This page is an archive and its contents should be preserved in their current form;
any comments regarding this page should be directed to Template talk:In the news. Thanks.
Disney reaches a deal to acquire Marvel Entertainment for US$4 billion, with Marvel shareholders being issued $30 and about 0.745 Disney shares for each share of Marvel they own. (Marketwatch)
Nigeria charges several banking executives with financial crimes discovered following the $2.6 billion bail-out of five banks. (BBC)
American Airlines retires all of its Airbus A300 aircraft after flying for American Airlines for the past 21 years.
Havent had business news in long time. and this although isnt the largest acquisition or anything like that but it might be of interest to a very large crowd. with disney and marvel involved. -- Ashish-g5514:08, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What impact is this going to have? As you note, this isn't a major acquisition in corporate terms, and I see no evidence that it's going to have any cultural impact either. Neither article has more than a one sentence mention of the acquisition. Oppose for now. Modest Geniustalk17:03, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My initial reaction was oppose but I'm not so sure. Considering the huge impact comics have on entertainment now (look at all the major films and video games based on comics), the cultural impact could potentially be rather significant. The thing is it's difficult to know what impact the acquisition will actually have--it could be that Disney will not actually interfere with Marvel's activities. That said, I'd probably be slightly more inclined to support had they picked up DC Comics.--Johnsemlak (talk) 17:29, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think a business item might be overdue so I'd be fine with it, but the maintenance tags bug me so I'd oppose for now. RxS (talk) 17:33, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
no impact to be had here its purely for interest purposes. even that im not really sure how much of an interest but i thought it deserves atleast a nomination for further discussion. -- Ashish-g5517:37, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm leaning towards oppose if it's not major and it needs to be cleaned up (unless someone is willing to do that but still oppose). Not sure if Marvel means the same to those who don't collect comic books as Disney might to those who don't watch films either. And then it's a bit early to tell if this actually means anything as well. --candle•wicke18:01, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It might take months or years to know if there's a significant impact. Just depends on where Disney goes with the properties it acquires.--Johnsemlak (talk) 18:06, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(<-) At the moment, there is only one sentence of update in the article and this is not enough. Besides, the article about Marvel is tagged as the one with not appropriate tone. Regarding the logo in the blurb, this is not ok because fairuse images cannot go on Main page. If all those issues are resolved, I may support. --Tone20:28, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support once articles are appropriately updated. This is a huge deal which effects movies, comics, theme parks, video games, and potentially other formats of entertainment. --PlasmaTwa201:53, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
i find the whole discussion fairly funny. oppose till articles are updated. support but articles need to updated. meanwhile there is nothing to update the articles with lol. all i see are like 2 same quotes everywhere which i would rather not add to either articles. mergers are getting boring these days sigh. if anyone sees better info to update articles then please do so. -- Ashish-g5502:20, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Wouldn't improving the article be your responsibility also Ashish-g55? I believe that under the current nominating citeria it states "If you question the quality of the update, explain this so the nominator has a chance to improve the article." If you, as the nominator, don't think that an improvement can be made then a definite oppose would be correct. Shinerunner(talk)04:33, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
my responsibility? a lot of articles are made/updated after nomination and supports and as event progresses. i just said there isnt a lot of info available yet... thats why i said if someone sees something please update. its no ones "responsibility". a definite oppose for that reason is a little weird but ok. -- Ashish-g5505:19, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't mean "responsibiltiy", as if you yourself would have to do all the work. I'm using "responsibility" in a broader sense with the thought that since you nominated this news item you would also like to work to improve the article in question so that the nomination may pass. Your earlier statements seem to be "deriding" opposers for wanting to see a more developed update to the articles in question. If I'm mistaken, I apologize.Shinerunner(talk)05:50, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My reading of the whole thing is that nothing has actually happened yet. OK, Disney and Marvel have agreed a deal in principle, but it still has to put before Marvel sharholders who could reject it. Also, the acquisition will then come under scrutiny from the market regulator in the US to make sure it is fair and doesn't breach any regulations. As such, it will likely be several months before the takeover is completed and I'd be wary of putting it up too soon. --Daviessimo (talk) 06:55, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
i think california had suffered a lot worse before we posted it last time so i would say wait a bit unless something exceptional happens. and i am not saying wait because this is US (just wanna make it clear). california is just fire prone so wait to see what happens here. -- Ashish-g5512:57, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Agree California has wildfires every few months, and less than 100 homes burned. If it becomes out of control and burn entire towns, then I guess we need to have it. Secretaccount15:41, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Are wildfires in California news? (sorry, joke). Anyway, there are very few deaths so far, it doesn't even seem to be having a major effect on Los Angeles. Certainly not notable enough yet.--Johnsemlak (talk) 17:48, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
WP:ITNR is only a guideline so it's not written in stone, not that I would support this anyway. But why only the Ashes India v Pakistan? It's the India v Pakistan bit I'm wondering about..don't know much about Cricket though. RxS (talk) 04:40, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Pretty much. There is no world championship in Test cricket, so we feature the two series which are considered to be far and away the biggest rivalries. And there's no way we could run every Test series. Modest Geniustalk04:54, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think there are a number of sports events that happened last weekend, or on any given weekend, that are of greater international interest that this. Óppose--Johnsemlak (talk) 17:51, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A nomination involving dead people in an African country
Location of Cameroon
Terrible train crash in Cameroon the other day. In fact there were two. Eleven dead so far. Death toll expected to rise. Luckily, only 400 of the passengers were injured with most escaping unharmed. At least one of the fires took four hours to put out though. --candle•wicke00:55, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Is there an article(s) for the crashes? Also, train crashes seem fairly mundane, not sure its too notable/significant. Leaning towards oppose. Deserted Cities03:09, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A nomination involving lesbians
Lesbians in two countries have just been given equal birth rights. This has been described as "brilliant news" and it is thought by some that "the media coverage will help get the point across that our lifestyle is 'normal', for want of a better word, and nothing to get excited about". --candle•wicke01:05, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Is there an article for it? I don't wish to get into an argument over wording, but most consider Wales and England one country (or more likely two parts of the UK). Either way I'd still support. Deserted Cities03:09, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Lesbians are granted equal birth rights in England and Wales. According to the United Kingdom article, Wikipedia considers England and Wales (and Northern Ireland and Scotland) as countries. First line of second paragraph: "The United Kingdom is a constitutional monarchy and unitary state consisting of four countries: England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales.19" I imagine there must be a good reason for this. --candle•wicke17:50, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The reason for England and Wales being mentioned specifically (as opposed to the UK as a whole) is because they have a separate legal system to Scotland, see the introduction of our Scots law article. – Toon18:42, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe the BBC doesn't care much about these topics... Anyway it is in several newspapers and one of the sources is the BBC (reporting yesterday though so it has probably been replaced by newer news now). --candle•wicke18:04, 31 August 2009 (UTC)'s[reply]
THis may be a very historic development but it is not getting prominent coverage right now. Has any media outside the UK covered this?--Johnsemlak (talk) 18:22, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Whether it was intentional or not, Johnsemlak has highlighted a major issue with the whole war in ITN regarding notability. This is by all accounts a very significant and historic act that has been passed, yet it has received very little attention because it does not have any major short term implications. As such it is both a very important encyclopaedic item (because it involves and change in the law and in the long term will affect to a degree, the culture of the countries in question) and also a poorly reported item. So how do you make a decision? This is were my view differs from many others because I personally feel you have to address any item based upon it encyclopaedic merits rather that by whether or not it is a top story on the BBC or CNN. Thus I would argue that this is exactly the sort of story we want on ITN because it is being judged on its value as encyclopaedic information rather than by its position in the news media --Daviessimo (talk) 18:44, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure that this item is any more encyclopedic than a number of other items discussed in this section recently, such as the Oasis split or the Marvel Comics acquisitions. We have the article update standard to try to make sure items are suitably encyclopedic. Also, this may be a historically significant event (or may not be, depends on how thigns play out) it is also a controversial issue with multiple sides in most of the world. Thus Wikipedia should maintain its NPOV strictly. Normally simply reporting events would not be a problem but in my opinion putting a news item on ITN that's getting such minimal coverage in even British media could be argued as taking a side.--Johnsemlak (talk) 03:36, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps, it's hard to say how big of a story it'll turn out to be. We don't want to pre-judge it. Wouldn't the story be as big (however big it turns out to be) no matter which side of the issue you are on? I kind of struck while the iron was hot as they say...I haven't been watching this page long but I wonder sometimes how anything ever gets added considering the debates recently.
I wonder if loosening the requirements a bit (which requirements I don't know) would help increase the turn over and make each individual nomination not as much of a big deal. RxS (talk) 04:02, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A nomination concerning the opening of a road
Silvio Berlusconi has opened the first section of a new 2,000km North African coastal highway which will eventually link Tunisia, Libya and Egypt. The event also marks the first anniversary of the signing of a "friendship treaty" settling all past disputes and much was made of this at the opening with a "huge photographic backdrop" of a handshake present. Probably a significant milestone in relations between the two countries plus a road which will stretch across an entire continent in one event here. Add to that the fact that Libya's leader is celebrating the 40th anniversary of his arrival into power, which will make him the longest serving head of state in both Africa and the Arab world. A lot of things happening here. --candle•wicke01:26, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm assuming an article exists, but where is it? I do support this as well, though the BBC doesn't say how long this first section is, or when the project will be complete. Deserted Cities03:09, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
THis is definitely a major item. I'm on the fence about whether to support or oppose but it deserves more discussion than it's got IMO. The Dalai Lama is certainly a notable figure and this is a major event in Taiwan/China/Tibet relations, events of which are followed worldwide. The event was discussed in a number of media that cover international events, though it may have been overshadowed by elections in Japan and the usual news from Iraq/Afganistan.--Johnsemlak (talk) 17:43, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Any other comments? I think it fits. The problem is that there's not much in the way of article updating around this. RxS (talk) 17:46, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Former Israeli PM Ehud Olmert has been indicted on three corruption charges for "fraud, breach of trust, registering false corporate documents and concealing fraudulent earnings" and becomes the first ex-PM in Israeli history to face criminal charges (from the BBC). Seems fairly notable to me, I know it is usual to wait for outcomes of trials but it seems fairly historic that it is the first time charges have been brought against an ex-PM - Dumelow (talk) 16:31, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am aware that we usually await a verdict but this is the first time in Israel that a current or former PM has been charged with a criminal offence. I can imagine the uproar if we didn't put up an item if (for example) Clinton or Bush were charged with a criminal offence (not sure if that is a first in the USA?), particularly one relating to an abuse of power. The blurb should obviously clearly state that he has only been charged with an offence at this stage. We would be stating no more than every major news site is at the moment - Dumelow (talk) 20:12, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I get the point of nomination, it's perfectly reasonable. However, I wonder where is a line between history and news in this case. This is one of the points that is being debated just now at the ITN RFC. Of US presidents, Clinton had an impeachment after the Lewinsky affair though this was not the same as here but he held the office then. Olmert is not the current PM so the trial should not directly affect the government. So, I'd still stick to the rule of a thumb that when a trial begins, it's news, when it ends, it's history. --Tone20:27, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This is a first for an ex-Israeli PM, but ITN must consider this from a worldwide perspective. Plenty of ex-leaders in recent world history have had charges placed against them. Besides, as Joshdboz said, he hasn't actually been found guilty, a fact infinitely less notable than if he had been found guilty of something already. If he's found guilty in the future, I think a debate can be had about putting him up on ITN. Until then, I oppose. Otumba (talk) 21:30, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, since everyone seems more interested in Japan I will add my support to this one just in case it gets overlooked. These are listed at ITNR anyway but just in case... --candle•wicke18:08, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's the top African story on IOL where it has been hailed as "a historic moment" and where "for the first time in more than 41 years, Gabonese casting their votes Sunday will not know ahead of time who their next president will be". --candle•wicke00:40, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Perfect. This one is ready to post as soon as the reference for the results table appears (since the table gives numbers and those are supposedly not final results yet.) --Tone21:00, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly, you didn't get Oasis up and now you're lashing out against the entire forum? I'm not quite sure that's the way to get more people to see you side (regulars or newcomers). Therequiembellishere (talk) 23:12, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Nice to see you're being helpful and productive. And if you haven't noticed, it IS being mixed up - there's far more people commenting here for a start, including both you and me. Modest Geniustalk00:22, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Remember to be civil, youngling. And I would suspect a new ambassador to America would be notable, but just like this Oasis story, I don't think its notable enough for ITN. It is a guitarist leaving a band. I have a feeling this won't be making top story in any newspapers. (Except for a couple in the U.K. of course) --PlasmaTwa203:08, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A good deal of the pointless and irrelevent junk that makes it to ITN is not 'top story' news in any country, certainly not if you mean that to be 'front page'. I have a feeling that no appointment of any ambassador has ever made the front page of any British newspaper, ever. MickMacNee (talk) 03:37, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ah no! I haven't read it... is it true... um, for ITN. In theory, I would oppose until some sort of wider long-term worldwide reaction is evident but I'll read it now and see what else is available. Don't know when the last time this happened to a band with similar significance so I'll wait to see what others make of it and what sort of reaction comes from it. --candle•wicke03:00, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
OK, from what I've read thus far one of them has left. It might be a very important one of them and they might not be able to continue but the news sources seem to be jumping to their own conclusions about an actual split and Wikipedia shouldn't fall into any traps there. It's breaking news right now so I guess we just need to wait and see what comes of it. He may very well decide to change his mind after all and they're always having arguments anyway. There needs to be some sort of reaction at the very least for it to be even considered in my opinion and even then there would likely be opposers (of which I may or not be one of them). Should be clearer on hindsight. --candle•wicke03:13, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) And, on the above, not that newspapers are necessarily important but does The New York Times and Houston Chronicle count? I think the early coverage leads me to be reluctant to give a straight oppose considering it has travelled quite quickly but it does need to develop more and actually confirm a split I think. And then for a bit more to happen in terms of impact. --candle•wicke 03:21, 29 August 2009 (UTC) Note: Now on The LA Times site too. --candle•wicke04:23, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As I've said (somewhere, probably I won't be able to find it quickly) below, we should stop throwing links around and look at the bigger picture -- this story and DJ AM's death is located at the lower part of the NYT's home page, ergo, not important nor, how would I put it, "interesting" enough. –HowardtheDuck03:36, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not disagreeing with you at all but the equivalent of a British band being in at least two American news sources might be an American being in two British ones, no? Otherwise would it not be a domestic incident? I'm just waiting to see if it gets "interesting" at this stage. --candle•wicke03:41, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If the Gallagher brothers started killing each other or Robbie Williams (I think he was the one who had a feud with them, I'm not sure.) then we should be adding this.
But actually, if there were to be a British band breaking up that "could've" made it to ITN not named The Beatles, it has to be the Spice Girls, but they're broken up already so it doesn't matter. (My point is that Oasis may not that be big for ITN. Then again, I dunno who Les Paul was so...) –HowardtheDuck03:46, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And Asia. And now even Australia. Quite encouraging in terms of impact considering it has just happened as well. Or supposedly has, since it is still just one bandmember leaving. Has DJ AM (apologies if it is an incorrect spelling as I've never heard of him) been getting this sort of global coverage? --candle•wicke03:53, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not found on The Australian's home page, found at the bottom part of Channel News Asia's home page.
