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).
Scientists have found life in an AntarcticLake Vida that was sealed off from the outside world by a thick sheet of ice several thousands of years ago. (The Guardian)
Basque separatist group ETA has reportedly indicated a readiness to disband, give up its weapons and enter talks with the governments of France and Spain. (BBC)
Nominator's comments: Snap elections are being held in Catalonia in response to the independence demonstration earlier this month. The Economist is calling it an "an unofficial referendum on independence" and "since Catalonia represents a big chunk of the euro zone’s fourth-largest economy, and since Spain is in the front-line of efforts to save the euro, the vote and its aftermath will be felt farther afield." Not a typical regional election; deals with the question of Catalonian independence and the European sovereign-debt crisis affecting Spain, so there's been a large amount of international coverage. --xanchester(t)09:44, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Bit of political opportunism, to try to get a majority for the nationalist party so that they can get a referendum up while the political iron is hot. If they achieve that, then the referendum will be ITNworthy, but the local election to try to create the circumstances for that to happen is too far removed to be on the front page. Kevin McE (talk) 10:23, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support - An organized major attempt to enable the breakup of Spain, done after masive demonstrations and despite heavy odds of getting this far. Set amid ongoing turmoil in Spain where unemployment is at about 25%, this is a fascinating subject and eminently ITN-worthy. Catalans would face extreme difficulties in setting up a new nation, including EU membership, but have their own language, flag and fiercely independent traditions. Article a bit on the thin side for content but is acceptable. Strongly suggest anyone on the fence regarding their !vote do some deeper looking into the subject; this is a very big deal. Jusdafax10:48, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
All of that seems to refer, as I have suggested above, to the next stage of the process: could you expand why the election, as opposed to the referendum that might follow. Kevin McE (talk) 11:16, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
As I say, it is my view that the election it*self is notable, and I have noted why in reasonable detail. Obviously we are at odds on this nomination, Kevin. I think we have each stated our cases. Jusdafax11:25, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - maybe if the results were interesting we'd announce those (such as Pro-independance parties win 75% of seats in the Catalonia election) but not notable before. LukeSurltc11:36, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Catalonia is an historically independent nation with a separate standardized language and a population significantly greater than Scotland, Denmark, or the Whole of Ireland. To describe its elections as "local" is a farce. Neither is this some stunt like the London or Wisconsin political protests we post on ITN, it's an official state action. Calling upon us to wait until we have results makes sense--that's not actually an oppose vote. Calling on us to wait until they have independence makes about as much sense as no political news out of Scotland, Wales, or Norther Ireland til they throw off the monarchical yoke. μηδείς (talk) 18:16, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. This election, as I understand it, is to elect their local Parliament, not to decide Independence. Once the Parliament has been formed, then the majority parties can decide to hold an independence vote (leaving aside legal problems with doing so). The actual Independence vote(or even the formal decision to hold one) would be ITN worthy, but this election is not. 331dot (talk) 22:04, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Strongest possible oppose Elections are supposed to be posted for all states on the List of sovereign states. If we can frown on San Marino because it's "too small" we can definitely frown upon this sub-national non-state which is crying foul now that it might have to pay it's share of the bill for decades of riding along with Spain. When they get independence and make the list, then fine, until then I don't care how many people are there or how different the language is, it's not a state and it's elections do not go to the front page. --IP98 (talk) 01:06, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose "pay their fair share" is a joke on your part? "With more people than Denmark and an economy almost as big as Portugal's, Catalonia has its own language. Like Basques, Catalans see themselves as distinct from the rest of Spain. ... Many Catalans are angry that Rajoy has refused to negotiate a new tax deal with their largely self-governing region. Annually, an estimated 16 billion euros ($21 billion) in taxes paid in Catalonia, about 8 percent of its economic output, is not returned to the region." Separatists winning in Catalonia]. μηδείς (talk) 01:28, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
But it still needs some article to be expanded and nominated. Support in principle, but the pre-emptive posting of noms is getting silly. The opening sentence of ITN documentation reads "The In the news (ITN) section on the main page serves to direct readers to articles that have been substantially updated...", not to simply mention news headlines: what is the proposal? Kevin McE (talk) 08:25, 25 November 2012 (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.
