Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:In the news/Recurring items

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia talk:In the news

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by WhiteKongMan (talk | contribs) at 20:57, 7 February 2011 (→Positions: drop Android too?). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Space flight

The launch of the following forms of space flight:

Volleyball

Volleyball should probably also get a spot for the yearly World Championships. If we post all the forms of football (including Gaelic and Aussie), while badminton gets two spots and hurling, netball also, volleyball should get one spot at least. Nergaal (talk) 21:57, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AFL shouldn't be there. Only played in half of Australia, Barassi Line YellowMonkey (new photo poll) 00:23, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wolf Prize

Any thoughts on the inclusion of the Wolf Prizes? They're awarded every 1-3 years in 'six fields: Agriculture, Chemistry, Mathematics, Medicine, Physics, and an Arts prize that rotates between architecture, music, painting and sculpture' (taken from the article). They're generally the second most notable prizes in their fields (after the Nobels, Fields medal etc.) and we could do with better science coverage. A glance through the lists of previous winners shows that they're not only prestigious, but that we generally have decent articles on the recipients. Modest Genius talk 21:37, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody car to comment? This would be an easy way of upping our coverage of Agriculture, Chemistry, Mathematics, Medicine, Physics and Arts. Modest Genius talk 23:35, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have to admit I've not heard of them, I'm happy to accept your judgement that they are worthy of inclusion. Possibly this should be added to the section at the bottom? -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 08:45, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
They're usually announced in February, so if they're actually going to be awarded this year we'll soon have an ITN/C test case. Modest Genius talk 17:26, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposals on ITN/R inclusions

Based on some recent discussion I feel like we could make a few changes, particularly under sports. So, I'm making a few proposals for changes. Grsz11 14:38, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal 1

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
No consensus to add. Grsz 11 15:37, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Add the additional Grand Tour (cycling) events in addition to the Tour de France:
Vuelta a Espana
Giro d'Italia
This increases stories per year in cycling from 1 to 3.
Comments
  • Oppose. There are too many sports events on ITN/R already, and I'm opposed to removing the ones you plan to remove to put these cycling events in.
Neutral. Cycling is a reasonably well-followed sport, in many places. But our article coverage of those two events is very poor, and I'm not sure they're really that well followed compared to, say, the UCI Track Cycling World Championships. Modest Genius talk 18:49, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for now. Similar rationale to MG, but for me the same rationale amounts to opposing addition to ITNR.--Johnsemlak (talk) 00:27, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Proposal 2

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
No consensus to remove. Grsz 11 15:38, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Remove the AFL Grand Final, reducing Australia rules football stories from 1 to 0 per year, as it is of little international significance. It can, of course, still be nominated and discussed each year.
Comments
  • Oppose. Australia has the fourth-most readers on the English Wikipedia. The AFL Grand Final is the biggest annual sports event in Australia. "International significance" is not an ITN criterion. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 02:05, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. This is the premier championship of Australian rules football. We have longstanding (and sensible, in my opinion) consensus to automatically include the premier championship[s] of every major sport, provided that the appropriate article updates have occurred. As Mwalcoff noted, "international importance or interest" no longer is a criterion (because it proved highly illogical and counterproductive). —David Levy 02:28, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 17:54, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I don't see why international significance needs to play into every item. Australia is the fourth-largest source of readers here; to say their largest sporting event isn't notable makes no sense. --PlasmaTwa2 18:37, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose - extremely popular sport, albeit over a small geographic area. Modest Genius talk 18:50, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Oppose. The AFL Grand Final is a very significant event for Australia and gets a decent amount of armchair interest elsewhere.--Johnsemlak (talk) 00:27, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Proposal 3

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
No consensus to remove. Grsz 11 15:39, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Remove Grey Cup, reducing Canadian football stories from 1 to 0 per year, as it is of little international significance. It can, of course, still be nominated and discussed each year.
  • Oppose. Canada has the third-most readers on the English Wikipedia. The Grey Cup is the biggest annual sports even in Canada in years in which there is no Canadian team in the NHL Finals. "International significance" is not an ITN criterion. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 02:05, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. This is the premier championship of Canadian football. We have longstanding (and sensible, in my opinion) consensus to automatically include the premier championship[s] of every major sport, provided that the appropriate article updates have occurred. As Mwalcoff noted, "international importance or interest" no longer is a criterion (because it proved highly illogical and counterproductive). —David Levy 02:28, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 17:54, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I don't see why international significance needs to play into every item. Canada is the third-largest source of readers here; to say that our largest sporting event isn't notable makes no sense. --PlasmaTwa2 18:37, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as well, but @Plasma, isn't the Stanley Cup far bigger in Canada than the Grey Cup? (though I'm assuming you're not considering it to be a 'Canadian' event in the same way Canadian Football is).--Johnsemlak (talk) 00:27, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The Stanley Cup is a seven-game series, and as far as I know the Grey Cup is the most watched-sporting event in Canada on an annual basis. Plus, half the time the Stanley Cup Finals don't even have a Canadian team in it. :P --PlasmaTwa2 19:02, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, there's a fair amount of Canadians in the Stanley Cup, regardless of whether the teams are American. Still, I'm impressed to learn that teh Grey Cup actually is that significant compared with Hockey in Canada. Reaffirm oppose removal.--Johnsemlak (talk) 11:57, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Proposal 4

