Misplaced Pages

:In the news/Candidates: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from[REDACTED] with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:In the news Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 02:49, 19 August 2010 editMickMacNee (talk | contribs)23,386 edits French national football team: rps← Previous edit Revision as of 02:52, 19 August 2010 edit undoMickMacNee (talk | contribs)23,386 edits U.S. Combat troops leave Iraq two weeks early: gobamaNext edit →
Line 36: Line 36:


*'''Update 2''': I have added a new to the article: 'Final departure of U.S. combat troops', with the salient facts to date. No doubt it can, and will be added to. Blurb upcoming, don't nod off just yet... ] 02:46, 19 August 2010 (UTC) *'''Update 2''': I have added a new to the article: 'Final departure of U.S. combat troops', with the salient facts to date. No doubt it can, and will be added to. Blurb upcoming, don't nod off just yet... ] 02:46, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

*'''Oppose''. from the announcement a few weeks ago, the 'withdrawal' was reducing troop numbers from 70,000 to 50,000. That's not a significant event. And the idea that in the last few years the troops have been on 'combat duties' any differently than the ones remaining, is pretty misleading. They've been bunkered in bases hoping not to get attacked. Still, no doubt this will sail thru anyway. Gobama. ] (]) 02:52, 19 August 2010 (UTC)


====U.N. warns more Pakistan relief badly needed==== ====U.N. warns more Pakistan relief badly needed====

Revision as of 02:52, 19 August 2010

For administrator instructions on updating Template:In the news, see Misplaced Pages:In the news/Admin instructions.
↓↓Skip to nominations
Click here to nominate an item for In the news. In the news toolbox
Shortcut

This page provides a place to discuss new items for inclusion on In the news (ITN), a protected template on the Main Page (see past items in the ITN archives). Do not report errors in ITN items that are already on the Main Page here— discuss those at the relevant section of WP:ERRORS.

This candidates page is integrated with the daily pages of Portal:Current events. A light green header appears under each daily section – it includes transcluded Portal:Current events items for that day. You can discuss ITN candidates under the header.

Grand Kartal Hotel in 2007Grand Kartal Hotel in 2007 Ongoing: Recent deaths:

viewpage historyrelated changesedit

Glossary

  • Blurbs are one-sentence summaries of the news story.
    • Altblurbs, labelled alt1, alt2, etc., are alternative suggestions to cover the same story.
    • A target article, bolded in text, is the focus of the story. Each blurb must have at least one such article, but you may also link non-target articles.
  • Articles in the Ongoing line describe events getting continuous coverage.
  • The Recent deaths (RD) line includes any living thing whose death was recently announced. Consensus may decide to create a blurb for a recent death.

All articles linked in the ITN template must pass our standards of review. They should be up-to-date, demonstrate relevance via good sourcing and have at least an acceptable quality.

Nomination steps

  • Make sure the item you want to nominate has an article that meets our minimum requirements and contains reliable coverage of a current event you want to create a blurb about. We will not post about events described in an article that fails our quality standards.
  • Find the correct section below for the date of the event (not the date nominated). Do not add sections for new dates manually – a bot does that for us each day at midnight (UTC).
  • Create a level 4 header with the article name (==== Your article here ====). Add (RD) or (Ongoing) if appropriate.
Then paste the {{ITN candidate}} template with its parameters and fill them in. The news source should be reliable, support your nomination and be in the article. Write your blurb in simple present tense. Below the template, briefly explain why we should post that event. After that, save your edit. Your nomination is ready!
  • You may add {{ITN note}} to the target article's talk page to let editors know about your nomination.

The better your article's quality, the better it covers the event and the wider its perceived significance (see WP:ITNSIGNIF for details), the better your chances of getting the blurb posted.

Purge this page to update the cache

Headers

  • When the article is ready, updated and there is consensus to post, you can mark the item as (Ready). Remove that wording if you feel the article fails any of these necessary criteria.
  • Admins should always separately verify whether these criteria are met before posting blurbs marked (Ready). For more guidance, check WP:ITN/A.
    • If satisfied, change the header to (Posted).
    • Where there is no consensus, or the article's quality remains poor, change the header to (Closed) or (Not posted).
    • Sometimes, editors ask to retract an already-posted nomination because of a fundamental error or because consensus changed. If you feel the community supports this, remove the item and mark the item as (Pulled).

Voicing an opinion on an item

Format your comment to contain "support" or "oppose", and include a rationale for your choice. In particular, address the notability of the event, the quality of the article, and whether it has been updated.

Please do...

Shortcut
  1. Pick an older item to review near the bottom of this page, before the eligibility runs out and the item scrolls off the page and gets abandoned in the archive, unused and forgotten.
  2. Review an item even if it has already been reviewed by another user. You may be the first to spot a problem, or the first to confirm that an identified problem was fixed. Piling on the list of "support!" votes will help administrators see what is ready to be posted on the Main Page.
  3. Tell about problems in articles if you see them. Be bold and fix them yourself if you know how, or tell others if it's not possible.

Please do not...

Shortcut
  1. Add simple "support!" or "oppose!" votes without including your reasons. Similarly, curt replies such as "who?", "meh", or "duh!" are not helpful. A vote without reasoning means little for us, please elaborate yourself.
  2. Oppose an item just because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. We post a lot of such content, so these comments are generally unproductive.
  3. Accuse other editors of supporting, opposing or nominating due to a personal bias (such as ethnocentrism). We at ITN do not handle conflicts of interest.
  4. Comment on a story without first reading the relevant article(s).
  5. Oppose a recurring item here because you disagree with the recurring items criteria. Discuss them here.
  6. Use ITN as a forum for your own political or personal beliefs. Such comments are irrelevant to the outcome and are potentially disruptive.

Suggesting updates

There are two places where you can request corrections to posted items:

  • Anything that does not change the intent of the blurb (spelling, grammar, markup issues, updating death tolls etc.) should be discussed at WP:Errors.
  • Discuss major changes in the blurb's intent or very complex updates as part of the current ITNC nomination.

Suggestions

ITN candidates needing feedback
Add nomination needing feedback purge
For future events in 2010, see Misplaced Pages:In the news/Future events/2010.