It's sourced to their official site (which is not now loading, probably due to all the Canadians wanting to find out the hot story), but if you want like word of mouth confirmation or something, you will probably have to wait until morning, Noel is probably busy mending his guitar right now if he's not out cold.... MickMacNee (talk) 03:57, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well I think you make a good point about waiting until morning. Perhaps when I wake up none of this will have happened and nobody will have to decide anything. --candle•wicke04:03, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
How many stories do we have that are covered in multiple countries? So a web page has a link to a story on it; it doesn't make it notable. The kidnapping case down below has been covered in every country you can think of, but it hasn't gone up yet. If this becomes CNN's top story, then it can go up. Normally, we don't cover entertainment stories. We didn't put up anything about Britney Spears, who is a lot bigger than Oasis (And i we did I lost all faith in mankind). It is two brothers of a band that I, for one, knew nothing about until a few years ago, having an argument. And MickMacNee, that joke has run thin. I don't think I've ever even heard an Oasis song on the radio in Canada; shows how much we care. --PlasmaTwa204:49, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
So, you admit you had heard of them though! I've never heard of DJ AM, you don't see me using that as an argument for or against him or Oasis here. Everybody else has also got the sense to discount personal opinions too as a factor. Celine Dion is the only Candadian artist I've ever heard of, and that's only because she is so goddam annoying. Just look at the independant coverage, and support or opposed from a decent and justifiable position, because quite clearly your original reason is flat out disproven. If you want to stand by the 'no entertainment stories unless it makes the CNN frontpage' stance, that is acceptable to a point, but it is also just a fastrack to narrowing ITN to a narrow field of topics. MickMacNee (talk) 12:49, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I had to look up Oasis and DJ AM so I don't know if I'm qualified to say if either notable enough. Seems like a relatively significant event in popular music but I don't know if it has wider significance. I guess the question is how significant of a band was Oasis and how significant does it have to be for its breakup to make ITN. Is there a current band whose breakup would warrant ITN inclusion without discussion?--Johnsemlak (talk) 04:57, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
my 2 cents. im from canada here... i do not know them. i am not the biggest music fan so that may be the reason. but i would think if someone was big/famous enough to be on ITN then i should know them since they are from my country. like if this was rolling stones then it would be different story. i am not opposing/supporting since i do not know enough. im just informing that i don't know them and im in canada lol... -- Ashish-g5505:03, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Aren't they British? Anyway, U2 would be a more recent band (than the Rolling Stones) whose breakup ought to warrant reporting. I've read through the Oasis Wikipedia artilce and they seem big but I just haven't heard of them. (EDIT) actually I should be more specific, this is not a break up of Oasis but simply a notable member of it leaving. Makes it less notable than a full breakup.--Johnsemlak (talk) 06:09, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My feeling would be that any band splitting up is, in itself, not notable enough for ITN (unless they were the size of the Beatles). Aside from the fact that I never saw Oasis as being that big outside the UK and Ireland (other than during the second BritRock invasion during the mid 1990s) my inclination would be to say that Oasis have split up many times before, but always reformed and whilst the general feeling is that this is final, both Take That and the Spice Girls reformed when someone waggled a bag of money in front of them (OK, maybe thats a bit cynical). --Daviessimo (talk) 10:09, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Nobody is going to be as big as the Beatles, they were a phenomenon. If that's the standard for ITN, then what's the point in it all really? Wikipedia will have probably withered away and died before you get an equivalent music event. A better comparison is actually U2 imho. As for it just being a band member leaving, this is, in all intents and purposes the end of the band, because this is comparable to Mick Jagger leaving the Rolling Stones, and certainly worse than Bonio leaving U2, that's how unlikely it is that even if the band continued, anyone would care enough to buy their music or see them live. And as for comparing the split to Take That and the Spice Girls, I would be extremely surprised if they reformed simply for money, but I don't even see how that is relevant to whether it is ITN worthy or not. MickMacNee (talk) 11:17, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say a band splitting up could in principle be notable, it just has to be such a band where the splitting up would have a broad cultural impact. The Beatles splitting up is at least a useful example of such a noteworthy event. However, that example shouldn't preclude all bands of lesser stature from being newsworthy. My problem is that since I literally just heard of the band (I did play their songs on the Wikipedia page and I recognize them but earlier I wouldn't have been able to name the act), I just can't comment on how newsworthy the breakup is (I'll concede for now that it is a break-up for all intents and purposes). I'd be useful if we had a few more users more familiar with the music scene came here and either voiced support or opposition. --Johnsemlak (talk) 13:14, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
@Johnsemlak. All I can say is that they were without doubt the biggest UK band of the nineties (note the use of the word band, to denote players of instruments, not boy bands like Take That), they remained a massive band into the noughties with numerous sell out tours, and single handedly made guitar playing cool again. They were regularly top billing in tabloid and highbrow journalism with their rock and rollness, yet they even got invited to meet Tony Blair at Number 10 as the rock ambassadors of Cool Britannia. If you want to know more about their cultural impact, I would say just read the Britpop article, and consider that not only did they dominate that genre, they went past it, and outlasted every act in that article. List of awards and nominations received by Oasis is a fantastic read. Ignore BW, he's obvioulsy a bitter Blur fan! MickMacNee (talk) 13:46, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Beatles threshold might sound high, but honestly the breakup of music groups is usually not that headline grabbing (nor world influencing) unless it concerns such a group that has similar global standing. The current absence of such a group doesn't mean that that threshold should be lowered. Joshdboz (talk) 13:57, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Simply not notable. Yes, they're a big band, but their heyday was a decade ago, they've split up before (take a look at the article), and the international ramifications are pretty much nil. Modest Geniustalk14:53, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And what were the international ramifications when the Beatles split up? Did governments fall? Did people riot? Was there mass panic? Nothing mentioned in The Beatles' breakup that looks like international ramifications at all. For a band whose heydey was allegedly a decade ago in your words, they were certainly doing well on the international touring scene this decade, and in case you hadn't noticed, the 'international ramifications' of this split includes three cancelled gigs left on this current tour. Not only is your oppose factually wrong, if you actually meant international notability, how do you suppose anybody goes about proving that if the already given international news coverage is not 'it'. MickMacNee (talk) 15:24, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
LOL. OK, so I'll hang fire for a few years, then when sufficient historical notability for the split of Oasis is established, I'll jump back in time and request it again! And if you can't provide examples for the Beatles, which are being held up by many as a standard, then what was the point in mentioning 'international ramifications' at all? MickMacNee (talk) 16:34, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
In fact, for crying out loud, what were the 'international ramifications' of it being Shuttle Discovery's 'birthday' on flight 128, as it flew up to change the toilet rolls on the ISS? MickMacNee (talk) 15:37, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly, it's a falacy to claim that just because story X went up, story Y should too. Secondly, shuttle launches are listed on WP:ITNR, and thus get posted by default. You may disagree with that, but it's the current procedure. Furthermore, the shuttle launch was discussed on an earlier potential launch date (which appears to have dropped off this page), and I don't see any opposition, which there clearly is here. Modest Geniustalk15:42, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well that's handy then, because comparing other postings is apparently out, and discussing the actual nomination also appears to be out. And 'they' say ITN is a farce! Not true I say. MickMacNee (talk) 16:34, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm leaning towards oppose right now. No significant coverage seems to have emerged beyond the initial breaking news after several hours and this ("As fans question whether this really is the end") indicates an uncertainty that the event has even happened. I disagree that this is worse (for want of a better word) than Bono leaving U2 and I think a U2 or Rolling Stones split might have a wider impact (alhough this probably comes about as close as you get with a more recent band). There is also the possibility that the two brothers are known by many with little interest in their music for their personal lives or non-musical exploits like, say, Bono or Amy Winehouse (the first two which spring to my mind) are for some of theirs (thus increasing their profile among the public in a way that might not be true of rivals like Blur) but even this aspect of Oasis lacks the type of coverage I would have expected at present. --candle•wicke17:22, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
And as soon as I saved that it appeared on the news I was watching on television (among other more serious events) but it was still not called a split unfortunately (or fortunately whichever way you look at it). --candle•wicke17:30, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'd oppose this one for a few reasons. First, the band hasn't been too notable since the 90s. Second, and perhaps more relevant, I haven't heard they've broken up, only that Gallagher is leaving and the band's future is unknown; and it seems that bands break up fairly often these days. Third, there's no precedent (that I know of) for band break-ups to be on ITN. Now there's always an exception, but going back to my first point, Oasis doesn't seem like they're it, and the only bands I would consider are U2 and maybe Coldplay. The Rolling Stones haven't been relevant in a while. Deserted Cities01:01, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think the phrase 'international ramifications' can seem to be an overly high standard (the WP criteria state 'international importance or interest') but I think it's important to remember that that 'international importance' may be within a certain field of interest. Thus, the Space Shuttle has international interest in the space community (It is going to the International Space Station). Usain Bolt's record was a world record and of interest in the sports world (though insignificant to anyone not interested in Athletics). I actually think Oasis may be of some interest to the international music scene, but the recent break-up doesn't appear to be notable enough. When the Beatles broke up there was massive international interest among fans worldwide. I think either U2 or the Rolling Stones, and probably a few others, breaking up now would qualify. The Rolling Stones may not seem relevant now but their music (from the past) is still very popular and they still draw large crowds at concerts. They've visited Moscow several times and those are big events. --Johnsemlak (talk) 04:40, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The people who think Oasis were only big in the nineties seriously don't know what they are talking about. If people want to look at it that way, they were huge in the nineties, unsurpassed, and then you can merely say they were 'big' in the noughties. They performed multiple world tours in this decade, and were doing one as they split up even. I think the only issue here is a band breakup is never going to be considered worthy for ITN, probably not even U2 if it comes round, yet every single utterly non-notable trash running shuttle launch seemingly is without so much as a whimper of comment unlike here, which is clearly patent nonsense if the idea is to highlight things of interest to the world. And I have to say, people are clearly ignoring the multiple sources given demonstrating worldwide notability. As for the fact that 'they break up all the time;, well, no, they don't actually, which is why multiple sources have recognised this break up as being 'the one', just as they also recognise that neither brother has ever made a public statement of leaving the band, until now. MickMacNee (talk) 10:11, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The trouble is Mick, whilst it is certainly notable here in the UK even our media have not spent that much time covering it, so if its not getting huge coverage here there really is not much justification to place it on the main page. At the moment the kidnapping of that young girl still has not been placed on the page and yet its had days of world wide media coverage.
If we were able to get some form of topic divide like you mentioned on the talk page for entertainment, politics etc then the oasis story would belong there but not in the present format. Oh and im not a blur fan either lol =) BritishWatcher (talk) 14:09, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm an idiot of course. I missed out: some politician/government does something first in their country that has happened in a billion other countries already. Isreal/Japan have a biscuit, and welcome to ITN land. MickMacNee (talk) 22:15, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Mick, you do realize that many people who have contributed to this particular discussion aren't ITN regulars, and I've seen a couple here who raised their voices against such regulars during the Kennedy debate. Otumba (talk) 22:13, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You've talked disparagingly about an "ITN land", and said mockingly "And 'they' say ITN is a farce! Not true I say", but the fact remains that many people here are not regulars and a couple spoke out against ITN regulars earlier. Yet, the consensus here is clearly against putting up Oasis. Therefore, my point was instead of believing ITN has conspired against you, maybe you should consider that the community genuinely does not believe this is worthy of being put up on the front page. Otumba (talk) 22:22, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
ITN land is conspiring against putting anything on the main page that is of any interest to anyone. This basic observation goes beyond the split of Oasis, which was clearly worthy of mention, and which people are clearly just ignoring evidence or facts in favour of some nonsense idea of what this page is for. Nothing, I repeat, nothing, of interest, the does not involve somebody's POV idea that their particular bullshit election/political scandal/war is 'important', will ever make it onto this crappy page, unless of course, it is a shuttle mission transporting 1000 bog rolls to the ISS. MickMacNee (talk) 22:30, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Shuttle
I know there is another section down below but the page is getting too long so i'll post it here. Shuttle is launching in about half an hour. maybe it will be good idea to mention that its 25th anniversary for shuttle. first discovery launch was aug 30, 84. what do u guys think? -- Ashish-g5503:33, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
well it is 25th anniversary. its not currently mentioned in the article but i think they will mention it in launch statement. lets see... -- Ashish-g5503:48, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
How about this when it goes and the article is updated (looks good for launch):
If the shuttle has been launched, shouldn't this news go into ITN already? There seems to be consensus and the launch has happened. In any case I support it.--Johnsemlak (talk) 06:09, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
India's maiden mission to moon has ended abruptly. The lunar spacecraft has stopped sending any kind of signals and become dumb. Since this was not expected end of the mission I think the news is ITN worthy. --GPPande11:13, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
For info, judging by the article they were half way through a 2 year mapping mission of the entire lunar surface, having entered orbit on 8 Nov 08 (and had also successfully deployed and impact probe to the surface). Not bad for a first attempt imho. MickMacNee (talk) 11:25, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Right, a remarkable achivement in the very first place by ISRO folks in getting the world's cheapest mission to moon. However, the abrupt end of the mission was unexpected. Significant event in India's space history. Worthy of ITN. --GPPande11:28, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The article needs a bit more info on the loss of communication, and as far as I can tell it hasn't received much international attention besides the BBC. One or the other should improve. Joshdboz (talk) 14:06, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
in some cases like mars rover that stopped working but started again within few days. so i would say wait a day to see what india is doing about it. if it is pronounced dead (in space terms) then post it. i support but wait a bit. -- Ashish-g5518:52, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Object (but I won't cry if it gets posted): We have far too much fairly routine space stuff on ITN. "Experimental probe fails" (or "Shuttle launches successfully") is hardly the sort of notability we ask for from other subject areas. I realise that these are generally good, well-sourced articles, but I think we should be a bit more discerning as to the general impact before placing them on ITN. Physchim62(talk)20:50, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I hate to play this card, but if it were an American probe/satellite, would we put it on? Also, as Ashishg55 said, it could come back on in a few days. Deserted Cities01:05, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
umm we put almost all NASA stuff on. atleast if it has to with space exploration. So yes if it were american it would most definitely go on. so no card to be played here...space stuff is considered international regardless of country exploring it. but in any case give it a day. -- Ashish-g5501:41, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Right, the launches go up, but I'm not sure something like this would. But I could be wrong. Also, why do shuttle launches always go up? I've wondered that. Deserted Cities05:02, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Umm, no. If this was America, it would not be posted either. Space events should only be posted occasionally - and the NASA post is a major anniversary. This failure is neither really unexpected (they have been having huge problems with overheating and malfunctions with several devices on the craft for some time) nor really important outside India.
i dont know where the above person got his info from... we didnt post shuttle launch because of anniversary (read above please) and if this was american mission YES it would be posted. Now that it is confirmed i support. this is quite amazing really... using anti-US argument first to get american items in then using it to keep non-american items out...its getting a little ridiculous. this is space item for goodness sakes. i can understand arguments saying there are too many space items but what does this have to do with US!!??! -- Ashish-g5517:29, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support...this was a high profile success from an emirging space power. It's at EOM now so it's a great chance to highlight our content on the subject. Just the sort of thing that's in ITN's wheelhouse. Or should be anyway...RxS (talk) 17:46, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If by success you mean failure then you might have a point. Regardless it has no impact outside of India. Moroever India is not a major space power unlike Japan, NASA, China, Russia, ESA.
Please read what I wrote. I called it an emirging power, not a major power. It had a decent amount of success [3], and met many mission objectives:
To construct the complex spacecraft with 11 scientific instruments.
To place the spacecraft in a circular orbit around the moon by orbit raising manoeuvres from a near Earth orbit.
To place the Indian Tricolour on the moon.
To carry out imaging operations and to collect data on the mineral content of the lunar regolith.
To set up the deep space tracking network and implement the operational procedures for travel into deep space.
Jaycee Dugard, who was kidnapped as an 11-year-old in 1991, has been found alive after she walked into the Concord, California Police Department. Police arrested her accused abductor who is believed to have kept her in a tented compound for 18 years and fathered 2 children with her.