Remove the All-Ireland Senior Football Championship, reducing Gaelic football stories from 1 to 0 per year, as it is of little international significance. It can, of course, still be nominated and discussed each year.
  • Oppose. This is the premier championship of Gaelic football. We have longstanding (and sensible, in my opinion) consensus to automatically include the premier championship[s] of every major sport, provided that the appropriate article updates have occurred. "International importance or interest" no longer is a criterion (because it proved highly illogical and counterproductive). —David Levy 02:28, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This is an iffy one for me. I'm inclined to allow the biggest sporting event in Ireland. On the other hand, we have too many sports events on ITN, and there just aren't that many people in Ireland. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 03:23, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That's what happens when exporting them is "a massive, relentless, and efficiently managed national enterprise". Though it has apparently provided prime ministers and presidents for the UK, Canada, Mexico, United States, Australia, Israel, Argentina, Chile, France... and Tokelau. --candle•wicke 03:44, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What that has got to do with anything? I don't think Bill O'Reilly (political commentator) (why is that even disambiguated?) knows New York GAA even exists. Ireland also only has 0.6% of the total page views. Heck are we going to add the Malaysian FA Cup too? When I saw that on TV the entire stadium was filled with people wearing yellow T-shirts.
Then again why should I even support the removal of this item when I'd lose a topic to laugh about every year? So oppose removal. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 03:42, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Why not post the Malaysian final as well? I didn't know Malaysia had its own sport and have never seen it proposed so wasn't able to support it at the time. It seems to have been around since 1990 (whereas this has been around since the 1880s) but why not if it is updated... --candle•wicke 03:53, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What has age got to do with anything? The Super Bowl started in the late 1960s and it has now has higher TV ratings (at least in the U.S.) as compared to say, the World Series which began in 1876. In fact no other annual sporting event comes close to Super Bowl in terms of TV ratings.
And does that mean you're also in favor of adding whatever final in countries that has at least 0.6% of English Wikipedia's traffic? –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 04:48, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support removal as per HTD.--Johnsemlak (talk) 00:27, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support removal per HTD. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 07:41, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
I've removed it. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 19:05, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've restored it. Both of us participated in the discussion, so neither of us is qualified to determine its outcome.
In my opinion (which counts no more than yours, of course), the above rationales are either illogical or irrelevant.
  • "The classification of Gaelic football as a 'major sport' is disputed."
    While we have no precise definition of what constitutes a "major sport," we certainly had nothing nearly this strict in mind when we established the principle that their premier championships automatically qualify for inclusion (provided that appropriate article updates occur). We intended to exclude stuff like this, not one of the two most popular spectator sports in Ireland.
  • "Too little interest outside Ireland." / "No significant reports outside the "British" Isles"
    As noted in my initial response, international interest isn't an inclusion criterion. And even when it was, we agreed to make an exception for sport championships (many of which are widely followed primarily within one country or a small number of countries). If I recall correctly, it was frustration with the "international interest" criterion's application that triggered discussion (leading to the aforementioned principle) in the first place.
  • "Negligible article views"
    We know that Gaelic football is one of the two most popular spectator sports in Ireland. We don't know what's causing a lack of attention at Wikipedia, but removing it from WP:ITN/R obviously won't encourage editors to update the relevant articles for the benefit of readers. (Keep in mind that unless and until this occurs, the events won't be mentioned in ITN anyway; inclusion at WP:ITN/R doesn't override the content update requirement, so there is no danger of neglected articles receiving blurbs.)
Please allow an uninvolved user to evaluate the arguments and gauge consensus (or the lack thereof). Thank you. —David Levy 17:38, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't contributed to this one. This is slightly confusing, because HTD has !voted both ways, and his rationale for the second (support removal) is rather strange. If this were an AfD (and I was an admin) I'd be relisting to gain more comments. Perhaps we should try running this one past people again. Modest Genius talk 18:36, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That seems sensible. —David Levy 19:12, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Seeing that Gaelic games were restored, and the arguments used in restoring them, I've withdrew my opposition to inclusion and instead fully supports their addition along with other national sporting events from other larger countries. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 03:05, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal 5

Add the FIVB World Championships, increasing stories for national team volleyball from 0 to 2 every four years.
Comments

Proposal 6

"Boxing: Major fights that receive significant coverage, to be judged case by case"

Agreed. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 15:09, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That's a good point. Not sure how it ended up with that phrasing, which I agree is entirely unhelpful. Modest Genius talk 19:02, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Reformulation: "Boxing: Fights in which a boxer can win his Quintuple Championship or higher, or fights that involve both boxers in the top three of at least three world pound-for-pound lists."
That's a complex criterion. I'd say let's apply Occam's Razor and just leave boxing up to discretion.--Johnsemlak (talk) 12:04, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
We can use the first part: being a Quintuple Champion is being a part of an exclusive club and happens rarely. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 03:23, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal 7

Add Ultimate Fighting Championship pay-per-views that features the heavyweight championship as the main event. Comparison:

–HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 07:31, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Slight oppose I would rather wait until the next time the Heavyweight championship is defended to make an opinion on this one. With Lesnar no longer champion there could be a drop in interest. From my standpoint, I would also have a problem putting multiple UFC events up per year when WrestleMania is not not included on ITN. --PlasmaTwa2 21:02, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'd probably lean towards leaving UFC out of ITNR and let it be nominated on its own merits first. If it is nominated an gets decent support at least once, then we can consider going further. Personally, I find mixed martial arts a bit hard to judge. I know they are very popular (I'm a teacher and loads of my students follow it). They get little coverage as far as I can see in mainstream sports media though, and are still struggling to get acceptance as a recognized sport. I might theorize that the high amount of page views indicated above might be due to the lack of any decent information on UFC from other sources.--Johnsemlak (talk) 13:18, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose. We should not be posting something purely based upon the broadcast payment options. Modest Genius talk 20:05, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Question: broadcast payment options? Aren't these PPVs? Although I've heard a cable channel in the U.S. airs this on tape delay. Note that UFC 123 had significantly less views than those that had the heavyweight championship as the main event. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 18:25, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Open proposals