Template:TOCpastweek

August 19

August 19, 2010 (2010-08-19) (Thursday) Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts, culture and entertainment

Business and economics

Disasters

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science

Sport

ITN candidates for August 19

August 18

August 18, 2010 (2010-08-18) (Wednesday) Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Business and economics

Disasters

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

ITN candidates for August 18

U.S. Combat troops leave Iraq two weeks early

Per live reports just now on MSNBC. No article online yet as the story is breaking literally just now. Seems the troops were removed early as a security precaution. Stand by for updates. Jusdafax 22:49, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

  • Update 1 - I actually, just 30 minutes ago, watched MSNBC show the last troops leaving. I have no doubt a WP:RS will be reporting on line any second, if it has not happened already. The article should be Post-invasion Iraq, 2003–present and I have already updated the lede there. Some additional material in the body of the article will be helpful. Jusdafax 01:55, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Strong Support Basically the end of the war. Doc Quintana (talk) 01:42, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Comment. We need an update on a WP article somewhere. Currently top story on BBC News. Physchim62 (talk) 01:48, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Tentative support, but wait a bit first. Difficult to get firm facts until the news outlets wake up tomorrow morning, and we need to know for sure that the all combat troops have gone before posting. Iraq War has an update, but needs more references. There's also a Withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq article, but that seems to be out of date. Modest Genius 01:50, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Just out of curiosity, is the story that they've withdrawn, that it was earlier than expected, or both? Also, is this just American troops or is it a coalition thing? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:55, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
The U.S. troops are the only major foreign force left in Iraq. But it seems strange to talk of a "withdrawal" when 50,000 U.S. military personnel will remain until the end of 2011... Physchim62 (talk) 01:57, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
It is both, but with the accent on that they have withdrawn. I'll come up with a proposed blurb in the next 60 minutes as I monitor television and online sources. As for a mention of a "coalition" I have seen none mentioned, I believe this is U.S. tropps only. Psych, the story we are being told, is that the remaining U.S. troops are for training and advisory purposes. Jusdafax 02:00, 19 August 2010 (UTC)


Someone at the BBC has woken up, but they're now saying 'the Pentagon has not confirmed that the move marks an early end to combat operations' and 'Some of the brigade remained behind to complete logistical and administrative tasks but would leave the country by air later in the day' . Plus 50,000 seems like an awful lot of 'advisers' to leave behind. But I still think that once all the 'combat' troops are out it's a significant step, and probably the closest to a definitive end we're ever going to get. Modest Genius 02:00, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Strong Support this is on CNN now. came her to nominate.--Wikireader41 (talk) 02:08, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Okay the, it appears this is official and getting some support. How about a blurb and an update? Preferably before I fall asleep on my keyboard. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:32, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
  • Update 2: I have added a new section to the article: 'Final departure of U.S. combat troops', with the salient facts to date. No doubt it can, and will be added to. Blurb upcoming, don't nod off just yet... Jusdafax 02:46, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
  • 'Oppose. from the announcement a few weeks ago, the 'withdrawal' was reducing troop numbers from 70,000 to 50,000. That's not a significant event. And the idea that in the last few years the troops have been on 'combat duties' any differently than the ones remaining, is pretty misleading. They've been bunkered in bases hoping not to get attacked. Still, no doubt this will sail thru anyway. Gobama. MickMacNee (talk) 02:52, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

U.N. warns more Pakistan relief badly needed

While the main story link will be to 2010 Pakistan floods, this story is continuing to unfold in press headlines around the world. A U.N. official says that, amazingly, "The Indus River is at 40 times its normal volume." The blurb, however would not be on the floods themselves but the U.N.'s urgent warnings regarding the huge human disaster in progress, with millions in need of help and so far, not getting it. Respectfully, I challenge potential opposers to produce a a more newsworthy story than this one for today. Jusdafax 20:42, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

No opinion on the nomination, but what would the blurb be if it were to go up? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:59, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. Maybe it's time to just shut ITN down. Interest in it seems to have completely died, most if not all new nominations are hopeless stubs, or systematically biased, or have a hundred other flaws. Obvious candidates do not happen frequently enough, and with decent enough updates, to justify this huge section. And no matter what anyone does, this idea that the section is not simply a news ticker just will not die it seems. Just shut it down, implement a horizontally scrolling bar along the top of the Main Page for ongoing news, and think of something better to do with the rest of the space. Like giving proper recognition to DYK contributors. It's beyond belief that this is what? the fourth time this item is about to be bumped. It's a flood. A big flood, but just a flood. There isn't even a basic nomination here showing that the article has actually been updated. Has it? Who knows. Who cares. ITN was supposedly created for publicising 9/11 articles. Can you imagine if that ever happened again, how many times those items would get bumped for being an ongoing event? Jesus. Enough already. Let's tear this useless section down. MickMacNee (talk) 21:24, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Comment - I strongly disagree with your thoughts and must also suggest your tone is hardly conducive to collaborative editing on this project. The challenge before us is to improve this remarkable resource and draw more contributors. Suggestions we throw in the towel are unconstructive here. And I did in fact check the article, and was quite impressed by the work done there, complete with a country-by-country table noting dontations to date. Jusdafax 21:42, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Oppose its already been posted. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 21:27, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Still not expressing an opinion, but an update would need prose, not just pretty tables and the blurb would need to be in the present tense. As it is, apart from being in the past tense, it sounds a bit like an appeal for donations. We'd need something alog the lines of "The UN announces it needs more money". HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:57, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Tense corrected, which was easy. I also updated the article's lede. I daresay more could be updated in the body of the article. Jusdafax 22:20, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Ah, now I've clicked through instead of over-depending on popups, I see the article is tagged with a rather unsightly {{copyedit}} tag. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:38, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Oppose - not a major new development in a story we've already posted more than once. Humanitarian disaster requires aid?!? Who'd have thought it. Modest Genius 21:55, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Comment. After the 2010 Gansu mudslide, the total death toll from the 2010 China floods exceeded that of the Pakistan floods, and the 305 million affected in China was a far cry from Pakistan's 20 million. An important update for the Gansu disaster was needed on August 15 for the National Day of Mourning declared in the country, but that still was not posted. This story has already been bumped more than once, although it will likely continue for a few more months. ~AH1 23:58, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Strong Oppose this is old news. most of the people affected were starving anyway floods or no floods. Also this crisis is likely to continue for months if not years. can't keep on putting it on ITN every few days.--Wikireader41 (talk) 00:51, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Fields Medal

By "today", the IP means 19 August. This item will probably get renominated when the section for that day is ready in 2.5 hours. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)21:24, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Note this is a WP:ITNR event, so if when a Fields medal is awarded (they don't have to give one out) it should be posted once the relevant article is updated. Let's hope we have decent articles for the laureates/topics... Edit: looks like they've never failed to award one, so I guess it's going to happen. Modest Genius 21:59, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Strong support. Announcement is due 13:00 IST (07:30 UTC), we should add the winners immediately. Something like "At the 2010 International Congress of Mathematicians in Hyderabad, X, Y, and Z are awarded the Fields Medal." Ngô should be a safe bet for one of the medals. —bender235 (talk) 00:11, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
We add it if/when the article has been updated, but after that happens (barring an influx of opposers), it will go up as soon as possible (ie as soon as an admin is around). HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:24, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
In 2006, two of the four winners didn't even have articles at the time they won. Hopefully, we'll do better this time around, but we do have to at least wait long enough that some updated content exists. Dragons flight (talk) 00:29, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
I don't think we need to say where it was announced, and would be better off with something like
and basing the final clause on the official citation (like we do with Nobel prizes). Modest Genius 01:37, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Unlike Nobel prizes, Fields Medals don't generally have a unified theme. Rather each of the two to four winners may be cited for entirely different accomplishments. Dragons flight (talk) 02:13, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Well we'll need to see what they are, but if possible we could include each of them. Length and the existence/state of the articles in question could be an issue though. Modest Genius 02:19, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Rod Blagojevich verdict

