::The consensus seems to be leaning oppose, IMO. [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot|talk]]) 02:51, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
::The consensus seems to be leaning oppose, IMO. [[User:331dot|331dot]] ([[User talk:331dot|talk]]) 02:51, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
:::Consensus already exists. If you want to change that, go to [[WT:ITN/R]]. And if this doesn't get posted for notability reasons, this automatically has to be removed from ITN/R because it needs to be posted every time unless it has update problems. '''[[User:Bzweebl|<font color="#D60047">B</font><font color="#F0A000">zw</font><font color="#00A300">ee</font><font color="#0A47FF">bl</font>]]''' ([[User talk:Bzweebl|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Bzweebl|contribs]]) 04:20, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
:::Consensus already exists. If you want to change that, go to [[WT:ITN/R]]. And if this doesn't get posted for notability reasons, this automatically has to be removed from ITN/R because it needs to be posted every time unless it has update problems. '''[[User:Bzweebl|<font color="#D60047">B</font><font color="#F0A000">zw</font><font color="#00A300">ee</font><font color="#0A47FF">bl</font>]]''' ([[User talk:Bzweebl|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Bzweebl|contribs]]) 04:20, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
*'''Conditional Support''': No question in my mind regarding notability, only regarding article quality (hardly any text update). Reg. notability: '''(1)ITN/R''': If it is on ITN/R, it means notability has already been deemed as satisfied and requires only update quality to be verified. ITN/R clearly states that results of general elections of all countries listed in the [[List of Sovereign states]] are considered notable for posting on ITN. '''(2)No exceptions''': ITN/R provides for case-to-case discussion on merits for certain topics like changes to heads of government. However, there are no exceptions or exclusions to the above rule on general elections provided under ITN/R. If the consensus is that certain countries need to be excluded, then the ITN/R rule needs to be changed. This has been suggested and debated several times (motions that I recall from memory included that micronations be excluded, only G20 be included, large sub-national entities /city elections be included, have an elections ticker, etc) but no change has been brought about. The basis of categorization has always been sovereignty. [[User:Chocolate Horlicks|Chocolate Horlicks]] ([[User talk:Chocolate Horlicks|talk]]) 04:24, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
This candidates page is integrated with the daily pages of Portal:Current events. A light green header appears under each daily section – it includes transcluded Portal:Current events items for that day. You can discuss ITN candidates under the header.
Blurbs are one-sentence summaries of the news story.
Altblurbs, labelled alt1, alt2, etc., are alternative suggestions to cover the same story.
A target article, bolded in text, is the focus of the story. Each blurb must have at least one such article, but you may also link non-target articles.
Articles in the Ongoing line describe events getting continuous coverage.
The Recent deaths (RD) line includes any living thing whose death was recently announced. Consensus may decide to create a blurb for a recent death.
All articles linked in the ITN template must pass our standards of review. They should be up-to-date, demonstrate relevance via good sourcing and have at least an acceptable quality.
Nomination steps
Make sure the item you want to nominate has an article that meets our minimum requirements and contains reliable coverage of a current event you want to create a blurb about. We will not post about events described in an article that fails our quality standards.
Find the correct section below for the date of the event (not the date nominated). Do not add sections for new dates manually – a bot does that for us each day at midnight (UTC).
Create a level 4 header with the article name (==== Your article here ====). Add (RD) or (Ongoing) if appropriate.
Then paste the {{ITN candidate}} template with its parameters and fill them in. The news source should be reliable, support your nomination and be in the article. Write your blurb in simple present tense. Below the template, briefly explain why we should post that event. After that, save your edit. Your nomination is ready!
You may add {{ITN note}} to the target article's talk page to let editors know about your nomination.
The better your article's quality, the better it covers the event and the wider its perceived significance (see WP:ITNSIGNIF for details), the better your chances of getting the blurb posted.
When the article is ready, updated and there is consensus to post, you can mark the item as (Ready). Remove that wording if you feel the article fails any of these necessary criteria.
Admins should always separately verify whether these criteria are met before posting blurbs marked (Ready). For more guidance, check WP:ITN/A.
If satisfied, change the header to (Posted).
Where there is no consensus, or the article's quality remains poor, change the header to (Closed) or (Not posted).
Sometimes, editors ask to retract an already-posted nomination because of a fundamental error or because consensus changed. If you feel the community supports this, remove the item and mark the item as (Pulled).
Voicing an opinion on an item
Format your comment to contain "support" or "oppose", and include a rationale for your choice. In particular, address the notability of the event, the quality of the article, and whether it has been updated.
Pick an older item to review near the bottom of this page, before the eligibility runs out and the item scrolls off the page and gets abandoned in the archive, unused and forgotten.
Review an item even if it has already been reviewed by another user. You may be the first to spot a problem, or the first to confirm that an identified problem was fixed. Piling on the list of "support!" votes will help administrators see what is ready to be posted on the Main Page.
Tell about problems in articles if you see them. Be bold and fix them yourself if you know how, or tell others if it's not possible.
Add simple "support!" or "oppose!" votes without including your reasons. Similarly, curt replies such as "who?", "meh", or "duh!" are not helpful. A vote without reasoning means little for us, please elaborate yourself.
Oppose an item just because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. We post a lot of such content, so these comments are generally unproductive.
Accuse other editors of supporting, opposing or nominating due to a personal bias (such as ethnocentrism). We at ITN do not handle conflicts of interest.
Comment on a story without first reading the relevant article(s).