Oppose. I don't think Fritzl was even posted. And not really exceptional since Fritzl has already occurred. Either way, international kidnappings are regular enough and don't usually feature. I just don't see anything encyclopedic about this. --candle•wicke19:47, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I think the Fritzl case should have been posted IMO. In any case, I don't think an 18 year kidnapping case is a 'regular' event. It's pretty unusual and rather newsworthy.Johnsemlak (talk) 19:54, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Must be encyclopedic, we have an article on it. And I doubt it has to be the first of its kind for inclusion, that would disqualify a multitude of significant events. This kind of kidnapping is quite rare, for it's length, children born etc. RxS (talk) 20:07, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"August 27 she was confirmed to be Jaycee Lee,with a DNA test pending" so what was method used to confirm if the DNA test is still pending. is it supposed to say it hasnt been confirmed yet? or am i just reading it wrong... -- Ashish-g5520:02, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I read as they don't see a need for one because the family ID'd her well enough. I'd be surprised if they don't run one anyway. RxS (talk) 20:21, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(double ec)18 years may be a long time from a western perspective - but not neccesarily from a global perspective. You see documentaries every day that talk about unsolved kidnappings in Russia, Colombia, Somalia etc and these last for years and years. When you factor in the bias often afforded due to Missing white woman syndrome and I think you have a classic case of media sensationalism. Does Wikipedia really want to follow this line? --Daviessimo (talk) 20:04, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Plus, it became more notable because the woman was found. Kidnapping cases in countries like Russia or Columbia may seem less notable because so often the victims are never found. I live in Russia and I certainly can't think of a case of a person being found after 18 years of kidnapping.--Johnsemlak (talk) 20:19, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think you would have to take a step back from what your local and national media are telling you, ignore the headlines and work out if the story they're informing you of is truly significant or unusual. I am inclined to think nice story personally but no for Wikipedia and ITN on this one right now (if there is anything long-term or new to be revealed then who knows). However, others may differ. But when a story such as this features quite high on the front page of a prominent news site you do have to be careful and think about everything logically and encyclopedically and not jump to include anything on ITN too quickly when it has just happened. Then it moves closer to breaking news. --candle•wicke20:28, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not looking at local or national media. I'm looking at international media and seeing this reported. And I'm considering facts of the case that make it far more notable than than ordinary kidnappings. The woman was kidnapped and held in captivity for 18 years, bore two children, and found. That's a very significant crime and would make a list of notable kidnappings. There are many kidnappings all over the world but the way this one happened over a long period of time and was resolved is not typical.--Johnsemlak (talk) 20:35, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm reading news outlets worldwide, it's a high profile kidnapping story that's already encyclopedic enough for Wikipedia, see Kidnapping of Jaycee Lee Dugard. This section is called In the News and this is a news story being reported globally. It's a really unusual kidnapping and perfectly accepible for inclusion here. There's nothing that says we don't include breaking news items. RxS (talk) 20:38, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's not a matter of whether we "don't include breaking news items". It's a matter of whether we include every breaking news item. Sure, all items on ITN are breaking news, but just being breaking news alone doesn't make something ITN-worthy...it's a "necessary but not sufficient" criterion. If we included everything that was breaking news, the ITN box would be a lot bigger than it currently is. rʨanaɢtalk/contribs20:43, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No one said that we include all breaking news storys. I said we include some of them, which we do clearly. This story has enough coverage to justifly inclusion. It seems to have happened in the wrong part of the world though. RxS (talk) 21:05, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
We did not include Fritzl case which was a lot more tragic and got lot more attention. including this without proving this is more notable to me sounds very iffy. global media tends to pick up same story but for ITN it needs to be notable and bias free (as much as possible). as stated above with Missing white woman syndrome putting this up mean we just followed media blindly which makes ITN a news source. it may not be stated that we dont put breaking news but it is stated that wikipedia is not news-- Ashish-g5520:44, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not including the Fritzl case astounds me frankly. That was one of the world's biggest news items for several days, if not the biggest. But regarding this case, it seems that like the Ted Kennedy case we're too afraid to post a news item that has anything to do with the US or Western counties or whatever for fear of appearing biased. Also some opposers are making presumptions about other posters' biases (e.g. 'I think you would have to take a step back from what your local and national media are telling you'). The missing white woman syndrome argument does not consider the facts and worthiness of this case. On the contrary, it makes it appear only a non-white male's kidnapping is worthy of reporting. --Johnsemlak (talk) 20:54, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Im from the UK and weve had non stop coverage of this all day on all news channels / in the headlines of all news reports. So the claim about "local and national media" are nonsense. I too am stunned that the Fritzl case did not get added to news, i hate to imagine what occupied the ITN section those days. The missing white woman syndrome comment was rather offensive, especially as this is about an 11 year old child kidnapped and raped. BritishWatcher (talk) 20:59, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You seem to be missing the entire point about the missing white woman syndrome: would we be reading about this, or discussing this, if Dugard were black? Indian? A boy? rʨanaɢtalk/contribs21:09, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
@Rjanag That's a horribly biased view of other people's world-view. It presumes that media outlets and readers are racist beyond any objectivity. There may be a small element of truth in that but to presume that that is the only reason this is being reported is heavily biased in and of itself. It's also a lazy argument that simply presumes people are prejudiced here and doesn't examine the facts of the event.--Johnsemlak (talk) 21:18, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
OK, Maybe a more important issue here is, were this to be a little black or indian boy, would it receive as much attention in the media - and if the answer was no, would you still feel it was being covered enough to put it up. My concern here is that when you blindly follow what the media do, you inherently build upon their biases. It is for that reason that Wikipedia:News articles states "A violent crime, sensationalized event or accidental death may be notable enough to reporters and news editors to justify coverage in the news, but not be of encyclopedic importance". --Daviessimo (talk) 21:17, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(ec)eh? u really think worldwide media would follow a missing indian male... This has nothing to do with western or US news. The point is ITN doesnt follow media on everything. We know through MWWS that there is a select group that gets reported a LOT more often than other so putting this up on ITN just shows that ITN also wants to follow MWWS like other media. -- Ashish-g5521:19, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If an Indian boy were missing, no it woudln't be reported. If he were found after 18 years of being kidnapped and abused, it would quite possibly make the BBC. Quite likely actually.--Johnsemlak (talk) 21:30, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think Daviessimo's comment above pretty much says it all. News papers will add the news if they see that BBC is following and other few news papers are following. then more will add it as they dont want to be left out. soon it becomes a global news. but does it improve wikipedia as encyclopedia? no it does not. i can find alongside the kidnapping news many other news thats also reported on alsmost all sites and newspapers but that doesnt mean we must add it here too. -- Ashish-g5521:39, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(multiple edit conflicts) Well, like I said, I'm going to stick with an oppose for now. There ought to be no hurry after all. I can recall at least one child abuse/incest incident which had comparatively minor attention yet was (as tends to be the way with these cases) no less horrific so I guess you can't be too careful. Statements such as "an 11 year old child kidnapped and raped" leads to everything getting emotional but having an emotional attachment to something doesn't tend to help matters either. The comment by me which was singled out above is how I view all, not just this one and it is not a presumption about anyone or anything so hopefully I've clarified that. You're perfectly free to have a different view in my opinion but I'll hope to try to put my nonsense to some better use. --candle•wicke21:27, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No i think dismissing something about an 11 year old girl that was kidnapped and raped as " Missing white woman syndrome" is a statement that doesnt help. It was deeply offensive, and had this happened to a black or asian girl in the USA it would of got just as much attention. After the disgrace over if Kennedys death should be included i expected there to be some stupid rejections, i didnt expect it to become so offensive and get into a bloody race debate though. BritishWatcher (talk) 21:43, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Agree completely. Many objections to this news item don't concentrate on the facts of the case and instead focus on bias of Western media (which is not Wikipedia's to correct). This strongly reminds me of the Ted Kennedy incident. Objectors saying 'Western Bias, US centric' and little attention to the objective facts at hand.--Johnsemlak (talk) 21:53, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
But that misses my point, which is in discussing whether media coverage of this is biased, we're not looking at the facts of this case which either make or don't make this newsworthy. The logic seems to be if she were white, it's not; if she were black, it's worthy. No consideration of how long she was kidnapped--18 years, that she was found after that long time, and that she bore two children in captivity. Those are the real facts that should be weighed in considering the notability of this case. Not where she is from or what race she is. On one thing I would agree is that this is more dramatic because it is a woman kidnapped rather than a male but certainly doesn't necessarily mean bias.--Johnsemlak (talk) 22:04, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It wasn't dismissing, and there's no reason for it to be offended. It is widely known and reported that kidnaps and rapes of young girls get far more attention that kidnaps and rapes of boys or people of other races. That's the very reason this case has gotten so much attention; if it were about someone else, I would venture to guess that none of us would ever have heard about it. Likewise, I wasn't saying that you are racist; I was saying that the media, as we all know, is very biased. Perhaps you should actually read the article, and the sources therein, before making nonsensical comments like the one above. rʨanaɢtalk/contribs21:50, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What does any "disgrace over if Kennedys death" mean or have to do with this case... can you be more specific as I can't find anything in the article? --candle•wicke22:01, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
i think he means that because it took longer to put kennedy's death on main page as it was opposed by many that we all disgraced his death. damn if we think of it that way then within last 2 months we opposed like 30 different deaths of fairly important people. talk above a massive disgrace pile up. but ya i dont see the point of bringing that in this coversation. the arguments here have nothing to do with kennedy at all. -- Ashish-g5522:06, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think the poster meant that Wikipedia disgraced Ted Kennedy's death. I'm pretty sure it was a reference to a common opinion that the failure to post Ted Kennedy's death in ITN quickly (It took hours) reflected badly on Wikipedia. There's discussion on it in several places, including below in the August 26 section--you need to click 'show' at the Ted Kennedy portion. I admit that that incident brought me to these discussions and I am trying to stay involved.--Johnsemlak (talk) 22:13, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) Well seeing as what I have said appears to have been misinterpreted, all I can do is explain again my concern. This item was nominated with a clear focus on the fact that is was being widely reported in the media. My issue with this justification is that any biases inherent in the media reporting this are transfered through into Wikipedia. The whole white women issue has nothing do with implying racism, rather it highlights how media organisations are well known for there tendency to have biases in media coverage. The issue being raised is, if this happened exactly the same, but to a black girl, in say Nigeria (which is another large, English speaking country) would the media give it the same attention? If the answer to that question is no, then by attempting to justify the inclusion of this item based upon what the media do, you are inherently continuing a bias that exists in the media into Wikipedia, something that shouldn't be happening. If you remove all consideration for the breadth of coverage in the media at look at this completely objectively, the question is, what is the current encyclopaedic value of this kidnapping over any other kidnapping? --Daviessimo (talk) 22:16, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Media attention is one but not the only reason this has been nominated. There's also the unusual specifics of the crime. Some objectors to this are focusing solely on the possibility that media attention is a result of Western bias IMO. OK, it's a real issue, but based on conversations I've followed the last week here there seems to be a near blanket over any news item that has a hint of Western bias or US centrism.--Johnsemlak (talk) 22:23, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well anyway, I wasn't online for any of that so am not fully familiar with what went on and anyone who hasn't witnessed it is thereby, I imagine, left wondering who or what "if kennedy" is or was when they're trying to make sense of this one. But I'd be concerned by the "common opinion" that something should be posted immediately and that it would be a disgrace that it should take hours. ITNs are regularly posted hours and days after they occur and that sort of immediate recklessness had Michael Jackson posted as dead before it was certain and then changed to "reported dead" on the Main Page instead of being removed thus contradicting the whole process. The same sort of recklessness led to something being posted on changes in the Chinese language recently, something which later proved to be inaccurate. It is not an attack on those who did it but why is there a "common opinion" that one should be rushed? So I would ask, on this and any nomination, why the rush? Is it not better to be certain and consistent rather than to respond to our emotions, e.g. "my favourite singer/politician has died" or "a child was raped" and demand it be posted without delay because the TV is bombarding you with extreme images? Why is it justifiable to post some nominations immediately when most must wait? But Daviessimo makes a good point above—how is this encyclopedic? It may very well be but nobody (I think) has explained how yet. --candle•wicke22:44, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with all of the above. This isn't just about media bias; it's about whether this is encyclopedic, appropriate, and important. No one doubts that the story is interesting. But ITN, as far as I know, is generally only for things that have a major impact on something in the world: major political changes and wars, major natural disasters, major events in sport or entertainment (such as Usain Bolt's WR that's on the main page right now) that affect lots of people. This story, while interesting, doesn't really have any major effect on the world, as far as I can tell. rʨanaɢtalk/contribs22:50, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
How does Usain Bolt's record qualify as having a major effect on the world? It's interesting...but has no major impact on anything. And yet, there it is. That's the disconnect and the sure sign that something else is going on other than ITN guidelines. RxS (talk) 23:10, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's an exact thought I had earlier. I think nearly every item reported in ITN could be argued as having little impact on most people in the world. Admittedly, this makes choosing what is significant news difficult. I appreciate the need to try to be unbiased. In any case, IMO in the ITN debates I have witnessed recently there is a tendency to apply a more stringent test on events that are US based or Western based than events elsewhere, in the attempt to avoid US or Western bias. I would guess that if the same kidnapping had happened in India or Nigeria and ITN editors were aware of it, it would be posted without any accusations of bias.--Johnsemlak (talk) 23:33, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
@Johnsemlak did u ever think maybe its the opposite? that any opposes to a western item has people accusing opposers of having some anti-US agenda as a way of justifying the item. this item as stated many times above has nothing to do with US bias. this is a global problem with media where a small group getting kidnapped is reported heavily. and all arguments above state that wikipedia should be avoiding that. also candlewicke is right. just last week we had 6 items waiting for 2 days. i dont understand why things need to be posted instantly without proper consensus,updates or even sometimes confirmation of the actual event. -- Ashish-g5522:52, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree there isn't a rush on this particular piece. It could use further debate. It's also a developing news item. The Ted Kennedy issue was a different matter as there was certainly no debate that he was actually dead. But on this topic, I think it's simply important to weigh the facts of this case. Also, you saying that the 'global problem with the nedia', while possibly true, is not a NPOV--it's highly subjective. I would agree with the Davidissimo that it's hard to imagine a scenario like this happening in Nigeria and getting reported by western media, but there are many reasons for that (how feasible is it to report in Nigeria where it's dangerous for westerners and there are political obstacles). But that shouldn't mean that we ignore this item. I'll repeat that I think it's a highly unusual crime that lasted a long period of time, comparable to the Fritzl case (which I'm still astounded was not an ITN news piece--that's a major failure. Ok, we can't go back and correct it but using it as an argument against reporting this event is very unreasonable). --Johnsemlak (talk) 23:10, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
See here under 18 March (beneath Natasha Richardson and, by that topic's standards, a quite short discussion on some sport or another) for Fritzl's trial and its several opposes—including a "strong no". That's why the verdict wasn't posted. --candle•wicke23:55, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As long as we're comparing cases here, I'll repeat my question from above (it was not rhetorical): How does Usain Bolt's record qualify as having a major effect on the world? What beyond being interesting justifies it? RxS (talk) 00:22, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A large world record in a major sporting event is far more newsworthy than this because it sets a new bar that people will be talking about and comparing things to for years to come. It may be the case that this sport is something you are not very interested in, but the fact of the matter is that a record like this still is influential. Something like the Dugard story, though, is far less influential, and is little more than an interesting story. rʨanaɢtalk/contribs03:53, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That record has been broken 3 times in the last year and 6 times in the last 10 years. How influential can it be? The Dugard story will affect how police follow-up on kidnappings, child safety and how sex offenders are treated/tracked for the long term...it's already starting. RxS (talk) 20:40, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am not even sure i want to explain this but i will give it a shot. When posting sports events effect and interest are pretty much same thing... i really thought everyone knew that. i dont really have an example of a sport event having "major effect" on people. Sports are all about interest. The 100m is nicknamed fastest man in world so whenever anyone breaks that record its a very BIG deal. -- Ashish-g5501:23, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I wonder if there was to be a suggestion of no more sports on ITN. Since they don't usually affect very many people. But I imagine some people would be displeased. To put it mildly. --candle•wicke02:10, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There's lot's of international coverage, please read this section for examples and links. And as should be obvious from what is consistantly included, international importance is not a necessary component. RxS (talk) 03:12, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
On the CNN.com (the international edition) this isn't the top story. I'd want us to quit on the roll coll of links and focus the amount of coverage it is getting from the media, not just the number of media outlets that have an article on this. –HowardtheDuck03:16, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Who in the world ever claimed that it was the top story? Who cares how a single outlet treats it? The amount of coverage worldwide is considerable. Both straight news and followup. The media is all over this story, both in terms of numbers and depth. I understand that you don't want this included, but your logic doesn't hold up at all. RxS (talk) 20:32, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note that ITN says "international importance or interest." I'm measuring "international importance or interest" by the importance the media is giving the story, in my case, I measure it if it is mentioned prominently on a website, or it appears as a headline in a newspaper, or it is the first one mentioned in a TV news report, etc. I've come to quit the roll call of links that has been used before here since it doesn't represent that "international importance or interest" signifies. If we'd follow by these number of links rule, A LOT of stories will get be "international importance or interest", most of them will be U.S. stories and you people won't like that. –HowardtheDuck12:53, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No offense intended, but how is this story a commentary on 'violence against women' in general? It's an isolated incident, committed by a criminal, condemned by society, and clearly extraordinary (as evidenced by the fact that people are so interested in it)—doesn't seem like a commentary on this society or country in general, it's just one event. rʨanaɢtalk/contribs03:55, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What I was trying to say is, I don't see how this illustrates a larger issue. Does the article say anything about how this incident sheds light on American society, or on how big an issue kidnappings are, or anything else like that? rʨanaɢtalk/contribs07:32, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't wish to be harsh here, and I don't personally doubt,nor do I deny the horrific nature of what is said to have happened, but at the moment all there is is an allegation. The only thing that we know incontrovertibly is that a person who was reported missing 18 years ago has been found. Let the process of law take place, then, if the story is still in the public eye, we might report it. It is a well established principle of ITN that we report the outcome of legal cases, not their instigation. Kevin McE (talk) 09:25, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