Oppose If posting Kagan was controversial, this would be courageous. It barely has national - let alone international - implications. I'd only support to get that stunning hair on the main page.--Mkativerata (talk) 05:09, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
oppose per global notability. btw- its not even nominated in the box above(Lihaas (talk) 06:01, 18 August 2010 (UTC));
I assume you mean the current events template. It's listed under August 17 there, since that's when the verdict was read. ~DC Let's Vent 06:57, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Oppose only convicted on a relatively minor charge. If he's convicted of conspiring to sell Obama's old Senate seat, then we'll talk. ~DC Let's Vent 06:56, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Oppose Illinois has a long history of political corruption. this really is business as usual in springfield. Yawn. WSJ--Wikireader41 (talk) 07:53, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. domestic US news. MickMacNee (talk) 13:39, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
I might have supported but the overwhelming opposition, particularly from editors better-informed on the matter than I am, convinces me otherwise. Per DC, though, I could support a conviction for trying to sell Obama's Senate seat. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:40, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Oppose on technical grounds, as we already ran the story of him being impeached (is that the correct term?), and as there is likely to be a retrial on the more "juicy" allegations. I would certainly reconsider a nomination for a conviction on trying to sell Obama's Senate seat, but let's see what comes of it. Physchim62 (talk) 23:51, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Oppose It is just, not so important. Diego Grez 02:48, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

August 17

August 17, 2010 (2010-08-17) (Tuesday) Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts, culture and entertainment

Disasters

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections
  • Protesters in Potosí and the Bolivian government resolve a three-week disagreement. (BBC)
  • Former Israeli soldier Eden Aberjil is criticized for her Facebook images of herself smiling with blindfolded and bound Palestinian prisoners. (BBC)

Sport

ITN candidates for August 17

French national football team

Support seems interesting - assuming the article is good enough. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 23:02, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
I'd like to see evidence this has hit America, but a support anyway. Different, certainly.  f o x  23:13, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Oppose The impact is misleading because Nicolas Anelka has borne just about all of the "team" ban himself. Doesn't have international impact.--Mkativerata (talk) 23:19, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Doesn't have international impact? You mean, a national football team losing four players (just before the Qualifying for the European Championships gets underway next month) isn't international?  f o x  23:38, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Just a note. The update at Nicolas Anelka is not up to standard yet, so please don't bold it without checking first. I would have been neutral on this one, but HJ makes the point that we're in a short news season so I'll go for weak support. Physchim62 (talk) 00:45, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose I usually hate ex post facto opposes, but for this one I can't help it. I don't really see the significance of this one at all... really one athlete got a substantial suspension. Happens all the time, for all kinds of reasons. Not to mention the update is a single sentence; sorry, but this never should have been posted. Courcelles 01:03, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
    Feel free to give any remotely similar example, I know of none at all. The item pretty obviosuly wasn't just about some player getting suspended, just like the endless bumping of the horizon oil spill wasn't just about whatever bit of news had occured at the time. It is the conclusion of the whole saga, which has been a huge deal in France and World Football. MickMacNee (talk) 02:48, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
On the update, I disagree with you. It's fairly clearly been updated as the event has progressed, so the strike and its repercussions are well covered in the article. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:33, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
    • removed due to lack of consensus. Second I also oppose. This has less impact that Abramovich or some other tycoon pumping in 500million and then the coach/board go crazy and buy a pile of leading players, or the reverse when a team goes broke. Anelka already retired anyway, and this kind of politics is common in common in developing countries's sports systems, eg South America, or in cricket, in Pakistan or India were the whole cricket board gets turfed out in a opaque boardroom coup with some help from underworld figures threatening officials or getting cabinet politicians to arrest them for corruption. Even in the England cricket team in 2008 there was a power struggle between the captain/coach resulting in both being sacked/forced to resign, and in football-type sports where all the players have to operate quickly in a synchronised way, it's the coach that makes the success/failure, much more than the players in such sports as baseball, cricket, or relay races. YellowMonkey (new photo poll) 01:26, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
      • 'Asian cricket is corrupt' so that means unprecedented events in international football are unimportant. Good luck with refereeing that trade off next time, this bizarre logic could be applied to any nomination about any subject. It's nonsense. MickMacNee (talk) 02:48, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Oppose, one federation making a foolish example of one player for the most part, not that significant. Grandmasterka 01:30, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Oppose as minor sporting news, of interest only to those who follow the sport. HJ, just because the timer is ticking doesn't mean we should post something which has no consensus. Better to go a while without an update than to keep adding and shortly removing items. Modest Genius 01:41, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
That's a few billion people tbf, and in international football, let alone French politics, this was not minor news at all. That's way more interested people than the population of the United States, so maybe Mwalcoff will be along to give his support now. MickMacNee (talk) 02:48, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Death of Francesco Cossiga

- Former President and Prime-minister of Italy dies at age 82. Notable enough? - Eugen Simion 14 (talk) 15:37, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Possibly, but the article is in need of quite a bit of work- it's quite skimpy on the details of his career and it will need information on his death. I would be surprised if the article could be brought up to scratch quickly enough, but it's happened before. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:45, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Oppose I see this just got posted without consensus. This guy was only briefly PM of Italy and later served in the fairly powerless position of President. He's now died of old age and the death hasn't impacted anything. To add to that, the article is substandard, not even discussing his tenure as PM.--Mkativerata (talk) 04:22, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Oppose per Mkativerata. I don't want to discourage article development, but I'm not convinced of the ITN-level significance if the article turned into a GA overnight. Courcelles 07:11, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Weak support, however the article is almost entirely unreferenced so it's rather moot. He may well have been a boring and non-confrontational president, and only a caretaker PM, but he was still head of state of a G8 country. Modest Genius 22:14, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Baghdad bombing

Apparently there was one this morning (though there is no online source yet as BBC World is on breaking news) that killed over 41 recruits to the Army. (probably the number will go up) and over 100 wounded.(Lihaas (talk) 06:39, 17 August 2010 (UTC));

