was "super famous" — the issue lies with a systematic bias. --RA (talk) 19:26, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose (still) An alternative blurb does not change my view that she does not meet our criteria for front page inclusion doktorb wordsdeeds 04:08, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Does your second bold vote here mean that I can go post another one above the reblurb? μηδείς (talk) 04:33, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say yes. I also noted my !vote in both places since this discussion got fragmented; wasn't sure how else to make it clear that I was responding to each. Khazar2 (talk) 04:42, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't understand how can this person get so many oppose votes when recently we've posted so many mildly famous actors whose careers have expired decades ago. Nergaal (talk) 05:32, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    We cannot infinitely go by lowering the death criteria. It must end somewhere and review the previous mistakes that were made. But this makes me even think that she's not that notable as the persons you're pointing on.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:31, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, per all of the above. – Connormah (talk) 05:37, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, This second blurb is again about a woman and her book, not known outside the US and maybe Europe. Changing blurb does not make her notable.Egeymi (talk) 07:25, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Funnily enough, although I disagree with Medeis' evaluation of her work, I entirely agree with his assessment of its importance, and the reason why we're getting 'oppose' votes from people who aren't familiar with her. I also support the second blurb over the first. AlexTiefling (talk) 15:36, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    If so many people have not heard her book or any other achievement of her until her death, it should tell you something: She is not notable enough. Egeymi (talk) 16:11, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Notability is not the same as fame. A person can be notable for their achievements. This woman's major achievement was Cosmopolitan. You have heard of that magazine, I presume? --RA (talk) 19:17, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I am not talking about fame. I said, she is not notable enough. BTW, the significance of Cosmopolitian is a topic that can be discussed.Egeymi (talk) 20:01, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    As I said, a person is notable for their achievements. And this woman's achievement was Cosmopolitan. Anyho... --RA (talk) 07:58, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Notability is not judged on how many of Wikipedia's (predominantly young) editors have heard of her, but on whether reliable sources confirm her influence and importance. I believe that they do. We already dropped the ball on Maeve Binchy (internationally famous, massively influential). Let's not do it again. It's preposterous that the editors of an encyclopedia can rely on an argument from ignorance. Do some research. Read some obituaries. Otherwise your argument just amounts to saying "Who?" - and I have no time for that. AlexTiefling (talk) 11:03, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose old lady dies. Some people in the US have heard of her. Sad but true. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:18, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Based on the fact she fits into the criteria for inclusion. I had never even heard of her before now but found it pretty interesting reading about her and learning what she was notable for. --Τασουλα (talk) 19:54, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. This just sets the bar too low. As a literary figure, she doesn't even pass ITNDC. An important footnote, maybe, in the history of print media, American literature and gender politics. But she isn't a Murdoch, a Steinbeck or a Beauvoir, which is the standard we ought to be at least reaching for. Formerip (talk) 20:02, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support (still) per above: Brown was central in re-orientating Cosmopolitan and is the female counterpart to Hugh Hefner with regards to consumerism and the sexual revolution. --RA (talk) 08:25, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

2012 Texas A&M shooting

[edit]
Article: 2012 Texas A&M University shooting (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: No blurb specified (Post)
News source(s): [131]
Credits:

Another day, another shooting. Probably not notable any more given that we seem have one or two a month now in the US, but worth opening up a debate as to whether any shooting of innocent people in the US is notable enough for ITN. Source. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:45, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Are you suggesting the news agencies are behind this? μηδείς (talk) 03:32, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No, you've misunderstood. What I'm saying is - you get the initial tragedy, and almost inevitably the media will inflate any others which follow. I didn't mean they 'construct' the events, they report them with perhaps more prominence than they should do doktorb wordsdeeds 04:11, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have to agree in this case, given that explanation. This was HUGE BREAKING internet news . . . until the facts were known.
  • Comment. It got some good coverage in Mexico, but I'm still unsure if it should be posted. The 2012 Wisconsin Sikh temple shooting was understandable because a particular religious group was targeted. This seems like a regular shootout, "notable" because it comes after a series of shooting events. ComputerJA (talk) 21:20, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose three people were killed last night in Boston. Why is this different? Hot Stop 22:05, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - not for ITN.--BabbaQ (talk) 22:06, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral, leaning oppose - Surprisingly prominent coverage in international media (Guardian, Al Jazeera, BBC, etc.), but not the top US story on New York Times or Washington Post, to name two examples. In other words, the fifth or sixth highest story in most places I'm looking. Tragic, but maybe not quite ITN-level coverage for an event with no obvious hook to make it long-term notable/memorable and attract long-term coverage (the way the Batman or Sikh temple shootings likely will, given the high international interest). Khazar2 (talk) 00:20, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose It's another few families destroyed forever and all that but as as the nomination statement acknowledges, it's same old, same old stuff. Unless it exceeds the Virginia Tech thing in terms of body count it's more of the same. Hell, as a Brit and to speak frankly, the only reason I remember even the VT thing is because of a "Hokies proud" T-shirt a girl in a video was wearing shortly afterward, doing things she probably regrets now. Crispmuncher (talk) 01:34, 14 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]
  • Comment Somewhat irrelevant now anyway as the article is at AfD and so can't be linked from ITN. Black Kite (talk) 03:22, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Even if the two major shootings in the U.S. recently hadn't occurred, this wouldn't be ITN material. I feel the only reason this is getting any international attention (and I don't think there's much) is because of the recent shootings and the desire to continue the "look how dangerous the U.S. is" line. I notice some of the opposers here have done the same as well, unfortunately. -- tariqabjotu 11:35, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - I'm amazed that this was considered by the media to be more newsworthy than what goes on in Boston in a daily basis.--WaltCip (talk) 13:16, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - I generally support mass shooting stories for ITN, but this just doesn't rise above the background crime level as far as I can see. It wouldn't be sufficiently significant here in the UK, where gun crime is generally lower, so it certainly isn't in the USA. AlexTiefling (talk) 15:38, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

August 12

[edit]
August 12, 2012 (2012-08-12) (Sunday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Business and economy
  • Qatar is to deposit US$2bn at the Egyptian Central Bank in an effort to help support an economy battered by a year and a half of political turmoil, an Egyptian presidency statement reports. (Al Jazeera)

Politics and elections

Sports

[Posted] 2012 PGA Championship

[edit]
Article: 2012 PGA Championship (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Rory McIlroy wins the PGA Championship by a record 8 strokes. (Post)
Credits:

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.

 ––HotHat (talk) 03:23, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I will let you all decide the article that goes up either Rory McIlroy or the 2012 PGA Championship. I don't know, but I assume the PGA one.HotHat (talk) 03:23, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with posting this in principle, but that sort of defeats the point of ITN. We need to update the appropriate bolded article (which is, conventionally, the article regarding the championship). Formerip (talk) 18:18, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Conventionally the article regarding the championship? I have seen both methods used almost equally in individual events, often depending on which article is better. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 18:52, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Shouldn't both articles be updated prior to posting? In fact, doesn't it make sense that any of the sports competitions that both the competition itself and the winners (individual or team) be updated to reflect as a requirement? --MASEM (t) 20:08, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Can you elaborate why that should be an absolute requirement? Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 20:15, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I would assume that for the person or team winning said event, it is a significant milestone in their career/history and thus should reflected on their page; and for the event, its completion and crowning of the victor is a critical aspect. Since they will likely share common sources as to these details, it seems logical that both should be updated simultaneously. --MASEM (t) 12:27, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've boldly removed the orange tag. There was no talkpage discussion, as is required by the guideline. It doesn't actually look too bad. Citations are a bit sparse, but mainly because you have large amounts of info (e.g. a list of everyone who played) cited to one location. Formerip (talk) 21:17, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] 2012 Summer Olympics closing ceremony

[edit]
Article: 2012_Summer_Olympics_closing_ceremony (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The closing ceremony of the 2012 Summer Olympics is held in London. (Post)
Credits:

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.

 --m'encarta (t) 14:13, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As of this writing, the closing ceremony is in about a few hours,

Obvious support I suggest with the winner of men's marathon. -- Ashish-g55 15:02, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No ofcourse it should be the mens Handball which is the last sport to get a winner at the Olympics. Either Sweden or France.--BabbaQ (talk) 15:06, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
AFAIK Water polo at the 2012 Summer Olympics – Men's tournament is the last (team) sport to start at 15:50; handball and basketball started at 15:00. –HTD 15:27, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'll update it as soon as the events happen. m'encarta (t) 15:21, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Women's modern pentathlon is the last sport to be placed. Therequiembellishere (talk) 16:21, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There is that, but my comment was mostly in response to the suggestion by Lugnuts immediately prior. Formerip (talk) 17:57, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hotstop, I'm American but I really don't think not mentioning the medal count is an anti-US thing. During the Olympics ITN has mentioned US medal winners twice and Jamaica's 4x100 relay team was the only other medal winner to get a specific mention, so I think the US is getting its fair share of ITN space here. The medal counts do get shown prominently in the media but they are not official--there is no single 'winner' of the Olympics, as opposed to the World Cup or the Super Bowl. There isn't even universal agreement how to display the medal table.--Johnsemlak (talk) 20:47, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm from the UK, but I think the story should just be about the end of a tournament in which 204 (I think that's the number) countries participated. Formerip (talk) 19:59, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm from Canada (we sucked) and live in the USA (we triumphed over communist aggression). It's probably best to not mention the "winner". The Olympics tend to not emphasize that. --76.110.201.132 (talk) 21:19, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per ITN/R. I see no reason to post the time of the ceremony or who won the most medals (USA! USA! USA!). The Olympics aren't about which country wins the most medals, so I see no reason to include them in the blurb. The blurb should just mention that the closing ceremonies are held. -- Anc516 (Talk ▪ Contribs) 21:32, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: If the Men's and Women's 4x100 relay Olympic records are still posted on ITN, I suggest we combine them all into one blurb. This is what we did in 2010, combining both the 2010 closing ceremony and Canada's Winter Olympic record.[132] Zzyzx11 (talk) 21:43, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That'll be one giant blurb. Just keep it separate since they happened at different times. With canada's record it made sense to combine it with closing ceremony. -- Ashish-g55 22:03, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
comment who the heck posts this? mere votes doenst make an article ready. DThere was not a scintill of soruces to the OR update. Ive just gone and aded a heck of a lot, but there are still plenty of tags that need answering! kindly see the article and the update before postingLihaas (talk) 05:12, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
WP:SOFIXIT. Lugnuts (talk) 10:59, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Egyptian president retires defense minister, army chief

[edit]
Article: Mohamed Morsi (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi orders the retirement of Defense Minister Mohamed Hussein Tantawi, Chief of Staff Sami Hafez Anan, and cancels military-declared constitutional amendments. (Post)
News source(s): BBC News, Al Jazeera English, Washington Post
Article updated
oppose it is NOT the final step in the revolution, that blatant short on vision. You dont know what the next step will be...there could very well be a counterrevolutionary coup. Please lets not Crysall Ball or work on recentism. Its notability is not inherent as he was merely defence minister at this pt.Lihaas (talk) 16:16, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, although a qualified one. This is a major ongoing development, but both the blurb and the article linked may need to be changed (for the article linked, Mohammed Morsi would probably be a better choice). Regarding the blurb: it is not simply about forcing out the Defense Minister. The Washington Post article[133] indicates that Morsi also fired both the Defense Minister and the military's Chief of Staff and, more importantly, cancelled the constitutional amendments that gave the military sweeping powers in Egypt. If that move succeeds, that will certainly represent a fundamental shift in the balance of power in Egypt. So the blurb needs to mention the constitutional amendments cancellation and also use a more conditional language, since it remains to be seen if the military will comply with Morsi's decree. Nsk92 (talk) 16:26, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support but nominator may also be interested in the fact (on the side) that Morsi has also "President Morsi fired intelligence chief Murad Mowafi and temporarily replaced him with Mohammed Raafat Shehata, a former presidential guards commander. Morsi also fired the governor of Northern Sinai, as well as the commander of the presidential guard, and named new chiefs for Cairo's security forces and the police's large central security. Morsi also asked Defense Minister Hussein Tantawi to replace the military police's commander.[2]" --Activism1234 16:37, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ http://www.london2012.com/
  2. ^ Stuart Winer and Greg Tepper (August 8, 2012). "Egyptian president sacks his intelligence chief in shake-up after Sunday's border attack". AP. The Times of Israel. Retrieved August 8, 2012.

August 11

[edit]
August 11, 2012 (2012-08-11) (Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters

Politics and elections

Sports

[Posted] Men's and Women's 4x100 relay records

[edit]
Articles: Athletics at the 2012 Summer Olympics – Women's 4 × 100 metres relay (talk · history · tag) and Athletics at the 2012 Summer Olympics – Men's 4 × 100 metres relay (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: No blurb specified (Post)
Article needs updating
One or both nominated events are 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.