*Support - Since it's pretty clear from recent event that ITN is a busted process that seems to be out of whack with the rest of wikipedia - who's to say that still holds true? --Cameron Scott (talk) 10:03, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
*Does that mean all arguments against can be ignored (since they might no longer apply) and just post whatever is nominated even if it is an allegation or might turn out not to be true? --candle•wicke20:13, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I wonder does this count for much (it is in the news at regular intervals, so much so that they haven't bothered to explain who she is in the first sentence). --candle•wicke18:32, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I started a discussion at Talk:Burma#Fighting and refugees suggesting to add something to the article on this; it's gotten a fair amount of coverage, I have two news articles in that discussion and lower on this very page there are three more (search the page for "Burma"). The NYT article claims that this is the biggest fighting there in 20 years, and as many as 10,000 (some claim 30,000) refugees have fled to Yunnan province, China. rʨanaɢtalk/contribs15:41, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hm... according to the Bangkok Post article, the violence began on August 8 and much of the refugee movement was 8–12, so maybe it's a bit old... on the other hand, though, none of this seems to have been widely reported until Aug 26–7. I'll try to scour the articles some more to see if there's been any new development or anything, or if the media has just be slow on the uptake... rʨanaɢtalk/contribs15:50, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(out) I've made an article now, and here's a blurb:
Support - very interesting and encyclopedic, would fit nicely and give an intriguing link for folks to follow to some areas that might not necessarily be regularly seen in ITN. Tony Fox(arf!)15:47, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
here it says "Each use should be accompanied by the credit line and notice, Courtesy of IBM Research - Zurich. Unauthorized use not permitted. Copying of images for further distribution or commercial use is prohibited without the express written consent of IBM." so if u put that credit and it is non-commercial it can be used. i am not positive about further distribution remark though... maybe someone else can comment on this. but yes the image is not in public domain though so now i am not sure if it will be allowed on main page. although its image of a molecule... u would think IBM wants it to be made known as long as it was credited to IBM. -- Ashish-g5518:02, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It can't. We require that the image be completely free from restrictions on re-use ("Images which are listed as for non-commercial use only, by permission, or which restrict derivatives are unsuitable for Wikipedia and will be deleted on sight, unless they are used under fair use. from Wikipedia:Image use policy). It is still a good candidate for ITN though and I support it - Dumelow (talk) 18:13, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am pretty sure this would qualify under fair use but we have this weird no fair use image policy just for main page. sigh. this is one of those images that everyone should see, its quite amazing really. -- Ashish-g5518:19, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
after reading more i dont think i wanna edit the article lol. not qualified enough to talk about AFMs. i dropped a note and hopefully this will get updated and posted within a couple days. -- Ashish-g5520:46, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I would support inclusion if an article is updated. The AFM article would be the place, which need a description of the CO attachment process. Unfortunately I don't have access to the Science article atm. Modest Geniustalk15:50, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This is notable, interesting and informative. Should be added when there are developments, i see most recent news from AP 20 mins ago is they have elected a speaker. [5]BritishWatcher (talk) 14:38, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I doubt this has gained much media attention (apart from coverage by PBS itself). I may be reading the intro to that article wrong but it doesnt make sense to me. "Reading Rainbow is an American children's television series aired by PBS from June 6, 1983 until November 10, 2006, that encourages reading among children. The show will cease airing on PBS on Friday, August 28, 2009 after 26 years on the air." What happened on November 10 2006? BritishWatcher (talk) 14:28, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose If it were Sesame Street I'd agree but this is not on the same level. I imagine there isn't precedent for what TV show cancellations are sufficiently newsworthy for ITN.--Johnsemlak (talk) 15:36, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. From what I gather from the article, the show supposedly last aired on November 10, 2006. Is it possible today was just the day they stuck a fork in it? --Smashvilletalk18:34, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
since death criteria isnt about head of state for politicians anymore i think this qualifies. he seems to have had fair amount of influence in iraq. support after a little more expansion. -- Ashish-g5521:55, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support. This conflict has generated major international attention, even if its smoldering finish has not attracted much attention. Joshdboz (talk) 16:02, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support also. However, the wording needs to be carefully selected because there remains ongoing fighting between rival groups on a smaller scale and, as such, we don't want to imply that all fighting has ceased --Daviessimo (talk) 16:07, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I was going to support this as it seems very notable, but this is just a military leaders opinion, in the very article its challenged as unhelpful by an analyst. To put on the front page the war is over or even "effectively over" as described in the article would be misleading and confusing. Also i cant find other coverage of this statement, things seem to be progressing but not enough yet if violence is on going still and no sign of a peace deal. BritishWatcher (talk) 18:22, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Is that a joke? It has been months since Darfur has even been suggested on ITN/C. I support, but agree that it shouldn't try to say the fighting is completely over. Therequiembellishere (talk) 19:44, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Technically, yes it is (in reply to the stupid "US-centric" comments made below), but I do oppose because the issue has not been resolved, noted in the article and in the comments preceding mine. seicer | talk | contribs19:48, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
To be honest I'm not sure about this. As far as I'm aware, we didn't put up Zac Sunderland when he broke the record not all that long ago. Also the governing body of sailing no longer recognise youngest sailor as a record so this record is only going to included in the Guiness book of records --Daviessimo (talk) 07:24, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - A good accomplishment but the same could be said for many records broken every day. Would be a good item for an "On this day" next year to mark his success. BritishWatcher (talk) 18:25, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support, especially if the "variety of sanctions against India by a number of major states" from the article is true. However, the article requires some work on its references and lack of them. --candle•wicke21:48, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
OK, this is where we see this blind US-centricism creeping in again. You can't really compare Kennedy to Les Paul (who was one of, if not the most important pioneer of 20th century music - remember without Les Paul there is no Beatles et al.) or Aquino (who was a former head of state). What makes Ted Kennedy more notable than any of the other 99 US senators? What makes a US Senator as important as a former Philippine head of state or nobel prize winning South Korean president? The only response that evers seems to come up, is because they are American and the US is apparently the centre of the universe, lord of all nations etc etc. Unless they have had a major impact on politics then political deaths should be reserved for current and former political leaders. For that reason I'm going to oppose --Daviessimo (talk) 08:23, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I am going to support because the loss of Ted Kennedy means the US Senate no longer has a filibuster Democratic block and won't for months due to Massachusetts laws that require a certain downtime before another senator is elected. This could have huge implications with the US health care bill that is currently being considered. While not world news, it will definitely have ramifications in the US. And honestly, I've never even heard of Les Paul, no offense. I also am not a huge fan of music. –Darius von Whaleyland,Great Khanof the Barbarian Horde08:51, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Ted Kennedy is obviously internationally notable, the sources from Deserted Cities say it all. This is no ordinary Senator. (Note that I opposed putting up Al Franken's seating, and that's from my home state.) I actually think this will help the health care bill by galvanizing its supporters... Grandmasterka09:35, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Why not? According to the death criteria, only one of the three must be met. He was a Senator, thus a high-ranking official. His impact speaks for itself. Deserted Cities10:16, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support. But it's not. This is the last of the Kennedy brothers who just died. We could of course discuss this for a week or so, then put it up in the "In the news" section, and make complete and utter fools of ourselves. Lampman (talk) 10:47, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ted Kennedy was not just a senator. He's been one of the highest-profile figures in American politics for 45 years. Your cries of US-centrism are meaningless; I propose there's a bias towards meaningless pap (cricket games and beauty pageants) and we should counter this bias with stories of political and economic significance. Noisalt (talk) 11:57, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
He was without a doubt the most influenful United States Senator of the past 50 years. Front page in almost every newspaper in the world explains it all. Not every American politician gets that treatment. SupportSecretaccount12:19, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
OK look, people keep using the argument that it is headline news across the world as an argument for this to go up, but with deaths this is not a valid measurement of importance. Like I've said a hundred times before a person is only notable for what they have done, not who they are - like I always say, apply the Tim Berners-Lee test - most people have never heard of him, but no-one can ever doubt the importance he has had in modern history. Yes Ted Kennedy is well known, but this is because of who he is and not because as a senator he has changed the face of American politics. Also I would just like to highlight a problematic fallacy with some of the argument which are claiming that the story is headline news around the world. I know from how the BBC works that if you live outside the UK, when you visit the BBC website you are taken to the BBC World home page and not the proper BBC homepage (which is .co.uk not .com) The top story on the proper BBC is not this story but rather a story relating the violence between West Ham and Millwall fans last night. I suspect the same is the case for other websites around the world and, as such, just because what you see is one thing, doesn't mean that is what people in the country in question are seeing --Daviessimo (talk) 12:55, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, the Times of London currently has Kennedy's death as the lead story in it's UK edition, or at least that's what I'm seeing sitting in Russia. Also, I would think that if the BBC Global website has it as the lead story, that would be stronger grounds than the UK version. The BBC Global site is global in outreach, therefore more relevant to what is in ITN than the UK version.--Johnsemlak (talk) 17:37, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
We have quite a simple criteria with a politician death (does not matter if it is stated somewhere or not). We post either head of state or former head of state. As i see it kennedy was neither and i dont remember (or have read) him having a worldwide impact to make an exception. strong oppose. we would fill the ITN with deaths everyday otherwise. but it doesnt really matter when it comes to US news. some admin always seems to post it either way -- Ashish-g5513:04, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
lol this is hilarious. while i was typing the above some admin posted it. in what world is all of the above a proper consensus... -- Ashish-g5513:07, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Posted for better or for worse. I'm personally on the fence about whether this is an appropriate addition, leaning on oppose, but the death criteria appears to permit it, even if it shouldn't have. -- tariqabjotu13:11, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Death criteria also does not state that it is ok to post a US senator where as not ok to post Canadian primeres, Indian chief of states etc etc. We quite literally expanded the field for US deaths by 99 people based on BBC posting it on their front page. As Daviessimo just said they had Millwall story last night on front page... we dont post every front page news because that is not our criteria. we are not a news source. we should be trying to remove as much bias from ITN as we can not add more by expanding a US only death field... this is more US centric in my opinion than Sonia Sotomayer making it on ITN like 3 times for same news story. -- Ashish-g5513:42, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"We quite literally expanded the field for US deaths by 99 people based on BBC posting it on their front page." I don't think that's what happened. -- tariqabjotu13:56, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
if this stayed up then yes we did. at next senator death people will come and show us the diff for this addition. and there is absolutely nothing that can be done then since logically if u post this one u will have to post others too. -- Ashish-g5514:10, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
i know what u mean but i only speak from experience. too many items get posted because we posted the last one. there will never be a good enough reason to not post the next one if we post this. -- Ashish-g5514:28, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(←)Strong OpposeThis is happening time and again. Every time anything happens in the US, its popped up in ITN. Just because all the news website cover this doesn't make it ITN worthy - the sheer fact that anything is US is closely followed by all major news websites (some of them are even from the US) is not an excuse. All the factors mentioned above: Kennedy Family, Health Bill, Majority in the US Senate etc., are issues which mean ZILCH in the rest of the world. The criteria specifically says that a death can be added to ITN only if there is consensus in the group. With so many oppositions, we definitely don't have a consensus. Admin: Please remove the posting from the ITN till a consensus is reached. Again, remember (as the critiera states) we are not a news website. Its not mandatory that we need to be quick posting stuff. -Natrajdr (talk) 14:04, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support INT debates seem to attract both those too America-centric and those too America-paranoid. There's one reason that this story can be found on the front pages of most major news sites around the world, and that's because the Kennedy mystique is not limited to the US by any means. (As for international coverage, this is one of the top stories on Times of India and Xinhua) Joshdboz (talk) 14:12, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, for my 10 cents, I would have opposed. I thank Wikipedia for showing that Kennedy had died, as I have long been interested in his life and Wikipedia's information spurned me to turn on the TV and learn more, but he is a US senator. An important senator, yes, but he's not had a great worldwide impact in what he did during his life. I will go so far as to say I believe some US-centricism is behind the posting of Kennedy's death; I find it hard to believe something on the death of Tony Benn will be posted. Otumba (talk) 14:21, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The only correct thing you said is that the death was not unexpected. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.37.216.66 (talk • contribs) 18:46, 26 August 2009
US Senator is not a major office of state, regardless of how long he held it. I was referring to positions such as head of state, head of government, or in charge of a major government ministry (eg foreign minister, treasury minister). Ted Kennedy never held any of those; he was an important legislator, but there are many of those, in many countries. Modest Geniustalk19:40, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Support Highly infulential and clearly world-famous statesman and historical figure (in both US and Irish politics, at the very least). Clearly Wikipedia has a vocal anti-US minority who wants to silence any US stories on the front page, but in this case the man is clearly an icon far beyond the borders of his state. It is quite silly to see "In The News" not featuring a story on which President Obama is to address the nation. 80.193.130.5 (talk) 14:48, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Support. I find this a ridiculous debate. Ted Kennedy is clearly a interntionally notable person. Posting it does not mean we have to put any US senator's death. His death is the lead story in just about every major news outlet of note (compared with the Ashes, which was not). Add nearly all Russian news media to the list of media that are covering this. I teach at a British school in Russia and my British and Russian colleagues informed me that Ted was dead right when it happened. This is a major international news item--end of story.--Johnsemlak (talk) 16:28, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, it was added a few hours ago. However, after a short while being up, it was removed on account of there not actually being a consensus here to add it. I suspect, seeing how this discussion is going, that no consensus will be reached to put it up. There's just too much opposition. Otumba (talk) 15:13, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Too US-centric. Non-notable politician. The only reason this is getting so much attention in Anglophone media is because the man was American. Offliner (talk) 15:15, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support One of the most prolific and longest-serving senators in U.S. history; his death has made international headlines, so this isn't U.S.-centric. It appears as though in trying to avoid a U.S. bias, ITN is actually becoming biased against U.S. topics. Cheers, Rai•me15:20, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Support. As has been mentioned above, the largest significance that Senator Kennedy's death holds is in the fact that the Democrats no longer have a filibuster-proof supermajority in the United States Senate, and will not have one again until January of next year, barring a change in Massachusetts law to allow a temporary appointment until after the special election. This means that the healthcare reform legislation currently dominating the national discussion in the U.S. will likely be on hold until then. This alone would probably be notable enough for ITN. Senator Franken's belated election victory was enough to make ITN if I recall, largely due to its supermajority implications, so I don't see why the loss of that supermajority would be any less noteworthy. The fact that Senator Kennedy was the last of a terrifically important dynasty in American politics, was universally recognized as being one of the most effective United States Senators in the Twentieth Century, and was a highly controversial figure in American politics due to his personal life as much as his political positions (he is invoked as a bogeyman by the right as much as, if not more than, he is invoked as a hero by the left), makes this a no-brainer. Here's a thought on a blurb:
Out of curiosity, why is the loss of the Democratic super-majority of any interest to the world? Wikipedia caters to the world, not just to an American audience. Otumba (talk) 17:17, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Extremely strong 'death to America' oppose. Come on, why are we discussing this? We all hate the US. We want more British-centric stuff on ITN. When is the next rugby match that we can put on ITN? Nutmegger (talk) 17:12, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Support What's with all the crazy anti-americanism? This is a wildly internationally notable individual, easily the most famous US senator, both for his incredibly wide-ranging legislative accomplishments (he is one of the world's most accomplished legislators) and his incredibly famous family. His immigration reforms of 1965 reshaped more than just America forever. His death fundamentally alters the composition of the legislature of the United States of America. This is rightfully one of the top news stories around the world today. It is sad to see anti-Americanism is more important than encyclopedic judgment at Wikipedia.
There's 347 Google News results for Ted Kennedy in France, 589 in Spain, and only 525 in the UK. This is not a lot when compared to the 11,805 in the US. This suggests to me that this does not have much worldwide impact or interest. (I know Google isn't an entirely reliable indicator, but it can be used as a small barometer).
As further evidence, Les Paul gets 8,472 French hits—a massive increase compared to Kennedy.
Les Paul's death was noted basically nowhere, while Kennedy's death is the No. 1 topic around the globe. I am from Germany, and Kennedy's death is reported as No. 1 news in every TV channel. --bender235 (talk) 17:56, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I just did a search of Ted Kennedy at Google news UK and got over 9500 hits. Same with Google News Australia. Over 1000 hits (less, but a lot) at Google Noticias Mexico.--Johnsemlak (talk) 17:59, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Just for everyone who are arguing about super majority or whatever it is called. i just want to know if we should expect another item when they do get super majority again (which they just recieved after Al franken who did go up on ITN). or if they lose it again due to some other death or resignation then again when they regain it? because i really thought we used to only put head of state getting elected. Im sorry if it sounds "anti-american" but it seems we put up any changes in US government no matter what they are (super majority gain, loss, supreme court nominee, supreme court elect, senator elect etc etc). If this isnt US centric bias then i dont know what is. AND PLEASE stop showing google hits as they will not be a factor taken into account, never have before and never will. we are not google or news service. -- Ashish-g5518:01, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think if he were from any other country, any person who generated this much news coverage would by already posted in ITN without controversy. --Johnsemlak (talk) 18:43, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No doubt about it. I'd never thought I'd be saying this, but I'm actually taken aback by the baseness of the anti-Americanism displayed here. The amount of inflammable comments and nigh-on uncivil cherry picking is downright embarrassing. I can't find a single oppose that is even remotely relevant to the criteria. Everything is either misrepresentation or "too much America". Maybe this is all just because the wrong people woke up on the wrong side of the bed on the wrong day, but it seems to me as if ITN is inherently incapable of handling deaths in any consistent manner.
Strong support Seriously. Not having this on the main page and instead having beauty pageant contestants and cricket matches while every other news organization has been reporting this all day makes Wikinews, and Wikipedia by extension, look like a joke. Chuthya (talk) 18:28, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That better? This event satisfies critera 1 and 2 of recent deaths, and arguably even criteria 2. This whole debate has been ridiculous. It shouldn't take the better part of a day to get this on the ITN section! Chuthya (talk) 19:36, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(a) the deceased was in a high ranking office of power at the time of death, ->>> He was not head of state. which is what a politicians high rank needs to be for ITN.
(b) the deceased was a key figure in their field of expertise, and died unexpectedly or tragically, ->>>> died of brain cancer at age 77. The field being politician he was not head of state.