Support - As soon as an article goes up, of course. Jusdafax 06:44, 17 August 2010 (UTC) Update: per New York Times, thanks Arsonal, will add to your article now. Jusdafax 07:59, 17 August 2010 (UTC) Update 2: Added some more, I see Lihaas did the startup work on the article, thanks. Jusdafax 08:43, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Support. Article is at August 2010 Baghdad bombing. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)07:51, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Support significant attack--Wikireader41 (talk) 12:02, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Article is in reasonable shape, though, to be picky, it's an orphan. I also moved it to 17 August 2010 Baghdad bombing since it's not the first attack in Baghdad in August and is unlikely to be the last. I'll wait for some more comments, but if the consensus that's emerging holds, I'll post it soon. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:11, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. In the afternoon coverage of this, the war correspondent was relaying how it was not so long ago that they didn't even bother reporting bombings if the death toll was not over 50, so I'm struggling to see how/why this death toll is ITN worthy now. While they are apparently becoming less frequent, I think we are still in the period where a mass bombing in Iraq is really not ITN material. MickMacNee (talk) 13:05, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Oppose. Definitely not enough victims to make the ITN quota. They should try to be more efficient. Crnorizec (talk) 14:05, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Oppose. Notability does not exist. - Eugen Simion 14 (talk) 14:15, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Says the person who thinks an explosion at some hospital is notable. I've no opinion on this as an ITN item, but it's probably notable enough for an article. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:18, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Support - Death toll now at 60 with 125 others wounded. This is undoubtedly deserving of going on the front page. Truthsort (talk) 15:13, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
support since death count is quite high. below 20-25 would deserve an oppose but 60 is pretty high. -- Ashish-g55 15:20, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
We appear to be reaching consensus to move forward. The article is adequate, for a brand new article. Suggested blurb below. Jusdafax 16:47, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Why "at least 50"? The article says 60 (the same number I just saw on the news) and it's sourced, so, aside from the usual uncertainty about casualty figures associated with this kind of thing, is there much reason to doubt that? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:40, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Support - Clearly notable, need to make sure the same amount of deaths is mentioned in the blurb as in the article though. BritishWatcher (talk) 21:59, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

The LA Times is reporting 51, and I see other numbers floating around, so like BW I want to get it right. My thing is to err on the side of caution and move the figure up (poor souls) as it gets clearer. I'd work further but have to be afk a couple hours. Will be back to help finish up (as needed, or if needed) soon. Thanks all! Jusdafax 22:21, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Support, I'd consider bombings with 40+ deaths worthy of mention, since smaller ones are so common, but attacks of this scale are still fairly unusual. BTW, I think the reason the LA Times is reporting a lower toll is because it hasn't been updated since 1:11 this morning, probably Pacific time. C628 (talk) 23:28, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Posted -- tariqabjotu 00:15, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

August 16

August 16, 2010 (2010-08-16) (Monday) Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts, culture and entertainment

Disasters

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science

ITN candidates for August 16

Bucharest hospital explosion

An explosion at a maternity hospital in Romania's capital has killed three babies, while two pregnant women and eight newborn infants sustained burns and other injuries. YahooNews Reuters - Eugen Simion 14 (talk) 20:12, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Well, that's a shame, but I doubt the article will last long and I strongly oppose posting it on ITN. This is nowhere near our significance requirement. Modest Genius 20:26, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Sad, but no lasting significance. Eugen Simion 14, please stop creating more work for other editors with your single-sentence sub stubs that are almost invariably deleted via PROD or AfD. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:24, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Death toll 4 - (Press Association via Irish Independent) (Voice of Russia) (Sky News) (CNN) - Eugen Simion 14 (talk) 06:22, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. Coverage in news sources does not indicate lasting significance. The sources themselves are quite "stubby" without any chance of more detailed coverage. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)07:47, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Eugen Simion 14, you might consider contributing to Wikinews if these kind of articles are your thing. They would be more appropriate over there. --Monotonehell 12:54, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

AIRES Flight 8250

- 1 killed, 114 injured in Colombia, after a Boeing crash in San Andreas. - Eugen Simion 14 (talk) 13:21, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

dont think enough happened here to be on ITN. I'm not even sure it deserves its own article right now. -- Ashish-g55 13:42, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Oppose fortunately only one fatality. ~DC Let's Vent 16:26, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Oppose despite the dramatic photo of the jet in 3 pieces... am also glad to see one one fatality. Amazing though. Jusdafax 18:32, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Support do people have to die for this to become a news? The fact that the previous members have also emphasized is that it is "fortunate", "dramatic", and "amazing". Good enough for me, to make a GOOD NEWS. Crnorizec (talk) 22:24, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
conditional support per plane crashes on ITN. the fiselage split apart on crash.
Is there a precedence/rule for this. What is the criteria? Simply editor voting or ITN-rules, if not we need the latter to set some rules down.(Lihaas (talk) 22:28, 16 August 2010 (UTC));

Support per all of the above (I find the two opposes ironic as they are both followed by what I see as valid reasons to support). 119 injured (according to the article)? A developed article? A governor calling it a "miracle"? Several nationalities from at least three continents on board, hence international appeal, not very local, etc. Crnorizec has a good point. Must all ITNs be horrific? And where did such an idea come from? Low death tolls and a high amount of injuries have been posted before, e.g. this (2 bombings, 2 deaths - both deaths in 1 bombing - mainly about a large number of injuries). --candlewicke 00:08, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

well my oppose was when the article was 2 lines long. It has been expanded quite a bit since. But even then i dont know if posting plane crashes with 1 fatality is a good idea. More people die in regular car accidents. And i dont mean to be cruel but the 1 fatality was due to heart attack and not injuries. The injuries were not all necessarily severe either. I mean ya its a plane crash but there has been quite a few in past year. So i am still opposed to this. -- Ashish-g55 01:06, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
And, in my point of view, posting this after not posting the Otter crash last week is laughable. ~DC Let's Vent 01:43, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Well the events are not really comparable. One was the crash of a privately operated light aircraft whilst the other was the crash and hull loss of a narrow-bodied commercial aeroplane. Also, in that case the emphasis was placed on who had been killed and not the crash itself. That being said, there have been 148 previous hull loss accidents with the 737 and with only one death I fail to see how this is main page worthy. For me, a low number or no fatalities needs notability elsewhere (e.g. British Airways Flight 38 as first hull loss for 777 or US Airways Flight 1549 as successful water landing) and in this instance I can't see any. I mean planes get hit by lightning all the time... --Daviessimo (talk) 06:56, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
In my view the 'China becomes number two economy' is a much bigger global story than the plane crash. Put up both if that's consensus but to exclude China and put up plane crash isn't right. Jusdafax 02:19, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
BTW, how did the US Airways Flight 1549 make the news, with no casualties? Check the archive here Crnorizec (talk) 14:06, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Daviessimo just said above that it was because of a successful water landing which is rare. And all the passengers survived from what was surely going to be a major accident. That is definitely news worthy. Also it was first time that happened in recent history. I dont think it would be as big a deal if it happened again. -- Ashish-g55 14:16, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