Support. Sufficient size of disaster to be notable. Has been covered internationally. Article seems to now meet minimum standards. LukeSurltc18:15, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support This is surely one of the deadliest and most significant fires in recent times. It also has a worldwide coverage standing on the front page on all of the media portals.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:04, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure what you mean by "recent" but we had 2 in Pak some 2 months ag..and bbangladesh fatalities of this magnitude or not that rate. (ferry singking or so pretty oftn)Lihaas (talk) 19:44, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Token oppose it's not our fault that workplace safety in Bangladesh is appalling. We're talking about a country where ships are hacked to pieces on the beach. Is it really a surprise that 120 people were killed in an industrial accident. I'm not saying it's not a tragedy, but what is really noteworthy about it? We posted a similar incident in Pakistan last year. I really believe the bar needs to be set higher in parts of the world where workplace deaths are routine. And yes, I have "thought of the children". --IP98 (talk) 01:00, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Moved per the "Please do not" section above. Not sure why it is being proposed at this time: it is ITN/R, and the article has been updated very quickly after the end of every previous round. Kevin McE (talk) 21:54, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Around 10,000 people demonstrate against austerity in Dublin amid calls for a general strike to shut the country down. (BBC)
Retail analysis says more Americans went out to shop (as opposed to shopping online) on Black Friday, 23 November. However, total sales decreased 1.8% from the previous Black Friday. (CNN)
Egypt's top judges accuse President of EgyptMohamed Morsi of staging an "unprecedented attack" on the judiciary, after he passes a decree granting himself extensive new powers. Critics and supporters have staged rallies. Crowds gathered in Cairo's Tahrir Square, vowing to stage a sit-in protest. (BBC)
Oppose. Obviously not important enough. Plus, neither of the linked articles contains any photos of pretty ladies, which sort of makes them pointless, surely? Formerip (talk) 01:11, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
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.
The article has an "outdated" tag and is short on prose. These two things should be addressed before posting. --Tone14:52, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Two military OV-10 Bronco aircraft collide in the air during a demonstration flight near military El Libertador Air Base in the state of Aragua, Venezuela. One of the pilots, guiding his aircraft away from a populated area, is killed. Three soldiers are also injured in the crash. (Pravda)(Bernama)
Opposition leaders in Egypt call for large protests after President of EgyptMohamed Morsi passed a decree giving himself sweeping new powers. Protests for and against his decision are taking place in Cairo, and violence has occurred throughout Egypt. (BBC)(RT)
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Speedy? The article's already got 1200 more bytes, although that's largely an expanded lead, one sentence on the death, and its ref. But I'd like to encourage quick action by an admin on this, assuming we don't have any opposes, in order not to be three days after the news cycle for once. Further expansion should follow quickly once people are awake to comment on his passing. μηδείς (talk) 05:30, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support recent deaths Notable actor, two major career defining roles and a long career beyond that. "Who shot J.R.?" is the question everyone was asking 30 years ago. – Muboshgu (talk) 05:34, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I was using them for comparison purposes. Tarmey was also a veteran male actor known for one long-running role on television. Hagman's role only went on for bout a decade. Tarmey's went on for 31 years! And Corrie's been on air for 52 years and counting. That's a substantial amount of it that Tarmey was involved in. Not convinced about how unique Hagman was in that light. He's also older and had cancer. I'd say Tarmey's death was more unexpected. --86.40.98.2 (talk) 06:07, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If you reeally wanna make a comparison, make a formal nomination. We simply do not compare actual noms with work done to fantasy noms anyone can name. μηδείς (talk) 06:32, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Recent Deaths The subject is obviously notable enough for a mention IMO. Leaning towards RD rather than a blurb due to a relatively common cause and age of death – "American actor Larry Hagman dies at the age of 81" would add relatively little value. There are some appropriately placed {{citation needed}} tags which need actioning though. —WFC— FL wishlist05:42, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Article needs updating Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Published 21 novels selling over 20 million copies worldwide; considered one of Australia's best known and most popular authors. Needs a bit more of an update, however. IgnorantArmies – 04:59, Friday November 23, 2012 (UTC)
Update I suggest the nominator focus on updating the article. I am also curious if any of his works have been adapted as films or won any wards? I am not at all opposed, but have no way of judging the notability. μηδείς (talk) 20:20, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: If possible, there should be more in Bryce_Courtenay#Writing about his works (style, themes, etc.), as opposed to pretty much only emphasizing his commercial success (perhaps that should be in a different section? SpencerT♦C23:21, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Russia lifts a 16-year ban on the import of Britishbeef and lamb. British farmers had been stopped from exporting to Russia following the 1996 BSE outbreak in the UK, despite the lifting of a worldwide ban in 2006. (The Telegraph)(BBC)