Hostess Brands announces it will file for bankruptcy and liquidate its assets, stating that a bakery union's worker strike stemming from contract disputes "crippled" its operations. 18,500 workers are expected to be laid off. (Bloomberg)
The furniture retailer IKEA says it "deeply regrets" the use of political prisoners in the former German Democratic Republic as forced labour by some of its suppliers. (BBC)
I have changed the blurb, but wait until the courts accept the agreement (in the same way we wait to post on takeovers of baseball teams until the deal is completed). Mtking (edits) 01:41, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'll let more comments come but i still think we should put the 4.5B figure not 1.26 since thats what BP has been told to pay. The other portion is basically punitive damages that they have to pay to National fish and wildlife association over period of 5 years. We cant just ignore that. -- Ashish-g5502:18, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the total figure should be mentioned, perhaps by saying they were "ordered to pay 4.5 billion in fines and compensation". 331dot (talk) 02:53, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support, though the blurb should be reworded to clarify that the 4.5 billion is not all criminal fines. It is notable to point out the criminal resolution to the largest oil spill in the US. 331dot (talk) 01:26, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
According to the UN refugee office, at least 414,838 Syrians are in neighboring countries registered as refugees or waiting to register. Turkey has the single highest number, with 114,944. (CNN)
Turkey's Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu announced that his government recognizes the newly formed Syrian National Coalition as the legitimate leader of the Syrian people, two days after France became the first Western country to recognize the council. (New York Times)
The Palestinian death toll rises to at least 16, including 2 children. Officials in Gaza report at least 150 have been injured since the start of the Israeli operation. (Al Jazeera)
Two rockets are fired at Tel Aviv, with one landing in the sea and the other hitting an uninhabited area in the city's suburbs. Islamic Jihad has claimed responsibility for the incident, which was the first attack against the city since the 1991 Gulf War. (The Jerusalem Post)(KleineOnline)
As nationwide protests over fuel price hikes continue in Jordan, unidentified gunmen storm a police station in the northern town of Irbid, leading to the fatal shooting of 22-year-old civilian, and injuries to 13 police officers and 4 protesters. Protests and sporadic looting are reported from Al Karak, Salt and Madaba. (Al Jazeera)
Separately, the two highest-ranking BP supervisors on board the Deepwater Horizon on the day of the explosion have been indicted on 23 criminal counts. (CNN)
Xi Jinping delivers his first speech as General Secretary in a "plain-spoken" style very different from that of his predecessor, Hu Jintao. (BBC)(BBC Transcript)
The Myanmar government pardons 452 prisoners under an amnesty in a goodwill gesture before a visit by US President Barack Obama. State media said some of the people released were foreigners, though it remained unknown if any dissidents are among them at all. Human Rights Watch accuses the government of using strategically timed prisoner releases to appease the international community. (Al Jazeera)
Article needs updating The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: I understand that this is a microstate, but it has been deemed notable enough to have a blurb. Unless the status of elections on ITN/R is changed, this is already considered to have consensus. The purpose of ITN/R is to eliminate unnecessary discussions on news already deemed to be notable by the ITN community. If anyone can figure out who won for me to update the article that would be great. --Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 00:44, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Because I'm guessing the results are probably known since the election was four days ago, but I just can't find them. I was assuming someone would know or would be able to find the results. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 01:23, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. A state this size is barely a country, this has all the significance of a city-council election. Consider this an WP:IAR or a vote against this being on ITN/R if you must, but whichever way do we really think this is noteworthy, or are we following the rules for the sake of it? LukeSurltc01:08, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support iff there is enough election information to have a complete, solid election article. If there is not enough information to provide such an update, oppose. SpencerT♦C02:08, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That would have to be one of the most arrogant, ignorant and bigoted comments I've ever read on Wikipedia. San Marino could easily be regarded as the oldest nation-state in Europe, with a national identity just as strong as any other. 58.7.94.82 (talk) 05:51, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Exaggeration aside, it's still a pretty narrow view of a nation with a rich history and a pivotal role in the creation of modern Europe. Size isn't everything. that's what she said GRAPPLEX19:09, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There's no "aside" about it. I said nothing about the place not having a storied history (although that's obviously a point of pride strong enough to drive a random stranger to call me a bigot) but we don't post the mayoral elections for Athens or Mysore either. Please don't anyone waste mine, yours, or this board's time further by lecturing me on history, I stand opposed. μηδείς (talk) 20:13, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'd be among the first to oppose mayoral elections for cities. But this is a country. You are comparing apples and oranges. GRAPPLEX20:17, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am fairly certain this dead horse has been beaten enough, but you can't offer the past historical import of a city-state (which is what this is), or any entity as justification for a current event being posted, or everything that ever happened in Jericho or Venice would have to go up on that basis. "It's an old city!" does not outweigh "It's of far less importance than any other current ITN item." μηδείς (talk) 23:00, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
See now you're putting words in my mouth. I haven't justified this nom on the basis of history or age. I supported it on the basis of it being a sovereign country, which you repeatedly seem to either ignore or overlook. This is as important on the world stage as countries like Lesotho or the Bahamas, which, size aside, have the same drop-in-the-ocean importance on the world stage, yet had their elections posted. Because they're countries and countries, like San Marino, are already pre-approved to run via ITNR. This is not just a city. It's a country. This is not just a city. It's a country. GRAPPLEX23:22, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I was just dropping by and I have nothing to do with any of this, that is I couldn't care less about what you do with the Sanmarinese general election, but this one did catch my eye: "Pivotal role in the creation of modern Europe"? Hunh? Especially in a post that starts with the word "exaggeration". Basemetal00 (talk) 20:05, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Italy as a unified state (what with it being one of the larger and more powerful countries on the continent and playing a large part in WWII and EU politics) owes its existence to San Marino being the safe haven of choice for many of the unification movement's leaders, Garibaldi included. Obviously that's not the same as, say, Germany's role or France's role in creating the modern landscape but it's hardly the reach that "tax haven with a zip code" is. But I digress. ITNR, sovereign nation state, post. GRAPPLEX20:12, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Population of 30k? That's smaller than cities that nobody's ever heard of, including the one I was just in a couple weeks ago. Who leads this microstate is certainly not in the news. Also, the article is in terrible shape. