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).
Support: No brainer. Most of Mumbai is virtually shut down right now following news of his death. Police has issued advisory requiring all residents to stay inside unless absolutely necessary. Several columns of paramilitary forces deployed across Mumbai. Top news across all Indian news services, top story in BBC Asia page. Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 14:36, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
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)
Article:Hostess Brands (talk·history·tag) Blurb: Hostess Brands, once the largest wholesale baker in the United States, announces it is liquidating its assets and laying off its 18,500 employees. (Post) Alternative blurb: Hostess Brands, the US baker of Twinkies and Wonderbread, is to lay off 18,500 and liquidate due to bankruptcy. News source(s):CNBCBBCGlobal News Canada Credits:
Nominator's comments: Major layoffs and the liquidation of a once-major company seems a notable event to me, though this is the first time I have done this. Article has been updated by others with recent information. --331dot (talk) 14:36, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support, more because this is "in the news" that everyone's reporting it with a slightly humorous bent ("what will we do without Twinkies?!" type reactions) but I know we normally don't include business matters unless they are more significant. I would say that if this was used, mention of the union/strike problems as the cause in the blurb. --MASEM (t) 14:55, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support; this seems similar, but much smaller, to the South African labour stories we posted before. It's a large story affecting thousands of workers. GRAPPLEX15:05, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I don't want to live in a world without Twinkies. Also a labor dispute taking down a major 82-year old company seems fairly unusual. --12.41.124.2 (talk) 15:32, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's not just the brand and products, but the end of a long-lasted and well known company along with a very large number of layoffs. 331dot (talk) 16:22, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
strong support "Twinkies" are an iconic American product, as much as Coca-Cola or McDonald's. Their demise leaves a hole in American culture. → Michael JⓉⒸⓂ16:38, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, Twinkies aren't really going anywhere. Hostess will sell off their assets, which includes selling their iconic brands to other corporations that will surely continue them. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:51, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Pull - It's not often I say that. But this is such an utterly parochial story, I'm surprised it's been so strongly supported. Here in the UK, I think most people would have no idea what Hostess or Twinkies were. I don't really care much for all this sentimental 'iconic American product' stuff. And as I understand it, the main reason that Twinkies aren't going anywhere is that the product is as nuke-proof as a cockroach. AlexTiefling (talk) 19:29, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Pull - It appears that shameless U.S. centrism is once again rearing its ugly head on WP:ITN. This has absolutely none, zero, zip, zilch cultural significance outside of the United States. Further research of the story will reveal that the Twinkies themselves are not gone as the recipes will be sold to the highest bidder. This is contrived.--WaltCip (talk) 19:55, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Pull - So the scandal that has enveloped the BBC is regarded as parochial and unimportant, but an American snack manufacturer is not? Why was this posted with such haste? This makes ITN look laughable. 87.114.31.223 (talk) 19:59, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Pull. I've never posted here before, but I was amazed to see this on the Main Page. Hard as it may be to believe, no-one outside the US has ever heard of Hostess Brands or any of their products. DoctorKubla (talk) 20:07, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I will say, that has got to be one of the quickest turnarounds of consensus I have ever seen. Almost impressive in a way. No opposition to the pull, obviously. Ks0stm(T•C•G•E)20:18, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Repost with the twinkie/wonderbread altblurb. First, the usual racist anti-american comments are against policy and should be discounted. Second, the "Twinkie" and "Wonderbread" brands are much more widely known than the parent company, a blurb without them will of course be met by "huh". μηδείς (talk) 20:28, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Americans aren't a race, so it's not possible to be racist towards them. Your complaints about anti-Americanism come across as an attempt to stifle dissent and perpetuate a status quo in which Americans, as the largest and loudest participants on Wikipedia, trample over others' concerns. This is an international encyclopedia, not an encyclopedia about things of exclusive interest to Americans. 87.114.31.223 (talk) 20:32, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Whatever, does bigot suit you? It's against ITN policy to complain a story affects one country. Read it. And please, show me one edit here ever where someone has opposed something as not American. Admin's should discount your opinion entirely. μηδείς (talk) 20:37, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Let us not be blind to our differences – but let us also direct attention to our common interests and to the means by which those differences can be resolved. And if we cannot end now our differences, at least we can help make the world safe for diversity. For, in the final analysis, our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this small planet. We all breathe the same air. 87.114.31.223 (talk) 20:38, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's not on the BBC front page, nor even on the BBC World News front page. You have to go truffling pretty deep to find this supposedly "internationally significant" story on the BBC website. 