Jump to content

Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m Suggestions: + ==January 17== {|{{Portal:Current events/2009 January 17}} ===ITN candidates for January 17===
ITN candidates for January 17: rescue TonyTiger's suggestion misplaced at P:CE http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Portal:Current_events/2009_January_17&oldid=263813102
Line 57: Line 57:
{|{{Portal:Current events/2009 January 17}}
{|{{Portal:Current events/2009 January 17}}
===ITN candidates for January 17===
===ITN candidates for January 17===
*'''[[Barack Obama 2009 presidential inauguration]]''' celebrations began on January 17 and continue until January 20 when [[Barack Obama]] and [[Joe Biden]] will assume office.--[[User:TonyTheTiger|TonyTheTiger]] <small>([[User talk:TonyTheTiger|t]]/[[Special:Contributions/TonyTheTiger|c]]/[[User:TonyTheTiger/Antonio Vernon|bio]]/[[WP:CHICAGO]]/[[WP:LOTM]]) </small> 14:52, 13 January 2009 (UTC) <small>(Rescued from [[Portal:Current events/2009 January 17]]. --[[User:PFHLai|PFHLai]] ([[User talk:PFHLai|talk]]) 14:49, 17 January 2009 (UTC))</small>


==January 16==
==January 16==

Revision as of 14:49, 17 January 2009

Purge this page to update the cache

This page provides editors a forum to suggest items for inclusion in Template:In the news (ITN), a protected Main Page template, as well as the forum for discussion of candidates.

This candidates page is integrated with the daily pages of Portal:Current events. Under each daily section header below is the transcluded Portal:Current events items for that day (with a light green header). Each day's portal page is followed by a subsection for suggestions and discussion.

Suggesting an item

In order to suggest a candidate:

  • Start, find or modify a blurb directly in the light green box for that day's Current events. Make sure that you include a reference from a verifiable, reliable source.
  • Update an article linked to from the blurb to include the recent developments, or find an article that has already been updated.
  • Nominate the blurb for ITN inclusion under that day's ITN Candidates subheading, emboldening the link to the updated article.
    For standard entry styles, please see WP:In the news section on the Main Page/Style.
Maia Sandu in April 2024
Maia Sandu

There are criteria guiding the decision on whether or not to put a particular item on In the news, based largely on the extensiveness of the updated content and the perceived significance of the recent developments. Submissions that do not follow the guidelines at Wikipedia:In the news section on the Main Page will not be put into the live template.


Sample candidate discussion

It doesn't seem to have any references for the new content. --They've also signed their comment 12:06, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
I went ahead and added some citations. It should be ready now. --User's Name 12:07, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
Looks good. Posted. --Responding administrator 12:10, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

And so on. When continuing the discussion please refrain from using dot points/bullets to allow the candidates to stand out from the discussion. Indent your comments for clarity.

Please refrain from straight support or oppose votes; focus the discussion on the merits of the available candidate items.

Creating a new day header

Use the following box to create a new day at Portal:Current events. Follow the instructions in the editing pane to create a new day under the Suggestions header.


Template:In the news/Next update/Time

Suggestions

January 17

ITN candidates for January 17

January 16

ITN candidates for January 16

Apparently the fighting in Gaza has finished. Who won ? Surely we can't let this event slip off the in the news section ? Sean.hoyland - talk 03:09, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why? It's been there for a month. The Cholera Epidemic in Zimbabwe has more victims and it didn't get as much coverage. Nor did the fighting in Sri Lanka. --Cdogsimmons (talk) 05:04, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's true...I suppose the potential global implications of what's happening in Gaza could be one argument....me, slinking away quietly. Sean.hoyland - talk 09:13, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

With so many people dying everyday, 2008–2009 Israel–Gaza conflict should stay at the homepage. It is important news. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.208.91.226 (talkcontribs)

It stayed for more time on ITN than it actually deserved. It is placed here and is enough for now. Lets move on. --GPPande 08:13, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This item has become too old and stale on ITN. We can bring it back when there are significant changes to the status quo (and such changes are documented, with refs, in appropriately updated wikipages). Until then, we'll have other newer news items on ITN. --PFHLai (talk) 17:58, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
How about something original and exciting for a change such as the nationalisation of another bank? :P I've been humbly writing about it here for a number of months and have just completed the latest updates from last night and today. --➨♀♂Candlewicke ST # :) 21:06, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