I feel rugby union stories can be reduced. Super Rugby is for club teams in countries that participate in the Rugby Union Tri Nations, representing just three countries. The Heineken Cup features teams from six countries.
I don't think there are too many, and those are the two highest club rugby tournaments in the world. Because they operate in different hemispheres, they're of similar standard and don't overlap. If we include one we really should include the other. Modest Genius talk 18:54, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that there's too much Rugby Union on ITNR. While I am not an expert on the sport, the people who I know who are rubgy union fans show far greater interest in international matches than club rugby. Also the articles for the tournaments mentioned above are often not up to scratch.--Johnsemlak (talk) 00:27, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The reason why there's too much rugby union is because we have to add two, the northern and southern hemisphere, competitions. Either you add both or don't add them and most of the time, people here would rather add both. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 16:27, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Neither the 2010_Super_14_season#Final nor the 2010_Heineken_Cup_Final were even nominated earlier this year. I'd say drop the club events. I'm not a rugby fan of any code but I've watched a number of matches and I know plenty of serious fans and it seems clear to me that the international matches are the most important events by some margin.--Johnsemlak (talk) 18:38, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I can speculate on why the Heineken Cup wasn't nominated -- no teams from British Isles, especially the island which is not "British" made it to the final. As for the Super 14 I don't think it ever made it past the nomination stage since no one bothers to update it w/ prose. The tournaments among international teams are annual tournaments anyway so we won't lose ITN's rugby fix. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 18:47, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Another thing about those club rugby finals is that they finish at a busy time in the sports calendar (late May), with football leagues finishing, the Champions League, the French Open, and with the Stanley Cup and NBA around the corner, just for starters.--Johnsemlak (talk) 19:01, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm planning on a Euroleague test case, which also ends at about the same time (but in early May) so I dunno how that fact comes into play. Was there also a previous consensus of adding the Premier League, Serie A and La Liga individually too? –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 19:06, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Last year there was a discussion on these boards (or possibly WT:ITN that agreed to combine the EPL, Serie A, and La Liga into a single blurb. However, this year I think the EPL winner was simply posted.--Johnsemlak (talk) 19:11, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know enough about the All-Ireland Senior Hurling Championship to judge here.

Move to close:

  1. Grand Tours of cycling: No consensus to be added
  2. AFL Grand Final: Oppose removal
  3. Grey Cup: Oppose removal
  4. All-Ireland Senior Football Championship: In AFD terms, "relist"?
  5. FIVB World Championships: No consensus to be added.

–HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 06:44, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Addition: New flag

The promulgation of a new flag for any country listed in the List of countries. The use of a new flag has far-reaching effects, and I'd say it's even educational, and does not occur often enough. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 13:58, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But many of the articles on flags are not nearly the kind of things that are good enough to be referenced from the Main Page, and it's not like there's so much interest in the flag of, say, Angola that we can trust the article will be improved significantly by the community. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 23:53, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Two uninteresting countries, Malawi and Myanmar/Burma (the latter got interesting because of Aung San Suu Kyi but other than that its uninteresting), had articles improve just past ITN standards. The flag of Malawi had seen a spike in article views when it was in the section, the same instance on the flag of Burma article. There's more than enough interest about flag changes, provided people knew about it, as seen on the latest two examples.
i think Mwalcoff means people from certain country will not be interested... which obviously isnt true and i think i will support this given we have some sort of update surrounding the flag change and not just the fact that it changed. -- Ashish-g55 02:05, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It's a good thing that "certain" country is not accepting new states or else we'd run their story every July 4. :P –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 02:46, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well there's always Puerto Rico. (as an aside, would PR or any other territory becoming the 51st state be ITNed) DC T•C 03:47, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Considering PR has some international identity that should be... hard since it's a U.S.-only issue. :P As for PR joining, I won't see it in the long run so don't except the U.S. flag being added to ITN, if it helps/harms this proposal. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 13:04, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not necessarily against posting flag changes to ITN. But I think we can consider each one on its own merits. There's no need to enshrine them in ITN/R and take away our discretion. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 00:45, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We still have discretion, as you can see from the far smaller number of election stories we're publishing now compared with twelve months ago. I would say that, at the moment, pretty much every flag change of a sovereign state is going to get consensus, so should be ITNR (not really "recurring", but anyway). Maybe some subnational entities would also get consensus, but it's pretty much impossible to generate a rule for them, so we leave them off ITNR. Does that sound reasonable? Physchim62 (talk) 00:52, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I don't see the point of putting either on ITN/R. Any nomination should be judged according to the quality of the Wikipedia content, the news value and reader interest. If a flag change doesn't meet those criteria, it shouldn't go up. I don't think the Flag of Malawi article is, even now, the kind of thing that should be featured on the Main Page. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 00:58, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As I've pointed out at WP:ITN/C, both flag articles did had steep increases in page views when they were in the Main Page, and they are not English-speaking countries. (The flag of Burma article views jumped from less than.150 to around 8k when the news broke, and around 40k when it got to the Main Page.) Ergo, there was significant reader interest once they knew what was happening. You are forgetting/missing this aspect of "reader interest" that happens after the people heard about it. Reader interest is not just interest when the event is building up. Compare to the flag of the United States article views which is around 5k everyday. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 04:55, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sure any item that goes on the Main Page is going to get a big increase in hits. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 00:30, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Depends if there is substantial interest prior to and after the event. 2010 All-Ireland Senior Football Championship Final did have an increase in hits (from less than a hundred, to 1k at the day of the final to ~4.2k on the days it was on ITN) but not by much as you've expected in an article linked to the Main Page for days -- the changed in the Burmese flag had more views even before it was on ITN. I've had DYKs that reach 2.5k views in 6 hours after being viewed by around 15-20/day. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 15:40, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
So what accounts for the 50-fold leap before it was posted? Nightw 09:28, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I know that ;) and you're entitled to express your opinions. But I don't think you've won that argument, not by a long way. Physchim62 (talk) 01:04, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I support this, given the obvious reader interest in the subject as seen in the jump in hits when Burma's flag was changed. Nightw 09:28, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think the sticking point here is whether the changes are major. Slightly changing the size of a crest, or the thickness of a line etc. is not enough for ITN. But a completely new flag is. How about 'ITNR for new flags, but redesigns of existing flags should be discussed at ITN/C' or similar? Modest Genius talk 18:56, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Good point. I'd say a complete redesign like the Lesotho, Burma and Rwanda flags should be examples. Addition of stars, changing of proportions (although I'd argue changing the color/s and/or order on a tricolor, changing of the coats of arms (wait should they be in the discussion too?) would be "major") would have to be happily discussed at ITN/C. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 18:52, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I also have a concern with the possibility of a very minor change being an ITNR item. My suggestion is, therefore, to simply leave flag changes off of ITNR and allow them to be judged on a case by case basis. Not being on ITNR doesn't mean we don't consider flag changes to be significant or noteworthy.--Johnsemlak (talk) 03:24, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Do we have any evidence that countries actually make frequent and minor changes to their official flag? Surely if this were to be a real problem, it would be voted down in ITN/C (and yes, we are allowed to refuse ITN/R items if it is deemed that there is no longer a consensus for them). Physchim62 (talk) 03:40, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
One example I could find was the Flag_of_Lithuania whose ratio was changed in 2004. --Johnsemlak (talk) 04:35, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Medals