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:56, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support - This is a sovereign nation, this is its principal election. Case closed, nothwithstanding the chauvinistic bigotry of the citizens of larger nations. AlexTiefling (talk) 10:06, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's not bigoted to think that some nations are more prominent in world affairs than others. Who is running this small country of 30,000 (smaller than all major US cities and most minor ones) doesn't have that great an impact on the world. 331dot (talk) 13:21, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment As the election was on 11 November, this should have been proposed under the 11 November section, not under today's. --RJFF (talk) 11:53, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, a coalition has won which includes both major parties of the country (Christian democrats and PSD). Shouldn't the blurb name the San Marino Common Good alliance as the winner? --RJFF (talk) 12:10, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, someone has to add some lines of prose to the article. Even if it is ITN/R, there is still the requirement of a considerable update (which should not only be a result table, but also at least five lines of prose.) --RJFF (talk) 12:13, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I see the maturity of the opposition to this posting has declined even further. If you can't tell the difference between one of the world's oldest nations and your own hometown, I have no clue why we should trust your opinion. AlexTiefling (talk) 13:13, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I can. My hometown has 15 times as many people. That fact that you have no clue about the insignificance of this makes me question your judgment. Hot Stop(Edits)13:20, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Though I opposed above, I am aware that this is a sovereign nation, not just any town with 30,000 people. I maintain however that it is of low significance due to the extremely small size. As stated above as well the article is (currently) terrible. LukeSurltc15:31, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment the size of the country is irrelevant. Belize, Iceland, Maldives and the Bahamas all have less people than Hamilton, Ontario. ITN/R is clear, every country on list of sovereign states gets a pass on notability. The article needs work, but lets not hate on san marino just because it's small. --IP98 (talk) 22:30, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose is of very limited relevance and notability. Not so long ago referendums in states with 10+ millions of inhabitants have been deemed not significant enough for ITN, now an election in a country of 30,000 inhabitants supposed to be more notable only because is called a "country". That's governance form bias. --ELEKHHT01:23, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Eh I think the problem (the reason why it was rejected) is that it was just an announcement of a referendum, not an actual result of one, whereas this is a result. (At least AFAIK with the Scottish independence referendum). hbdragon88 (talk) 02:08, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Heads we post it, tails we don't[2]. It isn't that big a deal either way, folks. No sense getting mad. (FWIW, I just got heads for the "official" flip, so I say post after decent update.) --Floquenbeam (talk) 02:21, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Consensus already exists. If you want to change that, go to WT:ITN/R. And if this doesn't get posted for notability reasons, this automatically has to be removed from ITN/R because it needs to be posted every time unless it has update problems. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 04:20, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Conditional Support: No question in my mind regarding notability, only regarding article quality (hardly any text update). Reg. notability: (1)ITN/R: If it is on ITN/R, it means notability has already been deemed as satisfied and requires only update quality to be verified. ITN/R clearly states that results of general elections of all countries listed in the List of Sovereign states are considered notable for posting on ITN. (2)No exceptions: ITN/R provides for case-to-case discussion on merits for certain topics like changes to heads of government. However, there are no exceptions or exclusions to the above rule on general elections provided under ITN/R. If the consensus is that certain countries need to be excluded, then the ITN/R rule needs to be changed. This has been suggested and debated several times (motions that I recall from memory included that micronations be excluded, only G20 be included, large sub-national entities /city elections be included, have an elections ticker, etc) but no change has been brought about. The basis of categorization has always been sovereignty. Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 04:24, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Backed by the Russian domestic security service, Federal Security Service, Russian president Vladimir Putin signs a new treason law, which opponents expect him to use to silence critics and almost anyone who associates with foreigners. (Reuters)(Daily Times)
Nominated by [[User:Colipon|Colipon]] ([[User talk:Colipon|talk]] ·[{{fullurl:User talk:Colipon|action=edit&preload=Template:ITN_candidate/preload_credit&preloadtitle=ITN+recognition+for+%5B%5BPolitburo+Standing+Committee%5D%5D§ion=new&preloadparams%5b%5d=Politburo+Standing+Committee&preloadparams%5b%5d=nominated}} give credit])
Article needs updating One or both nominated events are listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: The decision's out on Thursday morning on who will be part of the Politburo Standing Committee, the de facto top body that runs the world's second largest economy. World will be watching. I think this should be a 'no-brainer' ITN post. I just don't know how to exactly word it. Also worthy of discussion is whether the focus should be on Xi Jinping, the new general secretary, or the entire committee. Colipon+(Talk) 19:47, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am proposing with a somewhat more solid blurb, with direct references to Xi Jinping and the PSC and perhaps not so much emphasis on the Congress itself; as such perhaps this should be treated as a nomination in its own right. Colipon+(Talk) 00:23, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, ready to post, just agree on the blurb first. Ideally, I would include the Party Congress article, but I don't see much of an update. --Tone08:30, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This is a no-brainer, surely? A new President-elect (in effect) for 1/6 of humanity?! I moved the 'altblurb' into 'blurb', and suggest my own altblurb (adds context, since there are other General Secretaries and Politburos). I don't know if this is the correct procedure, but I was bold. We should also have the iconic photo from the press conference if we can obtain a copyright-cleared source. 10:01, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
Ok, then I'll just omit the congress article and link the updated ones. Someone update the picture, please. Nice, now we have Obama and Xi Jinping in the template at the same time! --Tone10:36, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: Breaking news on al jazeera (tv). its also the top israeli target and the highest hamas killing since, probably, Sheikh Yassin. It also comes hardly 24 hours after an Egypt brokered peace/ceasefire deal. Also, and this maye synthesis, but in the light of syria and hamas' breaking it could be more notable Lihaas (talk) 14:50, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Strongest possible oppose with the current blurb. He was killed in an Israeli airstrike. Using the term assassination is complete POV. RyanVesey14:57, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The deliberately targeted the car he was in to kill him. How is that not an assassination? - it fits the description in the wikipedia article perfectly. Using the correct words is not POV. Thue (talk) 17:20, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