January 15

ITN candidates for January 15

Rarely we see changes in ranks for this type of list in top 5 or 10. Ranks change every year but those are mostly beyond top 5 or 10 countries. Main article(by me) along with the list article(not by me) is updated. Feel free to alter the blurb. --GPPande 15:52, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support. An important milestone in world history. Thue | talk 16:57, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Interesting and important story during a time of global economic crisis.--Cdogsimmons (talk) 19:32, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Posted, thanks --Stephen 22:24, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It hasn't been updated on the world rankings list. Jolly Ω Janner 23:48, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
{{sofixit}} SpencerT♦C 01:55, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
How? Those are figures from the IMF, the World Bank and the CIA fact book, i.e. two or three highly trusted sources. I doubt anyone here has enough clout to get the IMF, the World Bank of the CIA to issue revised figures for us to use Nil Einne (talk) 18:54, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WHY ? Why was this news removed without a single word of discussion? I have really started hating admins these days. A bunch of them seem not ready to talk a word and delete whatever they feel like doing, be it FAR or ITN. Really horrible!!!! --GPPande 08:22, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The basis for China leapfrogging Germany is data released from within China. Surely we need a more reputable source to verify this (such as world bank or IMF) before we take this as true --Daviessimo (talk) 13:56, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There is absolutely no need for discussion if the statement we're making on ITN is not supported by the article. The main page defers to articles, always, and if you can't reach a consensus in the article then you shouldn't have anything on the main page. Frankly, not being an admin myself I feel they generally do a decent job and I'm much more 'hating' those who propose headlines without making sure the articles are ready first (or at least mentioning if they're not) Nil Einne (talk) 18:50, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The list article (for which the link is now removed in the blurb) was updated with China being third in rank. But it was quickly reverted and subsequently got buried down under newer edits. Check the history to see it. I did not update the list article further because it purely relies on three sources which would not be updating their own figures soon. So no point of making an exception for China. I agree to the current status of the ITN. The news is reliable because WB, IMF or CIA HB would never differ so drastically from China or any other top countries' self published figures. Now, my remark was not meant for admins here doing an exceptional job of keeping ITN rolling, but was meant for "the admins" who take "things in their own control" without even a small intimation - or - FYI kind of message why they did so. Edit summaries are not the right place to discuss individual opinions. I have seen this happen frequently with certain admins and so vented out. A right admin seeks community consensus rather enforcing his/her own free will. A proof of that is the admin who removed the news has not even bothered to explain his/her act. Clear lack of basic WP guideline. I would leave this discussion now as it is because this not an AN. --GPPande 19:17, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There is also a major problem with the hook. It makes it seem as though it over took Germany yesterday. It should be something like "The IMF published data signaling that China's economy overtook Germany in 2008". Please remove this, it should be posted when the CIA, IMF or WB publish the data. Jolly Ω Janner 20:03, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose, please remove this immediately. Wikipedia's list of countries by GDP is made up of three reliable sources. None of them indicate that China is greater than Germany. I would support this if it was correct, but I'm afraid the source isn't reliable enough. Jolly Ω Janner 16:43, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong support Dozens of reliable mainstream sources have reported the new revised figures. It has also been covered by the World Bank. I, do however, agree that the list article should only be updated when IMF or World Bank issue new datasets.[[1]] 130.113.81.33 (talk) 23:57, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]


US Airways Flight 1549 in the Hudson River.
US Airways Flight 1549 in the Hudson River.

US Airways Flight 1549, flying from LaGuardia Airport, New York City to Charlotte/Douglas International Airport, Charlotte, North Carolina, carrying 146 passengers and 5 crew members, has crash landed in the Hudson River. Matthewedwards (talk contribs  email) 21:17, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Strong support. For obvious reasons, any commercial plane crash in New York City should be on here. Its the lead on BBC.com, reuters.com, ABC (Australia), CNN. Clearly there is international interest. Parler Vous (edits) 21:32, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Usually i would support a plane crash but this one hit a bunch of birds and everyone came out unharmed. Except US Airways losing a 100 million $ plane nothing much happened. So i do not support this plane crash. 99.237.101.160 (talk) 21:58, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support As far as I'm aware, what happened here (and correct me if I'm wrong) is almost unprecedented in commercial aviation - a fully loaded jetliner making a successful landing on water. Personally I think that would be pretty noteworthy on it's own, even if you disregard the fact that it's a crash landing of a jetliner in the middle of one of the most densely populated areas on the planet. 87.115.87.175 (talk) 23:05, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Crashed into water in a single digit temperature. Pretty unusual there. Grsz11 22:13, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Plane crashes aren't as uncommon as you think. I don't think the fact that happened in New York in the river makes it any extra notable. Plane crashes are over-reported news, because planes are supposed to be safe and everybody gets scared when they crash. Wikipedia shouldn't be like this. Jolly Ω Janner 23:46, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support I don't really see why not. I recall other large plane crashes that have occurred, and the article looks nice. The wording needs some modifications though, it's not really that great. SpencerT♦C 23:48, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I was thinking the same thing, since more information is now available. How about "An Airbus A330, US Airways Flight 1549, flying from LaGuardia Airport, New York City to Charlotte/Douglas International Airport, makes an emergency landing in the Hudson River, following a bird strike with geese."
Do we really need the location? I was thinking of saying NYC to Charlotte, but it technically doesn't matter. I'm going to post this, there appears to be consensus. If someone wants to upload (and crop) the image and upload here, feel free. SpencerT♦C 01:55, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Is there an article for this? SpencerT♦C 23:45, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I guess that would have to be Atmosphere of Mars, in particular the section on Methane. It should probably be updated to reflect the latest announcement though. Lampman (talk) 23:55, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