A hostage situation in the northern city of Thessaloniki, Greece, ends peacefully, as policemen arrest a 72-year-old Greek pensioner who was threatening to set a tax office building on fire due to a financial dispute. (Global Times)
Article:Héctor Camacho (talk·history·tag) Blurb: U.S. boxer Héctor Camacho is declared brain dead, two days after a shooting. (Post) Alternative blurb: Hector "Macho" Camacho (for recent death ticker) News source(s):[3] Credits:
Nominator's comments: Arguably one of the top boxers of all-time and a legend in Latin America, very unexpected and sad development, if he is removed from life support I'll support a full blurb of his passing, though it clearly qualifies for recent deaths ticker. If he's not removed from life support, I think the shooting is notable on its own for ITN. Secretaccount00:26, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support but wait until officially declared dead. Seems like a person of high notability, and violent deaths are always more notable. If not a full blurb than at least an addition to the recent deaths ticker. LukeSurltc00:56, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support for recent deaths Bal Thackery is getting stale, this person seems notable enough for the ticker, and there is a decent update. The incident itself "drug dealer shot by thugs" is utterly unexceptional, so the notability comes from the death of a reasonably successful professional athlete. --IP98 (talk) 01:58, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Right, so just as if he had died of natural causes, or in a traffic accident, it's a professional athlete passing away. Death ticker. --IP98 (talk) 16:12, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A sudden and violent death always means that there is a bigger story than natural causes. The fact that he may have been living a dangerous life in the few years before this doesn't mitigate that fact. Also, there's nothing in the article that says he was a dealer anyhow. LukeSurltc16:38, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Recent Death and only after he actually dies. I have been working on the article, and spoke to the guy a few times myself. But he's not a sitting head of state and we certainly don't need a premature death notice. μηδείς (talk) 16:57, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
PS, these "drug dealer" comments are shamefully baseless and a clear BLP Violation. Not that BLP protects people we have contempt for, apparently. μηδείς (talk) 16:59, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
PSS - Now that he is actually dead I can refer to him as a drug dealing low life thug without concern. Not to wikilawyer the point, but the B in BLP is Biographies, and the community discussion page of ITN hardly qualifies. --IP98 (talk) 00:49, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
At the time of this post, the portion of his boxing career from which he derives his notability has no inline citations. If this is remedied I would have a weak preference for a full blurb, but am content for it to go up in either form. —WFC— FL wishlist05:27, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's comments: Another major traffic accident. A low death toll, but a high injury rate. Clearly an unusual event. I made a very small update, and my authoring is awful, I would very much like help fixing it up. --IP98 (talk) 23:51, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support. I'd find this more worthy of inclusion in ITN if there was a higher death toll, but I think the number of injuries and large number of vehicles involved makes it OK to include. 331dot (talk) 00:53, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Reply in the United States vehicle safety is more than polite suggestion. Roads and vehicles are highly engineered and safety enforced. That fact that there were few fatalities was a triumph of engineering, given the speeds and number of vehicles. This is far from a "meh" item. Frankly I think large crashes with few fatalities are less common, when some overcrowded bus can get rammed by a bus/train/whatever at some poorly maintained crossing. As for the article, I would love to get some help. Once it gets to two paragraphs, we can fork it, which seems to be the norm. --IP98 (talk) 02:04, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - With respect, this item isn't what I consider ITN-worthy. A lot of bent metal, mostly. This is not to minimize the tragic aspects. Jusdafax03:15, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Sorry, but I don't think this is ITN-worthy. It doesn't have an article, and even if it did, the low death-toll doesn't convince me. ComputerJA (talk) 05:01, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Question So when an unfit bus in some developing country, bursting at the seams with children gets hit by a truck or train, we heap support upon it. A major traffic accident (albeit with few fatalities) occurs in a place where they are uncommon, and it's "meh". I added an update to the Interstate 10 article. Help me get a second paragraph and we'll fork it. --IP98 (talk) 10:52, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think traffic accidents in the U.S. are uncommon. Yes, major traffic accidents probably are (not sure yet), but the low-death toll makes this not ITN-worthy. I hate to say this but it makes the wreck look like "all the other ones" in that sense. ComputerJA (talk) 17:50, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment IP98, these fog related multi-car pile-ups do happen once or twice a year, and luckily they usually have few fatalities. I definitely see where you are coming from with the bursting at the seams bus accidents, but I thing stronger opposes there, rather than support here, is the right course. μηδείς (talk) 