The US women and the Jamaican men both set world records, one long standing at 27 years and the other on a pretty high profile event. (those are ITNR criteria). I suggest we post both in a combined blurb. This will alleviate some concerns mentioned below in the women's nomination, and also give us a chance to put Usain Bolt on ITN finally, albeit indirectly, and I think there's a strong opinion that he deserves mention.--Johnsemlak (talk) 05:07, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

'one more among hundreds of results', so one death among hundreds(millions), one researchers annoucement among hundreds. By such logic you are opposing all ITN/C and therefore the ITN entirely. Regards, Sun Creator(talk) 13:50, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Don't mioscharacterise my arguments. If you wish to argue in favour of the proposal, do so by all means, but don't insult my intelligence by misrepresenting me. Kevin McE (talk) 14:09, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have any evidence that the claim that 'one more among hundreds of results' as a way of opposing any and every Olympic suggestion, isn't simply an insult to everyone's intelligence? Equal media coverage of each result perhaps? Equal amounts of expert commentary for each outcome? Or is it merely borne out of the fact that because each athlete gets the same medal? Because, as arguments go, that's pretty weak. HeCameFromTheShadows (talk) 17:06, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
pull Where is the update? There is 2 lines describing the 4 runners for the usa team. Nor there are any sources for the data.Lihaas (talk) 16:23, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It appears to me that the update is down to two lines because you just deleted most of it. I don't have any strong opinions here, but maybe the easiest solution is to restore the sourced information that you removed?[135] Khazar2 (talk) 16:29, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A citation for the final times has now also been added; as the issue appears resolved, I've removed the tag. But I'd be happy to discuss further on the talk page if this hasn't addressed your concerns. Khazar2 (talk) 17:04, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comments after posting
[edit]

Why Usain Bolt picture has been put up? Just because, he was a part of the relay team. We can't be biased to the US side. Right?Regards, theTigerKing  12:46, 12 August 2012 (UTC):[reply]

Well, I know pictures we post are often based on what's available as much as anything, but I think the current blurb with Usain Bolt's picture is just right myself.--Johnsemlak (talk) 12:53, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The first ITN none U.S <person> image for 10 days. Regards, Sun Creator(talk) 12:57, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Mars, the 51st state? Hot Stop 14:12, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Good catch. Person added.. Regards, Sun Creator(talk) 21:10, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The image used was a rendering of a US rover vehicle, not Mars itself. GRAPPLE X 20:53, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • This combined posting only makes the David Rudisha outcome look even more perverse. At least the women's relay had a plausible claim of importance (although of not much interest to editors it seems compared to Rudisha even without a main page appearance). Rudisha smashed his own world record in the event he dominates just like Bolt does in the 100m, thus he got lots of media coverage for it (the only non-GB athlete to be interviewed on the following night's BBC coverage for example), and tons of expert commentary hailing the achievement, because he ran what is acknowleged by them as the best race of these games, and possibly the best for the 800m ever. Yet it gets ignored in favour of this pseudo non-sexist symmetry, with a nod to bolt thrown in as a fop to the failure of the suggestion to post his notable back to back in its own right? Ridiculous. HeCameFromTheShadows (talk) 17:15, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What is actually going on? This page (which receives more user hits) has Usain Bolt and this one has Allyson Felix pictured. Why so? It would be better to remove the pics.Regards, theTigerKing  19:19, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The blurb currently does not show the importance of those world records and the reason why they were selected for ITN. Should be clarified ASAP. Brandmeistertalk 14:29, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That information does not necessarily need to be in the blurb. These criteria exist to help us determine internally what makes the cut.--Chaser (talk) 14:57, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Tabriz, Iran earthquakes

[edit]
Article: 2012 Tabriz earthquakes (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ At least 50 people are killed and 400 injured in a pair of earthquakes near Tabriz, Iran. (Post)
News source(s): [136], [137], [138]
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Major natural disaster. --MASEM (t) 17:18, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

August 10

[edit]
August 10, 2012 (2012-08-10) (Friday)
Armed conflict and attacks

Disasters
International relations

Politics and elections

Law and crime

Sports

[Posted, but consensus challenged] Women's 4 × 100 metres relay WR

[edit]
Articles: Athletics at the 2012 Summer Olympics – Women's 4 × 100 metres relay (talk · history · tag) and 4 × 100 metres relay (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ US team breaks a 27 year old world record in the Women's 4 × 100 metres relay in the London Olympics (Post)
Credits:

Article updated
One or both nominated events are 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: This is one of those boring WR in athletics. HOWEVER, the previous WR dated from 1985, and the OR was from 1980, both from East Germany (back in the times when in that part of the world women would heavily roid up). Actually looking at List of world records in athletics only three other records are older, while in List of Olympic records in athletics there is only a single record in womens' that is older, and only the mens' long jump passes that mark. Yes, this is a boring record, but it is clearly one of the oldest. --Nergaal (talk) 23:38, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