87.114.31.223 (talk) 20:40, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Once again you show bad faith. Who here are you quoting as having said "internationally significant"? Are they the same Americans who've trampled you in the past? μηδείς (talk) 20:45, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support and RepostThis was not a good pull since post oppositions were mostly about locality and its clearly stated above "Do not complain about an event only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. This applies to a high percentage of the content we post and is unproductive". At time of posting there was a strong consensus and items should not be pulled unless there are some exceptional circumstances (it just looks awful). Also article has been updated quite well. I see no reason to not post -- Ashish-g5520:40, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, note that 4 of the 5 pull votes above are complaints from Brits they've never heard of it or that the US gets covereage at the English Wikipedia and the fifth is based on the inaccurate claim that Google News hasn't covered this. μηδείς (talk) 20:51, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Marcus Qwertyus accurately pointed out that this story does not even make the US news page on Google News. You replied that it is under [the US] Business section, but that doesn't make him wrong. 87.114.31.223 (talk) 20:57, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: very limited scope is a relevant factor when it is not countered by great importance, and this is not a matter of great importance. Assets, including no doubt the right to make and market the apparently greatly valued Twinkie, will be sold, so we are left with one more business going under. It is disingenuous to say that it is featured on the BBC without being willing to acknowledge that it is the 7th story on the business page, behind the release of the names of companies being investigated for nuisance marketing calls and a CBI press release suggesting that the government should promote growth. That is a measure of the priority the BBC gives the story: it is repeating an agency feed, not making an editorial priority of the story. Kevin McE (talk) 21:57, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Reposting That was pulled too soon. Hostess is an iconic and well-known american brand-name, equal to, if not more reputable than Kodak, which we posted when they went bankrupt earlier this year. Definitely merits reposting. EDIT: In terms of significance, CNN has a whole section devoted to Hostess news on their homepage, with links to 10 different stories about the closings. In addition, BBC.co.uk's article on the closing is on their "most shared" list.- Anc516 (Talk ▪ Contribs) 22:20, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose had to look hard to find this article on the World page of the BBC website, and given the "iconic" Twinkie brand will doubtless continue in another form (since Hostess will sell its assets "to the highest bidder), the only significance is the number of jobs being laid off. Seems like this has been a long time coming in any case, filing for bankruptcy three years ago. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:43, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comparison with Kodak doesn't stand up. Every country I visited sold Kodak products, it was an international corporation. Can't say the same for Twinkie cream cakes. Leaky Caldron22:52, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
So they aren't notable because they aren't sold outside of the US? I have yet to see a convincing reason as to why this shouldn't be posted, other than those who are not from the US saying they aren't notable. It's perfectly acceptable to not be knowledgeable of every product outside of one's home country, but you need to look at it from the other country's point of view, hence the reason for "Do not complain about an event only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. This applies to a high percentage of the content we post and is unproductive." in the very large and un-noticed blue box at the top of this page. Just because it doesn't matter in the UK, doesn't mean it's not important (same goes for non-US stories!). It's silly that others (US, UK, wherever) have this same idea that things outside of their home don't matter. I support the postings of things like Cricket and non-US elections, which mean absolutely zilch to me in the US, because I understand the significance to other countries. Hostess IS a highly notable brand in the US, and a pioneer in the mass-production of baked goods, and not just for Twinkies, either. Wonder Bread was one of the first mass-produced sliced breads to be made available. Seems simple, but that was highly innovative back in the day, and was a huge success. Even if you look past this, 18,500 people losing their jobs is HUGE no matter what country it's in. (Sorry for the long rant) -- Anc516 (Talk ▪ Contribs) 00:26, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. For reasons already given. Plus, as well as being an internationally enormous brand, Kodak is a significant business and technological innovator on a historic scale. So the comparison...well, there really isn't one. Formerip (talk) 23:41, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
So because Hostess made simple creme-filled cakes and not cameras/film, they aren't innovative? They were the first of their kind to be mass-produced and widely distributed, and have been around since before WWII. You can't walk into a convenience store in the US that doesn't sell a Hostess product of some sort (well now you can!). Hostess was a pioneer in the industry for Sliced bread (Wonder Bread) and other mass-produced baked goods, just like Kodak was for film products. They are the same. Plus, how is 18,500+ people losing their jobs not notable? -- Anc516 (Talk ▪ Contribs) 00:26, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Well, that did turn around quick. I don't really understand the "it's a US thing" objections; I see plenty of UK news in the ITN that I've never heard of. Someone said above that "in the UK, I think most people would have no idea what Hostess or Twinkies were." Well, you have an idea now- just as I would about UK news- which seems to me to be part of the point of ITN. I think that 18,000 plus job losses are notable regardless of the company or location. 331dot (talk) 02:55, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Repost. I ask that it be reposted, as it is stated above that "Do not complain about an event only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one."331dot (talk) 03:03, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Repost - A major, shocking story. That one does not know of Hostess does not mean it is not significant; I had to look up the significance of Archbishop of Canterbury, for example. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:40, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Being the effective leader of the third largest Christian communion in the world with a membership of 80 million is inherently more notable than a cake manufacturer. Leaky Caldron11:06, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