20:24, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Medeis. Thanks for the moral support. I knew this would be a long shot, I was hoping for a little more consistency in our treatment of traffic accidents. Cheers. --IP98 (talk) 00:52, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's comments: A bit of a long shot, but might raise a smile, and while it is probably more likely to appear on DYK, I think it deserves at least a !vote as to whether it makes it to ITN. --Kevin McE (talk) 21:30, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ambivalent, leaning support. It's a great tidbit that would work in either section, I think. It is technically news, and the BBC are covering it. It's new enough to work for DYK (one of the extremely rare occasions where cries of "DYK!" are actually constructive or actionable) but the ticklish tone would be a nice change of pace for ITN right now, filled as it is with terrorism, disaster, corruption and revolution. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grapple X (talk • contribs)
I'm torn here, this is perfect for DYK I agree, but we need some decent story that isn't disasters, or conflicts posted ITN, and this story sounds interesting, and rare enough for ITN. I'll SupportSecretaccount00:12, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose- If people actually thought this was an island, why did it only get an article today? It's not in my atlas, so I'm not sure what exactly is going on here. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 01:44, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Article:Mohamed Mursi (talk·history·tag) Blurb: Challenges to the decrees, laws or decisions of the Egyptian President is outlawed by President Mohammed Mursi, in a move slammed by opponents as befitting "a new pharaoh" (Post) Alternative blurb: Egyptian President Mohammed Mursi outlaws all challenges to presidential authority News source(s):[6][7] Credits:
Oppose. Noting actions of a politician doesn't seem noteworthy; perhaps an article should be made first, as the above user suggests. 331dot (talk) 23:13, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support - top story on New York Times. Very important political development in Egypt, the intellectual center of the Arab world. Thue (talk) 23:40, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Thue, something like this is a bad sign for stability in the Arab world, top story or near top story in several top news agencies. Secretaccount00:09, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
*Oppose. This is against WP:NPOV as it only represents the opposers side in the last half of the blurb. The story is only important if this ends up causing issues with protests, etc. and even then there'd be a doubt in my mind as to whether it's really ITN worthy. If we were able to provide a sourced, neutral, concrete reason why this could affect anyone, then I may rethink it. gwickwire | Leave a message00:54, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support with alternative blurb. This decision, and reactions to it, are making headlines around the world and have profound implications for the region. AlexTiefling (talk) 13:39, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. This is amateur hour. The relevant section of the article is hopeless; it needs a complete re-write for reasons that would be obvious to anyone who reads it. The proposed blurb is of course a blatant violation of NPOV. The alternative is better but is it accurate? What are "all challenges". The word all isn't in the sources, which suggest that only certain kinds of decrees are immunised from challenge. --Mkativerata (talk) 21:59, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Further Comment - Well, it's posted. I agree the story itself is big and ITN-worthy but I continue to feel this assumption of powers, for lack of a better term, needed a separate article. Failing that, the sub-section in the Morsi (not Mursi) article needs to be pumped up quickly by those supporting the blurb for our Main page. I'd like to see reactions cited, the wording of the statute clarified, and NPOV analysis of what this means to the political process in Egypt and the regional implications. Failing that getting going in the next hour or two, I'd say pull it off ITN. Jusdafax23:14, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Article:No article specified Blurb: The United Kingdom's Lord Chancellor Chris Grayling tells the House of Commons that a European Court ruling on prisoner votes can be defied (Post) News source(s):BBC News Credits:
Oppose I fail to see the significance of this. Maybe when Parliament acts this will notable enough, but nothing's happened except a politician saying something. Hot Stop(Talk)17:24, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support - This story's notability derives not just from the cultural and political standing of the BBC, but also the recent furore about alleged child abuse by one or more of the Corporation's most prominent celebrities in the 1970s and 80s, and the subsequent fumbled reporting of these claims. This is therefore part of a much larger story - but one that is still relatively localised - hence my only moderate support of the posting. AlexTiefling (talk) 14:08, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: Identity of the DG makes little or no direct difference to viewers/listeners. Resignation was related to an implicit accusation in cases totally unrelated to Savile. Insufficient depth of impact to counter limited geographical relevance. Kevin McE (talk) 19:31, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support - 1. He will be head of a large corporation that transmits in many countries all over the world. 2. The decision on who would be the next DG has been a major topic of discussion in the UK. I would also like to say I prefer the shorter blurb I have just added. The longer blurb is problematic for reasons highlighted by Kevin McE. Yaris678 (talk) 11:07, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Opppose. Two wrongs don't make a right. In the previous discussion, our judges gave weight to three votes which appeared insular in nature, one which correctly recited ITN policy without giving any insight into why the nomination failed that test, and an oppose based on a comment which was actioned in the form of a significantly revised blurb. That monumental cock-up does not justify posting a far less notable chapter in the story. —WFC— FL wishlist02:53, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Pakistan deaths