We could mention that it was targeted or planned, but we should not be calling it an assassination unless international media does. RyanVesey15:19, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, then it's impossible to have a complete blurb, because that rocket-fire from the Gaza Strip was in response to something Israel did, which was in response to something the Palestinians did, and so on and so forth until the dawn of time. It isn't POV to state "So and so was killed in an airstrike". There's no need to assign reason or rationale behind every action. --Jayron3215:52, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It may be the case that the rocket strikes were related to earlier Israeli actions, but that's irrelevant. We need to use what the news says. The New York Times[4] mentions that the Israeli Military said the attack was "in response to days of rocket fire launched from Gaza into Israeli territory". It is clear that this was a response and we should mention that. RyanVesey
Ditto per Jayron, its really nitpicking. Assassination is not a pov term, there is a definition. If X was killed by a palestinian (or bhutto with the suicide bomber) itd still be as assassination. Dont see the pov, seems people think one side is being defended vs. the other which is NOT the case. killed by X is the same
For the record the first sentence on the section was not made by me and someone welse things that too. But either way , suggest an alt blurb instead of opposing per local council normsLihaas (talk) 15:57, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It would be POV. We would be deliberately choosing a term with a negative connotation when the sources we are using (including somewhat liberal ones like NYT) don't use that term. I propose the alternate blurb "Hamas military chief Ahmed Jabari is killed in a targeted airstrike by Shin Bet in response to rocket strikes from Gaza into Israel." RyanVesey16:20, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
For the sake of brevity (and for the sake of Jayron's point, which is entirely valid), how about just ""Hamas military chief Ahmed Jabari is killed in by an Israeli airstrike"? BBC isn't naming Shin Bet as being responsible so something less specific such as just "Israeli" might be warranted. GRAPPLEX16:27, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The negative connotation of assassination comes from the concept itself, not from the choice of words. Dressing it up in a "nicer" word to paper over the truth would be POV. Thue (talk) 17:25, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support though I'd prefer if we say he was killed by an Israeli airstrike. Assassination conjures up images of a gunman hiding in a grassy knoll. Hot Stop(Edits)17:28, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Recent Death First, I am not certain he's all that notable. Second, just listing him as recent death avoids the "assassination" debate. Third, if there is better consensus his listing can always be promoted up to a full ITN blurb. Given this is updated and there are no total opposes I think it should go on recent deaths immediately and then be promoted if agreement is reached. μηδείς (talk) 17:40, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Recent death. But if it must get a blub then it should say killed by an Israeli airstrike. I feel it is normal in the course of armed conflict to strike at officers and leaders. Assassination should be reserved for killings in non-combat situations, at least in Wikipedia blurbs. Richard-of-Earth (talk) 17:45, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support - This blurp or similar: Hamas military chief Ahmed Jabari is assassinated by an Israeli airstrike. Calling it an assassination is not POV, as assassination is the correct description. Striking officers and leader in armed conflict is still assassination. I'm opposed to including the claim that it was in retaliation for rocket fire from Gaza as the rocket fire was in retaliation for something as well and just mentioning the Israeli justification is POV. Zaalbar (talk) 17:47, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support important development, in a conflict we've not covered for a while. I've suggested an alt blurb that simply says 'killed'. LukeSurltc17:52, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support from what I have heard from media sources this could well be the beginning of a serious (ground) offensive by Israel into Gaza, the death of the top military figure of Hamas is really quite significant, and if all we have to oppose is the wording of the blurb, let's work on the blurb. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:01, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I was aware of the article before I posted the item and decided not to use it, at least not as the main article. The Jabari article seems better put together and pertinent. That being said, I imagine the blurb can be changed to use the operation article in the not-too-distant future, and I wouldn't be against someone doing so. -- tariqabjotu20:55, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't particularly care whether we say "assassinated" or "killed" but, for pity's sake, what is going on between editors' ears when they object to the former? Formerip (talk) 00:33, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
My old user name is mired in the IPC, I deliberately stay away from it now. You might find a mountain of WP:RS calling it an assassination, but it's going to set off an NPOV feces deluge, and it's just not worth the trouble. Leave it at killed. --IP98 (talk) 01:06, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Our current headline is dishonest. There is not an internationally recognised WP:RS that is not referring to this as an assassination or targeted killing. "killed in an Israeli military operation" is doing our readers a disservice. Leaky Caldron10:53, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
While I may regard this as an assassination, I note that the BBC's front-page reporting uses 'killed' to refer to victims of recent attacks on both sides. It only switches to 'assassinated' for its sidebar in the main report, linking Jabari's killing to those of other Palestinian leaders in the past. There is absolutely nothing untrue about killed, and it's an unjust accusation to call it dishonest or a disservice. He evidently has been killed, and it was a consequence of a targeted military campaign. I don't think any reasonable person reading our headline would conclude that Jabari's death was an unintended side-effect - collateral damage, if you will - rather than a deliberate part of this operation. Please keep your POV-pushing out of this, even when it's my POV too. AlexTiefling (talk) 11:00, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You're wrong on every level. 3 separate BBC news programmes, News Channel, Newsnight and Radio 5 Live have repeatedly called this assassination. 