please discuss its vageu ITNR credentials. "such as" could include many other records liek weighliftingLihaas (talk) 00:48, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I don't agree with those saying it's only another race or 30 world records were broken at the Olympics so far. Breaking a world record that was simply unbreakable for 27 years is a very big deal. Several months ago we posted the new WR in men's decathlon which was broken after 11 years. This one seems to be much rarer, and is additionally set on a more prominent competition.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 01:44, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Oppose Being an old record means the previous record setting was a notable achievement but I don't see this being that much, even the nominator said it was boring. Still, I'm generally wanting more ITN Olympic news. Regards, Sun Creator(talk) 01:54, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I think that most of the Olympics nominations that come up here should not be posted, otherwise ITN is flooded with Olympics results, defeating the purpose of the sticky. However, this event exceeds all three ITN/R requirements for World Record ITN/R postings: it was broken by a large margin (a half a second is a lot in track and field), it was broken after very long time period (27 years), and it is a highly publicized event (#1 sport article on BBC as of now, on the front page of Reuters, and top coverage across all popular sporting websites, like ESPN). I don't recall any other world record nominations that can clearly meet each of these requirements (Rudisha below beat his own record that he had 2 years prior, and not by much) without any gray areas. -- Anc516 (Talk ▪ Contribs) 02:41, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Support Generally unless the event is a very major marquee event, I would oppose, but in this case, the World Record ITN/R criteria are met. Given the 27 year margin and the size of the record break, I will support, but only weakly. SpencerT♦C 03:13, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment If this is posted, I predict a riot. To say that the story has had top coverage across various sporting websites and the BBC is hardly a surprise – the Olympics itself has been the top story for almost a fortnight. Many, many other Olympic stories have also given prominence on those sites, and quite rightly they were not given undue weight on ITN. To claim that this specific medal is particularly noteworthy will lead people to infer systemic bias, and we already have quite enough of that. If it had been, say, Ethiopia that had won the women's 4 x 100m relay and broken the record in this fashion, it wouldn't stand a snowball's chance in hell of being posted. 87.112.8.150 (talk) 09:07, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Given you're effectively the first (second if you count FormerIP above) to mention/imply the fact that this was won by the U.S., and definitely the only one so far to throw out that (yet again baseless) accusation of "systemic bias". I can guarantee you that if it had been an Ethiopian team it would've been even bigger and likely have more support, given that they aren't exactly known for sprinting. —Strange Passerby (t × c) 09:49, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per Spencer, World Record lasted 27 years until today (I saw it on television while at work) Secret account 10:20, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. 27 year old record, it wipes East Germany off of the record books forever. I think it meets ITNR--the relays are a fairly big deal.--Johnsemlak (talk) 10:30, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: There have been plenty of records broken during this Olympic games. Certainly this one is somewhat more notable than others, but I oppose it on the grounds that it is yet more Olympics news and we can't have news about every single record broken. -- Peter Talk page 13:19, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Having already a link to Chronological summary of the 2012 Summer Olympics, posting this will really be a joke to me. ♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 13:31, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support - If we posted about Phelps breaking the personal Olympics medals record, this seems likely on the equivalent type of news but the blurb definitely needs to be set to focus on the fact that it was the longest-standing record that was broken. --MASEM (t) 14:00, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment this is a 6.5 supports to 6.5 opposes until now. However, can people who oppose explain exactly how is ITNR overridden here? We have had only Phleps' record posted for the entire Opympics (other than the opening ceremony) while there were months where Syria would get 2-3 posts on the ITN template; and usuallt the posts were not ITNR items. Nergaal (talk) 14:10, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's what happens when ITN/R is not clear cut and specific: if it leaves grey areas that need to be discussed, it cannot be a list of items for which inclusion without discussion can be assumed. Best just ignore ITN/R for the purposes of this discussion. Kevin McE (talk) 14:39, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, as I would any simple outcome of any sport through the Olympics. Kevin McE (talk) 14:39, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Perhaps, given the debate above, we should remove or modify the world record section from ITN/R? Without commenting on further on the nom one way or another, it's clearly not agreed that we should post the breaking of a long-standing world record in sports; no point in keeping something in ITN/R that doesn't have editorial consensus. Khazar2 (talk) 15:19, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly what I proposed at WT:ITN/R 16 minutes before you posted this :@) Kevin McE (talk) 15:42, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose If we didnt post 100m or Bolts back to back win or grenada's win in 800 or 30 other broken records in olympics then i see no good reason to post this either. -- Ashish-g55 16:56, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. ITNR states A world record (in an event such as aquatics or athletics) that is broken either: by an unusually large margin, after a very long time period, or in a highly publicized event. THere is no way 27 years doesn't qualify as ITNR. Duly marked as ITNR.--Johnsemlak (talk) 19:51, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Totally agreed with John. We should focus entirely on the world record regardless of the other achievements at the Olympics. I wonder whether the opinions stating in favour of the other Olympic events would help this if it's happened out of the Olympics. When we posted Eaton's world record in decathlon, most of the opinions pointed on the length of 11 years which was considered a rareness in an athletic event. No need for double standards please.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 20:18, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. David Rudisha's world record is widely considered by those in the know as the best track performance of these games, and possibly the best ever for that distance. He is to the 800m what Bolt is to the 100m, that's a fact. I am a bit bemused that people want to write him off for breaking his own world record that was only set a couple of years ago, when that's no different to what Bolt's been doing to become a global superstar. While breaking a long standing world record is notable, if that means this relay result gets posted on the main page as an athletic achievement, but Rudisha gets ignored, then Wikipedia is going to look pretty ignorant, which is not great for something that bills itself as the font of world knowledge. On simply media coverage for the results, I'd say they were even, but if that's the criteria then obviouly Bolt wins hands down, so again, if this was posted and Bolt/Jamaica was not, it again would look a bit silly. I'd also be skeptical of these claims that East Germany are no longer on the record books, as I tried to verify that last night with a view of going with that as an ITN angle, but couldn't - they still hold records in discus and something else I am pretty sure was track based. HeCameFromTheShadows (talk) 20:37, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Rudisha's nomination was unfortunately handicapped by an nominator who appeared to refuse to fill out a template, provide a source, or update the article. It looks like the article's been updated since, but the initial discussion took place with incomplete information. You might make a new case there now if you're inclined; a claim like "widely considered by those in the know as the best track performance of these games" is a powerful one if it can be supported. Khazar2 (talk) 20:55, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The East Germans indeed have world records for women's 400 and men's and women's discus. I got the line of the East Germans 'off the record books forever' from the BBC live text summary for that day. It probably was a dramatic flourish by the particular writer. I'm not sure if it meant that the East Germans no longer have Olympic records or if it erases them from this particular event.--Johnsemlak (talk) 21:33, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I expect "off the record books forever" was just in reference to the fact that East Germany no longer exists as a country. Formerip (talk) 21:40, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Minor note the men's one also had a WR. Nergaal (talk) 21:16, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support If the ITNR category on world records means anything this surely fits the bill. The arguments "we didn't post this or that" do not affect the legitimacy of this nomination, nor does the fact that it occurs among other events. Since no-one has raised any objections as to article quality I'm going to mark ready and be damned with it. Crispmuncher (talk) 01:11, 12 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]
comment it is not ready as there are absolutely NO sources for the result and timings and the prose update is not adequate.
comment2 one could then also add the men;s realy which was also a world recordLihaas (talk) 01:24, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You'll have to do better than that. There is a reference for the result times: reference 4. You don't need sources at the end of every single sentence for them to be valid. There are also seven sentences of prose covering the final alone: that is more than a minimum update per our usual requirements. Crispmuncher (talk) 01:31, 12 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]
i still dont see consensus... especially after men broke the record as well, would be very biased posting only women's. old or not breaking records is no small feat. and a lot of them were broken this olympics. we didnt post any. -- Ashish-g55 04:29, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's ITNR, so consensus isn't an issue. And I certainly don't see how posting a women's event is biased; plenty of men's sports gets posted.--Johnsemlak (talk) 04:44, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
ITN/R is based on the assumption that consensus as regards importance will be overwhelming. That is clearly not the case, so ITN/R is redundant in this case. Kevin McE (talk) 11:23, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It is not posting women's thats biased, its the fact that men also broke it in same event. the achievement is still the same. people outside ITN (our millions of viewers) dont know that the record needs to be long standing to get on ITN, thats why it will look biased. It will just become a "country" thing on the talk page if you know what i mean. if this gets consensus men and women both should be posted (ill support posting both, initially i was opposed) -- Ashish-g55 04:51, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
THe women broke a 27 year record, which is how it qualifies for ITNR. The men did not achieve the same. That said, combining both one one blurb should be easy, might be recommended.--Johnsemlak (talk) 04:58, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There's been no discussion for the men, and we shouldn't post it without one. Hot Stop 04:59, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've started a discussion above.--Johnsemlak (talk) 05:13, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
By what standard is a comment only valid if it addresses ITN/R? ITN/R is meant to be a recognition by the community that consensus is so confidently expected that it need not be debated. If it has been debated, and is by no means unanimous, then the inclusion at ITN/R is simply proved inappropriate. Inclusion at ITN, done with very little attention, cannot overrule specific and much lengthier discussion. Call needs to be made on consensus specific to this nomination. Kevin McE (talk) 11:53, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Counting bolded !votes, there are 10-9 against posting. Tagging nomination header. Kevin McE (talk) 12:20, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comments after posting
[edit]
  • Oppose/Remove, I think this entry should be removed from Template:In the news, because, as stated above, it's not significant enough to have this much attention in addition to the Olympics summary already linked from the main page, and it's only one of several records listed at 2012_Summer_Olympics#World_records. It gives the impression of the news favoring US-centered events, which may impair the goal of wp:reach out for the project. Mikael Häggström (talk) 07:16, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - was a bit surprised to see this posted at ITN, when Jamaica breaking the men's 4x100 world record was not included, though there was no way to know that would happen as well. The breaking of the men's record could be added to the blurb, but without using bolding. I think the best way to handle this sort of thing (probably too late for these Olympics) would be to have a summary of the records broken/notable events posted at the end of the event. That would include Phelps, Bolt, Rudisha and various records that were broken. Though that would likely end up too long for ITN. I'm not entirely sure the concept of a 'sticky' link down the bottom works well for something like the Olympics. What the sticky should do is link to not a timeline but an Olympics 'ITN' equivalent, allowing certain aspects of the Olympics to be highlighted the same way that ITN highlight various aspects of the news. That way it is possible for Wikipedia's readers and editors to home in on Olympics articles about topics that are in the news. Currently, linking to a timeline doesn't distinguish between Olympic topics that are in the news (worldwide), and those that aren't. It is also difficult, given that many countries focus on what their athletes achieved, to distinguish between national level news and truly worldwide coverage. Carcharoth (talk) 10:34, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
HCFMTS, I'm sorry that you're feeling the ridicule so intensely, but as I already pointed out to you that no one had bothered to give Rudisha even the minimum nomination--a blurb, a source, and a sourced update to the article. ITN is not a newspaper desk that "assigns" stories; it relies on volunteers like you to write about what's of interest to them, and these are the stories we then have available to choose from. Unfortunately, no one, you included, turned out to be very motivated about Rudisha. I hope that if this is something of concern for you, you'll consider sticking around to update articles like this in the future--we can always use more hands! Khazar2 (talk) 12:55, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry that you consider the filling in of forms to be more important than not making Wikipedia look like a dumbass when it comes to knowing anything about subjects like athletics. The David Rudisha article was updated hours ago, there's plenty more info in the links I provided too. If that's not enough to correct this monumental fuck up, then so be it. I'll let the complete lack of interest in the relay article by editors even after it's been posted on the front page to "speak for itself", as the final architect of this mess said. HeCameFromTheShadows (talk) 17:00, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Just observing that there are editors who work to build Wikipedia's content, and there are those who show up simply to curse at everyone. Unfortunately, ITN attracts its share of each. A nomination where no one cares enough to write a one-sentence blurb for the front page, provide evidence of news coverage, or source the article is usually voted down (and all three of these things were true at Rudisha when it was initially under discussion). I understand that you'd like other editors to do this work at your request (or, in this case, enraged, insulting demand), but that's generally not the kind of project Wikipedia is. I hope you'll consider working on some content-building in the future to help us correct what you see as deficiencies in our coverage--usually that's more effective than shouting at everyone about what dumbasses they are. Khazar2 (talk) 17:31, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
And there are plenty of people who are quite willing to twist people's words instead of directly addressing their point (unless you'd care to point out where I shouted at anyone calling them a dumbass?). At the end of the day, the article has been updated, plenty more links have been provided to show what a total error this was, yet here you are still complaining that a form wasn't filled out correctly so it must be ignored. Do you seriously expect that people who know about topics like athletics are going to be encouraged to contribute in that sort of environment? I'm certainly not, that's for sure. You can continue to do a poor job of it as far as I'm concerned, the professionals who are paid to analyse stuff like Rudisha's result will continue to do their job, which is to properly inform people about the subject of athletics, and the gap between what they tell the world and what Wikipedia does, will remain glaringly obvious. Wikipedia clearly cannot ever compete with them, not on this showing. So get all upset about forms all you want, get as huffy as you like about how outrageous it is to be expected to know about athletics topics before commenting on them, the editors who are already here and who updated the Rudisha article aren't even aware of this debacle thank God, so they hopefuly won't be turned off by this nonsense. HeCameFromTheShadows (talk) 17:44, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
HeCameFromTheShadows, I agree with Kahzar2. The article wasn't up-to-date enough to post it. Even if it was, there was no consensus to post it at all. If you felt so strongly that Rudisha's blurb should have been posted, why didn't you take the time to contribute to the vote on it? (Edit:Found This) Or, why didn't you contribute to the article? -- Anc516 (Talk ▪ Contribs) 21:55, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I see (Carcharoth aside) we're now attracting the people who declined to post a comment during the original nomination, only to now pop up and criticise us. If you're going to object, do so while the discussion is still ongoing! —Strange Passerby (t × c) 11:51, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Some of us did comment, and you popped up to micro-manage every remark made in opposition. 87.112.8.150 (talk) 13:03, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment from posting admin: ITNR is a guideline, with all that entails. There was not significant argument that 27 years was not a "very long time period" for a world record to stand (everyone was essentially assuming 27 years qualified, or failed to address it at all). There was also argument some (perhaps less) argument that the half second margin qualified as breaking the record by an unusually large margin, but I don't think there was enough focus on this criterion to say there was consensus that it met this ITNR criterion for world records. We do make occasional exceptions to guidelines like ITNR. The only responsive argument I saw above for making an exception was that the East German team, when they set the old record in the 80s, was doping. However, that argument, despite being mentioned in the nomination, did not attract enough discussion or support to convince me that the community wished to make an exception on that ground. The other grounds for opposition were 1) that this is just more Olympics, which totally ignored the breaking of a long-standing record, and 2) how posting this look like systemic bias, which is an essay that I personally agree with, but still just an essay. Therefore, I saw consensus based on the discussion which addressed the ITNR guideline and posted it.
So an assumption (proven to be false) that an item's importance is so obvious that it need not even be discussed is deemed to overrule the actual specific discussion of its importance in context that came to no such conclusion. Inclusion at ITN/R, achieved after little if any discussion, overrides a far more focussed discussion here. I find that to be a perverse conclusion. Guidelines "are best treated with common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply". Kevin McE (talk) 16:24, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
But you failed to give any substantive reason why the guideline shouldn't apply in this specific case. General dissatisfaction with the ITNR entry (which I share) is not itself a reason, it is something to take up on WT:ITNR. Deviation from guideline should not amount to WP:IDONTLIKEIT. If this record doesn't fit the bill then what does? Crispmuncher (talk) 20:50, 12 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]
I have, repeatedly. Inclusion in ITN/R is the belief that "Items which are listed ... are considered to have already satisfied the 'importance' criterion for inclusion on ITN, every time they occur." A minority of those contributing to this discussion have considered the importance of this event to be such that it merits posting in the context of the Olympics, and the coverage already given to it. Therefore the premise under which records are listed at ITN is proved to be an erroneous assumption in this circumstance. Further, the far more people have contributed here than ever contributed in discussion of the suggestion that WRs should be listed on ITN/R, so consensus, or the lack of it, here is far more compelling. Kevin McE (talk) 21:15, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Renewable Fuels Standard

[edit]
Article: Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007#World food security (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The head of the UN's Food and Agriculture Organization joins calls to suspend the US Energy Independence and Security Act's biofuel quota over concerns of a worldwide food shortage. (Post)
News source(s): [140] (registration needed) [141] [142]
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: I suspect this may be a tough sell but food security is obviously of critical importance. Article has a minimum update but I'm still not quite happy with it and I'll carry on working on it. Minority topic status asserted as an economics story. --Crispmuncher (talk) 18:20, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • The person making the calls for a suspension is not notable; the indication of a worldwide food shortage, however, is. Support.--WaltCip (talk) 18:34, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The corn forecast is top news in both US and UK news sources, so I'm inclined to support something like this for notability. But like WaltCip, I'm not sure the FAO criticism of biofuels is bigger news than the poor corn forecast itself, which is dominating world headlines. Perhaps the Summer 2012 North American heat wave might be a better article to expand here? Or is there an article on the growing food crisis? Khazar2 (talk) 18:40, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I'm fine with the current blurb, but if others oppose it in full, I could settle for simply the warning of the impending world food shortage which would of course would be of extreme importance to the majority of humanity. Already millions starve to death each year, but this year there will be more deaths and more violence. Canadian Spring (talk) 00:54, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Seems like subject is POV pushing. UNDUE. Speculation is no basis for an ITN candidate. Regards, Sun Creator(talk) 11:15, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
So it seems like we have some opposition to the blurb, but not the topic generally. What's a logical article to update now? Khazar2 (talk) 14:17, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Minority The idea of a "minority topic" has now been removed from WP:ITN and Template:ITNC per discussion at WT:ITN. However, I suggest that this nomination simply be grandfathered in, requiring a lower level of consensus to post, as it preceded that decision by 24 hours. Khazar2 (talk) 14:17, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
And I've just re-added it - there was no consensus for the change. Policy changes need more than two days discussion. Crispmuncher (talk) 16:22, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I was unfamiliar with that regulation, but I'm fine with your reverting me per WP:BRD. There's a thread going at WT:ITN if you'd like to make your case there for keeping this category. Khazar2 (talk) 16:27, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Brahimi new UN Envoy for Syria

[edit]
Article: Lakhdar Brahimi (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Former Algerian foreign minister Lakhdar Brahimi will replace Kofi Annan as U.N.-Arab League joint special envoy for Syria (by 1 September). (Post)
News source(s): Reuters, Washington Post
  • Nom. Still unofficial (yes, I'm aware of WP:CRYSTAL), but will become later today. Second option: we could wait until this decission takes effect, which is 1 September. (I'm actually in favor of the second option, so consider this a dummy nomination.) --bender235 (talk) 08:34, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support once officially announced and article is improved. Not because I feel this is groundbreaking news in itself, but on the principle that Syria remains the world's top news story after the Olympics; better to keep putting new updates like this than to sticky a note about the Civil War. Khazar2 (talk) 14:09, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Amending my comment above--TigerKing's quite right that this article needs some work, despite a current lack of orange tags. It's difficult to follow, piecemeal, and poorly sourced. Khazar2 (talk) 16:37, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support but only when it is official that he takes over. There's always the possibility it won't happen, but it will likely. --Activism1234 14:35, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support once officially announced and the article is readySome sections are empty and some require exhaustive copyedits for MoSRegards, theTigerKing  16:07, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose A replacement envoy was inevitable. If this is not worthy of ITN coverage, then we shouldn't post it. If there's consensus for a sticky, then we should do a sticky, not this. Annan leaving was news, and may have been ITN worthy, although I'm not sure whether we actually posted that.--Chaser (talk) 18:05, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Moon lander crash

[edit]
Article: Project Morpheus (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Prototype moon lander Morpheus blows up during NASA test at Kennedy Space Center (Post)
News source(s): CNN International

August 9

[edit]
August 9, 2012 (2012-08-09) (Thursday)
Armed conflict and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters

Law and crime

Sport

Men's 200m

[edit]
Article: Athletics at the 2012 Summer Olympics – Men's 200 metres (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Usain Bolt wins the Men's 200 metres at the 2012 Summer Olympics as Jamaica sweeps the medals.
Usain Bolt becomes the first athlete to successfully defend both the 100 metres and 200 metres Olympic titles (Post)
Credits:

Article needs updating

Nominator's comments: During the nom for the 100m consensus seem to say support if a record was broken or Jamaica sweeps the medals. In this race (closest to the 100m), Jamaica swept the medals with their three finalists all finishing in the top 3. --Lihaas (talk) 20:09, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