Article:No article specified Blurb: Bombings kill 37 and wound many more in Pakistani terrorist attacks (Post) News source(s):[12][13] Credits:
Oppose - Not headline news at all; just scientific findings. As with exoplanets, the discovery of dwarf planets that are not record-breaking, or facts about them, is unlikely to be sufficiently significant for ITN. AlexTiefling (talk) 10:49, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Minor result to non-astronomers. Am I the only one who was even interested enough to follow the link and discover that the nomination [15] was for the disambiguation page Makemake until this edit? PrimeHunter (talk) 22:31, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Even the source I read didn't say it had no atmosphere, but that none had been detected and it was possible there was a transient frozen one. μηδείς (talk) 03:29, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Over 160 rockets were fired into Israel on Tuesday killing one Israeli soldier and a civilian. One of the rockets fired from Gaza landed near Bethlehem, in the West Bank. Israel drones and airstrikes also kill 31 Palestinians, including civilians. (The Jerusalem Post)
Hundreds of government soldiers and policemen surrender to M23 rebels at a stadium in the city of Goma, which fell to rebel forces on November 20. (Al Jazeera)
Unidentified gunmen shoot and kill Benghazi's police chief Faraj al-Deirsy in front of his home in the latest attack against security officials in Libya's second largest city. (Al Jazeera)
Puerto Rican professional boxerHéctor Camacho is shot multiple times in Bayamon, Puerto Rico. The driver of Camacho's car is killed in the attack. Camacho was shot in the neck and face and taken to St. Paul's Hospital in Río Piedras, where he was pronounced to be in critical condition shortly thereafter. (El Nuevo Herald)
Nominator's comments: The ITN candidacy was put on hold after the Supreme Court rejected his mercy petition as he could still approach the President of India. Now, his hanging his inevitable.Regards, theTigerKing02:59, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Enactment of a sentence. Conviction and sentencing are the relevant newsworthy stages: this is procedural, just as release at end of a period of conviction is. Kevin McE (talk) 07:17, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Factually, this is the second instance since 1995 when a person has been hanged in India, even though hundreds of death sentence has been awarded in India during this period. The hanging has gathered attention of media all over the World as evidenced from sources above. Moreover, the whole background of the conviction need to be taken into account for ascertaining the importance. AmartyabagTALK2ME07:24, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
See if it holds? How could we do that? It's not like we can wait a month, and if the violence hasn't resumed by then, post that a ceasefire was passed one month ago. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 19:26, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think my comments have been interpreted as more negative than they were intended. I support this posting, as it looks like it hasn't fallen apart instantly (i.e. been ignored by one side). However if it does fail, we should be prepared to update the blurb immediately, as having a news item about a cease-fire on the front page suggests that the current state is one of (tentative) peace. LukeSurltc21:21, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I also support a backup, just in case. If it fails, what about an immediate change to The previous cease-fire between Israel and Hamas is broken by (insert party here) with (rocket/invasion/statement/etc.)? If anyone wants to change my proposal or just propose another change just in case, feel free to. Also, this is from an ipad, so i apologize in advance for any format or spelling issues. gwickwire | Leave a message22:14, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, if this is posted can the poster please remove the old one, which reads "Israel launches a major military operation in the Gaza Strip, as hostilities with Hamas escalate." That would be confusing to have both of them, and it leaves space for something else if the poster so wishes to post another item. gwickwire | Leave a message14:14, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The pro-Israel non-governmental organization HonestReporting brings attention to footage captured by the BBC and transmitted by CNN that shows a Palestinian man being carried away from a bomb blast only to reappear moments later uninjured. CNN's Anderson Cooper who was reporting on the original story issued a retraction during his television show. (Honest Reporting)(Fox News)
The BBC is further caught in controversy after tweeting a photograph of a young girl on a stretcher as being killed in Gaza when the photograph is 3 weeks old and of a child killed in Syria. (Fox News)
Israel’s PMBenjamin Netanyahu reportedly delays an IDF ground invasion into Gaza by 24 hours; the announcement precedes a series of critical international negotiations pushing for a ceasefire between the two sides. (RT)(BBC)
Islamist rebel groups in Aleppo denounce what they call a "conspiratorial project" and the new Syrian opposition, and say they seek to establish an "Islamic state". (Al Jazeera)
Tension between central African neighbours is reaching breaking point over an uprising in Congo's eastern hills. (Al Jazeera)