(c) the death has a major international impact that affects current events. The modification or creation of multiple articles to take into account the ramifications of a death is a sign that it meets the third criterion. ->>>>> Google hits does not qualify neither does front page of news sources. thats what wikinews is for. So by my count it fails to meet any criteria. -- Ashish-g5519:48, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing in the ITN Critera on Deaths states that it has to be a head of state. US Senator is one of the highest levels of power in US politics. Denying this fact displays a gross misunderstanding of the US political system. Chuthya (talk) 20:08, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Opposing because it's US-centric is just plain stupid, if we have a British or any other thing you almost never see, Oppose, too "british-centric". Kennedy was a major figure and the last living brother (?) of JFK thus he made an American impact, not sure how worldwide though.--Giants27 (c|s) 18:44, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Giants, what you have unwittengly done is highlight the US centricism that is so talked about in this discussion. You support the item because he had an impact in the US, irrelevant of his impact internationally. For someone to be notable enough to go on ITN they have to had a major impact on their field internationally. In political terms that sort of importance is reserved only for heads of state and political leaders and Kennedy was neither. Also, when will people understand the ITN is not a news service - it is not our responsibility to follow what CNN or the BBC or Le Monde do. Given that 99% of the time the top stories on these websites are no good for ITN (and we subsequently don't blindly follow them), why is it that this is what people are saying we should be doing now? --Daviessimo (talk) 19:34, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No, I know exactly what I'm talking about. In countries that have monarchies the political leader (usually a Prime Minister) is not the head of state. Thus, in politics a notable death can either be the head of state (if the country is a republic) or a political leader (usually a PM in a constitutional monarchy). But of course disregarding WP:CIV and making a personal attack is more fun I suppose --Daviessimo (talk) 20:29, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Whoa Nelly! Sorry to butt in, but I sense some sort of a clash emerging him which will not leave both parties with big smiles. I agree, Daviessimo, that Lar could have phrased better than "You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about", but I'm sure he meant no personal attack and just got a bit carried away. Truce? Otumba (talk) 20:34, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If what is meant was "head of government" (PM, or head of state) that's what should have been said. But anyone who says Kennedy wasn't a political leader (in the commonly accepted meaning of the term, someone who has great influence in politics in a given country) of the US really doesn't know what they're talking about. It's no sin to be ignorant, and it's not a personal attack to point out ignorance, if in so doing, enlightenment will follow. Let us hope for that, because what I see here is a lot of insularity and ownership... perhaps it's a good thing that a major event brought some non regulars here to see exactly what sort of arguments are advanced... hopefully not on a regular basis. ++Lar: t/c20:55, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support. The absence of Senator Kennedy from the front page is a glaring omission that has been troubling me all day, and I am frankly considering IAR'ing this and posting it within the next few minutes. Newyorkbrad (talk) 19:25, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
IAR on Main page is a really bad idea. Please, first read the comments of people who run ITN every day. --Tone19:31, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This is not the case. ITN has some guidelines and ITN people are more familiar with them. That's it. Also, TFA and DYK have guidelines. And several people have expressed their opinions why in this case the guidelines are not met. --Tone19:59, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I can tell pretty much everyone opposing is doing an IAR by making highly imaginative interpretations of the death criteria or ignoring them altogether.
I don't think I've ever seriously IAR'd in my three years here, but this seems like a fine place to start. The absence of this item from the mainpage today is indefensible. Any concerns about US-centricity are undercut by the fact that no other US-based items are listed on ITN right now. Newyorkbrad (talk) 19:43, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Support Per above reasons. U.S.-centric should not be a valid argument for every news item brought up. Kennedy is just as notable as Les Paul, who was listed for days. Gage (talk) 19:44, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
oppose - it's far more important that we have the death of a Taliban leader and the crowning of this year's Miss whatever on the front page then the death of some US Senator. So what if he was brother of someone many consider their favorite US president, a perennial shadow candidate for president himself, scion of one of the leading political families of the east, sponsor of over 500 bils that made it into law and the third longest sitting US senator, the Ashes series in cricket is MUCH more important than that. ++Lar: t/c19:56, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not every US senator is important enough to be listed on ITN, I suppose, but this is frickin Ted Kennedy. He was a significant liberal voice in the Senate for 50 years. He killed someone and got away with it. He ran for President. Before his death he was the leading voice for health care reform which could affect 1/6th of the US economy. He passed and Overrode Ronald Regan's veto of the Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act of 1986 (world-wide significance?) He was Knighted! Another blow against Wikipedia as a serious and credible information source. Thatcher20:04, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A death should only be placed on ITN if it meets one of the following criteria:
(a) the deceased was in a high ranking office of power at the time of death
(b) the deceased was a key figure in their field of expertise, and died unexpectedly or tragically
(c) the death has a major international impact that affects current events. The modification or creation of multiple articles to take into account the ramifications of a death is a sign that it meets the third criterion.
Now as far as I can see no-one has explained how Kennedy's deaths meets any of these criteria. Arguments are limited to saying that he was very important in America and as such it is ITN worthy, saying his death is being followed by loads of news organisations across the globe and ITN should follow suit or saying that opposing on the grounds of US centricism is not a valid reason and as such should not stop this going up--Daviessimo (talk) 20:16, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Concur. It is unfortunate that accusations of anti-Americanism are now flying around, along with a threat at IAR, but it doesn't help that US-centricism accusations have been made by people, including me, for which I apologize. My basic point is that the criteria labelled above does not cover Kennedy; to put briefly, he was an important figure in the US, not in the world. Otumba (talk) 20:24, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
well i did explain in steps how it does not meet the criteria. the response was "US Senator is one of the highest levels of power in US politics", so i stopped replying. Im sorry but clearly people supporting dont even want to read why the item doesnt meet guidelines. i got nothing against US items or Kennedy. He was great senator sure but this news item is limited within US and logically if u post this u should be posting 2nd level (below head of state) politician deaths for entire world. Since we will clearly not do that then posting this item makes ITN US-centric by default. People comparing this to Les Paul should first find out that Les Paul was a musician who had worldwide impact and thats why it was posted. ITN is not breaking news or today's top stories. it needs to stay neutral (as much as possible) across whole world and for that reason it should not be posted (unless ofcourse all those supporting would like to come back and support every death of other countries 2nd level politicians. but most likely no one will be seen on ITN again and the regular people will have deal with the aftermath). -- Ashish-g5520:27, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have added a brief mention of Senator Kennedy's death to the listings as its absence at this point is absurd and glaring. Please also see my edit summary for the addition, which invokes WP:IAR, if needed. I have kept the item brief given the lack of complete consensus for its inclusion, and not added a photograph, although I strongly recommend that it be added. Newyorkbrad (talk) 20:33, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Really not a good idea, and I'm glad another admin has reverted. WP:IAR is good for some situations, but with such a heated debate going on with neither side having majority support, arbitrarily trying to impose your own view seems very unwise. I understand your annoyance at this not being up; I myself am annoyed that a user is going around removing the order of succession of various incumbent leaders, despite my reverts, but in the end sometimes we must all accept our view don't always win. Otumba (talk) 20:40, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Absurd is not the word I'd use Brad. Nowhere near strong enough. Yes I understand we do not want to be all US all the time, but this is bloody ridiculous. SirFozzie (talk) 20:46, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
To be honest, I think I will support having Kennedy up just to prevent this whole thing degrading further. Arguments about whether Kennedy should be up or not are not worth enough to have the mudslinging that is happening between some editors now. Otumba (talk) 20:49, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I second that. This news is being reported all over the world. To give some countries that people haven't mentioned: Japan, Italy, and South Africa. Most International coverage features multiple articles and multimedia coverage like video and pictures. Gujarat Samachar, a niche Indian newspaper published in a local language, also has a front page article on this, as does Sandesh, another local newspaper. I'd say that the coverage in these newspapers and TV channels, across several languages, in addition to coverage on the Guardian, the Times, Le Monde, etc. speaks for the importance the global press assigns to the topic. In terms of his impact, leaders all over the world (a mostly complete list at Huffington Post) have come out to remember him. Ted Kennedy was the brother of an American president and a near-President, and ran for the post himself. He brokered peace in Northern Ireland and has been a steadfast supporter of Israel. The only argument I've heard against adding him to the ITN section is that he is a Senator, and that he is an American. The American argument I won't even address. But the Senator argument? He's not just any Senator. He's the most prolific and powerful senator in American history, matched only by Henry Clay. He's a political celebrity with deep familial ties to the Oval Office and with supporters all over the world. Would foreign Prime Ministers feel obliged to respond to the death of Al Franken? would that be covered in every foreign newspaper worth the paper its printed on? Would that be on the main page of the French, Portuguese, Dutch, Swedish, etc. Wikipedias? The answer, by the way, is no, because Al Franken is just another Senator, no more important globally than Shinjiro Koizumi or Alan Campbell. However, the title of Senator (or, equivalently, MP) does not disqualify someone from being considered important globally- look at Barack Obama or Hilary Clinton. They were household names all over the world while still acting in a Senatorial capacity. The point is, in every country, some legislators are more prominent than others. For a select few, that prominence in global. Ted Kennedy, while not necessarily a topic of active discussion, is a household name in my village of a hometown in India- which is more than the Canadian Prime Minister can say. To not report his death on Wikipedia- excuse me, to report his death on every version of Wikipedia but the English one- is simply shameful for a website that claims to be the centre of information on the web.
Support Even speaking as a European surrender monkey who sometimes gets irritated with US-centrics here, to leave this off ITN is ludicrous. Black Kite20:46, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This should never, ever, ever happen again that a handful of editors block the placement of an obviously newsworthy death. It's absurd that this discussion occurred, let alone went this long. Tan | 3920:53, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
80% of supporters stepped on this page for the first time (or in a very long time atleast) and did not give a crap about what ITN guidelines are and people who opposed were simply trying to state why the item does not qualify. those 80% will never be seen again here and not that their support does not matter IT DOES but atleast try to justify the support. or listen to editors who do know the guidelines. The reason why it seems like the item took long is because every US government change gets nominated and argued upon over here. -- Ashish-g5521:05, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If the completely embarrassing conversation listed above is typical of the regular constributors here then perhaps it is time for some new eyes to get involved at ITN. Any random American senator dying, fair enough ... but Ted Kennedy?! Frankly astonishing. Black Kite21:08, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
you are more than welcome or any of u above to come here more often. but fact is almost none will and when some other "random" US senator dies and gets nominated we will go through exact same discussion again with new people and no one will remember ur statement. seen it happen again and again over past years. and calling above discussions "embarrasing" shows u do not know much about ITN yourself. -- Ashish-g5521:13, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is probably best that I wrote "embarrassing" rather than what I actually think about that conversation and some of those that took part in it. Black Kite21:17, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
At the end of the day there is a concensus and this item has gone up - fair play. But can I just ask, of the many admins and general editors, who have come here to comment on this and in the process seemingly acted to criticise and attack regular ITN contributors like myself, how many of you will be contributing to ITN tomorrow? Or next week? Or even next month? Its all well and good criticising us over this (and the end of the day all I've done like many others is follow the criteria laid down as WP:ITN/DC), but come tomorrow, when this has blown over it will be once again the same few editors and few admins who actively contribute to ITN that'll be here working away developing items to go up on the main page. And yet we still end up with comments like those from the above user, which are in my mind totally uncalled for and nothing but a needless attack on the hard work that regular ITN contributors make --Daviessimo (talk) 21:19, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If ITN regulars oppose Edward Kennedy's death going on ITN, then core changes need to be made to the system that has evolved. If this is the ethos that "hard work" has produced, I say scrap it all and start over. Tan | 3921:21, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No, it's not an attack on ITN contributors as a whole, more of a response to the comments like the one from Ashishg55 indicating far too high a level of WP:OWN going on here. Or perhaps it's more of an attack on a process that appears to have become slightly insular, but nevertheless it is quite ludicrous that for pretty much a whole day ITN has not carried a story that has been the #1 news item in a vast majority of the world. Black Kite21:24, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict, to Daviessimo) I understand completely that the editors who spend a lot of time on ITN, both in developing the guidelines and in doing the day-to-day work of selecting and crafting items, play an important role and should be recognized for doing so. All of us self-select our different niches and responsibilities around the project, and mine, for example, are generally on pages other than this one. That means that 999 times in 1000, I will generally defer in the selection of ITN items to the people who focus on ITN. On the other hand, conversely, it also means that if I or others come to this page to raise a specific concern about the omission of a given item, the concern is sufficiently glaring that posting about it became a priority even for someone whose attention is generally elsewhere. Of itself, that is reasonably relevant input suggesting that application of the usual standards or guidelines might need to be reevaluated or superseded in that given instance. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 21:28, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Its a complete joke, what makes it even more offensive is what was considered notable enough like the Miss world thing. How something as pathetic as that which gets no international headlines gets in and the death of a senior senator known around the world and reported on around the world cant then i agree clearly the guidelines need to be rewritten to encompass commonsense. BritishWatcher (talk) 21:28, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support inclusion, of course; this was front-page international news. There also needs to be a closer eye kept on ITN in general, because it's clear that some of the regulars have created their own little bureaucracy with absurd "rules." That has to stop. *** Crotalus ***21:21, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
ITN FAIL (IOW Support). Kudos to the brave/smart individual who added this obvious worldwide news story to the Main Page. Every time I visit ITN/C, the chorus of "too US-centric" makes me throw up a little in my mouth. It's obvious that Kennedy's death is being covered by major news organizations around the world. I admit it's not nearly as important as who won the Miss Universe Pageant. (you know, because she will clearly have a great impact on her country's political system) APKthat's not my name21:47, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, here's an argument I think hasn't been offered before: The last time he died it was our fault. This time I think the least thing we owe him is a proper obituary, right? Lampman (talk) 00:19, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Moldova
The Moldovan government announces that it will stand down before the opening of parliament on Friday. A coalition of four opposition parties will then attempt to elect a president. This will (I think) result in the fall of Europe's last communist government. Could be mainpage-worthy on friday if not today. Source: (BBC) - Dumelow (talk) 17:13, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think the standing down of the current government is in of itself notable enough to put on ITN. If, however, a new president is successfully elected, that is notable enough. Otumba (talk) 17:21, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Iraq and Syria
Iraq and Syria have recalled their ambassadors to one another following the discovery of links between Syria and terrorism in Iraq. Relevant article is Iraq–Syria relations but it needs an update. Worthy of the mainpage? Source: (BBC) - Dumelow (talk) 17:21, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have done a small update, haven't got time to do any more at the moment but it has the basic info on the incident in there - Dumelow (talk) 17:21, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Women's Equality Day
Just a placeholder that August 26 is Women's Equality Day in the U.S. Celebrating the passage of the Nineteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution which gave women the right to vote. I understand that ITN doesn't like American news and usually by accident favors photos of men. But just in case a woman wins something around then. TFA and DYK both have suggestions for this day, and I put a note into the WikiProject for OTD. Thank you. -SusanLesch (talk) 17:18, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You mean have a woman as the image? There doesn't seem anything wrong with that suggestion. Maybe if other countries have similar women's days and someone suggested they be included on those days also though. --candle•wicke00:04, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
i will support but whats the news item lol. isnt this more of OTD thing. and for the photo we did have miss universe but it got removed due to copyright issues. i guess there are a lot less free images of women ;) -- Ashish-g5523:46, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well I believe the 8th March should be the most important day to try and get a photo of a woman on ITN. The lack of photos on ITN is unfortunate but reflective of the unfortunate fact that there are still far fewer women in positions of power then men, particularly world leaders who we have most often (given the frequent availability of photos from USgov sources). Having said that while there's nothing wrong with having a free photo of Miss Universe or whatever on ITN, I would hope we would have a lot more then just that, it's not exactly the right message if the only females we ever have on ITN are beauty contestant winners Nil Einne (talk) 11:40, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
actually what i was saying was that we didnt even have a free image of miss universe lol.everything seems to be copyrighted these days -- Ashish-g5513:30, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez announces plans to break off diplomatic relations with Colombia over the neighboring country's plan to allow U.S. troops access to its military bases. (CNN)
The Morris Fire begins near Morris Dam in the Angeles National Forest. This fire is thought to have been caused by arson and is the first in a series of wildfires to burn through Southern California in 2009.
Oppose. In any case, X says Y is not an appropriate ITN blurb. The story here is that Baitullah Mehsud died and this is where we use the death criteria. I don't think they are met here. --Tone20:27, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's okay, but—and except that it is a Start-class and not a B-class article—it meets the death criteria:
a high ranking office of power, and had a significant contribution/impact on the country/region.
was a very important figure in their field of expertise, and was recognised as such.
has a major international impact that affects current events. The modification or creation of multiple articles to take into account the ramifications of a death is a sign that it meets the third criterion.
Let's base it on FIBA World Rankings points: this one is worth 0.1 points for 1st place.(virtually worthless). A EuroBasket championship stated below is worth 1 point.
Probably not. However, shall we include Eurobasket (this will take place next month)? It's the second biggest international event in basketball, after the World c'ship (and Olympics, but those are less frequent). --Tone20:27, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
New Zealand won, and it was an upset, but nobody really cares by now since both countries will qualify. I'd argue on the inclusion on EuroBasket next month, let's see if something happens there. I'd bet if the Luol Deng-powered UK performs well we'll see a marked increased in "notability" among the people here. –HowardtheDuck05:23, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yemeni troops claim to have killed more than 100 Shia rebels in the past two weeks, including two leaders, but the rebels deny their leaders, Mohsen Saleh Gawd and Salah Jorman, are dead and no independent confirmation is made available. (BBC)
Support. it is "universe", cant get more diverse than that (also i think this should be ITNR). and partially for the reason mentioned above. -- Ashish-g5517:46, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
...and people wonder why the "In the News" regulars were getting flamed for refusing to post Ted Kennedy's death. Nobody would have complained if the other stuff in ITN was earth-shatteringly important, but why is this utterly irrelevant factoid still hanging out here five days later? In the News should not be some kind of bizarre "let's be fair" recap of international events, especially when said international event is like 1/1000 the importance of, say, a sporting event that people actually care about like The Ashes or Usain Bolt. And the Miss Universe 2009 article has maybe 4 paragraphs of prose in total, and a lot of lists, so it's not even a great feature on those grounds.