January 14

ITN candidates for January 14

January 13

ITN candidates for January 13

What wording do you suggest? SpencerT♦C 22:45, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There are lots of ongoing wars and other events, I think we should let Israel/Gaza slip at the next update. --Stephen 01:15, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm unsure of the notability, perhaps a European ITN participant can fill me in. You may want to say "....Černý's satrical scuplture...". SpencerT♦C 22:49, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I doubt this will qualify as an ITN item. Since it's brand new, why not nominate it for DYK instead? Lampman (talk) 23:39, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't mind seeing this on ITN, but I wonder how "big" this is. I don't think this is "frontpgae materials" in newspapers around the world, except maybe in Brussels and Bulgaria. So I'd recommend DYK, too. It's already nominated at T:TDYK#Entropa, anyway. --PFHLai (talk) 22:51, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I was also considering it for DYK, I just figured I should try here first since it's a current event. If consensus here is not to use it for ITN, I can take it to DYK. Thanks, Politizer talk/contribs 00:40, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

January 12

ITN candidates for January 12

  • The portal space is still empty... Is there an article about ferry disaster in Indonesia? And Golden globes were handed out today, this is one of the biggest awards. However, due to many categories, it's hard to propose an adequate wording. --Tone 08:23, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Slumdog Millionaire is updated. It won 4 GG awards. --GPPande 08:59, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
At 66th Golden Globe Awards, the movie Slumdog Millionaire wins four awards and Kate Winslet two. Wining two acting awards is probably significant as well. John Adams (TV miniseries) also won four, maybe we should put this one as well. Or, an alternative is just 66th Golden Globe Awards ceremony takes place in Beverly Hills, California., with no winners featured. Though I am somehow inclined to have the Slumdog Millionaire in. Any other opinions? --Tone 10:16, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
How about – Slumdog Millionaire, Kate Winslet and John Adams win multiple Golden Globe Awards? --GPPande 12:04, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
How about: The 66th Golden Globe Awards takes place in Beverly Hills, California, with Slumdog Millionaire winning four awards including best picture - Personally I'd prefer only one winner mentioned. If slumdog millionaire won the most for a single film then that should go up. Having too many winners makes it very long and clumsy: --Daviessimo (talk) 15:52, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, this is fine with me. Posting. --Tone 16:23, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
How about Kate Winslet winning both Best Actress and Best Supporting Actress? That seems pretty remarkable. –Howard the Duck 01:30, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't regard the Golden Globe Awards as being worthy of its inclusion here. It happens every year and it's just people getting awards. Not really news. Jolly Ω Janner 16:59, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Globes are not listed WP:Recurring items on ITN but I'd support its inclusion. –Howard the Duck 01:48, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Slumdog Millionaire director Danny Boyle

Proposing File:DannyBoyle08TIFF.jpg so Mr. Atta-Mills can have a break: The 66th Golden Globe Awards take place in Beverly Hills, California, with Slumdog Millionaire (director Danny Boyle pictured) winning four awards including Best Motion Picture—Drama.

Commons:File:DannyBoyle08TIFF.jpg says "cc-by-sa-2.0", but the source page at Flicker.com ( http://www.flickr.com/photos/gdcgraphics/3025796443/in/set-72157607247444523/ ) says "(C) All rights reserved". We need someone with an OTRS account to verify the copyright status of this image before it can be used on MainPage. --PFHLai (talk) 08:44, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. Release of the Danny Boyle photo is verified. As an alternate image, may I suggest as well? howcheng {chat} 21:56, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. If someone wants to flip the image (so it faces the text) and upload it here, that'd be great. I think the Boyle photo is better than the alt. SpencerT♦C 22:02, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
 Done I concurred with Spencer's flipping. --Stephen 22:35, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Howcheng, Spencer & Stephen. --PFHLai (talk) 02:27, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I think I'm done. Wording: Flooding in Fiji kills 8 people and displaces 6,000. SpencerT♦C 22:02, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Looks fine, I think you can post it. Maybe the ferry accident as well, interested in starting an article? --Tone 22:37, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. The artivlr is at Teratai Prima, and I'll look into it later...I'm going to log off soon, and won't be able to get back for a bit. Ask gppande to see if he would like to. SpencerT♦C 22:42, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I added the ferry, as I'm in favour of shorter articles getting developed by views off the MP. But if anyone strenuously disagrees, then just revert. --Stephen 22:46, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