8000+ news sources are calling it assassination. If you disagree say so, but don't dare accuse me of POV pushing. If ITN is to be consistent and trsuted in its news delivery it should reflect what reliable sources are reporting, not dumbing it down. It could easily be read as being killed in a military operation, because that's what it says. The fact is our headline is missing a key word, "targeted". Leaky Caldron11:07, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Can you get down off your high horse and tell me what, exactly, is inaccurate about the existing headline? "Killed in a military operation" is true. That is how he has been assassinated. What's your problem? AlexTiefling (talk) 11:21, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Of course it's true but it is not the whole truth is it? A military figurehead killed in a military operation would not be a headline, unless they were a 4 or 5 star U.S. General. The whole point of this being notable is that the 2nd in command in Hamas was intentionally targeted (assassinated). He didn't just happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time and ended up getting killed. We could dumb down any newsworthy story to a vapid, wishy-washy headline that causes no offence, but since every reputable news outlet is describing this accurately why should WP ITN stand out as lacking in precision? Leaky Caldron11:29, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I actually agree that "killed in a military operation" can easily sound passive to someone not familiar with the story, but I could not think of another way of phrasing it that didn't use the over-the-top "assassinated". The latter word is barely mentioned in the articles linked from the Main Page, so I don't think it's appropriate to be used there. If it's apparent (as it does appear to be) that the killing was intentionally, that could be conveyed somehow, but could you suggest an alternative phrase that doesn't resort to the use of the word "assassination"? -- tariqabjotu20:41, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There is no reason to be squeamish here. This would not be a story if he had not been targeted and there are 8000 hits for Hamas assassanation during the last 24 hours plus mentions on news channels. However "Hamas military chief Ahmed Jabari is killed in an Israeli military operation." can easily be improved by adding targeted, thus: "Hamas military chief Ahmed Jabari is killed in a targeted Israeli military operation." Leaky Caldron20:49, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Considering you just called me "squeamish" after I asked for your input, you're going to have to find someone else to make the change you suggested. Bye. -- tariqabjotu21:08, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It is the community that is being let down by the timid and inaccurate strap line. Shame to see Wikipedia not being completely honest with our readers. Leaky Caldron21:29, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Following over 150 rockets being fired into Israel over the past four days from Gaza and attacks by Israel, Egypt has mediated a truce. Both Hamas and Ehud Barak praise the efforts for peace. (JPost)
A pinch of fine sand and dust became the first solid Martian sample deposited into the Sample Analysis at Mars, the biggest instrument on NASA's Mars rover Curiosity. The sample came from the patch of windblown material called Rocknest, which had provided a sample previously for mineralogical analysis by CheMin instrument. (JPL-NASA)
Medicine
Scott Routley, a 39-year-old Canadian man, makes medical history by becoming the first person believed to have been in a vegetative state to tell scientists that he is not in any pain. The discovery requires the rewriting of medical textbooks. (BBC)
Article needs updating The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: Total solar eclipses are on ITNR. Event is ongoing at the time of this nomination, with about 90 mins to go. The article needs a prose update, but I'm currently struggling to find reliable sources to do this - it might take until tomorrow for the major news sources to publish anything. EDIT: a couple of sources added above Modest Geniustalk23:02, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support as per ITN/R. Unless the eclipse resulted in anything unexpected, we can just change the article to past tense and be done with it. Would make a good front page picture I'm sure. LukeSurltc01:01, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at the path, totality seems to have avoided human settlements pretty much completely. We might not get any pictures of the total eclipse on commons. Also the whole "Related eclipses" section in this article seems rather unnecessary. LukeSurltc01:05, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
With less than one five-millionth of the world's population? Seem's to support Luke's argument. Is this getting coverage anywhere but locally? μηδείς (talk) 04:14, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well it was in the BBC TV news headlines 12,000 miles away, that's not local. But totally predictable, and without any ongoing effect beyond memories for 50,000 people on hand. Oppose. Kevin McE (talk) 07:19, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Cairns is even bigger, and Queensland's population has apparently swelled by ~50k with tourists coming to see the eclipse. There are already several images on Commons, though all of the partial phase so far. Modest Geniustalk11:07, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I could support this on the basis of reader interest if that were shown, but it really does point out the utter folly of ITNR as a concept. With super bowls, soccer matches and solar eclipses, who needs judgement or discretion? μηδείς (talk) 04:58, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Less than once a year? Next total eclipse is in 2015. That doesn't seem overly frequent to me. Of course it's predictable - that's why it's on ITNR. That is after all the whole point in the page. Modest Geniustalk11:07, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - No international significance, very limited national significance where it is being seen... Really, what more can be said.--WaltCip (talk) 12:17, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support I really do wish people would pay more attention to documenting worldwide press interest. Given NASA has posted some cool images we should have a good free image for use if this does get posted. μηδείς (talk) 17:43, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There has been no update for 3 days and there is no picture because of the recently implemented policy. We won't get the Chinese item before tomorrow and there is not yet a consensus whether the Hamas item should get a full blurb. Posting this one to get the ITN some fresh material. And the image. --Tone20:08, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: The blurb gives as much information as the article. I don't think there's any reasonable improvement to the current article that would allow this blurb would work. RyanVesey21:41, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
comment What does cattle rustling have to do with terrorism? Was this in a single attack? I could support this if there were an article on it, not a mention in a grab bag. μηδείς (talk) 04:04, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A second mortar shell from Syria has been fired at an Israeli military outpost in the Golan Heights, after a similar incident the day before. The Israel Defence Forces have responded with tank fire at the source of the bombardment, scoring several direct hits on artillery units belonging to the Syrian Army. (NY Times)
At least 38 police officers are killed in northern Kenya amid clashes with cattle rustlers. (CNN)
Muslim cleric Abu Qatada will be released on bail after winning an appeal against deportation from the United Kingdom to Jordan. The UK government says it will appeal against the ruling. (BBC)
Neutral I nominated the same item last year and it was strongly rejected because of its different nature in the tennis world and the much lower importance it receives than any Grand Slam tournament. But still not for oppose, even if it occurs in the same calendar year with the Olympics and another top-class tennis tournament.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 21:19, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Tennis has 4 majors: this isn't one of them. It is one of several events at a level below that: how many tennis events per year would you support as routine results? Would you allow the same number for other global (however that is determined) sports?