China becomes world's 2nd largest economy

Support: Obviously !. Yug (talk) 10:29, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
In principle, support. However, I think we've had this announcement three times already in the last couple of months. --Tone 11:47, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Support: I think this time its for real ;-)(NYT)--Wikireader41 (talk) 12:26, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Comment there isn't much of a prose update (unless I missed it while skimming the article) and I doubt much can be updated. So I'm not sure it's suitable to post because of that. ~DC Let's Vent 16:34, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. 2nd is not notable. MickMacNee (talk) 16:43, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Support. An obvious item. I'm not sure what Tone is alluding to though, so I might reconsider based on an understanding of that. __meco (talk) 16:48, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Support per Past Discussion. IIRC, when this item was first tentatively put forth through the Chinese media, the "general" consensus was to wait for posting until the claim was independently verified by the international press. It appears that now the story has been validated... Thoughts? Cwill151 (talk) 16:58, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Support - Major news as a milestone. China continues to make strides as a world power, and this shows that. Number two economy behind the USA is notable. Good ITN item, in my view. DC's point should be dealt with, however. Jusdafax 18:29, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Support - as previously nominator for this story. While in general being #2 isn't notable, being #2 global economy is a pretty big deal. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 19:10, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Do we have any kind of an update? I suppose the PRC article would be the logical choice. If there is something, I'm willing to post this based on the consensus above. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:22, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Support - once we have decent prose in the Economy of the People's Republic of China article. A rare milestone like this is an easy support even if it comes as no surprise. Nirvana888 (talk) 19:30, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Support in principle but there are some problems with the articles.Economy of the People's Republic of China is rightly tagged as being too big (at 161kb), while Economic history of the People's Republic of China is unsourced tracts of OR.--Mkativerata (talk) 19:35, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Bloody hell, that article's massive. I'd have concerns with putting that on the MP since it could take bloody ages to load for those on slow connections. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:40, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Post now? article has been updated —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.65.21.27 (talk) 21:03, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

It's only two sentences. ~DC Let's Vent 21:10, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
oppose granted we now have confirmation, still dont think its that notable just because econ. data keeps coming and going (4 times a year for this) and it can fluctuate.(Lihaas (talk) 22:29, 16 August 2010 (UTC));
Support Japan's economy has been stunted for 20 years and China is at 11% pa, so even if they have a slowdown they still won't get overtaken. These aren't a group of similar economies growing at 1-3% that can overtake each other back and forth YellowMonkey (new photo poll) 01:13, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Please post now. Economy of the People's Republic of China has been updated sufficiently. There's not much to write on this story anyway. __meco (talk) 06:35, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Agree, please post. Jusdafax 06:40, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Comment: I don't mean to sound like a Wiki-lawyer, but in posting this, we should keep in line with WP:NC-TW, and use "People's Republic of China" instead of just "China". Night w (talk) 06:47, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Comment - I've had a read over some of the news articles and unless I'm being blind I can't see where China's data is coming from. Is it the same data they released a couple of weeks back, because if so surely we should be waiting until the IMF or World Bank verify what is being said --Daviessimo (talk) 07:02, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
It was on the BBC News channel last night. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 07:13, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Actually, I oppose because the data only relates to one quarter. For the second quarter of 2010, China surpassed Japan by nominal GDP, but for the first six months as a whole (i.e. first and second quarters combined) Japan is still ahead of China (as stated in the bllomberg article). Now, as List of countries by GDP (nominal) uses data amassed over four quarters and this information is verified by the IMF etc I think it is presumptuous to start saying China has overtaken Japan as the second biggest economy when it has only surpasses it for one quarter --Daviessimo (talk) 07:31, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
It appears that the ITN from 2009 also used World Bank data (see current references 32 and 33 in Economy of the People's Republic of China). —Arsonal (talk + contribs)07:44, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
It's not the least bit presumptuous. As YellowMonkey points out, japan's economy has been stagnant for 20 years whereas China has a 10% increase per year. __meco (talk) 08:08, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Well it is, because you are essentially predicting the future based on past trends and it is not our place to do that. It is highly likely (in fact probably a certainty) that China will surpass Japan over four quarters of 2010, but if it is good enough for the IMF or World Bank to wait, then why not us. At the end of the day, the data for 2010 shows that even though China surpassed Japan in the second quarter of the year, over the first two quarters of 2010, Japan still had a higher GDP. Thus for us to say China is bigger because "Japan's economy is stagnant/China is growing rapidly" completely defeats the purpose of accurate statistical evaluation --Daviessimo (talk) 08:26, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
I believe we have a rough consensus to post this. Any suggestions for the blurb? (actually, I'd like to know which articles exactly to feature) --Tone 08:23, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
If you are going to post this I would make sure it is clear that China has only surpassed Japan for the second quarter of 2010 and not 2010 as a whole and avoid stating categorically that China has become the second biggest economy without independent verification --Daviessimo (talk) 08:28, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
I'm fine with either; was worried about length so I left Japan out, but would be happy with yours if it is not considered too long. Jusdafax 09:16, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Posted This item poses a myriad of problems. For example, the headline should, ideally, be in present tense. -- tariqabjotu 09:22, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

August 15

August 15, 2010 (2010-08-15) (Sunday) Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Business and economics

Disasters

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Sport

ITN candidates for August 15

2010 Gansu mudslide, again

Support merging this information into the existing blurb. ~AH1 01:59, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. There should be no bumping at ITN period. The list of things people think are significant enough to qualify for a bump is seemingly never ending. MickMacNee (talk) 16:45, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
*Shrug* I just proposed this because the golf thing was going nowhere at the time, it was something like 30+ hours without an update, and this was the best I could think of. Doesn't really matter anymore. C628 (talk) 17:12, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

2010 PGA Championship

Opppose - many sports starting/finishing their seasons are not added. BritishWatcher (talk) 15:48, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
If you took two seconds to look at the article, you'd realize how factually off your statement is. ~DC Let's Vent 16:44, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
Support per WP:ITNR#Golf. However, the article will need a prose update. At the moment it's a list of participants and tables of results, with only the first day mentioned in any text. Modest Genius 16:27, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
Support if WP:ITNT#Golf says it's the way to go, let's do it. Jusdafax 18:59, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
Support with prose update. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)20:28, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
support when sports tournaments are dont the winner is customarily announced on ITN.(Lihaas (talk) 20:53, 15 August 2010 (UTC));
Comment: the timer's red, so sooner or later someone's going to start hassling mop people. This has support, so I'm inclined to promote it. Are there any issues with having two sports-related ITNs next to each other? TFOWR 21:04, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
I don't think the article is postable in its current state: it has almost no prose whatsoever. So my support is in principle only. Normally I would do the work myself rather than sit in my armchair but I need to go to work. --Mkativerata (talk) 21:06, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
Fair enough, and we edit conflicted as I was about to ask for a blurb (which is conspicuously missing, and makes life very difficult for the lazy admin. I can hang about and whine until someone sorts the article out - or we get support for something else (not sure what, though). TFOWR 21:10, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
Blurb is at the top, just fill in Golfer X. The article hasn't been updated yet, but then again the tournament is still ongoing, with the title still up for grabs. So we need to a) wait for the tournament to finish b) get a results table and a prose update and c) fill in the name of Golfer X. Modest Genius 21:30, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
Does anyone know when it's scheduled to end? C628 (talk) 23:38, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
Too late for me - I'm logging off in a few minutes. Blurb at top noted, TFOWR's spectacles cleaned and polished. Prose update still needed... TFOWR 00:08, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Martin Kaymer won this one. (The New York Times) (MSNBC)Arsonal (talk + contribs)00:57, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Update seems sufficient, who wants to post? ~DC Let's Vent 07:18, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
I'm not so sure. The playoff prose is a massive unsourced tract of text, whereas the prose for some of the full rounds of the tournament is barely a sentence long.--Mkativerata (talk) 07:25, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
I've just gone on a slightly pointy tagging frenzy - hopefully that'll encourage some improvements. If I get time I'll try and educate myself about this mysterious sport and fill in the gaps, but ideally someone(s) with clue would fill in the gaps. TFOWR 08:33, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Note to admins: An alternative method of posting the story is bolding the winning golfer's name rather than the tournament itself. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)09:57, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
I'd actually prefer that: Martin Kaymer looks to be in quite good shape. OK, so the revised blurb would be:
Martin Kaymer wins the 2010 PGA Championship at Whistling Straits.
If there's consensus for that, I'll post it within a couple of hours (allowing time for you all to tell me what I'm doing wrong ;-) TFOWR 10:17, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
I think the format I've seen previously is: In golf, Martin Kaymer of Germany wins the 2010 PGA Championship. We usually include the sport for people who are unfamiliar with tournament names. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)10:25, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
I knew that, honest! ;-) That looks good. I may append "...at Whistling Straits" depending on balancing needs, but I don't think the course is as important as the sport. TFOWR 10:29, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Posting. --Tone 11:48, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Toy Story 3