January 11

ITN candidates for January 11

January 10

ITN candidates for January 10

January 9

ITN candidates for January 9

This [3] looks like a good ITN item. I wonder if there is any good article on the topic. --Tone 13:58, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nice. Recently India saw the greatest corporate scam in its history. Satyam Computer Services had inflated balance sheets of 7,000 crore (US$840 million). Do you think, if I made a quality update to the article, it would make it to ITN? --GPPande 14:32, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Looks big and it has some international consequences. In any case, it's good to have the article updated, ITN or not ;-) --Tone 14:49, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Satyam_Computer_Services#Accounting_scandal_of_2009 is updated along with Ramalinga Raju's article (which was severely vandalized on Wednesday when scam was opened). Yes, the scam has international importance as Satyam is listed not just on Indian stock exchange but also on NYSE and American investors of Satyam ADR have already initiated the legal case – not to mention Price Waterhouse Coopers' legal hassles. --GPPande 15:12, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Is using genetic screening in this way a new thing? I have the impression that we have had the technology to do such screening for some time. Perhaps the only news here that people are screening for that gene for the first time, which would make this just-another-gene-screening-process. Thue | talk 19:12, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think the significance comes from the fact that using screening they were able to avoid passing on one of the most prevelant hereditary diseases in the world (breast cancer). The profound implications is that it will allows couples, where one of them has a family history of breast cancer, to screen embryos and prevent passing it on. But without an updated article its a non-starter --Daviessimo (talk) 20:49, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The article in focus would be BRCA1, or maybe Predictive testing. However, I am not an expert on the topic therefore I leave the expansion to others. --Tone 21:35, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Looks ok to me. --Tone 21:35, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Posting. SpencerT♦C 22:32, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

January 8

ITN candidates for January 8

Have fun with the stubby United Nations Security Council Resolution 1860 wikipage, Howard. Happy editing. :-) --PFHLai (talk) 15:31, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

January 7

ITN candidates for January 7

How original suggestion turned into "Israeli ground forces enter Gaza after a week of airstrikes against Hamas in the area." See our detailed objection in January 3 title below. Over 300 civillians including over 130 children are dead by now, only yesterday 75 civillians had been killed, while only 4 Hamas gunmen had been killed. IDF claimed Hamas is the only target and they took cautions against civillians, then they bombed a UN School, which is reported to IDF as a school by UN, which resulted 40 deaths including children. High civillian casualties should be stressed immediately. Kasaalan (talk) 12:19, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Suggest a better wording then. --Tone 13:14, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Israeli ground forces enter Gaza after a week of airstrikes over city, statedly against Hamas, resulted with high civillian and children casualties. A better wording may be suggested since I am not native English speaker, yet high civillian casualties should be stressed. Near 2700 people are wounded, 670 are dead already, while over 300 of them are civillians and at least 130 them are 16 year old or smaller children. Source AP [4] Kasaalan (talk) 01:02, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's war. There will be inevitable collateral damages. I'm not sure if it's such as good idea to bring up the children as this seems to be "sensationalizing" the news item. I've rewitten the line as:
Actually, I plagiarised (from Portal:Current events/2009 January 7.) --PFHLai (talk) 01:20, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Actually we shouldn't do play-by-play on ITN. Re-posting as
and moving the blurb to the bottom. --PFHLai (talk) 01:47, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, with respect (and I'm sure it's not your intention) this kind of sanitised, understated characterisation of what's happening is likely to bring shame on Wikipedia in many peoples eyes. 'Resume hostilities' hardly seems to be an appropriate description that mirrors the terms used by the majority of English language reliable sources around the world. I've seen what seemed to be more appropriate titles in this section given their due weight. This event is on everyone's TV screens after all and it still seems to be the headline on all channels given the ongoing developments. Just a thought. Sean.hoyland - talk 04:31, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, ITN doesn't report news, just highlighting new or well updated articles related to news..... with a factually correct sentence that doesn't require too much updating. I must say I am not 100% happy with the word "hostilities", though. Perhaps "resume fighting"? Or "resume combat"? I don't know. Suggestions are welcome. I'm putting in "resume fighting" for now. I hope it's not too "chatty". --PFHLai (talk) 06:19, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think After a six-month ceasefire, Israeli and Hamas forces resume hostilities in Gaza is exactly the kind of undramatic and NPOV kind of wording that an encyclopedia should be using and commend the author/s. --Dweller (talk) 08:37, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I hope you're okay with the change from "hostilities" to "fighting". It's more than "staring, angrily pointing fingers and screaming at each other," eh! --PFHLai (talk) 13:56, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]