To clarify, I'm not opposed to this inclusion on prudish or second-wave feminist grounds, nor because I think only "serious business" should be included. Feel free to keep featuring sports and the like. I'm opposed to its inclusion on the basis that Miss Universe is a footnote on the scale of cultural importance, but apparently was included anyway because "it cant get more diverse than this." It should be removed in favor of... well, Kenndy's up there now, but pretty much *anything* else. Escaped Quaternion (talk) 03:20, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
the above comments are only jokes because we get bored sometimes. it wasnt stated but it was obvious amongst people why miss universe is important. did u ever stop to think how many people in the world actually follow miss universe event. how notable it is in countries like india, canada, venezuela etc. thats why with my little joke i proposed it for ITNR. it was included before too so we here didnt feel its important to state all the reasons everytime. some things are just understood. just to make it clear this wasnt added as "lets be fair" recap of international event... it was added because it is of interest to people around the globe and if u think there is no cultural importance to it then that is your POV. i would also like to know how u came to decision that its got 1/1000 importance. can u cite some material to prove that. -- Ashish-g5503:56, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I may be tempting fate but England are close to winning The Ashes from Australia later today or tomorrow. The article is at Australian cricket team in England in 2009 and seems to be fairly decent. There is also a free image of The Ashes' urn which we can use. Whoever wins (or draws) the series it should probably go up anyway as it is listed at WP:ITNR - Dumelow (talk) 14:53, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I remember we did not have the result of one of the European football championship (was it UEFA cup?), therefore I think it is not appropriate to have the result of a match between two countries. --Tone19:49, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support The Ashes is a huge deal in cricket. It is the same as India vs Pakistan, only with a much longer and less politically charged history. Just because it only involves two nations shouldn't be an issue when events such as the Superbowl or AFL go up. Also we put the IPL up, which is a domestic league in cricket so I can't see any valid argument in opposition to this other than if it lacked an update. The UEFA Cup (which I nominated and wanted to see up) was rejected because there was also the Champions league to go up at the same time and people felt it was a second tier competition. There is no way you could ever call the Ashes a second tier cricket competition --Daviessimo (talk) 20:22, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure. It is listed at ITNR and yet Tone makes a good point too. I know it is at ITNR but is it truly above and beyond all others? Is there no higher level of cricket but a meeting of these two teams? And should India and Pakistan not be the one to post if it is therefore more politically charged? If India and Pakistan is more likely to be controversial I don't see why it might be left out—is it posted when it occurs? And, if this is not a second tier competition, it is presumably a first tier one in which case what tier is India and Pakistan? If both are first tier then there are at least two first tier—are there more than that, i.e. will someone else ask why their country is not represented at a later date and is it possible to provide them with a logical response as to why not? --candle•wicke20:58, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The highest level of international cricket is Test cricket (there is also one-day and twenty20 international cricket, which are different forms of the game and have their own entries on ITNR). Test cricket is played as sets of bilateral series between the various Test nations - there is no centralised `championship'. To save putting up an entry for every test series (about 20 per year...) we just feature the two biggest and most important series, which are the Ashes and India v Pakistan. Both are listed on ITNR, and both have appeared on ITN previously. Just about anyone who knows anything about cricket will agree that these are the biggest Test series. Modest Geniustalk21:12, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) Well, I admit I am not adequately familiar with cricket to judge which are the world-top events. If this is the top one - now drawing the parallel with football - like UEFA European Football Championship (not the Cup), then I have no problems with having it on ITN. Maybe it would be a good idea to go through ITN/R cricket items and check what really is the top level. --Tone21:17, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Now that I've just read the comment by Modest Genius, we have 4 cricket items on ITNR. For future reference, is that it or can we drop any or we need any more? --Tone21:20, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
They look good to me. That's the top international event in ODI and T20 forms of the game (world cup every 4 years, T20 every 2 years), plus the two top Test series (averages every 2 years each). Makes ~1.75 stories per year. Modest Geniustalk21:32, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I think this is fine now. Posting, just without the result since it is standard ITN practice not to include it. Someone please upload the photo. --Tone21:49, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Just for the record, it seems we have an article dedicated to the 2009 Ashes series as well as the Australian cricket team in England in 2009 one that was used in the above wording suggestions. I think it would be more appropriate to use the Ashes one rather than the summary of the entire tour, which includes limited-overs games, which are a separate competition and might be confusing. 87.115.38.226 (talk) 22:12, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That article was a redirect when the suggestion was made above. It's been expanded using material taken from the tour article. But yes, it's probably more appropriate. Modest Geniustalk22:47, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Argentina's Foreign Affairs Ministry “harshly condemns” the nomination of Ahmad Vahidi to serve as Iran's Defence Minister as he is a suspected international terrorist sought by Interpol in connection with the 1994 attack on AMIA Jewish community centre in Buenos Aires. (MercoPress)
Islamic insurgents attack a government checkpoint in Somalia's capital, Mogadishu, sparking a gunbattle that kills at least five people on the first day of Ramadan. (IOL)
Niger's police use tear gas to injure and arrest several people during clashes with opponents of a new constitution that would enable PresidentMamadou Tandja to seek unlimited mandates. (IOL)
Thousands of Venezuelans join rival marches in Caracas over a controversial education law that critics say strengthens President Hugo Chávez's grip over schools and universities. (Reuters)(BBC)
Taliban official Hakeemullah Mehsud is selected as the new head of the Pakistani Taliban, a local Taliban commander in Pakistan's federally administered tribal areas confirms. (CNN)
Not sure if I'm doing this correctly, but the championship of the Women's Professional Soccer league had been decided by a 1-0 victory by Sky Blue FC over LA Sol. Should be included as this is the premier league for women's football with many international players.Rhodesisland (talk) 05:53, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A missile fired from a U.S. unmanned plane destroyed a suspected militant hide-out in northwest Pakistan on Friday, killing at least 12 people in a stronghold of a jihadi leader blamed for attacks in Afghanistan. (Associated Press)
A 34-year-old Tunisian woman from Gafsa, thought to have been pregnant with 12 babies and whose story had attracted international attention, is determined to have been the victim of a phantom pregnancy. (IOL)
Well, just looking at the infobox, a death toll of 21 looks a bit small to me when compared to figures of 500, 1,600, 223,000, 82, 72. I know it wouldn't be notable for Iraq anyway and it seems Somalia is in a similar situation (it just doesn't get as much press coverage unfortunately). --candle•wicke04:40, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A line of severe thunderstorms rolls through Ontario, Canada, spawns over 18 tornadoes in one day which has been declared to be the largest tornado outbreak in Canadian history, at least four F-2 tornadoes were confirmed, including one touching down in the town of Durham, Ontario, northwest of Toronto where at least one person was killed, and the other in a Toronto suburb of Vaughan, Ontario where over 600 homes were damaged or destroyed.(CTV)
Elizabeth Ramos and Louis Williams, owners of defense contracting company Technical Logistics, admit to bribing an employee of the U.S. Navy's Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command in exchange for defense contracts. (UPI)
For the first time video ads will appear in a magazine, using a screen similar to a cell phone that can store 40 minutes of video. (BBC)
well this is fairly rare for toronto. but i will stay neutral for this one since the tornado was like a km from where i was... me supporting will prolly have some bias in it lol ;) -- Ashish-g5515:38, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Might be too old. The date on the URL is 14 August, the oldest ITN is 16 August. "Received July 7, 2009. Accepted July 24, 2009" at the bottom doesn't help there either. --candle•wicke18:09, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand what you mean by the 14th of August. On the journal page, it says "Published online before print August 19, 2009", so the paper was only accessible yesterday. The received and accepted dates are common in technical literature and can sometimes span up to three months. There is no way to have known of this paper's existence before yesterday (unless you were the peer-reviewers or authors), and the release date of the paper to the public is more important than the date where only a few select people even know of the dinosaur. --Spotty1122219:00, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately not for Wikipedia, as I believe all images are under copyright by the PNAS. There is an image here if you want to see what the fossil looks like, but its listed as being under "Fair use" [21]
Oh, BTW, I just wanted to let you know that under the ICZN naming conventions, scientific names are to be italicized here possible. Could you italicize it? Thanks! --Spotty1122219:21, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
move it up though. its like 5 items down. considering this happened today and everything is ordered by time it should be moved up. -- Ashish-g5519:37, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'd prefer keeping it where it is. In any case, there should be a consistency in the blurb, 100m links to world record progression and 200m links to the event. --Tone19:42, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
26 dead on election day; Afghans vote in 2009 election under guard from 300,000 soldiers linkage
Not really for ITN in my opinion. Being released on compassionate ground isn't especially new or unusual. I don't think his death would make it either. --candle•wicke00:15, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If it's not unusual why do I see it being the top story all over BBC, CNN. It should be on ITN given the massive amount of response generated, diplomacy and controversy it has. - Mailer Diablo19:21, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's got no chance of getting on ITN when there is a NPOV tag on the article. However, if that was fixed I think there is a valid argument to say it is a major event, because it will likely have repecussion on both US and UK relations with Libya. More than one political commentator on the news has suggested that the actions of the UK, via the Scottish government, may have been influenced by the big pot of oil sitting below Libya. But as I've said NPOV = No ITN --Daviessimo (talk) 19:43, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think it does have potential if something else happens but not right now in my opinion. It doesn't matter if it's all over BBC and CNN as that's not how ITN works. They need news of any sort to attract readers and viewers, Wikipedia and ITN need something more. And it's not unusual because "compassionate ground" has already been all over BBC, CNN, etc at least once this month. --candle•wicke22:54, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
well story has attracted quite a bit of worldwide attention since libya started celebrating his release and US and UK were getting mad about it. even though the blurb will not state that but it maybe a good reason to post it. -- Ashish-g5500:12, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The NPOV issues have to worked out first. Otherwise, this is an "up-to-date encyclopedic content reflecting important international current events" which can be added here. –HowardtheDuck05:08, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
So will I, as soon as there is some more update to the article. With all the media coverage, it won't be hard to compose a decent paragraph. --Tone08:20, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Seems we have a consensus here. Kim Dae-jung, the former president of South Korea, dies. This is a bit short, any suggestions to improve? --Tone08:00, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I switched to a photograph of Kim Dae-jung, but I later noticed that the article had not been updated beyond a two-sentence mention of his death. Why did you post the item before the aforementioned "decent paragraph" was written? —David Levy17:52, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
After a reconsideration, I agree that the update is not significant at the moment. But I don't have time to expand it right now, could anyone help here? --Tone20:10, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This is precisely the type of situation I raised recently about the requirement for substantial updates, using the example of Elizabeth II. Any such "significant update" will be, in essence, recentism and reportage of unencyclopaedic, predictable elegies (although these were grounds for getting Les Paul onto the page), which detract from its encyclopaedic tone. Kevin McE (talk) 04:47, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
How is information pertaining to a death's impact unencyclopedic? And if no such information is available, what's the point of placing an item on the main page? ITN isn't a news ticker, and if we can't direct readers to an article that's been significantly updated to reflect the current/recent event, what service are we providing?
There is some merit to the argument that in the case of a highly notable person's death, we should focus on directing readers to information about his/her life (including pre-existing prose). However, this would be a dramatic format change for which consensus has not yet been established. It also would arguably discourage people from visiting Wikinews, which routinely links to our articles for background information. —David Levy13:38, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support, this was a notable event and in the headlines for weeks. There's nothing confusing about it anymore, since the ship was found and the hijackers were arrested. If this hasn't been on ITN before, now is a good time. Offliner (talk) 02:47, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support. This is the worst attack in Ingushetia in recent years, and will surely have major political implications. Article has been expanded. Offliner (talk) 21:55, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Is it ready? I'm really sorry I haven't even commented or checked it out but I'm about several days back (lol). What's it like in the future? :D --candle•wicke01:36, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ashish; it's not about the lack of admins, but the uncertainty around whether or not to post. I'm just thinking of a tagline; "The bombing of a police headquarters in Nazran, Ingushetia, kills 20 and injures 71." How does that sound? Also, I'll get around to formatting the references properly and everything in a bit. Master of Puppets - Call me MoP! :D02:01, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The tagline is fine, but there were 138 injured instead of 71. What references are talking about? The ones in the article seem properly formatted. Offliner (talk) 02:08, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
well im sure lack of admins has played a part in the slowness (a bit atleast) since these things usually get discussed a lot faster. but ya as offliner said the injuries have gone up. blurb sounds fine. -- Ashish-g5502:27, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There are several others which have been waiting hours and possibly days to be posted. I'm not blaming anyone but I don't understand why, if there are admins viewing these pages today, aren't they saying, "no, this is not for posting", or something along those lines under each one which is otherwise OK to go? --candle•wicke02:34, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The world's fourth-largest hydro plant has had its turbine hall severely damaged and will be unusable for months, at the least; I would call that significant. Radagast (talk) 00:41, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Police clash with hundreds of protesters in Peru demonstrating over the failure of PresidentAlan García's government to rebuild the city of Pisco two years since it was devastated by a powerful earthquake. (The Irish Times)
Interesting, sure. However, there is only one sentence update in the article at the moment, as far as I can see. We need more. And some words about the impact of it. --Tone09:09, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Basically the MOE publishes a vocabulary list of commonly used Chinese characters, and they've issued a request for public comment for the new revision. This isn't worth putting in the news, and if someone does it, they need to at least summarize it correctly. The new list *doesn't* strongly change the way that the language is used. For the most part it just designated which characters the Education ministry considers "common." Also it's not a major simplification. In fact the new list replaces six characters with their traditional forms.
Either summarize it correctly, or remove it, and if you summarize it correctly, I hardly see why this is earth shaking news. It just changes the characters which people have to memorize for high school and doesn't change language usage at all.
Not to be harsh about this, but before posting a front page news article about a major change to Chinese language, you might want to get some feedback from someone that actually speaks and reads the language.
I think it's a good idea to remove that line, because it makes Wikipedia look like total idiots to anyone that can actually read Chinese. Please remove until we can discuss this a bit more.
Please just leave this out of ITN for now until things are confirmed or can be put in good English. My friends frantically messaged me this morning telling me that Chinese characters were further being simplified and citing Wikipedia as the source. It shows what an erroneous ITN can do for you. Colipon+(Talk) 16:31, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's what seriously worries me. What I'm worried about is if someone from a major news channel reads wikipedia and starts quoting errorneous information. We need to get it off the front page before newspaper picks it up and repeats it. Roadrunner (talk) 16:36, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Removed now. This is something that happens when there's not an accurate wording for a start... Well, mistakes happen. The sooner they are noticed the better. This is just another indicator that we need more people monitoring ITN/C. --Tone17:10, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Don't want to jump on the user who posted this because it was in good faith. But in the future these things can definitely be avoided. I know that many news sources (including some major ones in developing countries) use Wikipedia as a legitimate verification tool for their news so it is best that we take care of all ITN items with the utmost accuracy. Colipon+(Talk) 18:26, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
We could also be a little less hasty to post the current day's nominations when several remain from yesterday and previous days. ITN isn't a breaking news service; for instance, the achievements of Lin Dan at the 2009 BWF World Championships and Y. E. Yang at the 2009 PGA Championship are much more verifiable and covered by sources. I have the badminton one ready now and am going to leave a suggested wording after I save this comment. :D --candle•wicke18:40, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't this a rather puny deal at $500 mil and hence not much press. In contrast, we just saw a deal between Australia and China valued at $50 billion (almost 100 times larger).
Support this and all the sports stories underneath; however, we need to decide on one or maybe two; we can't have 3 sports stories up ITN at once. At least, I think that would be ludicrous. Master of Puppets - Call me MoP! :D02:13, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I thought whatever is ready gets posted. There has been no limiting deaths and disasters so why sports if someone is willing to work on them?
We still try not to have ITN focused only on one type of news. There are, and always have been, times where we've got more news-worthy articles than time to post them up. It's best to keep them varied, develop them regardless, and so forth. That's why I'm not a fan of posting up three sports stories at once. Master of Puppets - Call me MoP! :D07:44, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support I believe this is a historic moment in world sport. The first Asian born player to win a golfing major. I also get the feeling if Tiger Woods would have won it, despite it being less notable, it would have got put on the main page. I don't see a problem with it 81.153.15.38 (talk) 21:32, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree. With ITN, we're always going to have the problem on some occasions that certain similar items come at the same time. When we can't combine them, we may end up with multiple items on similar things. We should try to achieve long term balance, in other words, we shouldn't allow so many sports events that we have one on ITN permanently, but be it elections or sports, or natural disasters or whatever we ultimately will sometimes end up with multiple items, and should just accept that as the way things are. Sure we'll get some complaints, but we get complaints all the time about different things. Nil Einne (talk) 09:41, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Not significant enough as it a regional competition. Would have supported if it was a World Championship.