I'd like to propose that the awarding of any nation's highest military decoration (Victoria Cross, Medal of Honor and the equivalent thereof in other countries) should be an ITN/R item. Such awards tend to generate a great deal of interest in the press and tend to be very rare so we're not likely to be swamped with such items. Thoughts anybody? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:11, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

These? Grsz11 23:13, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Again, I think we can consider each of these on their own merits; there's no reason to put them in ITN/R and take away our discretion. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 00:46, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Mwalcoff. It's rare in some countries, but not others, especially in times of war. Nightw 09:19, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
We would have great difficulty dealing with countries where the highest gallantry award is handed out regularly to commanders, nepotism etc. This is a big problem for countries rules by military juntas or dictatorships, which tend to award such medals to high-ranking members of the government as a matter of course. As an example, should we be posting Kim Jong-un receiving such a medal? He almost certainly will do at some point. Modest Genius talk 19:03, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think the only way to do this practically is to actually specify the medals that will be considered ITNR, such as the Victoria Cross or whatever. Each medal can then be judged on its own merits; as has been noted different countries may have different norms on awarding medals. I think opening ourselves to a commitment to post the highest medal of any country could have some unforeseen consequences. Frankly, actually naming the medals as opposed to having a blanket rule for medals from any country is consistent with how we do other awards. For film awards, we don't have a rule that we post the top film award for every country; we decide which film awards are notable enough for ITN and post them.--Johnsemlak (talk) 15:30, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That template seems good. although the criteria perhaps can be determined. Posthumous? its a rare event anyways.(Lihaas (talk) 04:39, 29 December 2010 (UTC)).[reply]

Soccer

UEFA and CONMEBOL club tournaments are here so the AFC Champions League and CAF Champions League should be too, less pov.(Lihaas (talk) 04:15, 29 December 2010 (UTC)).[reply]

Dunno if the AFC Champions League is that widely followed in Asia. I'd say more Asians watch the UEFA competitions. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 17:29, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Its broadcasted widely. The CAF one is broadcasted beyond Africa too.
Its also more neutral to add a more globalised version.(Lihaas (talk) 17:57, 6 January 2011 (UTC)).[reply]
Yeah it's broadcast widely but does anyone watch it? See this example:
  • Korean version (one of the teams competing in the final was from the ROK) views was 150 at the final.
reading the wikipedia page at the point perhaps, i presume koreans dont really read their wiki-language page?
gaelic football page on championship day = 2.3k cfl final = 8.2k table tennis 1.6k + japan baseball, eurobasket, chess, netball, (which only a couple of commonwealth countries play) etc. I think they were there for national/global importance. in whic case these are their continental champions as the UEFA and CONMEBOL ones are there. (the CONCACAF and OFC ones i agree are much smalleR)Lihaas (talk) 04:15, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This is soccer we're talking about, not some fringe sport played only in Ireland. For soccer, we should at least accept events that have views of at least 10k. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 00:21, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That way the Suzuki cup would be validated ahead of more continentally-notable tournaments?
But beside the fringe sports, if those "fringe" games get on then why no more important ones?Lihaas (talk) 04:15, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Those important ones that are not watched by many, if at all? (Note that I've opposed "fringe" sports, even mainstream ones like rugby w/c had really low view stats). –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 04:43, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

American football

football is a bigger tournament than this reflects. Super Bowl apart, college football is pretty big, some would even say bigger (or from TX even High School). We cant obviously list all bowls, but the rose bowl should go on to ITN.(Lihaas (talk) 04:31, 29 December 2010 (UTC)).[reply]