*Comment The Jamaican sweep is impressive, and it's a good way to get Usain Bolt a deserved ITN appearance, so I'm inclined to support. But is the 200m gold going to get a 5-7 line prose update in his article given all his medals? (I'm honestly not sure how these running articles usually go). -- Khazar2 (talk) 20:19, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Phelps wsa "ust another record too...Lihaas (talk) 21:35, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral -Im neutral here. I am not sure this story is for ITN. It isnt anything special about it really.But on the other hand it is a great sport achievement. But I have to lean towards oppose somewhat. --BabbaQ (talk) 21:39, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, if we didn't post 100m, then we shouldn't post 200m either. No world records and the fact that Jamaica swept the medals is a nice curiosity and that's it. 800m run, see below, is a better candidate, though I don't think we should post it. 100m and marathon world records, more or less. --Tone 21:56, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per before and per Tone. Was not a WR, and we have event results in the sticky link. SpencerT♦C 22:40, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose There are many stories in the Olympics. We cannot post each one. --RA (talk) 23:36, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Why can't we? Lugnuts (talk) 09:52, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Not that unusual: they did it in the women's 100m last time around. Kevin McE (talk) 00:17, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Notability record akin t o PhelpsLihaas (talk) 05:51, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, as I would any result among so many from the Olympics (so count it as an oppose for Rudisha and shooting/weightlifting world records as well if necessary), but I would point out that while Bolt is the first person to successfully defend the double, he is not the first person to defend it. Kevin McE (talk) 10:28, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

David Rudisha

[edit]
  • David Rudisha just broke his own world record in the Olympics, winning the 800m Olympic gold in the process. It's a feat that in many ways eclipses Usain Bolt's achievements, and by rights should get just as much press attention as the simple result of the 100m (but won't). But I know nobody here is interested in all that, all that matters is that he has acheived what is apparently the only thing needed for a front page mention, a world record. FerrerFour (talk) 19:35, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • But hang on - now we have a Jamaican 1-2-3 in the 200m, so by Wikipedia logic, this is now worthy of posting, and will probably displace poor old Rudisha who for a few brief minutes met the apparent inclusion standard. Quite why, who knows, the 1-2-3 will get just as much press coverage as the 100m result did, but it like the 100m result didn't involve a world record. There was of course also a lot of other notable sporting things that developed out of the 1-2-3, but I expect these to be treated as irrelevent, just like they were in the 100m. Perhaps this page is just a glorified 'and finally' type segment, that features in most TV news broadcasts, where the only thing that is needed is some element of quirkyness. FerrerFour (talk) 20:05, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Actually its your personal opinion that "for a few brief minutes met the apparent inclusion standard", there is no hard and fast inclusion standard (some would even argue against ITNR). The POINTy nature of th enom is not going to win much support. At any rate, there were several world records broken, even by the same athlete (Weightlifting) and we dont post that. Ths is the first and only 1-2-3. (theres not much opportunity to replicate that...possibly at marathon on Sunday though)Lihaas (talk) 20:13, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
At the end of the day, there's no logic to how this will eventually end up, which is what I am trying to highlight. If items are judged by press attention or attention from outside the field, it would be 100m, then 123, with no Rudisha. If it was athletic merit, it would be Rudisha, then 123, with no 100m. If it was world records, it would be Rudisha only. That's why I say the only thing this place apparently runs on is quirkyness or some other whackadoodle method. If people dissgree, then by all means explain how people can oppose the 100mn based on no world record, but then post the 123 while ignoring Rudisha because we can't have two items. The fact the first support for the 123 is in part due to the injustice in not listing Bolt originally, only makes it more farcical. FerrerFour (talk) 20:28, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Your rephrasing of my comment is yours, not mine. Khazar2 (talk) 20:31, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's why I put my name at the end of it, not yours. FerrerFour (talk) 20:56, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Although it may not even be quirkines - Kirani James was rejected after all (although you will note all the people who would have supported, had it been a world record, yet that's not going to get Rudisha posted now eh?). Perhaps it's just organised chaos, a total free for all, where items get posted on purely random convergence of unrelated factors, like who was reading this page at the time, or when the event occured. FerrerFour (talk) 20:36, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
At this point youd be better of just withdrawing this. "If it was athletic merit" for Rudisha is dubious, you dont explain why his medal is the most "athletic" and "If it was world records" for Rudisha is also dubious and you dont explain why. Lots of WR's fell this olympicsLihaas (talk) 21:40, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose for now, but I admit I'm having trouble seeing past the nom's general scorn for the process to whatever argument lies beneath. (Also, would it be possible to get a full nomination template--blurb, source, etc.?) Perhaps editors more knowledgeable than I can help sort out how notable a record-break this is. Khazar2 (talk) 20:31, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I'd say this is more postable than the 200m. 1-2-3 in the 100m would have been something, because that's the fastest event, but for the 200m its not quite the same thing. Maybe the first one to update should be posted. Formerip (talk) 20:32, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Also today, we have the first ever medals for women's boxing, which I'd say is more worthy than either of the items that have been suggested (not that I'm going to nominate it). Formerip (talk) 20:44, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose just as I opposed the 200m final above. However, this has more merit than the circumstantial 1-2-3 from Jamaica, but it's still just a "world record". Several WRs have been set in the Olympics, some in finals, none of them are really ITN-worthy. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:33, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose:
  • Record was less than two years old
  • Four of the last ten 800m records have broken the previous one by the same margin or greater.
  • 800m is not highly publicised in the same way as the 100m - it probably gets 10% of the media attention.
What then is there to support according to our guidelines on world records. I also note that in this case the individual in question hasn't even won the record, but simply bettered his own existing record. Crispmuncher (talk) 21:13, 9 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]
David Rudisha - the greatest 800m runner ever? - that's what the BBC was saying even before the race, based on the prospect of him breaking the WR. He held six of the 10 fastest ever runs of this race, yet somehow using Wikipedia logic, that will count agaisnt his chances of being listed on the main page?!?!?!? FerrerFour (talk) 21:21, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
FerrerFour, given your obvious investment in this topic, why not spend some of this energy updating his article? Though you've declined to provide information on your nomination (like a blurb, source, and update status), right now it doesn't even appear to have a proper update (no citations for the new information). It seems a shame to spend this much heat complaining about ITN voting while not touching the content itself, which should be the long-term priority. Khazar2 (talk) 00:39, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Everything on the frontpage is trivia. Lugnuts (talk) 09:55, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A quarter of a million people are forced from their homes, and you consider it trivia? What the hell is important? Kevin McE (talk) 10:03, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
People being shot in a church is trivia? doktorb wordsdeeds 10:06, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
ITN is effectively a subjective form of top trumps – most of the stories we post are highly significant, but we trivialise all of them by debating their relative importance. —WFC— 21:43, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • No consensus to post at this point. World records are ITNR in the three cases described here. It seems like this might be by a large margin, but there's little to no discussion of that at this point.--Chaser (talk) 05:15, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Homo rudolfensis

[edit]
Article: Homo rudolfensis (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Researchers announce three new fossils of Homo rudolfensis, helping to confirm it as a distinct species from Homo habilis. (Post)
News source(s): [143], [144], [145]
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Most sources appear to consider the existence of this species confirmed with the new findings, meaning that two homo species coexisted in Africa. --Khazar2 (talk) 11:36, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Three new fossils help confirm it as a distinct homo species BBC. Nergaal (talk) 02:40, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment This sounds like a promising nom to me, but could we get the full template--blurb, article status, etc.? Khazar2 (talk) 02:53, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support And I second that from Khazar2. An important discovery in the fields of evolutionary and biological science. --Τασουλα (talk) 09:14, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support and marking Ready. Interesting anthropology news, widespread media coverage, good encyclopedic topic. Khazar2 (talk) 12:07, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose This isn't a neatly packaged, conclusively true science story. Some people already accepted the premise without these latest discoveries. Others still do not and are demanding further evidence. As such this story is not "this has be proven" but "a few more people have been persuaded that this is the case, but it still lacks scientific consensus". That just isn't ITN material in my opinion. I've unmarked it as a minority topic too: I don't see which category it could possibly fall under. Crispmuncher (talk) 12:44, 9 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]
Quite right on the minority topic; sorry for the error. Khazar2 (talk) 13:11, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - notable, interesting, important, you name it. Wish the article was a bit longer. Having trouble keeping from making snarky comments along the lines of "at least we won't be debating that this is another dead American." Jusdafax 12:50, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. It's a great story but, per Crispmuncher, "helping to confirm it as a distinct species" does not make for a clear-cut scientific breakthrough. Formerip (talk) 13:16, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If it does get posted, though, we should illustrate it with this image: [146]. Formerip (talk) 13:18, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps consensus could be found if we simply tweak the blurb? Three hominid skulls with previously undescribed features is big news regardless of classification; we can debate whether the final conclusions are clear-cut, but the discovery is discrete, major news for paleoanthropology either way. Khazar2 (talk) 13:22, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support It's not a church shooting. μηδείς (talk) 15:31, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support As I previously suggested, we should be more supportive of major (validated) scientific breakthroughs if we're regularly reporting sporting wins. This would qualify but I think that the blurb could be made more appropriate for a lower common denominator to explain the importance; Mohamed CJ's suggestion above is partway there but there still needs a good "why should I care"-type statement. --MASEM (t) 18:16, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ready? The ready tag was removed earlier, so hopefully I'm not overstepping myself by reintroducing it. But it appears the editor simply wished to note opposition rather than a problem with the article itself, since no article-level problem has been mentioned here or there. This appears ready to me once sufficient consensus has been reached, but I'd be glad to have more eyes on it. Khazar2 (talk) 19:14, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
More or less ready, we just need to agree on the blurb. Almost there. --Tone 19:19, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You cant mark something you nom as ready. Please read aboveLihaas (talk) 20:04, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Khazar2 templated it up, he didn't nominate it. I removed the ready tag earlier more since it appeared premature - two supports after less than twelve hours is less than convincing evidence of consensus. Crispmuncher (talk) 20:10, 9 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]
Hm, I do need to be slower about that; I thought it was simply to indicate that the article had been updated and had no outstanding issues. I'll be more careful in the future. Apologies, Khazar2 (talk) 20:13, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, though t you had done it as you had nom's omments.Lihaas (talk) 20:14, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. Though I didn't do it here, I actually have done that before, so I'm glad you pointed it out to me. Khazar2 (talk) 20:32, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What alternative phrasing would you suggest? (Not a sarcastic question, I was really stuck on this). I agree "helps to confirm" may not be the best phrase here, but "suggests" seemed far too weak for a conclusion published in Nature. Khazar2 (talk) 20:43, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Not necessarily. Not that I've read the paper, but Nature does routinely publish articles that draw weak-but-promising conclusions. Formerip (talk) 20:54, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. Looking over science reporters for our reliable sources, BBC and Smithsonian seem to treat it as settled fact, CNN uses "suggests", and NYT uses "indicates". Given the range, I'm fine with choosing a more conservative approach. What do you suggest, Walt? Khazar2 (talk) 21:05, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

August 8

[edit]
August 8, 2012 (2012-08-08) (Wednesday)
Armed conflict and attacks
Business and economy
  • China announces plan to close one-third of the nation's 23 rare-earth mines and about half of 99 smelting companies. (CNN)

Disasters

Arts and culture
  • Anthropologists find the skeleton of a young woman inside a burial in Templo Mayor, surrounded by piles of 1,789 human bones. This finding is "unprecedented for the Aztec culture." (The Huffington Post)

Law and crime

Politics

Sport

[Posted] Libya NTC hands over power

[edit]
Article: National Transitional Council (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Libya's National Transitional Council transfers power to the democratically elected General National Congress. (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: A change of government, and the first peaceful transfer of power in modern Libyan history. --Khazar2 (talk) 00:58, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe a double-bolding here would be most appropriate, but technically it's the NTC who took the action, which makes the GNC harder to update. I'll work on it, though... Khazar2 (talk) 01:15, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Nigerian church shooting

[edit]
Article: Deeper Life Church attack (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Three gunmen kill nineteen people in a church in Okene, Nigeria. (Post)
News source(s): [147], 19[148], [149], [150], [151], [152], [153]
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Three gunmen kill nineteen people in a Nigerian church. Even though another church tragedy is on ITN currently I think this may be worth a spot on ITN.