Oppose: Six monarchies, some of whom are already actively supporting the rebels, recognizing them as a "legitimate representative of the Syrian people" isnt really big news. Equivalent to Iran insisting that the Assad government is the legit government. Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 10:33, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't call those equivalent. The status quo generally isn't news. Right now the status quo is that the Assad government is the government of Syria so Iran recognizing the Assad government as legitimate is not similar to France and the Cooperation Council recognizing the opposition. RyanVesey20:56, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support because it's the first diplomatic recognition of this entity, and thus a major development. If there already were a dozen nations recognizing the Syrian opposition then it wouldn't be notable. -LtNOWIS (talk) 18:40, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Clashes take place between Syrian troops and rebels near the borders of Iraq and Turkey. (Khaleej Times)
The Israel Defense Forces has fired an anti-tank missile in the direction of a mortar position in Syria after a 120mm mortar shell exploded near an Israeli post in the Golan Heights. Although the missile was reportedly intended as a "warning shot" and directed to miss the mortar position on purpose, the IDF's response marks the first time since the 1973 Yom Kippur War that Israel has fired at Syrian territory. (Ynetnews)(Arutz Sheva)
Nominator's comments: Arguably one of the most notorious figures during the Falklands War plus recent death ticker been very quiet lately and he seems like the only one who qualifies for it the past week or so. Needs an update of course. Secretaccount06:08, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support for ticker - Interesting historical figure. IMO we don't need an extensive death update for the ticker persons, these are individuals for whom their deaths (often from old-age/natural causes) are not hugely earth-shattering news, but their lives was notable. LukeSurltc12:14, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support for ticker--but only if it's updated or we have consensus that such updates are necessary. Strong oppose for a full blurb--not at all the equivalanet of a sitting head of state. μηδείς (talk) 18:03, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support- Governor of the Falkland Islands is a pretty interesting and important position, and his role in a number of historical events surrounding the Islands is enough for him to be posted. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 02:20, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know. This is a warning shot in response to what looks like a mis-fire. This is a lot different than the war that was happening in the 1970s.--Chaser (talk) 15:59, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There's been another day of shelling, with an intentional direct hit on a target in Syria this time. With the sticky there, I don't think it's yet enough for a blurb, but it's closer.--Chaser (talk) 16:37, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
18th National Congress of the Communist Party of China
Comment, I think it should be posted after leaders are appointed. So the blurb should be changed accordingly. Btw, who is the nom?>Egeymi (talk) 08:55, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support in some form or another - it's probably best to wait a few days until it concludes, or when the new leaders are announced as Egeymi suggests (not sure if that happens on the last day, or sooner). --Bongwarrior (talk) 09:59, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
To offer a fairer assessment to the nominator, maybe this is of some importance in Canada and the United States. It is difficult to tell and I've never heard of them so cannot offer anything further. But would a similar break-up of a celebrity couple from England or Australia be supported? I think not, so I will offer a weak oppose out of the kindness of my heart. --86.40.97.160 (talk) 21:16, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Two suicide bombings in Daraa killed at least 20 Syrian troops. (Fox News)
At least 27 people are killed and dozens are wounded in conflicts between inmates and guards at Welikada prison in Colombo, the capital city of Sri Lanka. (BBC)
Palestinian militants fire a barrage of rockets from Gaza into southern Israel, in a cross-border escalation following an earlier attack in which four Israeli soldiers are injured, two seriously, when an anti-tank missile fired from the Gaza Strip hits an Israeli army jeep patrolling some 200 meters inside the Israeli border with Gaza; Israel carries out counter-strikes, killing five Palestinians and wounding 30. (The Times of Israel)
Disasters and accidents
Seventeen Turkish soldiers are killed in a helicopter crash on Herekol mountain in the Pervari area of Siirt province. The crash occurred due to bad weather conditions. (Reuters)
A married couple is presumed dead, seven are hospitalized, and five houses are completely destroyed (at least 27 were damaged and up to 81 were affected) in a massive explosion in the Richmond Hill neighborhood of the far southside of Indianapolis. A faulty furnace or gas leak is suspected. The blast, with an affected area of several blocks, was so large it registered on IUPUI earthquake detectors and was felt for several miles. (Indianapolis Star)
Law and crime
Two members of the Kuwaiti royal family are released after being held for tweeting messages supporting the opposition. (Al Jazeera)
Comment. Kind of equivocal about this. On its own the resignation isn't enough (see Petraeus and the CIA below), but I don't think we've really covered this whole story much if at all. Is there a way to maybe bundle some of it together to include this and any formal charges made against those arrested or questioned (been a bit since I checked but I believe Starr and Glitter were both arrested or questioned over this). GRAPPLEX23:40, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support American news outlets have been carrying this as a major story (I've been following it on NPR) and one can find prominent stories about this scandal all over mainstream media around the world. --Jayron3202:36, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Let me get this straight, WC. The resignation of the head of PBS is of far greater importance than that of the head of MI5 or the KGB? Is that what you just said? (Oppose) μηδείς (talk) 03:46, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Putting aside the fact that the BBC is to PBS what Barack Obama is to George McGovern, the comparison is irrelevant, as neither departure would be posted in ordinary circumstances.
