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).
A Chinese-made training airplane K-8 crashes during an air force flying exhibition in Venezuela, the two pilots ejected successfully. The French-made military helicopter Cougar sent to rescue the pilots also crashes, no one is injured. (The Montreal Gazette)
Education
The UK government is to create a new wave of universities both in the private and public sector, the first new universities in the country for two decades. (BBC)
A HungarianMP from the far right Jobbik party calls for a list of Jewish politicians and government employees who are a "threat to national security". The Hungarian Government later released a statement condemning the comments. (BBC)
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.
Support: I've not heard of him until today because I dont follow American sports, but he is described as "one of the two or three most important men in baseball history". It only seems fair that his death be included in the ticker. Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 17:37, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
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)
Comment Carney does not take the new job until July 1st, if I am not mistaken. Don't know if that will change anyone's opinion of this item. --PlasmaTwa202:27, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No, I will still Oppose it as I will every one of Obama's cabinet appointments unless on of them is Morsi or Medved (and not the Movie critic). μηδείς (talk) 02:45, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That too was a mistake. It's neither of grand public interest nor related to any article of great encyclopedic worth. I think the proper words for the audience interested in such things are "wonk" and "boffin" and and perhaps "remittance man" and feeding them on ITN amounts to systematic bias of the worse kind. The appointment of a junior league rugby coach would be a better nom. μηδείς (talk) 04:28, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose' for notability and lack of impact. By my guesstimation, several national banks shuffle their leadership every year, and of them almost no one greatly impacts the running of their respective institutions. While the first non-national to lead a national bank might be interesting, I don't think there's going to be much culture shock with a Canadian running a British bank. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.188.8.27 (talk) 10:19, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I would also like to point out that ITN is usually dominated by this sort of human interest stuff: managerial changes, catastrophes, human conflict, etc., and now there's even been a burst of sport-related ITN items. In contrast, an ITN item for "Makemake has no atmopshere" was roundly opposed for notability (a vote that I agree with), but with this current nomination in mind, I can't say whether a lack of atmosphere on Makemake is more or less interesting or encyclopedic than a change of post at the Bank of England.130.188.8.27 (talk) 10:29, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support. I think the fact that this will be the first foreigner in the post could be noteworthy, though the mere change in governorship isn't on its own. 331dot (talk) 10:53, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
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: It's the 100th Grey Cup, biggest game of the CFL, seems like a no brainer. For the record, however, I doubt it will be posted. It happens every year. Some user comes along and says "Oh, it's only the CFL", then some biased admin comes along and finds some silly reason not to post it despite it being listed at WP:ITN/R. -- Scorpion042204:42, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No, you can't, because this appears to be the first Grey Cup posted in a number of years despite it being the top level contest in its sport just as the Super Bowl, the McCarthy Cup or the Tour de France/Giro d'Italia are, and we've posted all those this year without much fuss (well, the McCarthy Cup took some arguing). GRAPPLEX05:21, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
How about you and Scorpion look at the archives before spouting such nonsense? "Biased admin"? Considering I was one of the people who responded to the 99th Grey Cup, I take umbrage to this baseless accusation. Whenever I respond to an ITN/C nomination, I insist on a relevant update. For sporting events, that means some prose about the event itself. A year later, the 99th Grey Cup article still has no prose whatsoever under "Game summary". And, guess what? The 100th Grey Cup article isn't any better; I still have no idea what happened during the game, because the article doesn't say. The standards haven't changed, and they are widely published. Rather than making idiotic conspiracy claims, how about you actually fulfill the criteria for posting. If this game is so damn important, why can't someone write a paragraph about the game within a year of its occurrence? -- tariqabjotu06:00, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Not when they're too busy being sniped at by self-assured admins; you could have just posted the nom without any condescension, especially when it's quite clear that the event has been ignored on the past on an inconsistent rationale, one which is conveniently overlooked when the news is "big" enough like the below-mentioned US election, which saw no prose update when it was posted. But I can't swear you out for