The Independent on Sunday - "set to become the first animation to take $1bn at box offices globally after becoming the highest grossing animation ever". --candlewicke 01:09, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Support - Good international story, the worldwide box office is astonishing, timely, will look great on the main page with a photo. The article is in reasonably good shape as well. Jusdafax 01:32, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
Calm down - Highest-grossing animation movie is not really that notable, considering that inflation is not taken into account. And it is now at $920mil, and since it made 30 mil overseas and 3 mil in US last week, it means that probably at least another week or two will pass before getting close to the round mark. Nergaal (talk) 04:18, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
Oppose Crossing the billion dollar mark does not mean as much as it did when Return of the King did it. Toy Story will be the seventh movie to gross that much and that does not make it very notable, even if it is an animated film. It won't even be the first film of this year to gross over a billion dollars worldwide. --PlasmaTwa2 05:50, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
Oppose per Plasma2. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 08:33, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
Oppose unless and until it becomes the highest-earning film ever. We can't go dividing things up into genres, or we'd be forever posting stories about the highest earning horror/documentary/blacksploitation/pornographic/musical/whatever and getting into problems of defining which category things fell into. Modest Genius 14:14, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
realistically speaking no animation movie is going to ever be the highest grossing film ever. A billion in itself is just a number. I will support when Toy Story passes Return of the king and sits at #3 since thats the prime realistic spot for any movie. Catching 2 above is just ridiculous -- Ashish-g55 15:26, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
Oppose - not notable enough. BritishWatcher (talk) 15:49, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
Oppose - Mainly due to the fact that it appears factually wrong. The highest grossing film of all time is Avatar, which is animated. Unless there's some loophole where it doesn't count... --Smashville 19:47, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
Avatar is live action with significant computer animation. Toy Story 3 is entirely computer animated. Technicality? Maybe, but I doubt Avatar would have been considered for Best Animated Film. :P --Golbez (talk) 19:54, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
IMO Avatar was the other way around - animated with significant live action. But that's exactly the problem with having per-genre records. Modest Genius 21:32, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
oppose no record breaking, we cant added caveats to everything. no big deal either, and certainly no wide press (int'l or even american wide outside the entertainment media)(Lihaas (talk) 20:54, 15 August 2010 (UTC));

August 14

August 14, 2010 (2010-08-14) (Saturday) Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Business and economics

Disasters

International relations

Law and crime

Politics

Science

Sport

ITN candidates for August 14

2010 Women's Baseball World Cup suspended after player shot

A player for Hong Kong was shot during a game, the event is suspended, Hong Kong team withdrawing. BBC News CBC Sports Reuters The Sydney Morning Herald --candlewicke 01:03, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Support if they decide to completely suspend the event. Something like this is notable enough for ITN. --PlasmaTwa2 05:52, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. Hmm, a stray bullet of unknown source, while the tournament is being played on a military base. Sorry, but 'Venezuelan armed forces are incompetent' is not an ITN worthy event, it's a given. Much like all the 'USA learns new skills' nominations. MickMacNee (talk) 15:33, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
Oppose, given that it seems to be continuing, albeit in a different location. Sucks for the person who got shot, but since there's no lasting impact on the event, I don't see the importance. C628 (talk) 15:41, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
Oppose- for reasons above. BritishWatcher (talk) 15:50, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
Firstly, isnt it softball? as in the olympics. support if the event is called off because that is not usual. Munich 72, Atlanta 96, etc, etc were not called off.(Lihaas (talk) 20:57, 15 August 2010 (UTC));
It's baseball as the name says. 2010 World Cup of Softball was another event. By the way, softball and baseball have been removed from the Olympics. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:34, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Support brawls etc are not notable, but knife and gun attacks certainly are, eg Seles being stabbed...as for the event not being cancelled neither was Munich nor the tennis tournament YellowMonkey (new photo poll) 02:25, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. It's being described as a stray bullet and not an attack. At the moment it sounds like an accident which hit a single low notability person (Cheuk Woon Yee is currently red) who is reported to not be seriously injured. The tournament itself is not particularly high profile in the world of sports and it goes on. Monica Seles was the world no 1 in the probably highest profile women's sport when she was deliberately attacked. This baseball incident is not like that. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:34, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Fair enough but why do you assume something is of low notability because of a red link? Everything starts somewhere and everything here was once a red link. --candlewicke 23:40, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
I also Googled her and the result seemed modest for an athlete at a World Cup. I just did a new search and got more hits due to the shooting. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:34, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

2010 Summer Youth Olympics

The 2010 Summer Youth Olympics, the first of the Youth Olympic Games, begins in Singapore with 3,531 participating athletes aged 14–18 from 205 National Olympic Committees. (BBC News) (The Straits Times)Arsonal (talk + contribs)02:45, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Support seems like a pretty big deal - especially as its the first. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 09:19, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Weak oppose. On the one hand it's the first incarnation of something which might possibly become a major international event. On the other hand it's getting virtually no press attention (at least in the UK: hidden well down the BBC sport page and not mentioned at all on the Guardian version), and it's just a youth version of a notable competition. We don't post the youth versions of any other major tournaments such as the FIFA U-20 World Cup or the IRB Junior World Championship. Modest Genius 12:27, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Support As an inaugural event, this deserves to be mentioned. The possible future of the event is far from now, and we should not comment about it. Votes slanted on the fact that it has not received enough attention since, are not criterion that should be roughly respected here. Also, it is silly to compare such event with junior events in single sports.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 13:22, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Support - a fine upbeat story with international appeal. As consensus appears to have formed, suggest we move forward. Jusdafax 14:11, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Note This piece of news was also discussed at the Future events section of In the News. See here. Shall we continue the discussion here instead of there? ANGCHENRUI 14:37, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Here is a proposed alternative:

The 2010 Summer Youth Olympics, the inaugural Youth Olympic Games, begins in Singapore with the opening ceremony held at The Float@Marina Bay.