But 18,000 plus job losses is notable, regardless of the company. Objections based purely on the fact that Hostess is a US company are invalid, according to the criteria on this page. 331dot (talk) 11:17, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Repost. While an event's international significance is a valid consideration, the absence thereof isn't a disqualifying factor, so opposition based thereupon is invalid. The company in question is nothing short of iconic in the United States. Literally everywhere I went yesterday, I heard people talking about its demise. I would support an ITN item about the closure of any company with comparable historical and cultural significance in its home country. —David Levy14:01, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's comment: The ICTY's decision was widly celebrated in Croatia. Around 100,000 people cheered when they arrived in Zagreb and they were greeted by the top officials. On the other side, Serbia halted its relations with the International Court and called the court's decision "scandalous". --Wüstenfuchs18:39, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Both articles updated. Just need consensus...Totally politicla as it is cnsidering this entity is gonna join the eu in 6 weeks.Lihaas (talk) 02:25, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Its also then if youre to lecture me, then th eupdate requires sentences of prose not your posting of the election of the US or the posting of the copt pop.e (BOTH of which had nota single word of prose update when psted...which was quit hypocritical in saying below it needs a prose update when 2 weeks ago you say none to post)Lihaas (talk) 04:38, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Markač's article has an extensive update while Gotovina's does not. Fix this first. Otherwise, we've posted the first verdict so it is in place to post the final one as well. --Tone10:38, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's comments: Major turn in the potest that previously mentioned a constit. monarchy. MOre notable by its neighbours Syria, in civil war, and israel , in a new war --Lihaas (talk) 02:45, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The protests have been going on all week, and I don't see detail (on BBC reports) that this is appreciably bigger than anything earlier in the week, which were not massive by any means. Watch out for escalation, certainly, but looks to be below the threshhold from what I see at the moment. ENGVAR note: in UK English, an ouster would be a person who ousts, which would lead the reader to b) remark that the news of the king's overthrow had passed them by, and b) wonder what they are calling for the revolutionaries to do. Kevin McE (talk) 10:32, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I agree with Kevin McE; it doesn't seem that significant an event yet; it it becomes such, then it can be included. These current protests seem to be driven simply by fuel prices and not just a call to remove the King. 331dot (talk) 11:08, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Jabari is certainly no longer the main story in this conflict, but I could not support a blurb that refers to Jerusalem attacks without balance of mention of attacks on Gaza. Kevin McE (talk) 10:22, 17 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 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: 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[4]. 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]
No, consensus does not exist: the presumption of consensus exists at ITN/R, but that presumption is being shown here to be erroneous. Despite my support below, discussions such as this demonstrate that unless the consensus on ITN/R inclusion is so strong as to make it clear that opposition is eccentric, that consensus is not secure. To claim that consensus exists on the grounds of a generalised discussion, when specific debate indicates otherwise, is to put the bureaucratic cart before the horse. Kevin McE (talk) 07:32, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
In that case, prpartake in the long-winded discussion we had on talk. If people dont want to partake in discussion of this nature then they cant claim to oppose because there is no consensus. Those who discussed it deemed this as such.Lihaas (talk) 08:00, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I see no evident conclusion from my comment that prparticipation in another discussion is called for, nor do you offer the assistance of letting me know which discussion you refer to (the now closed one I contributed to on 18 April perhaps?), nor do you assert by what authority you presume to order me as to what discussions I should or should not prpartake in. I have not opposed because there is no consensus, I have pointed out that in the case of this specific proposal, there does not appear to be a consensus. Consensus is identified by analysis of merits and quantity of the support for and opposition to a proposal, not a grounds to support or oppose: please don't insult my intelligence by accusing me of such a fundamental failing of logic. Kevin McE (talk) 19:31, 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]
Support, because an encyclopaedia exists to educate, and so is not driven purely by numbers. Objections that this is smaller than my home town are no more relevant than saying that we should not report Libyan national election because we don't report municipal elections in Shangqiu, which has a larger population. Kevin McE (talk) 07:32, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
marking ready as the requisite update is there (though after the US election posting, clearly no prose is required as a preequisite). oppose votes dont matter to ITNR, if people (as usual) choose to oppose ITNR then they should to take it to talk for debate, which has been tried endlessly to no avail.Lihaas (talk) 07:55, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think the many opposes here should just be dismissed as irrelevant; what users think matters. Additionally, if the prose is limited to nonexistent, it shouldn't be posted on those grounds. 331dot (talk) 11:35, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Huh, what a discussion! While I support inclusion of election results or changes of heads of states to ITN (even for two smallest countries in the world, Monaco and Vatican!), this particular article is simply not sufficiently well updated to be posted. Instead of arguing, add a couple of lines of prose and make it a good one. Time better spent. --Tone12:28, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think it is staggering the amount of discussion about a relatively trivial topic. We have a glaring example of treading on broken glass with the inadequate headline of the Hamas assassination and the resident Admin refusing to include the word "targeted" in the blurb because he has taken personal offence. Leaky Caldron12:46, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose votes dont matter and they should NOT be hear if one paid attention 331dot and not just listened to what wants to be heard. Its ITNR and all thats needed is the update!!! for disputiing ITNR take t to the talk page..