that, please please please, can I? GRAPPLEX09:47, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You're going with the "two wrongs make a right" argument? Jayron32 posted both items prematurely. In this instance, he merely criticised the nominator's rudeness (subsequently acknowledged to be a deliberate ploy intended to generate an emotional response that would get the item posted immediately). —David Levy16:29, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No, I'm going with the "don't act like a condescending dick about a valid point" argument; regardless of motive the nominator was rightly entitled to point out the discrepancy between when a significant update is expected and when it's waived. GRAPPLEX19:34, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly, the nominator drew no such comparison. He/she attributed past omissions to the sentiment that "Oh, it's only the CFL", combined with "some biased admin [coming] along and [finding] some silly reason not to post it" (an outright lie, self-described as a "cheap tactic" employed for the purpose of "manipulation"). No mention of article updates (let alone a double standard regarding when they're required) was made. Secondly, you didn't merely condemn the inconsistency; you opined that this item should have simply been posted. How is that not a "two wrongs make a right" argument? Thirdly, on what do you base the assertion that such a "discrepancy" (related to subject matter) exists? Again, the administrator who posted the U.S. election item prematurely also posted the Grey Cup item prematurely. The problem is that certain admins sometimes neglect to uphold the update requirement, not that certain topics are systematically favored in such a manner. —David Levy21:23, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I did not insist this should have automatically been posted, but that it should not be overlooked; there's a difference. Frankly I feel that sporting events and elections could be considered "updated" with a result rather than needing a meaty text update, but that has no bearing here as I didn't bring it up earlier. I simply responded to the tone of Jayron's response (strange that isn't the "two wrongs" you're picking up on as it actually is something the phrase describes) by explaining that the nominator would be expected to be tetchy given the sporting events that could be seen as being on par with this one that went up with no fuss, not demanding this be posted promptly. The fact that the same editor posted both of the stories with no updates should speak further to the baselessness of their condescending remarks, as they're the editor responsible for introducing the slippery precedent of "X was posted with no update, why wasn't Y?". As for the comparisons being drawn, the nominator lamented past Grey Cups not being posted; they weren't posted because of their lack of updates; there is now a case of recent stories being posted with no updates which seems to create a disparity between what goes up with what content. This is a pretty simple train of thought to follow without needing to spelt out. I guess I'll think twice before taking someone to task for their holier-than-thou tone in future lest I find my mouth full of someone else's words again. GRAPPLEX21:38, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not defending Jayron32's premature postings. (I await his explanation below.) I'm noting that this problem (about which I've complained on multiple occasions) has far more to do with certain administrators than it does with certain subjects. Past years' Grey Cup events weren't discriminated against because they pertained to Canadian football. The items were omitted because the nominations happened to be evaluated by admins who applied our inclusion criteria properly. Other items, whose nominations happened to be evaluated by admins who didn't apply our inclusion criteria properly, have slipped through inappropriately. I don't condone that in the slightest, but it has nothing to do with "biased admins" "find[ing] some silly reason" (as the nominator falsely claimed, without even mentioning the lack of an article update). —David Levy22:30, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It was not an "outright lie", because it DID happen last year. And I've seen plenty of cases of admins picking and choosing what they post, and I've seen several cases of one admin over-ruling the consensus of several people. It was pointing this out in the nomination that was the tactic. Either way, I'm not sure what the point of continuing this discussion is, because I can't see anything good coming of it. -- Scorpion042221:40, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The article update requirement is plainly and unambiguously stated in the ITN inclusion criteria, and it was plainly and unambiguously cited when the item was omitted. It's appropriate to criticise the rule's inconsistent application (as I've done on multiple occasions), but your disingenuous claim that "some biased admin [came] along and [found] some silly reason" has absolutely no basis in reality. —David Levy22:30, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Lihaas, I really don't know what your problem is. This is the third time you've brought this up in response to me insisting on an update. As I told you the first time, I did not post the U.S. election story, so stop mentioning it every time I say the word "update". -- tariqabjotu16:37, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've suggested nothing of the sort. I merely seek to identify the cause (in the hope of avoiding similar situations in the future). This isn't a personal attack. I've made mistakes with main page content too, and I've tried to learn from them. —David Levy23:33, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