  • Comment: This seems like something I'd potentially support for notability, but you (or someone) will still need to write the article before !voting can properly start. Khazar2 (talk) 03:12, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I am not the best at creating and writing articles on Wikipedia which is why I ask if anyone else is willing to help create an article about this event/tragedy to please do so. Andise1 (talk)
I might tackle it in the next day or two, but can't make any promises. Khazar2 (talk) 03:42, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

August 7

[edit]
August 7, 2012 (2012-08-07) (Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters

Law and crime

Politics

Sports

Seven Olympic athletes from Cameroon disappear

[edit]
Article: No article specified
Blurb: ​ Seven Olympic athletes from Cameroon have disappeared overnight, and may be seeking new homes and better sports opportunities in England. (Post)
News source(s): NPR, Washington Post, Yahoo Sports, Reuters, NBC, Al Jazeera, CNN, The Guardian
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Article needs to be updated - will update soon unless someone beats me to it - most likely "Controversies at the 2012 Summer Olympics" unless someone has a better suggestion --Activism1234 03:31, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose This happens everywhere. For the benefit of readers who can't be bothered to click through they have disappeared, not they have been disappeared. This "asylum seeker" story comes up regularly: I remember it distinctly for the Manchester Commonwealth Games and almost certainly for Melbourne too. It should come as no surprise that few would seek asylum in China at the last Olympics. Essentially this is a national insult (or campaign for freedom) in Cameroon, and a small bit domestic story in the UK. No truly international repercussions. Crispmuncher (talk) 03:50, 10 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]
PS: I only noticed this after my initial comments above which have not been coloured by this, but I am always very hesitant about usernames such as "Activism1234". This, coupled with the mostly political areas of interest on your user page, automatically sets off the NPOV bad smell whether that is justified or not. I stress that is simply an impression, not an allegation of misconduct. Crispmuncher (talk) 04:03, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
While I hear you on "activist" user names generally, I've been working with A1234 on several articles over the past few days and can testify that she/he has been a very fair-minded editor in some sticky content areas, as well as having a breadth of interest beyond any obvious agenda. They've also been making some great contributions here at ITN (the Egypt-Israeli border attack, the Deeper Church shooting, etc.). Khazar2 (talk) 04:11, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The name "Activist" was meant to show an interest in being active on Wikipedia, not as an activist for any group or organization. Sorry for the confusion, didn't think about that when I created the name. --Activism1234 04:13, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Also, please note, I have never edited an article about Cameroon before, and have only done a few edits at Controversies at the 2012 Olympics page. I don't have any political biases interfering here, although I appreciate your "oppose" comment and explanation, and generally aim to be as neutral as possible in all areas of Wikipedia. Feel free to discuss further on my talk page. --Activism1234 04:18, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Typhoon Haikui

[edit]
Article: Typhoon Haikui (2012) (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Flooding from Typhoon Haikui forces the evacuation of at least 250,000 people in Manila. (Post)
News source(s): NYT, BBC
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Prominent coverage in international media (first noticed it in the top 3 of BBC yesterday); one-third of the most densely populated city in the world is now underwater. --Khazar2 (talk) 02:55, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Marvin Hamlisch

[edit]
Article: Marvin Hamlisch (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ American composer Marvin Hamlisch dies aged 68. (Post)
News source(s): Wall Street Journal, Daily Mail, Herald Sun
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Hamlisch scored and arranged music for dozens of film and Broadway productions, including The Way We Were, Sophie's Choice and A Chorus Line. He has earned Emmys, Grammys, Oscars, a Tony, a Pulitzer Prize and Golden Globes. --JuneGloom Talk 13:36, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • In other words, the death of yet another writer?--WaltCip (talk) 14:24, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Though I'm a fan of his work, generally I like to see a death dominating domestic news and high up in world news to make the main page. This seems to be only in the top 5-10 in US news sources and not making much of a ripple outside the US (save the BBC, but I'm starting to suspect BBC tailors its website coverage by country). It seems to be fresh news, though, so I'll try to remember to check again later. Khazar2 (talk) 14:30, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hamlisch currently appears eighth in the list of one-liners, under "Other Top Stories" on the BBC News main page. His death is, in fact, below that of astronomer Bernard Lovell, who may be more well-known to UK website readers. I think Hamlisch might be most remembered in the UK for the minor hit single he had with The Entertainer (rag). Martinevans123 (talk) 14:41, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting. He's the 4th highest story for me. I'll have to remember that this isn't consistent. Khazar2 (talk) 15:15, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I probably would support this in terms of notability but the article would need both a proper update and a good copyedit before I'd be happy to see in on the main page. It's at a stage many WP articles go through with lots of one-line paragraphs that give the impression of bombarding the reader with random, unconnected facts. It needs going through and the random elements joining up into something that doesn't read as if it has been written by hundreds of people acting independently. Crispmuncher (talk) 16:04, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Firming up to oppose. Still the same story as my initial analysis. If no-one cares enough to give a proper update that itself is telling aboutttttttt the subject's notability. Crispmuncher (talk) 05:34, 8 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]
Or maybe editors are just lazy and expect someone else to do it now that it's on the verge of ITN. Martinevans123 (talk) 07:38, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Seeing the two above !votes juxtaposed together certainly helps to indicate the level of absurdity WP:ITN has reached in recent months.--WaltCip (talk) 03:04, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Now isn't that funny, I hadn't even noticed what W/OBB had said. Imagine that! μηδείς (talk) 07:31, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I just went through the archives for this year and below is the list of notable persons from the fields of Art/Culture whose death has been posted on ITN this year.

  • Jan, Etta James, USA
  • Feb, Whitney Houston, USA
  • Feb, Davy Jones, UK
  • April, Dick Clark, USA
  • May, Maurice Sendak, USA
  • May, Robin Gibb, UK
  • May, Vidal Sassoon, UK
  • May, Carlos Fuentes, Mexico
  • May, Adam Yuach, USA
  • June, Nora Ephron,USA
  • June, Ray Barbury, USA
  • July, Rajesh Khanna, India
  • July, Gore Vidal, USA
  • July, Maeve Binchy, Ireland

Unfortunately, my knowledge in Western art/culture is very limited (except for contemporary movie/tv stars perhaps) so I havent heard of any of these people except for Ray Barbury (and Rajesh Khanna because he's from my part of the world). So, I have not been commenting on the notability of these people. But given the volume we've posted already this year, just wanted to check if we are getting a bit too trigger-happy with posting deaths of notable people from the art/cultrure space ? Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 18:47, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a fair question. Although - seriously - you have never heard of Whitney Houston? Formerip (talk) 19:46, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nope (at least until the ITN nomination). I would think that's the case with most people in India, China, Africa, Middle East, Russia and other regions where English-language arts are not the primary source of entertainment. Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 18:14, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and I suppose a fair question deserves a fair answer. Yes, you make a good case that our posting of deaths this year has lacked balance. Formerip (talk) 19:50, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That's a whole two a month. Hardly problematic. The way things are going, with three mass murders on the front board now, had Hamlisch shot six Mormons he'd already have been posted. Second longest running Broadway show ever and Oscar, Tony, Emmy, Grammy, Pulitzer and Golden Globes get you nowhere compared to a 9mm. μηδείς (talk) 19:53, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think you're missing the point that CH is making. Not that we post too many deaths, but that we only post deaths of people noted for their contribution to the creative arts (this year). Formerip (talk) 00:02, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Do I understand you're saying the point is that not enough scientists and politicians are dying? μηδείς (talk) 15:44, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that's obviously what I'm saying. Formerip (talk) 16:48, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Mass murderers are more newsworthy than composers who die of old age. Sadly, the presence of the mass murderers on the front page is necessary. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:58, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
But if mass murders are happening almost every day, especially in areas that are common (Iraq, Syria, Nigeria and so forth) don't you think it gets tiring as well for the front page. I've seeing too much focus on mass murders and terrorist attacks in iraq on this day... front page as well. Secret account 20:04, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The work of artists lives on. The acts of murderers leaves the general public consciousness as soon as the next big news item occurs.

Is there need for more update on the article? If so, let me know. If not, consensus is in favor of posting and it should go up. μηδείς (talk) 20:12, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A good intermediate step to keep the ball rolling is to give the article a good checking over and then mark it as ready. Khazar2 (talk) 23:37, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean by "domestic story"? Nsk92 just listed a fair number of countries where this was carried. Or are you implying that we should only cover the deaths of individuals who die in two or more countries? μηδείς (talk) 15:44, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I meant what did Chocolate Horlicks say. This is hardly a person with some notability outside the United States and it thereby can be fully marked as a pure domestic story. We don't need to misuse ITN for posting deaths of American people without any international significance.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 16:18, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"American"? Gotcha. μηδείς (talk) 16:27, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Now, you can accuse me for anti-American bias, but such nominations only use to prove the existence of American bias. Anyway, it doesn't seem reasonable for me to continue a discussion that wastes my time. My comments don't seem to strike the rules of Wikipedia, regardless of whether you like it or not.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 16:32, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The point I was making, as FormerIP suggested above, was that either we are setting the threshold for who is a notable person in art/culture (and particularly Western art/culture) too low or that this has been an exceptionally tragic year for Western culture with so many of their top artists passing away in quick succession. Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 18:08, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Also worthy of note: eight of them were Americans (nine including Hamlisch), another three were British and there were just three more from the 202 other countries of the world put together. If that isn't evidence of systemic bias in favour of Americans, then what is it? 87.112.129.180 (talk) 18:31, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed; my constant wish is that more editors would choose to work on nominations from the other 202 countries instead of obsessively posting about Americans. But few seem to take that path from either side of the argument. Khazar2 (talk) 18:40, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Seconded. There's an obvious bias towards things that get nominated and so instead of whining every time an American gets posted, people should try and get other stuff up. Of course, it's probably easier to complain than make something worthy for the main page. Hot Stop 19:15, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Most of the users on the English Wikipedia are from the United States, but it doesn't give this group a democratic right to choose what they're willing to support. Don't forget that Wikipedia is neither a democracy nor bureaucracy and not always things supported by a majority should prevail the arguments of the minority. What we're attesting here is only counting votes without taking into account the general point beyond the comments on the both sides, and it apparently strikes some of the rules of Wikipedia. My point is why this was posted when the nomination received only a slightly greater amount of votes "support" that yield hardly better arguments than those with opposes.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:53, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW, as a minority topic, this required a lower level of consensus to post. (That rule's currently under discussion at WT:ITN but stands for now). I opposed the nom myself but thought the posting was entirely reasonable. Khazar2 (talk) 20:03, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for pointing out the discussion. I should take part in it.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 20:07, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This has got to be the most bizarre case of penis envy I have ever seen. Who in the world supported his nomination because he was American? (I always thought he was a European Jew.) He was the top of his field, look at his accomplishments, awards, that he had the second-longest running Broadway musical ever. How does his being American count against him? This is outright racist hatred and you presumed liberals should be ashamed of yourselves. And BTW, Britain has 1/6 of the population of the US, so isn't 3/8 the nominations of the US a huge (more than 100%) overrepresentation? What American here has ever said that someone should not be posted because he is not American? Accomplishment is accomplishment, not an insult to the unaccomplished, or a reason for ressentiment. I have never heard a bigger load of hovno in my life. μηδείς (talk) 20:11, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You should check some of the polices (WP:CIV, WP:NPA) before commenting here. I really don't need to discuss with someone who simply doesn't respect the most basic rules of civility on Wikipedia.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 20:22, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Calm down. The issue is not that Britain is overrepresented, but rather that America and Britain are both overrepresented – America considerably more so. America has less than 1/20th of the population of the world, yet 60 per cent of the posted deaths were Americans – that is excessively disproportionate. But waffle on about racism and penis envy some more if it makes you feel superior. 87.112.129.180 (talk) 20:21, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Medeis, please spare us the population comparisons, we will all be posting almost entirely Chinese and Indian news if that was the rule to go by - it's a recognized problem that Wikipedia and ITN suffers from systemic bias: "because of recentism bias, the "In the news" section on Wikipedia's front page may be limited by an unequal proportion of significant news from English-speaking nations compared to news from others"[165]. Systemic bias does not mean people supporting people from their own region, thats regional bias (and no one here is foolish enough to say I'm supporting this because he is from from my region). Systemic bias, in this context means, since most editors here are English speaking, white, technology-oriented, males from Western countries, most editors will credit more notability to people from cultures that are more exposed to that demographic. I dont think there is any doubt that systemic bias exists, the only discussion needed here is whether it should be resolved (as opposed to "there are more of us here now so deal with it") and if so, how to do it.
I'm not even opposing the nomination of Marvin Hamlisch, I havent even heard of the guy before to comment on his notability (like I havent heard of all except 2 of the people in the list above). I'm just taking this opportunity to call on editors who know more about Western culture to be more restrained in the frequency of the nominations and supports because there clearly is a problem. This presumed notability of Western artists does not factor in vast populations of China, India, Africa, Middle East, Eastern Europe, and other regions where English-language arts are not the primary source of entertainment. So when we talk about news in the art/culture space - except for a very few handful of people (like Michael Jackson) - notability will almost always be limited to within that culture (unlike news in relation to politics, armed conflicts, natural calamities, etc which are far more relatable).
As for the call for more nominations from other cultures: We at least have a few Indian editors here who could post about Rajesh Khanna (whose death prompted condolences by the prime ministers of India, Pakistan and Afghanistan and still had to go through a debate which some of the other nominations did not have to and whose posting was a continued source of resentment for some editors: "If we post an Indian actor I've never heard of, we post this or face the fact that ITN needs a serious shakeup." - in the context of Sally Ride's nomination). I concede that nominations are thin but I can only imagine the treatment that will be meted out of if even lesser notable people from these cultures are nominated. Despite only a fraction having access to the internet, given the sheer number of Indians who use English, there were luckily enough English language sources to support the Rajesh Khanna nomination. Its even worse for cultures not covered by English language sources. Bangladeshi Humayun Ahmed who topped the best sellers list of the Bangla Academy for two entire decades (from what I've read in the article) was nominated and was shot down. China for example which despite being the most populous country has no culture related news coming out of it. I agree with Khazar2 that the way to go is for more work towards stories from under-represented cultures, but at the same time the threshold (of notability within the respective culture) for stories from Western art/culture needs to be moved up to match the high threshold that has been systemically set for the under-represented cultures (unless we are saying we will ideally like to post 50+ deaths from the art/culture sphere per year). Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 06:48, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Still mulling over your points here and thinking about the best solution. But as a practical note in the meantime, would you be interested in restarting this discussion at WT:ITN instead of here, perhaps with your above comment? It might get prematurely archived here. Khazar2 (talk) 06:58, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, you are right. Will move it there - this probably isnt the place to discuss a systemic issue as opposed to the specific nomination of Marvin Hamlisch. Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 07:44, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