Pfffh! Hilarious. Nightw 09:31, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think this is a particularly ridiculous suggestion. American Football is fairly popular and currently only posted once per year. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 09:50, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Really? As far as I can tell, American football is simply not followed outside the US. Whilst it's plainly of greater interest than some of the other sports we post (eg. Gaelic football), I'm not sure it's major enough to merit two items. As a separate matter, college sports have attracted a lot of opposition on ITN, mostly because with all other sports we concentrate on the highest level of professional competition. And college football is even worse, since team rankings etc are determined by computer rather than competition. Modest Genius talk 16:43, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
While American Football isn't followed outside the US, Americans make up half the audience. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 16:52, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
So? We're supposed to counter systemic bias, not reinforce it. Modest Genius talk 17:00, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, dear, here we go again. The point of ITN is most assuredly not to "counter systemic bias" by refusing to post items of interest to readers and that meet all of the other criteria. On the contrary, it is to do just that -- to feature quality Wikipedia content that readers are interested in. This attitude of "Fuck the readers" is precisely what's wrong with open-source projects with no profit motive -- people writing for themselves rather than for the public. Anyway, when it comes to sports, the only way to judge what is "important" is public interest. You can't make blanket statements like "Professional is more important than amateur" or "international is more important than domestic." If that were the case, minor league baseball (which is international and fully professional) would be bigger than NCAA football or basketball. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 01:11, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Quite. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 10:52, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry I missed replying to this until now. I think it's abundantly clear that different contributors have different ideas on what ITN is for. My own idea does not include posting items simply because they are popular (or we'd end up with continual streams of celebrity and reality TV news), and that a degree of objective 'importance' is required. Your opinion may differ on one or both of those points. But without going off on a huge tangent, I still find the argument that 'While American Football isn't followed outside the US, Americans make up half the audience.' extremely unconvincing, and I certainly don't see what that has to do with whether any particular items should be added to ITNR or not. Modest Genius talk 22:19, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Wasn't there a Japanese animé about American football? Like the Prince of Tennis only that they were playing American football. So someone can argue that American football is not strictly for Americans. Still have to see rugby, cricket or hurling animés, though... –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 17:14, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It's Eyeshield 21. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 17:17, 4 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
College football is massively popular. NCAA basketball has a an itnernational level to it (albeit small).
Canadian football and Gaelic football are of far smaller scope.(Lihaas (talk) 22:25, 6 January 2011 (UTC)).[reply]
Given its 4 for vs 2 against, and one of the oppose !votes doesn't make a case I think we have a consensus for this. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 18:30, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I see no actual support or oppose !votes, only one of the comments even mentions the Rose Bowl, and consensus isn't a vote anyway. In the circumstances I think it would be best to run the Rose Bowl past ITN/C next time it occurs, and make a decision on ITNR after that. I notice you didn't even nominate it this year, despite the fact that it occurred whilst the discussion was going on.. Modest Genius talk 22:19, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Fair point. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 23:07, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There clearly is not a consensus here. Furthermore, the key BCS game is the championship, not the Rose Bowl. That said, I find it odd how one can fail to understand how the makeup of our audience relates to ITN decision-making. One of the goals of ITN is to direct readers to recently updated current-events articles they are interested in, and how can we figure that without taking into account who our readers are? -- Mwalcoff (talk) 00:39, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

elections

i know its obvious and posted, but we should make de hure the inclusion of supranational elections like the EU and the UN Secy gen.(Lihaas (talk) 17:58, 6 January 2011 (UTC)).[reply]

Agreed, as long as its restricted to bodies of that level of importance. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 18:33, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
can only think of EU, UN Secy Gen and Sec Council (election or taking office?)Lihaas (talk) 17:58, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There are hundreds of international bodies (off the top of my head, the G20, G8, WTO, World Bank, IMF, ASEAN and APEC), many of which may or may not have elections. I think we need to limit it. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 22:24, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
yeah. yeah. i meant the notable/warranted ons. what do y ou think the limit should be?Lihaas (talk) 17:58, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New ITNR proposals

I noticed that handball is not listed, although it's one of the most popular team sports. Currently, the report about the men's world championship is posted in the ITN template, and I'd like to start a discussion about the possible expanding of the list with the men's and women's handball championships which take place every odd year.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 22:32, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you GreyHood. We should talk about volleyball too. I remember the World Women's Championship last year, which get posted after long discussion.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 23:29, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, I was going to propose Handball and Volleyball for ITNR for quite a time already, but you beat me to that. Also, I'm going to propose some economy and technology stuff. Perhaps, it would be better to list all proposals and then start voting like in the discussions above. GreyHood Talk 23:53, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
To avoid confusion with the almost identical list further down. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 20:21, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
So, here are some things that could be added to ITN. Feel free to expand this list:

Economy & Politics

Infrastructure

Airports

  • New Terminals at airports serving cities with a population of at least 5 million, or who are in the top 20 largest airports by passenger numbers.

Rail transport

  • New metro systems.
  • High-speed rail lines in new countries, or over 500km in length at or above 300 km/h.

Technology

Computing

  • CES
  • E3
  • Major new versions of Windows.
  • Major new versions of Android
  • Major new versions of iOS.
  • Major new games consoles.

Aviation

Air Shows
These three are the most high-profile airshows, as far as I know :
  • Paris Air Show (every odd year, seems to be the most famous airshow)
  • MAKS Airshow (every odd year, the full name is International Aviation and Space Salon - so it also includes space technology)
  • Farnborough Airshow (every even year)
New aircraft models
Should be posted either on the day of the first flight or after introduction into service, or on both dates (the two are usually separated by many years).
  • New civilian airliners with dozens of orders and hundreds of vehicles planned.
  • New fifth-generation fighters, possibly 4++ generation too.
  • Latest generation bombers.
  • Latest generation military helicopters.
  • World's largest/heaviest/fastest aircraft, other records too.

Automotive

Motor Shows
New cars
Should be posted on the start of the serial production, or after a record is established.
  • New innovative and mass-produced electrocars, hybrid cars etc.
  • Fastest/heaviest/largest vehicles, other records too.