The original statement included participant no. and info, which are not really primary to what we intend to report. You may also wish to refer to past news statements on multi-sports events for a better idea; i.e. archives. Regards, ANGCHENRUI 14:45, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Oppose the mention of The Float@Marina Bay. It does not add much, and the weird style of the name makes the whole thing a lot less understandable. Possibly write The Float at Marina Bay per Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style (trademarks) (Follow standard English text formatting and capitalization rules, even if the trademark owner considers nonstandard formatting "official": e.g. avoid: REALTOR®) /Coffeeshivers (talk) 08:54, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

It is done. Third time I've done this now (second was just now) so a spot of sanity checking wouldn't go amiss. Also, someone doling out the ITN award would be appreciated. I'm going for a nice cup of tea and a lie down: me head hurts after all that fun. TFOWR 16:16, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

 Done the awards as best I can. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 16:38, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

There are now a number of free images available of the opening ceremony. I would recommend this one if an admin wants to use it, but feel free to use any other ones that have been uploaded. The cauldron images don't look too great at the moment. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)08:31, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Done. --BorgQueen (talk) 16:00, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Cordoba House aka 'Ground Zero mosque' supported by President Barack Obama

Support for the construction of Cordoba House, a mosque and Islamic community center near the site of the September 11 attacks, was voiced by United States President Barak Obama. New York Times Story has strong international appeal. Jusdafax 05:44, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Oppose. Many politicians and others have already voiced an opinion. As president, Obama will get more attention than most, but I don't think raises his (largely predictable) opinion on the matter rises to the level of being ITN worthy. I would also note that Cordoba House hasn't been updated at all to reflect this info (though presumably that could be corrected). Dragons flight (talk) 08:37, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Oppose per Dragons flight. Additionally, the story is still premature and does not have a conclusive result. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)08:52, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Oppose, Obama has stated that the sky is blue. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 09:21, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Support. Actually, I think this could be an angle which made it possible to post the Ground Zero mosque controversy on ITN. It is an extremely divisive issue in New York City and elsewhere in the United States, and, even though that is fringe, with the contentions about Obama's own heritage, and the less contentious fact that he is the supreme leader of the country weighing in on the issue, combine to elevate this conflict beyond a local politicized quibble to a battle for the heart and soul of that nation. __meco (talk) 09:41, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Oppose If Obama had opposed the construction that might have been worthy of inclusion (owing to the subtext "President considers all Moslems guilty by association in the 11 September attacks, and so seeks to prohibit their right to buy and use property in the vicinity") but he didn't. Despite the misleading headline in the cited NYT article, nothing is quoted to say that he thinks it is positively a good thing that the centre be built: he simply asserts equality of rights of people of all religions and distinguishes between the attitudes and aims of Al-Qaida and mainstream Moslem opinion: it would hav been genuinely extraordinary for him to have said the opposite. "Queen joins BNP" would be ITNworthy: "Queen does not join BNP" is not. Kevin McE (talk) 11:21, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
You seem to miss the perspective that the only neutral thing would be for him to keep quiet on this issue. __meco (talk) 11:34, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Strong oppose - this whole story is just a load of local-interest cruft. Obama's opinion certainly doesn't cut it. Nor will the judgement, nor the commencement of construction, nor the opening. Modest Genius 12:20, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Oppose - unless I'm missing something, building a mosque in the United States is like building a factory, a chemist, a garage, whatever in the United States. Islam isn't banned in NYC so I don't get why this is such a huge deal. I imagine there were Moslems among the victims that day, too. (Basically, this story wouldn't exist if they were planning on putting a church there.)  f o x  18:45, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Oppose for now at least. A president simply offering support for something that currently does not exist and which may never exist? Perhaps if it is built... --candlewicke 23:38, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. A pile on, just to make it more obvious that this sort of US domestic news tedium is not ITN worthy. And since when was the US President not supposed to stick up for what the constitution actualy says? MickMacNee (talk) 15:37, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

August 13

August 13, 2010 (2010-08-13) (Friday) Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economics

Disasters

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science
  • Peru's health ministry is deployed into the Amazon to battle the vampire bats blamed for the deaths of four children from rabies. (BBC)
  • India's health ministry completely rejects as "unscientific" and a "conspiracy" claims by researchers that medical tourists are spreading a new "superbug" that is alleged to have originated in the country. India states that its hospitals are safe. (Aljazeera)
  • Scientists find evidence that 250 rare Caquetá Titi monkeys survive in Colombia. (CBS) (ScienceNews)

ITN candidates for August 13

Death of Guido de Marco

Guido de Marco in 2003
Guido de Marco in 2003

President of Malta who led the country into the European Union in 2004 after submitting its application in 1990 when he was the country's foreign minister. A former president of the United Nations General Assembly. English is one of Malta's official languages. --candlewicke 01:42, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Support. Unexpected death after what what is usually a safe operation (less than 1% of patients die from complications with angioplasty). Notable international relations career as well. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)02:14, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Support per Arsonal. Can't wait for the "Malta is small" arguments. --PlasmaTwa2 02:16, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Support - also per Arsonal. Jusdafax 03:26, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Former President of Malta and President of the United Nations General Assembly Guido de Marco (pictured) dies suddenly at the Mater Dei Hospital, Msida. --candlewicke 04:47, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Just because the hospital has an article doesn't justify expanding the length of the blurb with a trivial detail, IMO. Courcelles 04:58, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
I'm good with it either way, as long as it goes up quickly. :) Jusdafax 05:49, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Oppose per and the article (which until yesterday was a copyvio) only has two sentences on his Presidency.--Mkativerata (talk) 07:32, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Oppose He was not in office upon his death, he was replaced in 2004. Unless it can be shown that he was remarkable in some other way, I'm not sure that this qualifies as a death for ITN. Can anyone expand on his efforts to put Malta forward for the EU? That might be an angle, but I'm unsure if that would be enough. --Monotonehell 07:36, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Comment His death meets the second out of the three death criteria. Note that ITN only requires that a person's death meet one of those criteria. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)08:46, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, I'm aware of the criteria and how to apply them. I from the info in his article I couldn't meet point two, but others seem to think so. --Monotonehell 17:33, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Support per the death criteria. Took Malta into the EU, notable UN and Commonwealth roles too, seems significant enough for me. Admittedly the article is rather lacking, but it meets the ITN requirements. Modest Genius 12:33, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
support to globalise and give prominence outside the status quo, and per death criteria for ITN.(Lihaas (talk) 15:27, 14 August 2010 (UTC));
It is done. Given my track-record at ITN (non-existent/very poor), can someone sanity check what I've done? Doling out the requisite ITN baubles would be appreciated, too. TFOWR 16:07, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Given I whined about the lack of updates on WP:ANI I believe I have done so. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 16:16, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Thank you! Incidentally, I didn't update the picture (never done it before, scared I'd break something, etc etc) but I'd suggest this would be a good candidate item for a picture? I've just added the Singapore Youth Olympics, too, but I don't think there's a suitable picture yet? TFOWR 16:18, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Support inclusion of picture. The Colombian Presidential picture is old and tiresome. ~AH1 21:21, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Support picture as well (most of the blue and stars could be removed - leaving the red and white of Malta - but maybe not if that offends Americans). --candlewicke 23:22, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Support - 1. His knowledge of Maltese criminal law and parliamentary affairs are exceptional, probably best in the Maltese Islands. He was up to his death, a Professor at the University of Malta, lecturing second year students in the Bachelor of Laws (L.L.B) - study unit - Criminal Law, an undergraduate course leading to the postgraduate course of Doctor of Laws (L.L.D).