August 6

[edit]
August 6, 2012 (2012-08-06) (Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Disasters

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science

Sport

Kirani James

[edit]
Article: Kirani James (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Kirani James wins the men's 400m race at the 2012 London games to become Grenada's first Olympic medal winner. (Post)
News source(s): BBC,
Credits:

Article needs updating

Nominator's comments: I hate it when people saying they are just flying something up the flagpole, but that's what I'm doing. Reasons to support: (1) A maiden gold is a rare Olympic event which has only occurred one other time, summer or winter, since Atlanta 1996 (UAE in Athens); (2) We should always grasp the chance to post a positive story about a country for whom we are the native-language Wikipedia, but who we would normally ignore outside of an election, war or earthquake. Formerip (talk) 00:33, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Neutral, leaning support. Man, I'm torn on this one. This is a fascinating story, and your logic makes sense. On the other hand, it's hard to justify putting up this instead of Usain Bolt when he's dominating the coverage of several nations. I'll be curious to see what others have to say. Khazar2 (talk) 00:45, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I was just about to add something about users not being so foolish as to oppose this because of us not posting Bolt. ;). We shouldn't compare one story to another because that way madness and drama lies. But if we do, what posting this would show is that we like to share the love and we're not just a predictable news-ticker. Formerip (talk) 00:51, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ha! Well, in any case, this just jumped to #3 on BBC News, so now I feel justified in full-throated support. Khazar2 (talk) 00:56, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW, probably not eligible for DYK, as James seems to have had a substantial article pre-Olympics. Khazar2 (talk) 03:57, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Grenada at the 2012 Summer Olympics? If expanded and nominated today or tomorrow it should still be within the guidelines. GRAPPLE X 04:05, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Good suggestion. Khazar2 (talk) 04:12, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose I had no opinion on the "running really fast" 100m but this is something else: it's "running slightly slower over a slightly longer but still short" distance. Nationality of the competitor is a complete irrelevance and there is no assertion of notability beyond that. Crispmuncher (talk) 04:16, 7 August 2012 (UTC).[reply]
    Irrelevant to whom exactly? The International Olympic Committee don't seem to agree with you. Nor do all the competitors? Nor most of the people watching at the events? Nor, probably, several hundreds of millions watching the events on television? Maybe we should scrap all the medals tables? Martinevans123 (talk) 07:47, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Irrelevant to us as a consequence of NPOV. We have enough problems of alleged country bias one way or the other here as it is without explicitly advancing subjects because of the country involved. Crispmuncher (talk) 16:06, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Haha. But that's why it's in the news, "lol". Martinevans123 (talk) 16:17, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
After initially enthusiastic updating with comment on most results and other milestones, that sticky has gradually become not much more than a gold medals ticker: there is nothing on it about Grenada's first medal. Kevin McE (talk) 19:13, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Defection of Syrian PM

[edit]
Article: Riyad Farid Hijab (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Syrian Prime Minister Riyad Farid Hijab defects to revolutionary forces. (Post)
News source(s): BBC, Al Jazeera
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Appears to be an important milestone in the war, and it's on top of world news. --Khazar2 (talk) 15:08, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You could say that about any sticky, though. We're at the stage where we're running stories all the time and there are likely to regular stories in the near future. That's stickyville, isn't it? Formerip (talk) 23:51, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
As an aside, how does a sticky work here, exactly? Is there a section on it where I can read up? Khazar2 (talk) 23:53, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I assume in the same manner as the olympics link on ITN at the minute; a long-term link at the bottom pointing to some manner of central hub. GRAPPLE X 23:55, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Marked as ready. -Zanhe (talk) 03:40, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

August 5

[edit]
August 5, 2012 (2012-08-05) (Sunday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Sport

[Posted] 2012 Egyptian-Israeli border attack

[edit]
Article: 2012 Egyptian-Israeli border attack (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Unidentified gunmen kill 16 Egyptian police officers on the Egyptian-Israeli border. (Post)
News source(s): BBC, Al Jazeera, NYT
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Many dead (twice the Oak Creek casualties) and with domestic and international implications--well-armed gunmen appear to have been trying to break through to attack Israelis. 3rd headline on the NYT, 2nd highest on BBC, top on Al Jazeera, etc. Article is still just a little stub, but I'm working on expanding --Khazar2 (talk) 04:26, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Added 6-8 more sentences, but I agree it could use still more fleshing out as more news develops. Somebody else will need to take the baton at this point, though--I'm off to bed and will be on dad duty all day tomorrow. Khazar2 (talk) 06:07, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
How much more expanding are we looking for? The article seems to exceed the minimum described at WP:ITN, but I will try to add in more in about twelve hours if it's needed. As for formatting, I may just need help with that if you wouldn't mind; I'm not sure what you're looking for. Khazar2 (talk) 14:37, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] 2012 Oak Creek shooting

[edit]
Article: 2012 Oak Creek shooting (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A gunman kills six people at a Sikh temple in the U.S. state of Wisconsin. (Post)
News source(s): BBC, Al Jazeera
Credits:

Article updated

 --Khazar2 (talk) 03:51, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Another spree shooting in the US, this time seemingly direct at Sikhs. Seven (including the gunman) killed. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:01, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lihaas also proposed deletion of the biggest blackout in the history of the world last week as "recentist". I wouldn't worry about it. Khazar2 (talk) 19:25, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Lihaas is famous for making "such moves". Even, I am having experience with his speedy deletion tag. He recently objected to an article's nomination in the ITN (which I had nominated and was unanimously supported to by the editors). He had put up a comment on my usertalk page saying that "the article was not an ITN candidate". Interestingly, he had put an article's nomination in ITN for the same day previously. Just wonder, why he makes such "uneducated moves"Regards, theTigerKing  19:47, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That might be a better discussion for another thread. =) Khazar2 (talk) 19:59, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Not needed :)Regards, theTigerKing  20:18, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
PLEASE KEEP YOUR NPA AND PERSONALITY POLITICS OFF THIS and DISCUSS CONTENT which is thepurpose! Im perfectly in my right to nominate and you are in youre right to challenge it and have it removed! Which is a better option than crying out loud!Lihaas (talk) 20:59, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Pardon? Didn't quite catch all that. You incorrectly nominated an article for deletion. Learn from it and try not to repeat the mistake. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:03, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No point discussing it. Peace Lihaas peace!Regards, theTigerKing  15:29, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I actually used to live near this temple, so I won't pretend to be an unbiased vote here and support or oppose; I'm darn upset to read this news. Objectively, on the one hand, we did just post another shooting two weeks ago, and the body count is still a bit low for a mass murder. (For comparison, it's less than half of those dead of ebola in Uganda, currently languishing for lack of attention below). On the other hand, this is the top headline on NYT, the BBC, Al Jazeera, the Hindustan Times, and the Times of India, and the fact that Sikhs seem to be specifically targeted by a non-Sikh shooter makes this particularly nasty. Khazar2 (talk) 19:25, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I'm unsure at this point, need more details to know for sure, but if it's a hate crime, that would suffice for me. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:31, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Let's wait sometime before the article is ready up and more information is available about the incident.Regards, theTigerKing  19:33, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Agree. Regardless of what we judge to be significance of the event, we should not consider posting until there is a stable article constructed from hard facts. Formerip (talk) 19:38, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I don't disagree with the idea of waiting for a useable article, but the point here is to determine the suitability of the subject for ITN inclusion, then work out if the article is up to scratch. As for Lihaas' cowboy speedy deletion tagging, thanks, I had no idea he had no idea on this. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:52, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
How can we determine a story's suitability for inclusion before we even know what the story is? Formerip (talk) 20:24, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That speaks volumes to me. If seven people had been shot dead anywhere in Western Europe, Australia etc, we wouldn't even need to know "why" it had happened. Perhaps because it's a US-based massacre, we need to know that it's more than just a head-case with a carbine, we need to know why he wanted to kill specific folks? The Rambling Man (talk) 20:37, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Who said anything about needing to know why? We don't even know the number of dead and wounded yet. And, not that it's seemly to compare: [166] [167]. Formerip (talk) 22:22, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • And to me, motive is a big factor in deciding suitability. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:15, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Agreed, but I still think any kind of shooting at a "minority religion" temple (i.e. not a church) in the US is worthy of note. Let's see what happens in due course. In any case, it would still have had to have been nominated under "today", it may not be "ready" but hey... The Rambling Man (talk) 20:22, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • Given the arguments about how ITN does not need to be timely in discussion of Maeve B. below, we don't have to post a breaking news event until we're sure there's enough details about it to be notable. On first blush, a shooting that kills 6 + the shooter at a church seems significant, but at the time the article created, that was literally all that was known. Now we know it was a hate crime, and so I do expect a full article is appropriate, and thus ITN is appropriate. But ITN doesn't have to be posted the same day or even week. --MASEM (t) 20:31, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
          • Come on, trying to speedy delete a massacre in the US is lame in the extreme. But okay, more interested in your comment "now we know it was a hate crime", sources? The Rambling Man (talk) 20:35, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
            • Speedily deleting a news article that has potential to be notable is bad form, but so is racing to create an article before notability is established - there's a balance needed on both ends. As for the hate crime, its a statement made by one of the temple's leaders per [168]. --MASEM (t) 20:44, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
              • Are you joking about "bad form" in creating this particular article? What is "non-notable" about creating an article, the first edit of which I included a link to Reuters stating that many people had been shot to death in the US, some of whom were in a Sikh temple? At what point was that non-notable? Even if it wasn't a hate crime, the shooting of up to seven people in a temple is inherently notable, or can you demonstrate otherwise? The Rambling Man (talk) 20:47, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                • If this happened in, say, the West Bank or Iran/Iraq, it wouldn't be a notable event. Yes, having it occur in the US likely makes it notable, but that's systematic bias and a fact that repeatedly comes up about US-centric ITN coverage. Now, as more details fill in and show that it was a likely hate crime, this is more that just a bit of violence, and there's no real question on notability. When I saw the article when it appeared here, all that the Reuters article had was the report of the shooting but no additional details - we shouldn't be presuming notability off that. All that I'm saying is that we can wait just a couple of hours here to assure that the event is very likely to be notable before creating the article and creating the ITN entry. It isn't a race but many that do create the recent news articles seem to think it is. --MASEM (t) 20:57, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                  • Well we'll agree to disagree. For me, notability is asserted simply by virtue of a number of Sikhs being shot to death in America. If a number of Jews were shot to death in London or a number of Muslims were shot to death in Bradford we'd have a similar argument. The article will inevitably be created, all I did was to do it in such a way that it was correctly and neutrally referenced (using Reuters rather than good ol' USA Today). Perhaps your and my version of "notable slaughter" is different. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:07, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
                    • I'm not arguing the event isn't notable now; all I'm saying is that when this came up, and I looked at the Reuters article, it was, at that time, all of 2 paragraphs, which would not be a good sign that the news event is notable. Now, a few hours later, we've got plenty of sourcing to make it a notable event. That's fine. The symptom is the assumption that it would have been notable event based on the state of the news at that time. Neither WP nor ITN requires immediate coverage (in fact, we shouldn't be doing that, per WP:NOT#NEWS and as a tertiary source) so when these types of stories break, it is always best to wait until we know its considered notable by worldwide newspapers before making the article. If the article is made prematurely, you run into the CSD issue that was noted. We don't need to be first to update, and basically all I'm cautioning is that until it's something blatently obvious to be notable, we can pause, take a breath, and wait for the story to develop before making an article and doing ITN. --MASEM (t) 22:12, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I think the article is prepared now. Further copyedits and layout edits could come later.Regards, theTigerKing  20:42, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, 31 died yesterday in 2012 Himalayan flash floods and no one even says a thing. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 20:56, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Not just a case of "another shooting", this has not permeated into the international conscious in the same manner as Denver, and as such does not carry the weight of importance we would expect at ITNC doktorb wordsdeeds 21:19, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Many editors complained when the 2012 Aurora shooting made it to the ITN headlines, especially due to the body count. The Wisconsin attack is terrible, but I don't think a US-based shooting should make it this time. It has a lower body count, and many other massacres that are worse than this one are usually ignored. ComputerJA (talk) 22:31, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Disagree this attack is highly unusual as it took place in a Sikh temple. It's already on top of the BBC website, and I imagine it'll also receive prominent coverage in India and Pakistan, since most Sikh-Americans are immigrants from Punjab which is split among the two countries. -Zanhe (talk) 05:42, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Zanhe's right ... its making big news here in India. The Indian PM has released an official statement condemning it. As for Sikhs in Pakistan, I'd rather not comment here. Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 12:41, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Comparatively minor incident and hence US domestic news (more people get killed around the world every day). Josh Gorand (talk) 22:52, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Let me preface my support by stating that I agree that the death toll is low and this is a relatively common event for the US or for the world. Yet, I am afraid our media does not follow, or even come close, to WP:UNDUE, for example the missing white woman syndrome, or as I stated earlier, that 16,000 children starve to death every day and we all know how much daily coverage that gets. We pretty much are, by our purpose and sources, a shadow of the media. One of the purposes of ITN is, "to help readers find and quickly access content they are likely to be searching for because an item is in the news" - well due to the massive coverage by international media, there will no doubt be many coming to wikipedia to read up on the event, and ITN is where many will be expecting to find a link to the event. A second purpose of ITN is "to feature quality Wikipedia content on current events" - well the article is pretty good and is guaranteed to grow in quality and quantity as more information is printed by sources just as 2012 Aurora shooting did. Our article is good enough that Google news already has a link directly to our article on the event.
If we don't post this then we must have a serious talk about why we are even here, are we here to post events we believe to be important that are in the news, or are we here to post links to articles that many of our readers are looking for because they are in the news? Canadian Spring (talk) 01:51, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Funny How this is not worth posting because it is just another American story and how at the same time "America" is also to blame because this is supposedly not getting the same coverage the movie shooting incident did. (Why does this place always smell of Lilliputians?) Were the synagog shootings in France posted on ITN? Was France to blame in that debate? In any case, I don't think there is a good article here to feature, as there was when Ernest Borgnine died. But I do think there are a heck of a lot of readers who will want to find this item and think it strange if it's kept off the front page while we host the picture of a conspiracy theorist known for inspiring perhaps the worst screenplay ever filmed. By all means, though, up with Vidal and down with Sikhs! μηδείς (talk) 02:15, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: Notable event making headlines across the world. The size and quality of the article exceeds minimum requirement for a new article. As per ITN general criteria for posting, the size of the 2010 Jiangxi derailment article (at the time of posting) is quoted as an example for satisfying the article/update requirement. Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 03:46, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support its been the subject of international coverage, article is okay. Hot Stop 04:13, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose because it's in the United States. No seriously, this is an obvious attack on a religion that has been covered by multiple international news organizations. Obvious Support. Thechased (talk) 04:17, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I struck out "oppose" because it is meant for sarcasm. Feel free to revert if you disagree. -Zanhe (talk) 19:04, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - possible terrorist attack. Although death toll is relatively low, but the location of the massacre: a Sikh temple in the US, makes the event significant. -Zanhe (talk) 05:24, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support as it's now being treated as terrorism [169], Secret account 06:11, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I believe that a very high proportion of the Sikh community speaks English as many live in Canada, the USA, Australia, England etc. This may be one of their avenues to find information. Is it news on the Punjabi Wikipedia? I believe this is the primary language of most Sikh's but google translate does not provide for it.--Senor Freebie (talk) 11:26, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, I did nominate this myself, but someone else has decided they did. In which case, I will support the inclusion in ITN of a terrorist slaughter of a religious minority in a first-world country. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:30, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ha, sorry about that. I wasn't sure how to fix the nominator part of the template when adding an official template to this one, since that goes in automatically. Feel free to change, or, should I receive some sort of credit for this, I'll be glad to deflect it your way. Khazar2 (talk) 14:32, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - This is classified as a terrorist attack on the basis that the Wisconsin police are claiming it as such. Take that loaded language out of it and this event really doesn't bear any notability.--WaltCip (talk) 15:04, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • I guess you didn't support the Aurora shootings either? So un-notable that it's on The New York Times homepage, Yahoo's homepage, the Sydney Morning Herald homepage, the BBC homepage, the La Monde homepage, etc etc. You clearly have an odd notion as to what really constitutes notability and items that are "in the news". The Rambling Man (talk) 15:15, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • The U.S. has one of the highest murder rates in the world. I don't know what the news organizations find so notable about it, but we're not a news ticker, and in the grand scheme this is no different from what goes on every day in the streets of Chicago.--WaltCip (talk) 15:18, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - This has made headlines here in the UK, and is of clear international importance, both for its immediate attention-grabbing character and its wider community relations implications. I do not feel that we can fairly disregard the news value of mass killings simply because they occur in countries with high murder rates; mass killings are a specific type of act in their own right, and the ostensibly sectarian nature of this event simply enhances that. AlexTiefling (talk) 15:58, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support- Has made headlines in major publications and media around the world. Secondly, we don't see people attacking a religious site frequently. Attacks on the Sikh community are rare. Don't go by the number of the innocent lives lost. I don't think that only terrorist attacks should get a space in ITN.Regards, theTigerKing  16:19, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted -- tariqabjotu 19:49, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Belatedly updating my initial ambivalence to support, based on the minority group and setting, which have produced significant coverage sufficient for ITN. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:43, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Mars Science Laboratory