For some reason the page views dropped off after the quarterfinals (I think I know why) so the interest waned off. It would haven't made it anyway since there are no prose in the article. –HowardtheDuck11:47, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
After investigating this, it seems that the England team withdrew after one of their players received a terrorist threat. Dunno if that plays into the sporting side of the event. –HowardtheDuck08:04, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, posted now. The articles updated at the moment are Bolt, Championship and World record progression. Some of them need some firm sources still. Maybe the text can be changed a little if needed. --Tone20:06, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The tracking device onboard the Arctic Sea was briefly reactivated according to Russian media, showing the vessel to be off the coast of France. (RIA Novosti)(Associated Press)
A blaze in a tent in Kuwait, where a wedding party is held, kills 43 women and children. The ex-wife of the groom confesses to starting the fire. (Al Jazeera)
Needs significant expansion. Also, while tragic, I'm not sure it's something of international importance; just because it's a freak accident doesn't mean it's ITN-worthy. Of course, it's not solely my decision, so go on, discuss... Master of Puppets - Call me MoP! :D07:38, 17 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hm... I'm not sure where I sit on this one. I agree that it's not worthless, and of course it's notable, but as the article states, prison riots and escapes aren't unheard of in Mexico. Also, do we have an article? I can probably fashion a tagline for it if someone makes/I make it. Master of Puppets - Call me MoP! :D21:12, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
While this event began two days ago, it was only yesterday that it began to be reported, so I think its not too old to make an appearance on ITN. --Sherif9282 (talk) 15:11, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I couldn't think of another title, especially since none of the news sources have given a particular naming to the event. I chose the current one based on other articles in this campaignbox. Can anyone think of a better title?
At any rate, it seems there is enough support for the article to go on the main page, yes? If so, how is this step performed? I'm new to ITN.--Sherif9282 (talk) 10:08, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This doesn't have a huge death toll for a country in the middle of a war, but a direct attack against NATO headquarters is very significant in my opinion - support --Daviessimo (talk) 07:04, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hundreds of people protest in Caracas, Venezuela, after journalists protesting a new education law were beaten the previous day. (El Universal)(Associated Press)
Malagasy peace talks break down when the armed forces reject one clause in the peace deal. (IOL)
After launching a major offensive attack on a suspected ASG training camp, the day-long clash in the Southern Philippines resulted in 23 government casualties and 31 casualties from the Abu Sayyaf Group. (Philippines Government Portal)
An archaeological excavation uncovers the foundations of the 17th-century Smock Alley Theatre and several artefacts from theatrical performances in Dublin. (RTÉ)
Including the phrase "international" seems rather redundant to me. Would a trip from Islamabad to Istanbul not be international? At first glance it suggests that this the first ever international container train from Pakistan. As for the inclusion, this strikes me as rather minor step in relations and the update is only three sentences long so I don't think this should be posted. 71.210.186.32 (talk) 05:29, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
We've always included links from sources other than the home country(ies) to mark it as "international." I say we make a notch higher; if it were featured prominently on the home page of that website, that should give it extra... "points." In the age of globalization, there are news that are covered elsewhere, especially with wire reports and such. –HowardtheDuck08:19, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Drunk-driving incidents like this happen every few days in the Western world, and it isn't exactly a far-fetched incident. I'm worried that there won't be much support for this as it is... Master of Puppets - Call me MoP! :D06:43, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I completely disagree with (or else misunderstand) you on several points. First, I'm missing whether you qualify Romania as the Western world or not with that sentence but if not then what goes on east or west ought not be compared to one another. For instance, wars may happen in one part of the world but not in another—if one does occur in an unusual place you don't say this happens all the time anyway so we won't bother with another one happening in a peaceful part of the world (if you understand me). Also, for some better comparisons perhaps, mining disasters happen all the time in China (I think someone argued that at the time) but not in Slovakia. We don't post Iraq's daily death tolls but no deaths here, one death here and two deaths here qualify as unusual enough. And train accidents don't seem to happen very often in Washington either (that incident also had a much lower death toll) but again the deadliest accident in one city encounters less difficulties than the deadliest in a country for a time. A bus-train collision precedent with a lower death toll exists too. So what exactly is wrong with posting this ("isn't exactly a far-fetched incident" is not how I would describe it either; it doesn't seem to show much regard or respect for Romania unless I'm misreading it) and expanded incident (before the time runs out like it just did with Argentina-Venezuela and very nearly did with Mauritania)? :D (Inserting smiley in case tone is misunderstood). I will try to resolve any issues it may have but I really don't see any issues at his stage. --candle•wicke17:37, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
So are we to now take it that the death criteria are redundant in the face of the stock comments that will always be rolled out by the ex-colleagues of everyone who was remotely notable in ny field? Kevin McE (talk) 11:19, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The French and German economies rebound, helping push the Eurozone to the brink of economic recovery in the second quarter, delivering a further signal that the worst of the global crisis may be coming to an end in Europe. (FT)
Where is the substantial article update? In Les Paul, I see nothing beyond a two-sentence (could be one-sentence) mention of his death and the most basic details thereof. —David Levy 19:08/19:14, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
With the addition of a third sentence, we now are informed that Les Paul was repeatedly hospitalized due to illness. This is hardly a shocking revelation.
Please report back when information about the death's impact has been added (which actually seems plausible in this instance). —David Levy21:48, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ah thanks, I understand this as of course all ITNs must be significantly expanded and was waiting for opinions (as most people seem to be doing nowadays) but I had thought he was also saying Wikipedia should feature shocking revelations instead of facts. --candle•wicke22:32, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No, I'm not saying that at all. In the future, please share such interpretations (so that others can address them). Your broad statement that you "[couldn't] actually make sense of most of the above" left me unaware of what required clarification and helpless to rectify the situation.
I meant that the information contained within the third sentence is extremely minor. I then opined that we should revisit this nomination when the section contains information about the death's impact (e.g. memorials, reactions from notable musicians, et cetera), at which point this would be a more suitable candidate. —David Levy22:54, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not certain about its suitability, however, if you think it is postable (and Spencer does too it seems) I will try to find more information. I don't think visiting hospital due to illness is "extremely minor" as not all people are hospitalised due to illness and it is even possible to be hospitalised without an illness but that is me giving an opining reply. --candle•wicke23:24, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't mean to suggest that Les Paul's hospitalizations were minor events in his life. I mean that the knowledge of these events is rather trivial in the context of his death. (This information would be far more significant if he were still alive.) —David Levy23:49, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This could work if I included it right now, as simply the death has a large impact on the world; however, I agree with David in that it will probably be a better update once we've included information about reaction to the death. I'm willing to bet you my house on the fact that nearly every rock musician in the last 50 years will release a statement on how much they'll miss him; after some news articles pop up about that, we'll be able to expand it and post it up. Master of Puppets - Call me MoP! :D23:23, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
So are we to now take it that the death criteria are redundant in the face of the stock comments that will always be rolled out by the ex-colleagues of everyone who was remotely notable in any field? Kevin McE (talk) 11:19, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know how to respond logically to that. I might have nominated this but it got two opposes and was posted. In fact, David Levy opposed as well because it wasn't long enough and when I checked it at one point after it was posted it was still too short. So that was three opposes at the time. On the other hand, BorgQueen nominated this, it got three supports and took over five days of reminders to get posted only to slide off the Main Page soon after. So... (shrugs shoulders) --candle•wicke19:52, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's not about counting the numbers; Les Paul was posted due to international significance in the field of music and a genre of music that shaped the lives of millions of people (something I conclude from the news media response to his death). As for the suicide bombing, I'm sorry that I wasn't here sooner to post it. In the end, though, we should be improving all of the articles for all of these pages, whether they're getting put up on the main page or not. Master of Puppets - Call me MoP! :D21:07, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I know what it is and isn't about, sorry if I phrased it badly—the supports just don't seem to hold up much to me either when weighing the overall argument. In the end, I suppose I am weighing up how each compares to the rest for some consistency and to guard against any possible complaints of bias. Musically for the sake of comparing like for like, I was reminded of D. K. Pattammal under July 17 where the arguments against consisted of comments like: "I doubt it. She died of natural causes after a long life to begin with." and "To be honest, when someone dies at that age, I think they have to be globally famous to get on ITN", and the like. Les Paul certainly fits the first description (he was in fact four years older) and whether he fits the second one, when compared to this, is debatable in my opinion. Anyone who plays a guitar will of course know Les Paul but so will anyone interested in Carnatic music know D. K. Pattammal. Are either household names? But that opens up a further debate I suppose. The other recent musical death (Michael Jackson) is in no way comparable in terms of reaction, etc, which led at leasttwo new articles.
And we are (or at least I am) trying to update as many of them as possible (I think?). Nobody has said this shouldn't happen. However, having spent several days at a time finding items for the portal first of all, then nominating, creating, expanding, etc, I or any one person at all can only realistically do so much of this work. --candle•wicke23:44, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Created article about it here. Only a stub, because it's 5:45 AM here and I need to sleep. When I wake up I'll resume expansion. Definitely ITN-worthy, though; possibly the biggest exoplanet ever found, and the first one we know of to have a retrograde orbit. Master of Puppets - Call me MoP! :D10:46, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This is a good story indeed. However, I assume that the planet was not discovered today, as the article says, rather the discovery was announced today. --Tone11:39, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Scientist announce the discovery of WASP-17b, the first planet with a retrograde orbit. If you agree that the article is long enough, I'm ready to post it. (Any good way to include the word extrasolar in the blurb? Just the first extrasolar planet is not good since one could think that this is something known in solar planets.) --Tone15:33, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You meant to say 'scientists', right? :P I'm biased, but I think the article is fine; I'm not sure how much more expansion could be done right now, as this is all the information I could fit in without having it sound esoteric and complicated to the average reader. As for the extrasolar predicament; how about "Scientists announce the discovery of exoplanetWASP-17b, the first known planet to have a retrograde orbit"? Master of Puppets - Call me MoP! :D20:41, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Lubna al-Hussein, the Sudanese woman facing forty lashes for wearing trousers in public, is prevented from leaving the country for a trip to Lebanon, where she was to take part in a televised talk-show about women's issues. (IOL)(BBC)
Astronomers discover WASP-17b, the first planet that orbits in the opposite direction to the spin of its star. (BBC)
ITN candidates for August 12
Microsoft Word Banned in the US
BBC. A judge has banned the sale of MS Word in the US. Quite possibly one of the most popular software after windows i think this is fairly big. Its comparable to US banning Gmail for google perhaps. what do u guys think? Microsoft_Word#Injunction would need to be expanded though. -- Ashish-g5521:14, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
well i dont mind... but since when is grinding world to halt a requirement... Microsoft is biggest software company in world so i figured its home country banning its product was interesting... -- Ashish-g5512:56, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The bigger issue IMHO is Candlewick's point. Microsoft is appealing and the injunction has not been implemented yet. This is a civil lawsuit and comparing it to a criminal one is fraught with problems. In itself the injunction shouldn't be thought of as a 'sentence' but a remedy to stop Microsoft continually infringing the patent. If Word is actually banned, then that is probably significant enough for the main page. But as supported by multiple sources, a far more likely outcome is that either Microsoft successfully appeals and the injunction is delayed or or they remove the infringing portion from Word or they reach an agreement with i4i. And whatever the case, that's a far less significant story unless the outcome there is significant, e.g. Microsoft pay a few billion to i4i but I think that's rather unlikely and the terms could even be undisclosed and in any case, it remains the fact that the possiblity that Word could have been banned but ultimately is not that significant in the grand scheme of things. Nil Einne (talk) 08:11, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This is an interesting story. But I'd prefer to wait until more is know. Searching is news. Piracy in Europe is encyclopaedic. Or whatever the outcome. --Tone19:37, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've already nominated the article for DYK and I'd rather see it there. By the time is hits the main page, more information should become available. Óðinn (talk) 22:47, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
<kidding> It's OK. We ITN people love taking away items from DYK. ;D. </kidding> Sounds good. If you're the principle author, be sure to come back and inform us here when more info becomes available. SpencerT♦Nominate!00:29, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
well we didnt post the 700 ppl when they got buried so i dont know if we should post when they are found either. its like we only care if they dont die... lol. -- Ashish-g5517:57, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
i believe it has now been officially named after the attenborough dude. either way i dont remember this making to ITN before and the article looks like its in decent shape. we have had new species of animals on ITN bunch of times but never really meat eating plants. so ill give it a support -- Ashish-g5515:32, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
UNASUR leaders express fresh concerns over Colombian plans to grant United States troops access to its military bases but cannot agree on a declaration to formally condemn the proposals. VenezuelanPresidentHugo Chávez warns that "the winds of war are beginning to blow" across the region. (MercoPress)
I wouldn't question the oppose; an oppose is the user's decision, regardless of reasoning. I agree, though; the founder of the Special Olympics (if that is indeed the case) is notable enough. Master of Puppets - Call me MoP! :D01:58, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hm... hard to say. I actually think that the ITN worthy event is when she finally gets released, at the moment it is just repeating of the old story. (Regarding two African articles, I'd like to have more opinions.) --Tone14:37, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There isn't much interest in replying to African nominations it seems. The one posted yesterday was first nominated last week... --candle•wicke14:42, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
well as i said this one is for "interest" rather than importance. even though her release would be a lot more noteworthy event, who knows when that will happen. -- Ashish-g5515:39, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm truly surprised that there are any opposes to this. She is a major international figure who has won a great deal of the highest praise across the international community (both its leaders and its people) and the highest humanitarian and state awards over the past twenty years. This is receiving an even larger response than the Saffron Revolution did. Strong support. Therequiembellishere (talk) 04:32, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Negotiators gather in Austria for informal talks aimed at unblocking a 34-year-old dispute between Morocco and the Western Sahara independence movement. (IOL)
A series of bombings in Iraq kill 48 people and injure 231 in Baghdad and Mosul in continuing violence between Shiites and Sunnis in the area. (CNN)
Ecuador’s Health Minister Caroline Chang says South America’s twelve nations have pledged to respect regional vaccine price ceilings to prevent businesses from exploiting fear of the A/H1N1 flu pandemic. (MercoPress)
Two Namibians and a Chinese who are suspected in a corruption investigation involving a firm linked to the son of China's PresidentHu Jintao appear in a Windhoek court asking to be released on bail. (IOL)
I think we have to wait for the tsunami and then it has to kill and destroy, then an article has to be created and updated then someone has to come along with a desire to post it. In other words not yet. --candle•wicke21:57, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
South African Chief Justice nomination controversy—Sandile Ngcobo
I think there's still time to add this. Jacob Zuma seems to have attracted some "abuse of power" criticism because of it. Nomination plus controversy. This type of item has featured at ITN recently (although not the South African version) so I imagine there would be little opposition? I haven't checked so it might require an update but that can be easily done. --candle•wicke16:50, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've removed this one from ITN because of the reason above. Even when updated, I am not really in favour of it - stepping down or similar action would be ITN for sure but mere accusation is questionable. --Tone19:36, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
600 people buried. this is quite a big number. im not sure how we can add it to the current blurb but i think it deserves a mention. -- Ashish-g5515:39, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Seventeen people, including five children, are killed when a crowded bus crashes into a ditch after being side-swiped by an oncoming heavy truck in Mount Darwin, Zimbabwe. (IOL)
A normal enough air accident I think when compared to other recent incidents. Deaths aren't even double figures. Location doesn't really make it any more notable. I think this might be a good DYK though. --candle•wicke20:02, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Do we have to mention every single crash, bomb and shuttle launch? (No offense intended to anyone) Items tagged under "Hudson" and "Airplane" shouldn't be placed into ITN twice in a year. Cargoking talk 20:10, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If this gets posted, while an Indonesian air crash (which had almost twice as many casualties) got rejected, I will have reason to accuse Wikipedia of US-centricism again. Cargoking's argumentation is good enough. Oppose.Offliner (talk) 20:59, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Should the figures be updated on the main page for the Tonga ferry disaster if the sources seem reputable? News reports are saying that there are now, unfortunately, more than 26 missing. Scanlan (talk) 13:22, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support as well - The attack is an unfortunate milestone in Mauritanian history. It is also important to French-Mauritanian relations. Scanlan (talk) 15:03, 13 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Typhoon "Morakot" (Kiko)'s winds of 175 kilometers per hour winds with gusts of up to 210 kph created landslides, flash flooding, 6 metre high waves taking the lives of 30 in the Philippines, and six in Taiwan. 28,629 were affected in the Philippines but only 10% evacuated amidst the storm Friday evening, 252,000 were evacuated in Taiwan before it hit Saturday, over 953,000 as China prepares for the storm apporach on Sunday morning.XinhuaSunStar This is too long...will try again in a minute or two...SriMesh | talk05:12, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I like that above one a lot,... this was going to be my shorter one...:::Typhoon "Morakot" (Kiko) hit the Philippines Friday night and Taiwan Saturday, killing, injuring and displacing citizens in torrential storms bearing high winds, flash floods and land slides, and is forcing the evacuation of nearly one million Chinese before making landfall there Sunday morning.SriMesh | talk05:23, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Bomb attacks on a Shia mosque and pilgrims at Shreikhan village near Mosul kill at least 36 people as Iraq's largest Muslim community marks one of its biggest feasts, gathering in Karbala to mark the birth of Muhammad al-Mahdi. (BBC)