Jerry Sandusky was based at Penn State until 2011 via The Second Mile; while well respected for what he achieved as a coach, he was not by any stretch of the imagination pivotal to Penn State's existence or prosperity, in the way that Sir Alex Ferguson might be considered at Manchester United. Yet we posted Sandusky because of how big the story was, and probably wouldn't post Ferguson because his departure will ultimately be that of an elderly man deciding to retire. This is a pretty similar situation. —WFC— FL wishlist09:12, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Let me get this straight, Medeis. You're comparing the world's largest broadcaster, a corporation with 23,000 employees, which is also the largest newsgathering organisation in the world, to PBS? Some perspective is needed here. 87.114.31.223 (talk) 15:54, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support. This isn't about "my organisation beats your organisation", nor about "my country beats your country" (and if there is a racial element to voting, that should be removed not only from here, but from Wikipedia completely). Which organisations they come from is irrelevant – if we were to choose 50 universities which are allowed one story per year (that itself would be overkill), I'm not convinced that Penn State would make the list. Petraeus stepped down due to an extramarital affair: sadly that's quite common nowadays. Entwistle stepped down because the actions of his flagship news show led to the British equivalent of a Senator being wrongly accused of being a paedophile – thankfully that is not common. The trail that BBC Newsnight started led to the British equivalent of the US President being given (on another station) a list of people he knew, whilst doing an interview live on air, and asked whether he was going to personally check whether they had abused children. —WFC— FL wishlist07:15, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support. From what I remember (though I may be wrong) ITN hasn't featured anything about the abuse scandals that are currently the top story in the UK, and in fact have been for many weeks - which I think is a problem. This would be an easy way to include it, just add something like Amid the ongoing child abuse scandal in the United Kingdom, .... And I would also think that some of the comparisons drawn here don't work; Petraeus' resignation wasn't notable (from what I know) because it had nothing to do with his job; if he had resigned after being accused of leaking information or something similar then that would be more important. I would think exactly the same if it were the head of MI5 or any security service. Where as in this case the resignation is directly because of actions taken as head of the organisation. Secondly I think comparing (the head of) PBS to (the head of) the BBC is a little off, though admittedly as a non-American, I still believe no one can think that the two organisations are that comparable both within their own country and certainly internationally.--23230talk07:48, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: If this is to be included, a better link would be to the North Wales child abuse scandal, which is what led to the resignation. I recognise that that story has only developed since the Savile affair broke, but it is essentially a different story. Ghmyrtle (talk) 11:40, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think we need to be careful about conflating the resignation (essentially due to a lack of confidence in his managerial competence in handling the reporting of the abuse claims) and the wider issues of the child abuse claims themselves. They are not the same and there are at least 3 or 4 related articles in mainspace. Leaky Caldron16:44, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, User:Leaky caldron makes a very valid point that the required brevity of the ITN sentences means that the implication to a non-UK reader is that Entwistle is somehow implicated in the abuse itself, rather than being manager of the organisation whose coverage of the matter has been brought into question. Bobtalk
Oppose the story is big news (rightly) in the UK, but doesn't have a significance or value to the encyclopaedia as an ITN item. --RA (talk) 19:10, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support as per 23230's proposal. This resignation is a direct result of the fallout of the ongoing scandal. The resignation itself probably isn't ITN but the cumulative effect of the scandal and the effect on a broadcaster of international standing is clearly of global interest.yorkshiresky (talk) 08:21, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Clashes break out at a jail in Colombo, Sri Lanka, killing at least 13 inmates and injuring 32 others. At least nine police officers, a prison guard and a bystander were also injured during the disturbances. (Al Jazeera)(AP)
The UK broadcaster ITV faces an investigation by the media regulator Ofcom after television presenter Phillip Schofield handed Prime Minister David Cameron an internet-generated list of potential suspects in a child abuse case involving a care home during a live interview on Thursday, and asked him to comment. (The Independent)(BBC)
An individual included on the list issues a lengthy statement denying all involvement in the abuse case, dating from the 1980s. (The Daily Telegraph)(Statement)
The BBC issues an apology after a key witness in a Newsnight report aired on 2 November wrongly identified a senior politician as a pedophile. (The Daily Telegraph)
Oppose It's fully expected that at the end of a president's first term, some members of his administration will leave for whatever the reason. While I'm surprised that Petraeus is resigning because of an extramarital affair, and is publicly admitting so, I don't see it as that shocking or groundbreaking in any way. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:33, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment it had generally been expected for Petraeus to stay with Obama for this term to provide continuity in defence and intelligence policy, especially in the post-Iraq and Arab Spring world. Therequiembellishere (talk) 07:02, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support when, Obviously a high-profile step-down. He's not the head of the CIA, he's a very naughty boy! - but only when a new one is appointed, personally. --Τασουλα (talk) 20:34, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose We might as well start a USA Politics sticky, because this sort of thing, firings, hirings, shufflings, agenda, won't be out of the news well into the next year. μηδείς (talk) 20:41, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per no big deal and not even when his replacement is appointed, because that wouldn't be a resignation and won't happen for several months. Leaky Caldron20:46, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I would assume international repercussions would be that the CIA operates internationally. A new CIA director will likely have a different policy than Petraeus. RyanVesey20:51, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ultimately, Obama's CIA director will have the policy of Obama. That's why Colin Powell made that regrettable display in front of the United Nations. He wasn't speaking on behalf of himself, but on behalf of the Bush Administration. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:05, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Despite a somewhat tabloid nature of this story Petreaus is certainly a very famous figure from his involvement to two armed conflicts. The CIA is probably one of the most famous organizations in the world for better or worse (mostly worse but thats POV).--Johnsemlak (talk) 21:47, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. For a second I thought this might have been one of those long-tenured positions which would carry a bit of gravitas (think Robert Mueller's eleven-plus-year reign as FBI director) but Petraeus has held the job for a year, which really doesn't strike me as showing that the position changing hands is that notable, as it seems to have occurred half a dozen times in the past few years. GRAPPLEX23:06, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Petraeus is better known for his role in the surge(s) than anything else. I'm not aware of anything he did at the CIA that would make him sufficiently noteworthy for ITN. Resigning because of an affair is not enough; infidelity is regrettably common.