[edit]
Article: Mars Science Laboratory (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ NASA's Curiosity rover lands on the surface of Mars. (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: The mission will land in the next 24h. Whether it is successful or not it should be on the ITN. Nergaal (talk) 08:01, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bravo for the rapid post! But could we have mention of NASA and/or the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in the blurb? Both are fine articles, and credit where credit is due... Also, that first photo is not the best choice in my opinion. Thanks. Jusdafax 06:15, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That is quite an achievement: posting support after you have died. I would like to either extend my sympathies to your family and friends, or refer you to a dictionary, whichever is necessary. Kevin McE (talk) 09:40, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your kind words, I'm sure they would mean a great deal to my friends and family if I didn't already have a dictionary at hand. The third definition listed: "occurring after the end of something; after the event: a postmortem criticism of a television show." Master&Expert (Talk) 11:17, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Great reply, Master & Expert. Kevin McE, do you take pride in being so mean to others? -Zanhe (talk) 20:04, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Anyone? Regards, SunCreator (talk) 19:58, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've updated the pictures. It's definitely a bit easier to see at the 100px scale on the front page. --MASEM (t) 21:09, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Iranian pilgrims abducted in Syria

[edit]
Article: Sayyidah Zaynab Mosque (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ 48 Iranian pilgrims abducted near the Sayyidah Zaynab Mosque in Syria (Post)
News source(s): [170]
Credits:

Article needs updating

Nominator's comments: 48 Iranians on pilgrimage to the Sayyidah Zaynab Mosque were abducted. This has also received prominent coverage in Western media. Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 03:47, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose can we pelase stop posting minor events in this war? If this would happen anywhere else it would probably be notable, but some form of terrorism happens in Syria every other day. ITN is not a Syria headlines. Nergaal (talk) 07:57, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I would say this is somewhat distinct because it involves a large number of civilians from another country. Also, any thoughts on which article should be updated? Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 10:55, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - a lot is happening in this conflict and im not convinced this incident is notable enough. The development is unlikely to trigger any significant change in the course of the civil war. BritishWatcher (talk) 11:11, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral I can't see any strong reason to oppose or support this. It hasn't received overwhelming media coverage and details are a little sketchy perhaps. --Τασουλα (talk) 15:52, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Although there are many other reasons, one of them is that rebels posted a video (related news can be seen here), stating that the people abducted are not pilgrims but Iranian Guards. While writing it, I have thought that the latter report is much more significant.Egeymi (talk) 16:17, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That would make it even more notable if 48 Revolutionary Guards got captured. Anyway, Iran is now asking Turkey and Qatar who are assisting the rebels to help secure their release. Perhaps we can probably wait and see how this pans out. Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 17:12, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with your latest comment, Chocolate Horlicks.Egeymi (talk) 18:05, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

August 4

[edit]
August 4, 2012 (2012-08-04) (Saturday)
Armed conflict and attacks

Disasters

International relations

Law and crime

Politics

Sport

100m finals

[edit]
Articles: Athletics at the 2012 Summer Olympics – Women's 100 metres (talk · history · tag) and Athletics at the 2012 Summer Olympics – Men's 100 metres (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In the 100 metres at the 2012 Summer Olympics, Jamaica's Shelly-Ann Fraser-Pryce wins the women's event and Usain Bolt wins the men's event. (Post)
Credits:

Article needs updating

Nominator's comments: Arguably the biggest single sporting event in 4 years (should be ITNR). The men;s event is more iportant (ticket prices are marked up), but in the itnerestsof fairness and like the tennis postings, ive nominated both/. Women's event is in about an hour and men's will follow in 24.
X is not just a politician ;) --Lihaas (talk) 20:05, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. A Jamaican 1-2-3 in the men's is also possible, and I think I would support that. Formerip (talk) 22:10, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. With several items in ITN and DYK each day, and apparently a TFA soon too, I think we might just have adequately made the world aware that these Olympics are going on. Trying to justify one event getting an additional mention is just beyond overkill. GRAPPLE X 21:02, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Well its the biggest singly event because it comes with the tag "world's fast man/women" for whatever reason. Its not the media alone, the organisers recognise it as the single biggest even t at the olympics (in terms of demand/viewship, id iamgine) as they prices are the most expensive for this event.
Its also undoubbtedly bigger than most of the ITNR sports we postLihaas (talk) 21:03, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Question we havent posted any single events in the tournament. Which others have the stature to be the biggestLihaas (talk) 21:26, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
We posted Phelps's record, which I think is the only sort of Olympics ITN posting that should be made. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:50, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I can see that, but i asked any single events in the tournamentLihaas (talk) 22:10, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Basketball, maybe the marathon. Hot Stop 22:16, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What I was trying to get at is that I don't see the need to post any single event. Something momentous would need to happen. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:53, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Bball? no way thats bigger than track at the lympics? for most of the world the lympics is trackLihaas (talk) 22:55, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose this is actually one of my favorite events, but I don't think it's notable enough to be posted unless something major (ie a world record) happens. Hot Stop 22:16, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
For the record I'd probably support if Bolt won because repeats are rare. But this was nominated so far in advance it muddles the whole process. Hot Stop 14:00, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Unsubstantiated opinion about the significance of the individual 100m events. As for the comment about prices being marked up for the men's events - not for London. Leaky Caldron 23:00, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
1. this is the ONLY event hat has the best tag of "worslds fastest" 2. did you see the price list.? i have it here and its also on london 2012, theres a significant markup from the general events and even from todays womens game.Lihaas (talk) 01:07, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
But maybe there isn't one event that should always be listed. Has anyone ever suggested it for ITNR? Formerip (talk) 23:54, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose No essential difference between this and any other Olympic title. May be more hyped, but no more important, and no more of an achievement, than fencing, canoeing, wrestling or trampolining medals. Kevin McE (talk) 00:25, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support we post all sorts of sporting event all year long without anything special happening in them every year just because they are on ITNR. For track and field this is by far the biggest event... quite literally billion plus will watch (dont ask me for reference). very random choice if we dont post this considering how much sports we post. The reason to post this would be world wide interest -- Ashish-g55 00:32, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral on this because this is what the sticky is for. The only events that I would deem to be post-worthy would be world-record setting performances at largely popular events, or very unusual/unexpected results. I realize that this is the biggest track and field event in the world, so I would not be opposed to posting it, but I would only truly support it if either a record had been broken, or some other unusual scenario occurred (like what FormerIP said about the Jamaicans sweeping it). -- Anc516 (Talk ▪ Contribs) 01:02, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Canadian football champions get an ITNR spot. The 100m is waay more notable and the Olympic title for this crown jewel even in the Olympics happens only every 4 years. Nergaal (talk) 08:03, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on the "we are not a news ticker" charge. If people want the 100m results they can go to any major news website. You will notice that the 2008 article on that event has barely any prose, and the 2012 articles do not look any different. I am only in favour of posting the men's result (and it alone) if there is a new WR, and even then the bolded link should be to Men's 100 metres world record progression. —Strange Passerby (t × c) 10:23, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - The 100 meters is not hugely more notable than a number of other sports taking place in the olympics so i do not see why this one track event would need to be mentioned BritishWatcher (talk) 11:14, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This is the main event of the Olympics and will be watching by more people on the planet than any other event. Nobody cares about fencing, canoeing, wrestling or trampolining, etc, hence why the average person wont be able to name a single competitor in those sports, let alone who wins gold. Lugnuts (talk) 13:57, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. The 100 m is one of the largest events at the Olympics, and it's not just hype as suggested above. It's one of those basic athletic events where people test the boundaries of human capability. The winner of the men's 100 m is tagged 'world's fastest man'. That's not the same of most of the events on the Olympic program.--74.72.52.132 (talk) 14:08, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
comment we posted "super rugby" below, to say its more vviewed/notable is ludicrous. "not hugely more notable than a number of other sports" certainly not for rugbyLihaas (talk) 16:05, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
We haven't saturated the main page with every possible mention of rugby we could find, though, nor is the Super Rugby final only one event of equal importance to hundreds of others taking place at the same overall event which is more than adequately covered already. GRAPPLE X 16:17, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
equal importance? There are sources everywhere (see below for the RS) indicating otherwise.Lihaas (talk) 19:18, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
'Support Why not? Regards, SunCreator (talk) 17:31, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Not that I dispute the importance of the men's 100m, "top billing" just means it's the last athletics event of the day. Formerip (talk) 18:46, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Uh, it's all about importance: Top Billing.--74.72.52.132 (talk) 18:51, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Someone said: The event is watched by more people than any other event. Facts needs to be produced in support of your argument! Stop putting in the lame arguments that 100m event tests human capabilities. Other sports do also test. And, only those athletes who break WR are dubbed the fastest man/woman on the planet. it need not be the winner of the London 2012 100m event. Also, the BBC says 100m event is "top billing" may be (not sure) because "the fastest man" on the planet is competing in the games. Instead we can have ITN for sports which have been included in the olympics this year for the first time ever (Women boxers).Regards, theTigerKing  18:54, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose unless record is broken. Lemonade51 (talk) 19:08, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose For the reasons outlined above. There is no proof that the 100m Final is somehow so emblematic of the Olympics as a whole that Wiki must treat the event in isolation. This nomination would be a terrible precedent, allowing editors to cherry-pick events, maybe leaving 'unfashionable' ones alone. Yes, winners of this race are considered notable - but that's not by our measure. doktorb wordsdeeds 19:23, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note asides from the automatic ITN post if the WR is broken, there is another way this race could be highly notable without the WR. It could be the first time all athletes have run under 10 seconds in the race, which is highly notable considering that only 82 have broken through the 10-second barrier. I think the previous record has been for the first six athletes to have done it, at Beijing. Nergaal (talk) 19:28, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note Let's wait for the event to conclude. If something worthwhile occurs (like WR equaled or broken or some "first time" scenarios), we should take it up for consideration. However, I Oppose its inclusion in ITN till then.Regards, theTigerKing  19:38, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Update Olympic record, second time ever, first time seven competitors under 10 sec (last one I think did not finish). Nergaal (talk) 20:55, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • No world record, no national record, no surprise, no clean sweep: only hype makes this any different from any other event. Kevin McE (talk) 21:00, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Most of our readers are not interested in sport, and this isn't even a highly significant event. Josh Gorand (talk) 22:55, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. In what Universe is the 100m not the blue ribbon event of the Olympics? How can anybody even dispute this? Whether a record was set or not is completely irrelevent, although the idea that this may not make the front page because it was 'only' the second fastest ever time, and missed the record by just 5/100ths of a second, only shows how whackadoodle this whole 'debate' really is. FerrerFour (talk) 23:11, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Per above, not a WR. For anyone interested in seeing the 100m results, one need only click on the "Summer Olympics Highlights" sticky link at the bottom. We have not posted non WRs in the past. SpencerT♦C 05:34, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I recommend they do that, then they will realise just how insane this idea that not being a world record means it's not significant, really is. They will see it's the second fastest running of the race ever. They will see it's an Olympic record. They will see it was just 5/100ths of a second short of the record. They will see it was just the 1st/2nd time someone has succesfully defended the 100m Olympic title, depending on whether you count Carl Lewis' promotion from silver. They will see that the guy who came second would have won every 100m Olympic final ever run that was won by anyone except Bolt. They will see it's the first time the field has gone under 10s. They will see it's the first time the Olympic final has featuredthe world's four fastest men. Even better, if they watch the actual race again, they will see that all Bolt would have had to do to get this posted to the main page as 'news', was not cut his finger nails that morning. Insanity. FerrerFour (talk) 13:08, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No photos from yesterday available yet, I believe... --Tone 11:43, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • OpposeMany WR were broken in this Olympics but not posted in ITN. WR hold higher prestige than OR. Instead, those events should be posted.Regards, theTigerKing  17:24, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Then nominate one then, see what happens. It will never be posted, because there's not a world record out there that is more significant than the 100m result. Read any newspaper, look at any website, this much is just obvious. Why people are pretending otherwise in here is beyond me, they must just hate Usain Bolt for some reason, that's all I can think of for this mass delusion. FerrerFour (talk) 19:58, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose A single Olympic event is not significant enough. -Zanhe (talk) 19:25, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose unless the red card given during the ping pong finals is mentioned. Far bigger event. --RA (talk) 23:41, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
NOTE theTigerKing has voted three times here. I have debolded the other 2.Lihaas (talk) 01:08, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] 2012 Super Rugby Final

[edit]
Article: 2012 Super Rugby Final (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Chiefs claim their first Super Rugby title in Hamilton, New Zealand. (Post)
News source(s): [171]
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: The Southern Hemispheres premier club rugby competition. Article update and ready to go. Listed at Wikipedia:In the news/Recurring items#Football (Rugby Union) --AIRcorn (talk) 14:42, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agree the blurb could do without the double mention of Super Rugby. Oh, and I hope and pray we can get through this discussion without mentioning Maeve Binchy. Formerip (talk) 16:03, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Incidentally, Maeve Binchy is still marked as ready below and could use administrator eyes; it's getting a bit dated now, but seems to have a rough consensus for posting. Khazar2 (talk) 15:55, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. I guess it's time to post in favor of Rugby. Besides, it's a major event watched by many around the world. ComputerJA (talk) 23:04, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted--Chaser (talk) 23:59, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - I think it should say New Zealand and South Africa, instead of the name of the teams. The teams aren't well known enough worldwide to just refer to their name. Alternatively, put the countries in front of the teams (New Zealand's the Chiefs defeat...). Acoma Magic (talk) 03:42, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Super Rugby...as opposed to???? "Wimpy" Rugby? For those of us who have never heard of this it might be helpful to add a word or two to indicate if this is a league of teams, their tournament, whatever. Also, is this a world-wide title? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.23.28.204 (talk) 15:03, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    The name of the tournament is "Super Rugby". We have not named it ourselves. And it doesn't have to be "Global" to be included on ITN. It is the premier rugby tournament between Australia, South Africa and New Zealand. --Τασουλα (talk) 15:22, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Agreed; no one has to explain (or even justify) the bizarrely-named "World" Series. "Super Rugby" is just another league, but one with international competition and presence. GRAPPLE X 15:25, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe not to you or your country but to the world of sport in Australia, South Africa and New Zealand it very much is. It was also listed on ITN/R. --Τασουλα (talk) 12:19, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

August 3

[edit]
August 3, 2012 (2012-08-03) (Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters

[Posted] Ugandan Ebola Outbreak

[edit]
Article: Ebola virus disease (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The World Health Organization states that the outbreak of Ebola virus in the Kibaale District of Uganda has been controlled. (Post)
News source(s): WHO CNN
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Ebola outbreaks are quite rare and extremely dangerous; though it is believed to have been brought under control, this remains unconfirmed and further spread is possible (and from a historical perspective, likely). This is my first time doing this; hopefully I'm doing it right. --Karthik Sarma (talk) 20:38, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support - Indeed you did, and whether it ends up passing or not, thanks for the nomination! Anyway, I support. I've seen this pop up on the New York Times and BBC websites several times, so it's obviously getting international discussion, and update looks sufficient. I'd only suggest rewriting the passive voice in the blurb to say that it's WHO stating the disease is under control. -- Khazar2 (talk) 21:08, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for now. An outbreak of a disease seemingly averted is not a significant enough story. However, I think it may be one to watch. Formerip (talk) 00:24, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hmm, I'm not sure that I'd say averted... "slowed" would probably be a better term. There's certainly still substantial risk of inter-regional spread. I've modified the blurb to reflect this and khazar2's comments --Karthik Sarma (talk) 02:38, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support not a very high impact news, but it is very unusual and the news have been slow outside the typical boring ITN tickers. Nergaal (talk) 06:25, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support It's an interesting article (and posting it will be a welcome step towards pushing Gore Vidal toward oblivion). μηδείς (talk) 06:47, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
interesting article? ITN is not to showcase articles, its for th event which is a very small section (and probably more recentism than anything). Support reasoning was a little POINTyLihaas (talk) 19:24, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Syrian Civil War UN Resolution

[edit]
Article: Syrian Civil War (2011–present) (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The United Nations passes a non binding resolution condemning the Security Council and the government of Syria for not curbing the ongoing violence in Syria. (Post)
News source(s): CNN Al Jazeera The Sydney Morning Herald All India Radio
Credits:

Article needs updating

 --Ayanosh (talk) 18:22, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose As you say, it's non-binding. If there's no teeth, I don't think it passes muster. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:24, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose per Muboshgu. We still have the Battle of Aleppo on the main page, so we're not neglecting the Syrian Civil War at the moment. Khazar2 (talk)
Well you can say that but it helps in building pressure on the government.Also whether or not it has teeth, the resolution has been passed by a world body which has almost all the countries as members and it concerns one of the ongoing conflict zones, so i think it deserves a mention.Whatsay!!--Ayanosh (talk) 18:33, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

August 2

[edit]
August 2, 2012 (2012-08-02) (Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Sport

Quebec election

[edit]
Article: Quebec general election, 2012 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Quebec premier Jean Charest calls a general election for September 4 amidst student protests against tuition fee increases. (Post)
News source(s): Wikinews, The Gazette (Montreal)
Credits:
I don't see how it's fair to compare this to Burma. Also, what's with the "Belching" part? O_o --Τασουλα (talk) 21:10, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The belching reference was to suggest that any trivial or flippant event in Myanmar gets a nom. Lee is released, Lee runs in a partial parliamentary election, Lee gets a visit from Clinton, Lee picks up a nobel prize she was awarded 20 years ago, etc. The comparison with Myanmar is that it is just as much of a self generated bother, yet it gets fawned on here where the Quebec thing and occupy got shat upon. --76.110.201.132 (talk) 22:18, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The situation in Quebec, whatever that is (I hardly think their oppressed by a military Junta, not even close - despite what a few nationalist tell you - is this to do with nationalism or not?) is nothing like the situation in Burma. The historical significance of all that Aung San Suu Kyi has done recently cannot be overlooked, and this is compared to an election in a Canadian province, not the protests - the election...so if we're going to judge them on individual merit... Neither seem to be notable enough - to me at least - for ITN. Like someone pointed out, we don't post these kind of elections anyway. And each to their own anyway. Is this part of the Occupy movement? Er...you know I probably don't know enough about this :P but these elections never get posted... --Τασουλα (talk) 08:44, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

August 1

[edit]
August 1, 2012 (2012-08-01) (Wednesday)
Arts and culture

Business and economy

Disasters

Law and crime

Politics and elections
  • A second Israeli who set himself on fire in protest of economic difficulties in Tel Aviv dies of his injuries in hospital. (Reuters)

Sport

Sight & Sound poll

[edit]
Articles: Sight & Sound (talk · history · tag) and Vertigo (film) (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In the decennial poll of critics and filmmakers by Sight & Sound, Vertigo is voted the greatest film of all time (Post)
News source(s): http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2012/aug/01/vertigo-hitchcock-bfi-greatest-film
Credits:

Article needs updating

Nominator's comments: Other than the annual ITN/R film awards this is the major poll of interest to cineastes. Of note this year is that this is the first time since 1952 when Citizen Kane hasn't won this poll. --yorkshiresky (talk) 19:27, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak oppose That's interesting about Citizen Kane being unseated, but it seems UNDUE for the Vertigo article to get a major update as a result of this vote. Vertigo is commonly named as one of the ten best films of all time, so to move briefly to the top seems comparatively minor. I do agree that this is considered the top of the top in terms of "greatest films of all time" polls though, so if others disagree with my oppose, I won't complain. Khazar2 (talk) 19:33, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose A poll with no impact or significance isn't news. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:38, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: Not news. Not that relevant in the realms of Cinema either. I will admit it is interesting though. --Τασουλα (talk) 21:09, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Interesting. Notable. And the poll actually is relevant or significant, Sight and Sound's decade poll is a big deal. However, this particular items doesn't really seem like news though. 21:12, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Oppose. A poll to rank works of art is not news. Modest Genius talk 21:18, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
not a minory topicLihaas (talk) 21:33, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
How so? Is it not "culture"? --86.40.106.208 (talk) 00:34, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Not so much...that would mean every film item is minority and it cant be the case with blockbusters and awards as they happen too often. By definition its not minorityLihaas (talk) 13:56, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates/August_2012&oldid=1151050012"