2.He indirectly propelled Malta to become a Republic during 1974, when Prime Minister Dom Mintoff needed a 2/3 votes in Parliament to amend the constitution. Guido de Marco was instrumental in a pact reached with the Opposition. Not so much is written about his Presidency, is due to the fact that the Maltese Presidency is largely a ceremonial position within the republic. None the less he submitted Malta's application to become a member of the European Communities on 16 July 1990 as Malta's Foreign Minister and later reactivated the frozen application in 1998 following 2 years in Opposition. --Gian (talk) 00:18, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

AgBank has completed the largest ever IPO

Long anticipated and closely watched event in the investor world. Agricultural Bank of China today completing the world's largest initial public offering in history at $22.1 billion . All-or-none (talk) 17:55, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Support if its the worlds largest IPO - the prose looks to have been updated to me. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 09:32, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Suggested blurb: The Agricultural Bank of China completed the world's largest ever IPO at US$22.1 billion.. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 09:37, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
If it is to be included (I have no strong opinion), it raises severe version neutral English issues. The IPO article only describes the US situation (although it does not acknowledge this limitation), and UK banking, or at least its reporting in the non-specialist press, would describe this as a public share issue. Maybe the relevant form of ENGVAR should be that of Hong Kong. Kevin McE (talk) 11:41, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Support Obvious feature, a top business and finance headline. __meco (talk) 11:49, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Weak support, seems a significant business story, even if most people will think 'so what?'. We certainly can't use a TLA like 'IPO' in the blurb though, and as Kevin McE points out there are ENGVAR issues to avoid. Modest Genius 12:50, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Comment In which article and what can be done to fix them? -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 13:09, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
In the blurb. There are issues in IPO, but that's not a problem for ITN since it won't be bolded. Modest Genius 13:35, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Support - Story has a good international appeal, and as noted per: Meco is a top business/finance story. Jusdafax 14:21, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
weak oppose flop IPO, unlike MakeMyTrip that surged 80% on day 1.Lihaas (talk) 15:29, 14 August 2010 (UTC));
By that logic the most notable IPOs are those in which the vendor massively underestimates the value of the company. Getting the valuation right and actually making money for the company would therefore be a bad thing. Which makes no sense at all. Modest Genius 18:21, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
What is this guy thinking comparing the worst largest IPO at 22 bil with a puny Indian IPO of a few million. Offtopic? The fact that this ipo took place amid some pretty daunting market expectations and raised a record amount says something about its strength and was perhaps unexpected. ..I strongly support the blurb by Eraserhead as there's no question it is notable... Its possible that this record will not be topped for a long time. 76.65.20.89 (talk) 18:54, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
For clarity (as it took ages for me to figure it out) the issue with the blurb is the term "IPO" which is an acronym and not necessarily perfectly clear. Though it does appear (as I show below) to be the term used in "Chinese English" so it shouldn't be a problem. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 19:02, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Comment: if you can resolve the WP:ENGVAR issues around IPO I'd be up to sticking this up. For what it's worth, I remember learning what "IPO" meant only fairly recently (UK/NZ English speaker). TFOWR 16:20, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

If by these ENGVAR issues you mean the fact that I've called them US$ that's only because without the qualifier they could be Hong Kong dollars given this is a Chinese business related story - and they are worth much less. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 16:39, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Nope, it's the issue Kevin McE and Modest Genius mention, around "IPO". I'd be OK with "initial public offering" - if that's the usual Hong Kong English term. (i.e. it needs to be wikilinked - I can live with numpties like me not knowing the term if it's wikilinked - because I suspect we'll struggle to find a way to say it in neutral English). TFOWR 17:14, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Ah, fair enough. I've done some research and Xinhua, the South China Morning Post, the Hong Kong Standard, China Daily and Shanghai Daily all refer to it as an IPO in their English language versions. They are all the newspapers I can find websites for that are mentioned in the Rough Guide to China so it should be a fair sample. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 17:29, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Just because the English versions of the Chinese press use the acronym 'IPO' doesn't mean we should too. Using undefined TLAs, particularly ones not used in certain parts of the world, is something we should avoid. It's not a complicated issue, just replace 'IPO' by 'initial public offering of shares' and it's fine. It's not as if the blurb has a length issue or anything. Modest Genius 20:42, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Fair enough, and I think TFOWR agrees with you. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 20:59, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
I do indeed. I think we'd struggle to find a suitable version neutral phrase, so "IPO" it is, but wikilinked as initial public offering. The whole main page experience terrifies me, so I'm going to hold off for now and promote this in the morning (if someone less easily scared hasn't done it already). I'd suggest using Eraserhead1's blurb, slightly modified: Agricultural Bank of China completed the world's largest ever initial public offering at US$22.1 billion. (I've removed "The" from the start, in addition to expanding "IPO"). TFOWR 21:11, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Fair enough, it seems most of the regular admins aren't around this week. Probably another reason why I should go for an RFA :/. Oh and one error with the blurb: 'completed' -> 'completes' for present tense. Modest Genius 21:22, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Posted TFOWR's blurb MG's modification and saying "raising" 22.1 billion. --Mkativerata (talk) 21:29, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Note: I should say that ideally the article would have more sourced content on the bank's history. But seeing as we put up the death of a country's President with only two sentences on his Presidency, I don't think that can justifiably hold this posting back. The material in the article on the IPO is good enough. --Mkativerata (talk) 21:48, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Discovery of Caquetá Titi

Long speculated but never confirmed to exist, this monkey species is new to science and appears to be critically endangered. Rlendog (talk) 02:13, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Support - Interesting, and an important commentary on modern human interaction with other species, in my view. Jusdafax 05:48, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Support though I don't think the article is good enough. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 09:52, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Support; IIRC, there was a blurb on the discovery of...something...not too long ago. C628 (talk) 11:34, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Support - interesting new species, published in the peer-reviewed literature, receiving interest from the scientific press. The article is OK, certainly better than many of the disaster articles we feature. It could do with a picture though, for which I suggest using under fair use (there are only a handful of pictures of this species in existence, so I don't think it could reasonably be replaced by a 'free' version). Modest Genius 12:38, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Question: Hang on a minute, this has a previous DYK listing from 27 July, how old is the story? Modest Genius 12:41, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:In the news/Candidates: Difference between revisions Add topic