Added information about this shootout to (the long article) Timeline of the Mexican Drug War and created above article. Thursday was busy in the Mexico Drug War with simultaneous shootouts occuring across several cities resulting in multiple deaths, injuries and seizures by police. (Perhaps the title should be changed) SriMesh | talk21:25, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The location of the arrest is undisclosed. Claims of Thailand and Malaysia seem to be speculation.[28][29] I have updated the article. The arrest was confirmed by Sri Lankan authorities who say he was brought to Colombo.[30] Time to put it up, do you think? ≈ Chamaltalk09:27, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Second thoughts: we have official confirmations from both sides so I suppose it is solid enough. Support. Anyone willing to update? --BorgQueen (talk) 15:34, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Headline on BBC states "There are growing indications that Pakistan's most wanted man, Taliban leader Baitullah Mehsud, has been killed by a US missile."... growing indications... still sounds a little iffy. its a support. but i would suggest waiting a little bit more -- Ashish-g5515:56, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I would urge to wait, because our third source U.S the main culprit, still not confirm it and also there is lot of doubt still exist [32]. So we can't rely on these and than face something like government officials had to face on the occasion of his second marriage.yousaf465
His aide has denied his death, and say he is still commanding his force. they will be presenting such evidence. yousaf465
the world press is reporting him dead. [33], [34], [35], [36]. anybody who claims to be Baitullah Mehsud from this point on ( I am sure impostors will be out there) will have an impossible task to prove he indeed is Mehsud. what is that guy going to do. provide DNA evidence ??? This is big news. I cant see how anybody can CONFIRM that Mehsud survived the attack either ???? would support using language like "Baitullah Mehsud reported/ believed to be killed in a Drone strike"Wikireader41 (talk) 16:35, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sure. The fact I was trying to to emphasize was that he is reported dead by multiple RS. His notoriety and this extensive coverage of his possible death itself makes it noteworthy and a candidate for inclusion in ITN IMHO. also 100% confirmation is going to be very difficult & possibly will never happen according to some sources considering the locale. if there was a possiblility that we could get confirmation either way in a few days/weeks I wiould have supported waiting too. Wikireader41 (talk) 17:46, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not really because Jones said he is 90% sure. The article is being updated. I would give them a week to find a belonging for DNA testing, and maybe another week for the Taliban to make up its mind. Four of these guys called the press to say he's still alive. -SusanLesch (talk) 19:56, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
neither of these is likely to happen in 1-2 weeks. You would need to find a dead body to do DNA testing with reasonable amount of tissue on it. a belonging just would not do. Some crazy from FATA is likely going to claim to be Mehsud Off and On. Wikireader41 (talk) 22:10, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Up to 50,000 people, including officials and visitors from countries around the world, attend a memorial service in the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Park built directly below the point where the bomb exploded. (Al Jazeera)(Xinhua)
South African photographer Neil Hartmann, accused of documenting Namibia's annual seal cull, is detained without charge for nearly seven hours less than a month after the arrest of two journalists. (IOL)
A company manager claims that a 77-day occupation of a car plant by hundreds of laid-off workers in South Korea has come to an end. (BBC)
A Google search of just "hurricane" shows that Felicia has more hits than Hurricane Katrina, which has had the most since 2005. I'm quite amazed that it has that many hits so I believe it is very much of public interest and a rare storm. Although it's forecast to become weaker before hitting the islands, the structure of the storm may allow it to maintain a higher intensity than forecast so I think this storm is definitely ITN worthy. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 01:37, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
sounds like crystal balling to me. oppose till it actually becomes a threat to hawaii. no point in posting "pose a threat" Ashish-g5501:58, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
i meant if it does some damage*... let it make landfall first. we dont usually post upcoming storms. before it makes landfall its pretty much crystal balling Ashish-g5502:06, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think the hurricane should be watched for sure...it would be truly devasting if it did strike Hawaii. I am glad folks are preparingSriMesh | talk02:08, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose item as currently presented until significant amounts of people die or record breaking damges are caused. Isn't the US content enough with the judge and former President? --candle•wicke02:24, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
AP says that Felicia is weakening, but is still a Category 4 storm, and tropical storm Enrique has weakened to a tropical depression.SriMesh | talk02:58, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
SupportABS-CBN News and GMANews.TV report Phillipines hit by Typhoon Morakot (Kiko) made landfall resulting in ten dead, ten villages flooded by four to five feet deep floods forcing evacuations of close to 2,000, landslides, mudslides, gusting winds up to 210 km per hour, altogether 28 villages or over 28,000 people affected. Search and rescue attempts underwaySriMesh | talk03:09, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Supporta large number of people has been affected.yousaf465
This one too, I am leaning towards support for an encyclopaedic in the news entry, and it has been mentioned in three or four news sources now as well. Added three citations and five sentences ~ three paragraphs worth to the article.SriMesh | talk01:52, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
wait i read it wrong... thats only in cambodia. worldwide its more like 1k. still pretty low considering they got less than a decade to extinction. Ashish-g5512:56, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is tragic that nine died, three ended up in the critical care unit and 30 had smoke inhalation injuries, and the hopelessness/helplessness of rescuing the elderly and physically infirm from such a disaster, however at the moment other European news events are more notable.SriMesh | talk01:52, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: Just noticed he is well ahead of any other article on the popular pages list and also occupies 4th spot. The Sotomayor woman is stuck in 7th with 23,000 less page views. Not that I'm for these types of statistics but anyway... --candle•wicke02:46, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
According to this, the Sotomayor article had 426.7k views in one day of May 2009 when Obama nominated her. Hughes has 168k. Again, as if these stats supposed to mean something... Then again, if that's the case, if the 2009 Ashes gets to be added, then certainly UAAP Season 72 won't be that far behind, or is actually ahead... –HowardtheDuck03:12, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
International talks over Madagascar situation in Mozamabique
Sotomayor is expected to be confirmed, based on the announced intentions of 98 Senators, and I would suggest adding this when the confirmation is officially voted on within the next few hours. Gage (talk) 18:16, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
hmm she gets nominated here everytime there is any movement in her nominee situation. i think this is like 3rd or 4th. oppose on a general basis that she is not head of state. then oppose again for the fact that she hasnt even been sworn in yet. Ashish-g5518:50, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
None of the developments previous to today were as substantial as an official appointment to the highest court in the United States. I do not understand your logic. Gage (talk) 18:56, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
logic is quite simple. She is not the president of united states. every single country out there has some sort of supreme court or equivalent and they all have their own nominees. we only post head of state and that should not change just because this one involves US. we have already discussed this in quite a bit of detail before so i am not gonna argue over it anymore. if some admin wants to post it without consensus like they did last time then sure. but its an oppose from me. i will leave it to other people now. Ashish-g5519:03, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not that I am opposing your nomination, but the diffs you've linked to are from 2006 and 2005. Can you find a more recent example? --BorgQueen (talk) 19:37, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A more recent example? Both diffs were of the most recent United States Supreme Court nominees being confirmed and sworn in. I see no discrepancy in a difference of ITN policy, within the last three years, that should exclude Sotomayor's inclusion, despite Ashishg55's claim. Gage (talk) 19:43, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have to disagree. Wikipedia is a busy place, where a lot of things can change in just one year. I've posted a couple of items with slight hints of US-centricity myself, such as Obama's Cairo speech, and they were shot down just after a few hours. You see, it is not just about the ITN policy, but the general consensus of Wikipedia that we have to avoid any perceived Anglo-centricity on Main Page. I am personally curious how many hours your item will take to be removed from MP, if I post it. --BorgQueen (talk) 20:00, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There is no reason whatsoever for anyone to claim that the confirmation of a member United States Supreme Court is not worthy of being included. Gage (talk) 20:11, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You are entitled to your own opinion, but I didn't ask for it. I was just trying to explain my position here, i.e. why I am not going to post your item. Perhaps some other admin might want to take his/her chances, but I am not thrilled to see the aftermath. --BorgQueen (talk) 20:23, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. How many more times is this woman going to be nominated? I'd hate to think what would happen if she decided to run for her country's presidency... and then if she actually got elected? --candle•wicke19:35, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
None of the current items listed on ITN involve the United States, with the small exception of Bill Clinton in North Korea. Gage (talk) 19:45, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
SUPPORT. This confirmation (NOT APPOINTMENT) has historical value. Simply using "not Head of..." and an argument does not fit the process of the other In the News articles (journalists are not head of anything, nor are diseases). This section is "In the News", not "In the Government's Upper Epsilon." First Hispanic/Woman on the Highest Court of the most powerful country in the world is suffice enough for Approval Sirkevinalot (talk) 19:48, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
wow. i thought this has been discussed thoroughly but i guess people only come by when they need some particular blurb posted. YES this is "In the Government's Upper Epsilon" (well technically speaking). Every country has a government. would u rather have us post every single nominee or appointment from all sorts of positions in every country. And making claims about most powerful country is rather naive for ITN and will never pass. i can argue China is more powerful in many ways. Ashish-g5519:54, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ah well, since you're all here now do you mind commenting on any of the other international nominations as well? There are some which haven't been made yet but I'll get round to it soon when I manoeuvre my way around all the edit conflicts. --candle•wicke19:55, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Deal. Collect the other nominees who have been confirmed/approved, and who are the "firsts" in that nation, and I will vote yea/nea. Simply being nominated is Such-and-Such Country is not relative to this nomination. She is of historical importance to our government. And Ashishg55, I will settle that the US is not THE most powerful, but rather "one of the most powerful." Sirkevinalot (talk) 20:04, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I meant ITN nominations. There are Belgian and Sudanese ones from yesterday which nobody has yet opposed/supported. There is also a jail sentence above this now. I would like sources for "one of the most powerful". --candle•wicke20:11, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, apart from Wikipedia not being a reliable source for itself, I learned that the European Union (27 countries) was above the United States on several lists. But that's not an argument for here. --candle•wicke20:24, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
just saying its notable doesnt quite make it so. please prove your point like we all have tried to prove ours above (many times before too). and quoting Sirkevinalot "She is of historical importance to our government" ..... seriously, whats our lol. are you assuming all of us here and ppl on wikipedia are all from US. Ashish-g5520:34, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Then it would be valid to post every single mistake and ITN that was taken down due to complaints in the past. And post her just because she's a woman? Even so, the two journalists are women so they outnumber Bill Clinton unless he can divide himself in three and have a sex change. --candle•wicke20:41, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well as i said earlier us discussing anything is usually a moot point since when it comes to US some admin will post it either way. most of the times without even coming to this page. go admin power woohoo Ashish-g5520:53, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
But how significant is it for an encyclopedia? Not how big is it perceived to be. Never mind. Again, in vain, is it too much to ask all visitors and guests to take the time to review some of the other candidates, please and thank you. (Note:ITN candidates, not Supreme Court candidates). --candle•wicke21:23, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This is a huge first not just in the US, but also for Puerto Rico and for Latin America more generally, a region of the world in which the US has a lot of influence. So there is a great deal of international significance. I wouldn't be opposed to covering more inner-workings of China, for example, but their legislature has only recently started exerting more control, so I'm not sure what to cover.--chaser (talk) 04:57, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I opposed the nomination and feel I was correct, as the first nomination of a Hispanic candidate is not of sufficient interest or notability. However the first successful appointment is Nil Einne (talk) 08:29, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Former Madagascar leader Marc Ravalomanana is hopeful that a relaunch of peace talks between the country's rival factions will bring progress toward a return of political stability. (IOL)
Belgian Justice Minister Stefaan De Clerck is under fire after three men with criminal records escape from a courthouse in Brussls. The escape follows the helicopter breakout of three inmates, including one of Belgium's most dangerous criminals, and the ladder breakout of six more convicts all in the space of twelve days. (Deutsche Welle)
This is becoming more like traffic accidents. posting all of them would look very weird. oppose. i think a plane crashing in total catastrophe are only ones that should be posted not skidding off and everyone surviving unless something very uncommon happened (like landing in water or smth). Ashish-g5514:55, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I also get this idea that these incidents are quite common in that country. Anyone belonging to that country could please elaborate. yousaf465
i wouldnt call it common per say but yes they do tend to happen. we have featured shootings that generated worldwide interest before but this one doesnt seem too big. so oppose Ashish-g5517:36, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Burundian police detain opposition leader and former journalist Alexis Sinduhije at Ruyigi in eastern Burundi, where he is accused of hosting an illegal meeting. (IOL)
Amos Kenan, Israeli columnist, painter, sculptor, playwright, novelist and leading intellectual of Canaanism died at the age of 82 in Israel, his funeral is scheduled for Thursday, August 6th, at a kibbutz cemetery in central Israel. (The Associated Press)
The Russian and U.S. Presidents discuss in a phone conversation the Georgian situation and “the need to decrease tensions in the region,” America's White House claims. (Civil).
UBS remains cautious about its prospects after client withdrawals spurred by protracted U.S. tax litigation drags the Swiss bank into another big quarterly loss. (Reuters)
hmm can someone comment on how often does x/president of US has visited NK. This might actually be notable if it doesnt happen often. seems like a fairly risky visit. Ashish-g5519:31, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
BBC "The last visit to North Korea by a former American president - Jimmy Carter in 1994"... actually this does not happen all that often. i think this story although US centric still manages to get worldwide interest due to north korean involvement. so i will give it support. also i believe both journalists got a pardon. Ashish-g5519:38, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Agree it's US-centric but support anyway. Highly unusual given North Korea's secluded status. Would also support if it was Putin visiting. Colipon+(T) 20:57, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No, no, no. The blurb should be all about the release of the two, possibly with a mention of Clinton at the end but he can't be the focus. If that happens, I'll support. And a Putin visit would have been very different - he's still the Russian prime minister. Therequiembellishere (talk) 21:08, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
lol dont want him to get stuck in north korea. then thats a totally new category of news. i would support for both the journalist and the relations being bolded. if journalists were released without clinton this would not make it up. so i think his visit is equally big a headline. Ashish-g5522:34, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What's with this credits thing? I thought Wikipedia is voluntary work. This is not even DYK where "international-ness" is a reason to reject potential items. –HowardtheDuck04:02, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I was looking at this one earlier and thought the death toll was a bit small for what after all is only the second least common version of the plague (according to the article). I was also unsure if one town is good enough for ITN as it does not seem to be internationally significant (at least yet). I will therefore wait for the input of others as it may be possible that some would make the same points. --candle•wicke15:31, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Would still support the Chifeng water system pollution over the plague thing in Qinghai. The Chifeng thing is extremely serious and I don't recall anything similar happening since the Taihu water tainting back in '06... it's just the article would need major updates. Colipon+(T) 21:02, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My understanding is that it open to people from Asia only? This may or may not be good enough although it doesn't seem to compare to the other ITN awards so I will wait to see what others think. It could open up all sorts of regional awards as well so there may be wider consequences of including it. If it is included I imagine it would be a candidate for WP:ITNR. --candle•wicke17:10, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I understand that and am just cautious of opening the floodgates to other awards so I will wait for other opinions before further action. --candle•wicke17:36, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, there were many recipients to the prize[41], why should we choose this one? Choosing just him would be subjective selection. The prize itself is notable though. Offliner (talk) 14:22, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Nine families who have been living in East Jerusalem since 1956 are evicted by force. (Previous reports of 'two families' are wrong.) (Al Jazeera)(AFP)(BBC)
Yeah, I know... A little humour please. Besides, it has been more than 2 days since the last update. Do you really need support from others, especially when this ITN playground is so empty and quiet? --BorgQueen (talk) 15:04, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's why I used the smile in case it is misunderstood as a negative. I am aware of this but asking has been unsuccessful, I have been trying too and I have updated two, one of which was opposed afterwards and the other AfDed. Mozart and others have also been opposed. I therefore thought it best to wait for some wider input before doing any more. It is based upon consensus after all. Playground? --candle•wicke15:24, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
16 people is definitely enough. We have posted many smaller air accidents as well. Those were mostly in Europe or USA, but the fact that this one is in Indonesia does not make it any less important. However, the article needs to expanded first. Offliner (talk) 22:21, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
2 new works of mozart have been found. Not too many details yet. they are to be released Aug 2. i think this is definitely noteworthy but maybe wait till more details arrive? Ashish-g55 (talk) 22:41, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Police fire tear gas and arrest over 400 people at street protests over laws that can see people detained indefinitely without trial by the authorities in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. (RTÉ)(Malaysian Insider)
Posted — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:05, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
Added. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 22:24, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
Done. howcheng {chat} 03:36, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
- TouLouse (talk) 20:07, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
--candle•wicke 23:21, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
--candle•wicke 19:35, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
--BorgQueen (talk) 11:14, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
, any photo? TouLouse (talk) 18:25, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
_cropped.jpg){kind=link}
![[21]](http://fossil.wikia.com/wiki/File:Tianyuraptor_skeleton_1.png){kind=link}