M23 fighters reportedly enter centre of Goma after seizing military airport in largest city in mineral-rich east. (Al Jazeera)
Arts and culture
Sesame Street puppeteer Kevin Clash, known for being the voice of Elmo, resigns after a second accuser files a complaint that Clash had underage sexual relations with him. (BBC)
Nominator's comments: A provincial capital with a population of a million people seized by rebels. Per The New York Times: "Rebel fighters seized one of the biggest, most vital cities in the Democratic Republic of Congo on Tuesday, setting off riots in several places across the country and raising serious questions about the stability of Congo as a whole." [16] --Khazar2 (talk) 00:30, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for notability. Is this a larger than normal merger, or does the merger affect the legal status of one of the parties, or does it suggest corruption, or...? These are not household names so their merger is not in and of itself notable. If there is something more going on here other than, "company A buys company B" then it should be noted in the blurb. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.188.8.27 (talk) 07:57, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Then I suggest that the blurb be changed to: "A moderately large merger (£56 billion, $89 billion) between Glencore and Xstrata is agreed" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.188.8.27 (talk) 10:33, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. "First-degree verdict"? This terminology is unfamiliar to me. The BBC article doesn't use that term, while the Wikipedia article uses that term without any explanation of what it means. Is this region specific terminology, or perhaps a translation issue? Either way, it might avoid confusion simply to omit the final phrase from the blurb; after all, "10 year in prison for corruption" would seem to be the essence of the event. Dragons flight (talk) 15:13, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oh. Does that mean he may be appealing or is it just the length of the sentencing that may change? Clarifing this seems somewhat important. LukeSurltc17:14, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It means that Sanader has a right on complaint... if the court denies his complaint the sentence remains as it is. It is the same case with Ante Gotovina. Wikipedia published his non-final verdict and the final one (it's on the Main Page as we speak). --Wüstenfuchs20:13, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
CommentOppose until article is better sourced This seems clearly ITN-worthy, but the first half of the article is thinly sourced, including discussion of Sanader's achievements and corruption scandals while in office. Not sure this is Main Page ready. -- Khazar2 (talk) 01:14, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
All important corruption affairs are included and are described as much as possible... I don't think we should write a novel about them. --Wüstenfuchs01:26, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The problem isn't the length; it's that nobody's bothered to provide sources for much of this. In the first 25 paragraphs of this article, there appear to be only 12-15 sentences with citations. I've removed or pared down a few of the more egregious, but this still seems to me on the border of needing an orange-level BLP sources tag. -- Khazar2 (talk) 01:45, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Police in Kenya fire tear gas amid clashes between rioters and ethnic Somalis in the capital Nairobi, after a bus bombing yesterday killed nine people. (Times of India)
Scores of Kenyan soldiers go on the rampage in the northeastern town of Garissa after three soldiers are shot dead by unknown gunmen. (BBC)(Capital FM Kenya)
In the Netherlands a 45-year-old man is arrested following a DNA profiling match in connection with a high-profile rape and murder case of a sixteen-year-old girl on May 1, 1999. (DutchNews)
U.S. Bankruptcy Court Judge Robert Drain orders the baker's union and Hostess Brands to negotiate through mediation, which was skipped when the company gave its ultimatum to shut down and release its employees and the strike continued. This halts the shutdown process and the moves by other companies to acquire it, for now. (Peoria Journal Star)
Indianapolis and Indiana state homeland security and police authorities now say that the $4.4 million explosion in Richmond Hill neighborhood may not be due to gas or a faulty furnace, but may somehow have been an intentional criminal homicide; they are seeking a white van that was seen in that subdivision the day of the blast with a $10,000 reward. (MSN)(The Indianapolis Star)
Oppose until more facts are available and the article is updated. As it is, the only first-hand source is Savita Halappanavar's husband, and beyond that the article has very little information about her death and focuses entirely on political reactions. A reader could not read that article and come to any conclusion other than; these politicians say this and those politicians say that. The timing of the onset of sepsis, the dual role of Irish and Common law and a complete account of the diagnoses are missing from the article, and I think these are necessary before the article can be considered encyclopedic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.188.8.27 (talk) 15:54, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. As the above user states, the article just seems to be a summary of political reactions, which isn't a news story in and of itself. Abortion protests (pro or anti) are not something I see too often in ITN. 331dot (talk) 21:01, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for now. Not unless something significant comes from her death (e.g. inquiry resulting in a change in abortion laws). Nomination is probably a bit late, though I'm sure coverage is ongoing. IgnorantArmies – 01:49, Wednesday November 21, 2012 (UTC)