Of all people Tariqabjotu says there is not updated? Where was he US election update that you posted? and another one just befpre (egypt pope)?Lihaas (talk) 02:30, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If oppose votes don't matter then there should be a separate page or section to discuss "updates", as it is very confusing when a suggestion posted on the ITN Candidates page is not actually a candidate and is going to make it on the page no matter what objections are raised. 331dot (talk) 03:08, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
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]
Support News is reporting this based as historic based on the size of penalties being paid. Since In The News is supposed to be based on actual sources, the actual sources consider this important. --Jayron3205:29, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps a record, but that's quite different from historic. Were this a conviction with awards going to victims it would be worth considering. Instead it's the cost of doing business and will happily be paid to the treasury to put the matter to rest. μηδείς (talk) 05:44, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, again, that is based on your feelings, and not on what is being reported in the Press. Firstly, portions of the fine are being used to recompense losses to people who were harmed by the oil spill: [5] and [6] and [7] all explain what portions of the fine go to what purposes, and significant portions are going to the "victims". Secondly, "historic" is not my word. It's the sources word: LA Times: "Largest in U.S. History". Albany Tribune: "BP To Pay Historic $4.5 Billion Fine To U.S. For Horizon Oil Spill". WWL News: "Legal analyst Chick Foret said that while historic, BP can afford the $4 billion in fines..." Mississippi Press: ""A historic disaster demands historic settlements," said U.S. Rep. Steven Palazzo, R-Biloxi." I understand that you wish that reliable sources didn't call this historic. They are. What your own personal opinion of how people should view the fine isn't really relevent to Wikipedia's standards of reliance on what source material has to say. --Jayron3205:56, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Your sources simply state that the states will get a part of the cut from the criminal fine, not that that money will actually go to harmed businesses and property owners. This is no different from the record settlement against the tobacco companies in which the money went to the states and federal government, and none of the putative victims of smoking personally saw a red cent. A record civil judgement in court recompensing actual victims would be worth posting, as would, say, if it were warranted, conviction of Tony Hayward or some other bigwig for criminal negligence. But this announcement is not about any such justice--it's the Justice Department getting a big enough prize to show its bureaucratic efficacy, with BP willingly taking a hit so that it can continue running ads saying how it has taken responsibility for its actions and is such a good corporate citizen. μηδείς (talk) 19:27, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Regardless of your politics, you cannot deny that this is "in the news". It isn't like no major sources have picked up the story, or aren't giving it any import... --Jayron3220:14, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose as nominated, although out of the kindness of my heart I will nonetheless give supporters some help in my final sentence. A "big fucking deal" this fine may be, but the same could be said of a lot of things that don't make the ITN cut. We've posted Deepwater Horizon at least five "fucking" times now (it's linked five times in the ITN appearances section of Talk:Deepwater Horizon oil spill, and I wouldn't be remotely surprised if that list is incomplete). Furthermore, the most recent posting that I'm aware of specifically related to BP paying a larger amount of money than this in compensation. Having posted the (estimated) $7.8B litigation agreement, the only possible justification for also posting this would be if this is indeed a record criminal fine, and we can succinctly and accurately communicate such in a blurb. —WFC— FL wishlist22:12, 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[9] 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]
Article:AMF Bowling (talk·history·tag) Blurb: AMF Bowling , the world's largest operator of bowling alleys, files for bankruptcy. (Post) News source(s):[10]
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]
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)