--Chaser (talk) 23:17, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. He hasn't had the job that long, and didn't leave due to political motives. His notability came from his military career and not his CIA work. 331dot (talk) 04:14, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Highly ITN-worthy, in my view. The CIA is perhaps the most powerful "civilian" agency in the world. Needless to say this has an international impact. The seamy circumstances pale compared to the facts of Petraeus' high profile as a high-profile U.S. general who was put in charge of the world's biggest spook outfit. The post-election timing and FBI involvement also are points of major interest. Opposes are utterly unconvincing. Jusdafax02:11, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - This story has remained "in the news" for days, with two headlines currently in the New York Times. I am tempted to renominate it. Jusdafax21:14, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think what's notable is the fact that Gen. Petraeus is stepping down for any reason other than retirement. Furthermore, a lot of people are hearing about Petraeus right now, and we have a fairly high-quality article about him, so, in keeping with the purpose of ITN, I think that, regardless of why he's getting so much attention, we should provide Wikipedia readers with information pertinent to a story that's been on the front page of the New York Times website for the past four days. — further, Francophonie&Androphilie sayeth naught (Je vous invite à me parler)03:34, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Francophonie is right on here. Well the media is stating that consensus among historians Petraeus was the best general since Eisenhower and the CIA is probably one of the most powerful "civilian" organizations in the world. This story being opposed for a sex scandal is just absurd to say at least. This has significant global implications within many countries including Iran, Pakistan and so forth. Clinton stepping down should be mentioned also. Focus on the importance of the resignation not the bullshit private life scandal surrounding it. Oh yeah and Strongly Support this being posted. Secretaccount06:12, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for agreeing, but I differ on the matter or Clinton. Petraeus's resignation is notable because it was unexpected; we've known that Clinton would resign for more than a year now, I believe. Several people commented earlier that we should not include Petraeus's resignation because such things are commonplace when a president is elected to a second term; I agree with this in the abstract, but simply feel that it does not apply here. — Francophonie&Androphilie(Je vous invite à me parler)06:23, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Further Comment - May I suggest we use a blurb acknowledging that this now happened days ago, i.e. "growing controversy" over it? Additionally, as Francophonie notes in his proposed blurb, suggest working the Petraeus sex scandal into the blurb. Let's get this done here, then renominate up top and try again, as in my opinion ITN looks pretty silly ignoring the biggest political scandal of the year, with implications extending in multiple directions. Another general is now involved, domestic spying is being questioned, journalistic ethics are suddenly an issue... we need a clever, inclusive blurb that isn't too long. Jusdafax07:36, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Wouldn't renomination be a waste of time? This can still be in the news a decade from now but the people here would still be opposed. It's interesting to note though that the BBC resignation is pretty split (5 support-5 oppose-2 other) vs. the CIA one (5-10-2), with a supporter in the BBC nom hailing the resignation of a BBC journalist, who is "of international standing," is of "global interest" while an opposer (that's not even a word) asking for "International repercussions" on the resignation, no matter the circumstances, of the CIA chief; that's pretty telling. –HTD08:06, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - What difference does this even make to someone across the state line in New York, much less in the wider world? This is not news in any useful sense. 'Epic'? Don't make me laugh. AlexTiefling (talk) 12:18, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Obama won the state by around 17% and didn't need it so this is of low relevance, both in election coverage and Hurricane Sandy coverage (it was due to an electronic voting system for voters displaced by the hurricane). This isn't Florida 2000. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:31, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Elementary, my dear Watson. I think it was my attempt to convey the fact I didn't really take this nomination seriously. Which all boils down to it being not important enough. Notability wise. Thus, not for the ITN! Got there in the end.--Τασουλα (talk) 19:27, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Your comment really is rather offensive, Tasoula. Should we make rather stupid anti-semitic comments based on the portrayal of Jews by Italians in plays written and produced by Englishmen? μηδείς (talk) 22:25, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose While of some interest, it's not important enough to land on the main page. Obama was going to win NJ with or without Sandy, with or without electronic voting. Maybe if electronic voting becomes the standard, it'll be worhty. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:14, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's comments: He has not been officially appointed yet, as his appointment will most likely be announced tomorrow by Lambeth Palace, but this has been widely reported in the UK press and, as the next head of the Anglican Communion, this will be an announcement of global interest which probably ought to be posted as soon as it is officially announced. --Bobtalk23:29, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Premature - should of nominated tomorrow. I mean this has been happening a lot recently...see the fiasco on the US elections. Support when it's announced, though. --Τασουλα (talk) 23:33, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support when announced Clearly a very significant announcement and highly notable. This nomination deserves to be on the front page. I agree that we may need to have a monetarium on nominating future events doktorbwordsdeeds23:40, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support - This has been in the British news today and there's no actual doubt about who will be appointed. We shouldn't actually post until its announced though, so we've got a little time to get the article prepared. I for one am perfectly happy with the nomination of near-future events such as this whereby the significance of the event can be assessed ahead of time, as it gives time for discussion and article improvement such that when the event does occur it can be posted speedily. LukeSurltc01:19, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support - very significant event, and likely to cause more news in future due to his view on female bishops, gay marriage, etc. (My previous support seems to have been lost in the move from the 8th) Optimist on the run (talk) 11:50, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I see the article has been expanded further, posting. Curiously, the Archbishop of Canterbury is also mentioned in TFA, rather unusual ;-) --Tone16:42, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Wait until formal announcement or inauguration (is that the right term). The Archbishop of Canterbury is the spirtual leader of Anglicanism worldwide (which is the third-largest Christian community). --RA (talk) 21:36, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
References
Nominators often include links to external websites and other references in discussions on this page. It is usually best to provide such links using the inline URL syntax [http://example.com] rather than using <ref></ref> tags, because that keeps all the relevant information in the same place as the nomination without having to jump to this section.
For the times when <ref></ref> tags are being used, here are their contents:
In the news toolbox_02_(cropped).jpg)