Quite ironically, a report recommending options for change to the abortion laws (as a result of A, B and C v Ireland) was concluding when this woman died. The report has since been delivered to Government. Sadly, this woman's death may serve to give expedience and a sense of realism to the interoperation and implementation of that report. --RA (talk) 18:46, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's comments: As the situation has developed, we should have a more comprehensive item for Operation Pillar of Defense to replace the Ahmed Jabari-focussed one we have currently, and be bought to the top of the ITN box. The current item makes it sound like the operation was a small action targeted on an individual, which is misleading. --LukeSurltc14:38, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support but omit the "in retaliation to rocket attacks". It's always in retaliation for something, and the causes are ususally too complex to sum up in a sentance fragment. --IP98 (talk) 16:44, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'd keep the mention of the rocket attacks. While the Isreali attack is larger, this is a conflict with two armed sides. Mentioning the rockets using some form of working gives a more complete picture. LukeSurltc19:05, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support principle, but absolutely not the purpose of an encyclopaedia to assert reason or justification. I've made an altblurb proposal. Kevin McE (talk) 19:23, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support' Kevin's alt; it's a near-infinite recursion to say "this was in response to this, which was in response to this...", better to state bare fact. Yet another strike happened, civilians died (the latter part being what's notable about this). GRAPPLEX19:27, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Uh, no. We should not be trying to equalize two sides that aren't equal. Kevin's blurb is worse than the original. Yes, there are dozens of civilian casualties, but the vast majority of them are Palestinian. -- tariqabjotu20:13, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Funny, I'm pretty sure I didn't mention anything about equalising anything. I'm not going to get into who's "right" in this but I've always sided with Palestine. That said, it's easier to cut out the notion of tit-for-tat and blame and just report on the fact that there have been a lot of civilian casualties in the past few days in the area. If the story was one side firing on the other, this story would never leave ITN; the reason it's up now is the volume of casualties. Let that be the focus. GRAPPLEX21:02, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You said you liked the blurb, so it is just as easy to respond to you as to Kevin, and by putting it below both your comment and his, I was hoping you'd both respond. I don't really care "who you side with", or if you side with anyone at all. The point is, vaguely saying "resulting in dozens of civilian deaths", when one side's civilian deaths -- even by Israeli estimates -- are outnumbered 10:1, is highly misleading and just as much, if not more, a faux pas as stating Israel's reported reasons for beginning this incursion. Considering the linked article is to the Israeli operation, rather than something like Second Gaza War (which would probably focus on both sides actions equally), it seems very much appropriate to focus on the Israeli action. Not to mention that Hamas firing rockets on southern Israel isn't exactly news; Israel's operation is. So, something like the following, borrowing elements from the two blurbs proposed already, seems better:
It is precisely because Palestinian civilian casualties are greater that I counter-proposed against the "They asked for it" tone of the original: I didn't "equalise", I chose not to specify. Any blurb is going to be something of a tightrope (there is already an objection to removing the reference to retaliation below), there is no point in narrowing it further. Let the blurb be neutral, or safe and broad, to the point of being anodyne to direct people to the article (which is after all the stated purpose of ITN), and let the reader see what might eventually resemble a balanced article that might help them come to their own conclusions about where justice lies. I would rather, however, see an article based on the conflict as a whole, not the Israeli action. Kevin McE (talk) 22:22, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The aim is fine, but the result is not. It should not be incumbent upon readers to discover for themselves that only one side has caused dozens of civilian deaths and the other has caused just a quarter dozen. -- tariqabjotu22:33, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Then a blurb which presents the raw numbers would be best; my main objection to the proposed blurb was the recursive "this was a response to this" opening which seemed to justify the deaths caused. A modification of Kevin's proposal with raw numbers (BBC seem to be reporting 105 deaths caused by Israel, or at least not refuting the figure) would be a good idea. GRAPPLEX22:38, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know why you continue to take this plainly unproductive approach to getting something you want. I'm starting to think you prefer whining about it than actually getting it changed. -- tariqabjotu22:48, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You've less suggested it than complained about it. There are 1451 other administrators you could have bothered, and yet you insist on harassing the one who told you outright that he wasn't changing it. Since repetition seems to be what you understand, let me say it again: I'm not fulfilling your request, I'm not fulfilling your request, I'm not fulfilling your request. -- tariqabjotu23:00, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
In keeping with my personal policy of not engaging in Israel debate on Wikipedia, I will not chose a blurb. However, I will express support for posting a blurb referencing the war. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 23:19, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