Culture

Book and Game Fairs

Festivals

Awards

Sport

Bandy

Basketball

Football (soccer)

Handball

Mixed martial arts

Motorsport

Volleyball

Multi-sport events

Opening of the:

Discussion

Any other proposals? GreyHood Talk 23:55, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'd suggest the Hugo Awards. I nominated them earlier and they were dismissed as 'genre awards', which is certainly accurate, though I feel we could expand literary awards beyond the Nobel Prize for Literature and the Man Booker Prize.--Johnsemlak (talk) 11:37, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I strongly support it. It is highly popular genre, perhaps even the most popular one. GreyHood Talk 15:21, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
How about the Struga Poetry Evenings as a prestigious international poetry festival? The current reccuring item for poetry is the Poet Laureate of the United Kingdom, which is awarded rarely and only to domestic poets.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 00:08, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well, judjing by a number of articles in different languages and an international status, the Macedonian event is more significant than British one, so I add it to the list. GreyHood Talk 00:16, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the book fair in Cairo, but the Frankfurt Book Fair could also be.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 00:13, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've added some for computing. I'd also like to see Glastonbury and SXSW on the list. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 22:22, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've added SXSW but I'd like some more comments about Glastonbury. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 23:34, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've added Glastonbury. Anyway, there likely would be some voting item-by-item or by groups of items, and Glastonbury certainly has a chance. GreyHood Talk 00:16, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Re: Glastonbury -- see this discussion. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 03:23, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, but if its clear we aren't posting enough culture it has a lot more of a chance. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 08:14, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure where I stand on festivals, events, or shows or the like, particularly commercial ones. However, if we are going to add some to ITNR, a few random ones I'd like to suggest would be Comicon, Essen Game fair, the Hugo Awards which I mentioned above, and Filmfare Awards.--Johnsemlak (talk) 12:22, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support Filmfare Awards, also because India is underrepresented. Not sure about Essen Game fair. GreyHood Talk 15:29, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Essen is the largest (most attended) trade fair for tabletop gaming in the world. It's attendance in recent years has topped 150,000, which is comparable to a major film festival. The largest similar event in the English speaking world is Gen Con, which is four times as small in attendance.--Johnsemlak (talk) 18:27, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well, since currently it is just the list of proposals and there should be some more voting anyway, I add it to the relevant section. GreyHood Talk 18:51, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've inserted Bandy World Championships to the list. Last time it was opposed mainly because of too much sporting items on ITN at the moment, and the poor quality of article. However, it is professional, IOC-recognised sport (demonstration sport during 2014 Winter Olympics), popular in Scandinavia and Russia and played throughout the Northern Hemisphere. GreyHood Talk 15:48, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm gonna oppose Bandy. Being recognized by the IOC isn't insignificant but the IOC also recognizes Tug of War. More importantly, in Russia, one of the countries where the sport is played the most, I can easily name 10 distinct sports that are more popular (In fact, I will--Football, Ice Hockey, Basketball, Tennis, Biathlon, Boxing, Athletics, Figure Skating, Rhythmic Gymnastics, and Formula 1).--Johnsemlak (talk) 19:17, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Unlike Ireland or Australia or Canada which all have their national sports featured on ITNR, Russia is a large country successful in all kinds of sports (after the U.S., Russia is the second most successful country in sports, if measured by the all-time Olympic Games medal count). So, the fact that bandy doesn't make it into Russia's top 10 sports, means nothing in the larger context. GreyHood Talk 19:27, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
We don't post America's top ten sports, considering College Football and College Basketball have a snowball's chance in hell of making it. Capt. Colonel (edits) 20:02, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
On those grounds I think I have to oppose bandy. College Football is much more worthy of posting. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 20:11, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'd have to oppose college football. A few banned formations does not make a new sport. I weakly support college basketball, men's handball and men's volleyball, and fully support the Euroleague for basketball, Premier League, La Liga and one more European soccer league, women's volleyball the Filmfare and Golden Globe Awards. I won't oppose the rest as I can't make a sound judgment on them. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 20:31, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. I'd also support a non-American, non-European and non-Indian cultural item. Whatever that is –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 20:34, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There must be some kind of Manga convention and there is also the Harbin International Ice and Snow Sculpture Festival for example. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 20:45, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Off-topic: There are some items that have consensus to be removed on earlier discussions at the top. Can someone not involved take a look at it. Thanks. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 20:26, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the Irish football as that looked to have a clear consensus for removal. I've left the others. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 20:29, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 20:31, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I oppose all of these. First of all, it's not news that, for example, the Edinburgh festival is going on in a particular year. ITN is not an events calendar. Secondly, it's absurd to have bandy, team handball and volleyball when their following as spectator sports among the readers of the English Wikipedia is infinitesimal compared to some of the events we don't have, like the above-mentioned NCAA football and basketball championships. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 23:59, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This should not be understood like if there is some item on ITNR, than it should necessarily be posted when the related event happens. There are also such things as nomination of the item and the sufficient update. So, if some festival is held, but nothing interesting happens there and no substantial updates are made, then it won't get posted. However, if something notable happens (the largest turnover for that event, for example) and the article is updated, than it could be posted without delay due to ITNR status. GreyHood Talk 00:30, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
As for the sports part, it is for the greater good of English-speaking or any other readership to get a more global view of the world. GreyHood Talk 00:30, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Typical American bias. That's the strongest argument against college American sport, systemic bias. I support the inclusion of bandy, volleyball et al. Strange Passerby (talk • contribs) 04:17, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't the inclusion of bandy manifestation of frigid European bias? What's next? Tug of war? Seriously more people are into kabaddi. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 06:22, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Do we have any idea how popular bandy is in the countries where it is supposedly popular? Like coverage depth in the media, TV ratings, etc.? –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 06:34, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
@Mwalcoff, the idea would be to say "Oasis headline this years Glastonbury festival" or something along those lines. Otherwise while it happens every year, the Olympics happen every 4 years so they are arguably un-newsworthy too.
Additionally do you really oppose the posting of brand new metro systems? -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 08:18, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
@Strange Passerby, we've shown on WT:ITN that there is no "American bias" in ITN. In the last 3 months the US was posted slightly less often than the EU. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 08:24, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This movement of opposing U.S. items masquerading as world events and replacing them with European items masquerading as world events just changes the bias from U.S. to European. While I'd like an annual Asian sports item, I don't think the AFC Champions League fits the bill (more Malaysians watch the Premier League than their own local league), and the Japan Series though big is participated only by Japanese clubs (the Asia Series still has to take off) not to mention the Japan Series is an "American" sport of baseball.
BTW, the bandy world championship takes place annually. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 09:38, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Baseball is as big in Japan as it is in the US so I don't think we should exclude the Japan Series because it's an American sport. To my knowledge it's one of the most significant annual sporting events in all of Asia. However, in my experience in trying to edit some of its articles, it is difficult to find information in English detailing the matches.--Johnsemlak (talk) 10:13, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well unless anyone can read Japanese it'll be pretty hard finding refs (perhaps you can try the English edition of the Asahi Shimbun?). Note that the last time the Japan Series went up, it was a "package" deal with the World Series: when the latter is bumped off, so will the former. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 10:28, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I don't wanna talk about bandy, but handball and volleyball are surely more popular than many of the varieties of football which are recurring items.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 15:31, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
And since somebody mentioned that this makes European bias, even bandy is widely popular than college football.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 16:08, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In Europe, I guess. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 17:56, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
As testament to this, let's look for college football and bandy news articles on places far away from both North America and Europe: Australia. Here's one preview of last month's BCS championship game. A search for "bandy world championship" expectedly gets us zero results. Let's try another one: Singapore. Here's a news report about the final AP rankings, while a search for bandy world championship (no quotes) at Google News gives us again a big fat zero. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 18:04, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
World map showing the 27 members of the Federation of International Bandy.
If you think there is an European bias and American, you're completely wrong. I must use the map that shows where the bandy is played, and it's clearly that it's not only in Europe. On the other hand, the college football is far from this and I haven't heard about any international tournament, even about any national team in this sport. So please, don't mention bias of any kind.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:20, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
College football's parent sport, American football, has (believe it or not) an international governing body: the International Federation of American Football. Counting the number of shaded countries on the bandy map, there are 27 countries playing bandy. The IFAF with 57 member states headquartered in France, which has no bandy federation, has held the IFAF World Cup: Japan had been to the final in all three times.
You seem to get wrong, since the American football is listed as popular sport with the Super Bowl being recurrent topic. We talk about the college football as a unique sport which is not even a professional sport. Otherwise, the parent sport of bandy is the ice-hockey.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:48, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Like I said above, a few banned formations does not make a separate sport. As per our article on college football:

College football refers to American football played by teams of student athletes fielded by American universities, colleges, and military academies, or Canadian football played by teams of student athletes fielded by Canadian universities

Otherwise, NBA, college basketball and FIBA basketball are all distinct sports. Bandy and ice hockey are organized separately by two federations, apparently. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 18:50, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Correct. In that line, bandy is a unique sport, but the college football not. Since the bandy world championship is the highest rated tournament in the sport, the college football could not be considered as an important tournament in the American football, where the NFL is the highest rated tournament.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:54, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Who says the only important tournament is the highest-rated tournament? If that's the case we should've removed the UEFA Champions League a long time ago. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 18:56, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It's another topic of discussion. The American football is not so popular as the association football or basketball, and that's why there should be distinguished any important tournament. The UEFA Champions league is also a club tournament. However, it's far from the popularity of the FIFA World Cup.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:03, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
To be honest, I doubt that bandy will get included, since it's still not popular as other sports, though its popularity has risen in the recent years. My comment was against the comparison with the college football, which as you mentioned above is not a different sport, but a variety in different league of the American football (you missed Canadian). However, let's end the discussion. I'm content with the discussion so far, but will more likely to skip on another topic. Best regards.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:08, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently, we may stuck in the discussion about the inclusion of bandy which attracts comments with inclusion of other sport events. I would sincerely appreciate to move on and discuss about the other topics, or to group the nominations above and start unique discussions of all.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:30, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(Note: I was going to reply but I got edit conflicted and I saw the reply above. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 19:12, 2 February 2011 (UTC))[reply]
Yeah we should quit talking about bandy due to WP:SNOW. I'd add some more sport events above. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 18:42, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest at the weekend we start an RFC to get further interest and vote on the items as part of that. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 21:17, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitrary section break

Some points:

  • A lot of these proposals are things which we shouldn't be including on ITNR, because they're subjective. What exactly counts as a new airport terminal in a major world city? We'd get continual arguments over what is and isn't a world city, and whether sometime like Madrid's T4S counts as a new terminal. Similar arguments apply to 'High-speed rail lines in new regions, or exceptionally long and fast', 'New innovative and mass-produced electrocars, hybrid cars etc.' and 'New civilian airliners with dozens of orders and hundreds of vehicles planned'.
  • 'other records too' needs to specify exactly which records do and don't qualify, or leave it up to ITN/C (in which case it doesn't need to be on ITNR)
  • Without getting into a detailed vote for and against each individual item, that's an awful lot of book fairs. And on the Youth Olympics we agreed last time around that it's impossible to judge the prestige of the event after a single iteration. If we're holding off !voting I'll keep the rest of my comments til then.

Modest Genius talk 22:06, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

    • I've updated both the airport terminals one and the high-speed rail one. The airports one is more controversial though - we can tighten it up further if needed as the main purpose should be to have something on the list. I agree about the book fairs. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 10:54, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We have far too much sport on ITN as it is, and now we're talking about adding more? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:05, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Surely if we add more other content we won't have too much sport? -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 21:39, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing that the two(!) Gaelic games items were restored, and seeing the reasons fort support for them, I added the men's tournament for the UAAP Basketball Championship, the most popular spectator event in the Philippines which is probably a zillion times larger than Ireland. And other Southeast Asian spectator sports. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 02:39, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Where are you seeing two Gaelic football events listed? I see the All-Ireland Senior Football Championship and no other. —David Levy 02:53, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Gaelic games. See WP:ITNR#Hurling. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 03:02, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, okay, thanks. I was unfamiliar with the term "Gaelic games" and mistook that for a reference to Gaelic football specifically. (As an indication of how little I follow sports, I'm an American with absolutely no knowledge of tonight's Super Bowl's outcome.) —David Levy 03:12, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
(Next question not addressed to David Levy.) Does anyone outside Ireland (except for a handful in Australia) even know hurling exists? Please, don't give me the "NY GAA exists" answer. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 03:41, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
P.S.: I've previously opposed some items in an earlier edit. I now support all, including bandy, with the just inclusion of hurling. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 03:48, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Considering new ITNR proposals

We've been looking at the coverage on ITN, and we found that the Geographical balance of ITN was reasonable. However we found that the coverage of some topics was less than what you might expect, especially in Economy & Politics, Infrastructure and Technology. On that note we thought a major expansion of WP:ITNR was warranted, as its a major expansion making the consensus an RFC sounded like a good idea.

It should be fairly self explanatory but the voting is split into sections.

Please if you have any further suggestions can you add them to the further suggestions section, and we can look at those after we've considered this first set. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 19:53, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Economy & Politics

The following are suggested for addition.

Positions

Infrastructure

Airports

  • New Terminals at airports serving cities with a population of at least 5 million, or who are in the top 20 largest airports by passenger numbers.
Positions

Rail transport

  • New metro systems.
  • High-speed rail lines in new countries, or over 500km in length at or above 300 km/h.
Positions

Technology

Computing

  • CES
  • E3
  • Major new versions of Windows.
  • Major new versions of Android.
  • Major new versions of iOS.
  • Major new games consoles.
Positions
Blackberry isn't in the top 3 OS's on current sales and generally Blackberry highlights their phones not the OS. Additionally on the PC side Mac OS X isn't included, the aim was to stick with the biggest ones, maybe Blackberry OS and Mac OS X would be worthy of including later, but in the meantime they can be suggested for posting on WP:ITNC. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 20:44, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. But if BB isn't included because they highlight their phones and not their OS, maybe we should drop Android too (Apple's OS gets much more attention than Android also). WhiteKongMan (talk) 20:57, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Aviation - Air shows

  • Paris Air Show (every odd year, seems to be the most famous airshow)
  • MAKS Airshow (every odd year, the full name is International Aviation and Space Salon - so it also includes space technology)
  • Farnborough Airshow (every even year)
Positions

Aviation - new Aircraft

  • New civilian airliners with dozens of orders and hundreds of vehicles planned.
  • New fifth-generation fighters, possibly 4++ generation too.
  • Latest generation bombers.
  • Latest generation military helicopters.
  • World's largest/heaviest/fastest aircraft.
Positions

Automotive - Motor shows

Positions

Automative - new vehicles

  • New innovative and mass-produced electrocars, hybrid cars etc.
  • Fastest/heaviest/largest vehicles.
Positions

Culture

Book and Game Fairs

Positions

Festivals

Positions

Awards

Positions

Sport

Bandy

  • Bandy World Championships
Positions

Basketball

Positions

Football (soccer)

Positions

Handball

Positions

Mixed martial arts

Positions

Motorsport

Positions

Volleyball

Positions

Multi-sport events

Opening of the:

Positions

Another proposal

Add the Daytona 500 to the Motorsport section. Second most notable race in the United States after the Indianapolis 500, and is known internationally. Nascar1996 01:42, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you think it's noteworthy enough, feel free and add it in the list above. Thus, it'll get included in the discussion of the other already proposed items.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:12, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. Nascar1996 13:24, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
He meant add it to the list under discussion on this talk page (above), not to the actual ITNR page. I've reverted and added to the list Kirl meant. Modest Genius talk 18:25, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry about that. I'm not that familar with the news section. Nascar1996 01:06, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Further proposals

A new section for any further suggestions generated by the RFC itself. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 19:49, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your comment above about a "manga convention", I believe the Tokyo International Anime Fair is the closest you will get to that. I don't really know about its international significance, but considering the Prime Minister of Japan has commented on the economic problems of a possible boycott it could be important enough as a Asian event. --PlasmaTwa2 20:09, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've snuck that in. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 20:24, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'll do some research later and find out if it really is the largest anime festival in the world. I'd also like to nominate WrestleMania for a look and see what others think. I nominated it a few years ago and it was denied on the basis that "it hasn't been added before, so why now". That aside, it is a major event in a billion dollar industry that sets attendance records in football stadiums and usually gives a $50 million+ boost to the host city's economy. If we want to have every UFC heavyweight title bout on, I think we should at least look at having one pro wrestling event a year. --PlasmaTwa2 20:43, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

From the computing section possibly new versions of Blackberry OS and Mac OS X would be worthy of inclusion. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 20:45, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ excluding sub-orbital sounding rockets, airborne observatories etc.
  2. ^ here 'maiden space flight' refers to the first successful space flight whilst carrying a non-test payload
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:In_the_news/Recurring_items&oldid=412597268"