We'd never be able to post stories about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict if orange tags stopped us. I think we should make an exception, unless there is something grossly wrong with the article, which is unlikely. -- tariqabjotu00:12, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No, I did not mean to say inevitable. There are probably dozens of editors contributing to the article in some fashion and if, as we'd like to all believe, it's true that Wikipedia articles end up being accurate and neutral because so many people contribute to it, it's unlikely it's grossly biased in any one direction. But it takes just one person to claim his or her side isn't represented enough, even if on just one point in a vast article, to mess things up. I won't say I know from experience, but, well... I know from experience. -- tariqabjotu00:36, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment- Making an exception on orange-tags for Israeli-Palestinian content seems awfully strange. In fact, I would think all the moreso we have to be absolutely sure the article is neutral because it is such a sensitive topic. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 00:23, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That is an impossible goal for an active military conflict in this area. That being said, I'm not even sure why the tag is there, because it seems like all of the issues brought up on the talk page when it was posted were fulfilled. It seems now more to just be a catch-all tag, because the article's neutrality is probably disputed by somebody. -- tariqabjotu00:36, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Will post Tariq's blurb soon if no convincing objection. There's obvious support for adding a hook. Tariq's comments about orange tags on I/P articles makes quite a bit of sense. And while I don't see a problem with Kevin's hook, (a) it's got no links, and I can't see a way to link the main article as cleanly, and (b) I do think Tariq's reads better. Giving people one last chance to provide a convincing objection, otherwise will post after dinner (unless someone else gets to it first). --Floquenbeam (talk) 01:01, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
And, since I'm not a regular ITN admin, I'd like some advice on placement; would it go on top, or would it replace the current Jabari blurb? --Floquenbeam (talk) 01:06, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comments:
Its probably best left as a judgement call for the admin, but I would say to put this at top, or wherever it fits chronologically, and take away Jabari blurb because they're both part of the same running story.
Not posting Kevin's hook because it doesn't have links is unnecessary. Blurbs do not need to be posted verbatim from nominations anyway, so adding links while posting is more than fine.
The problem I have with Tariq's blurb is that it implies that Hamas fired their rockets, finished up, then Israel retaliated with Amud Anan. During the operation, Hamas is still firing rockets and Israel is firing back. It's not like they're taking turns, and Israel is currently taking a turn at launching.
I support this posting, but I think it should be done with caution, and I do not endorse either blurb over the other, but I think both blurbs have problems that need to be addressed. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 01:34, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I meant the blurb: "Israel launches a major military operation in the Gaza Strip, as hostilities with Hamas escalate." It's not up top with Luke's and Kevin's, but about mid-height of this thread. --Floquenbeam (talk) 01:38, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict × 2) I'd concur with Bzweebl about placement. I also concur with the part about links; one could conceivably add a link to Operation Pillar of Defense through the word "Hostilities" (I'm sure that was the intention). I don't concur, however, that Bzweebl's interpretation is one the reader is bound to make. That being said, I agree that it is true that Hamas has not stopped firing rockets, so if you believe that the blurb suggests they're no longer doing anything, then you ought to choose a different blurb or reword it. I just don't see how one could come to that conclusion. -- tariqabjotu01:42, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Started a subsection to consider a sticky for the latest Gaza conflict. An assasination and now an incursion, expect some PLO retaliation. --IP98 (talk) 16:44, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
An assassination that we refused to even describe as such, or even the less specific "targeted killing", despite 8000+ reliable sources at the time. I hope ITN is not seen by non-WP readers of the Homepage as honest & accurate purveyors of news headlines. Leaky Caldron17:03, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The whole point of stickies (a la the Olympics, for which the stickies were first made) was for continually updated articles for ongoing individual events that could be posted separately. I think this conflict would fulfill this, but at the same time, we should then remove the Syria sticky. While their civil war is still ongoing, the article isn't being constantly updated with ITN-minimum updates, and there aren't as many individual events related to that civil war that would be potential ITN candidates. SpencerT♦C23:28, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This region has been in some form of conflict for pretty much all human history, and, sadly, seems likely to remain so indefinitely. As regards this current operation, a sticky would only be necessary if it lasted for weeks or months. Wait and see if this happens. LukeSurltc11:47, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
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