OK. If you're prepared for the full explanation, here it is: My goal was to see the article improved, and I thought that exposure on the main page would spur that on. The article had a bare minimum update (a few sentences in the lead and in the infobox), and the quality of the rest of the article was pretty darn good; better than a lot of the sports articles we get through here. When I posted it, I thought to myself "Well, it isn't perfect, but it is ITNR, so it would go up if there was a few more sentences of an update. What the heck, lets just post it and see if being on the main page attracts enough attention to get it expanded, since this is a really good start as an article". Or, as I explained originally, because I am a bad person. Whichever reason people wish to believe about me, I am comfortable with. I stand by the posting, both when I did it, and especially with the state it is in now. If anyone wishes to demand that my admin bit is removed for this, they are free to make that request from ArbCom. --Jayron3204:03, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Pull immediately Before anybody complains here, I have absolutely no problem with the concept of the Grey Cup being posted. But it still has to have an update just like every other article that's posted. This has absolutely no update beyond a single sentence in the lede and the changing of future tense to past tense. It doesn't even have a game summary section. Pull it, get someone that knows what the heck went on (I don't) to give it a proper update, and then if and when the article is properly updated, support. jcgoble3 (talk) 06:54, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Just as a general notice, I updated the article with a game/scoring summary as well as the winners of the two MVP trophies. No doubt the article will be updated as more information (TV ratings, reaction to the game and halftime show, etc) comes in, but for now I believe I have sufficiently updated the article. --PlasmaTwa208:32, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, i know the whole deal about reliable sources, but to my defence the article that I used as an example did not include sources within the summary either, and it was two in the morning. Cut me some slack lol. --PlasmaTwa216:32, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
And in reply to Scorpion4022, rejecting the Grey Cup on the grounds that it isn't notable enough is not a valid reason for rejection. The past articles simply have not been updated within the small timefram ITN requires (some not at all). Instead of complaining about biased admins, please feel free to update the article yourself so I don't have to stay up till 2:30 in the morning doing it myself. --PlasmaTwa2
You expressed insincere "doubt" that the item would be posted, purposely manipulating an administrator to do so prematurely? Why did you engage in such a ploy (about which you appear to be boasting)? Why did you want the blurb to go up "immediately", in the absence of a significant article update? —David Levy16:19, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Expressing sincere doubt is justified, I would argue. The Grey Cup has been on ITNR for at least two/three years and has never been posted until this game. However, as I said before, this is due to a lack of update and it would have been more productive to expand the article than to complain about it. it doesn't take a whole lot of time to provide a decent update. --PlasmaTwa216:32, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Right. And this lack of updated was noted every time it wasn't posted. The attack by Scorpion was baseless, and I am rather furious that he's boasting about his baseless attack rather than retracting it. -- tariqabjotu16:37, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Scorpion0422 "knew" that the complaint would cause the item to "get posted immediately", so the expression of doubt that it would be posted at all obviously was insincere. I agree with you, of course, regarding the update issue. —David Levy16:49, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've seen many different forms of manipulation here, both by admins and nominators, so I figured it's the norm. For example, claiming an admin that posts a blurb you opposed is biased, so the blurb can be immediately pulled (such as one on the canonization of new saints a month or so back). I've seen a number of worthy blurbs not posted because some users played the politics game better than others. The difference is, I openly admit that I had to resort to such cheap tactics to get something posted. If I hadn't, the nom probably would have lingered for days before being dismissed as being outdated. -- Scorpion042218:02, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've seen many different forms of manipulation here, both by admins and nominators, so I figured it's the norm. You observed a recurring problem and decided that contributing to it was the appropriate course of action. For example, claiming an admin that posts a blurb you opposed is biased, so the blurb can be immediately pulled (such as one on the canonization of new saints a month or so back). In the discussion, the posting administrator actually supported the item two hours earlier (noting that "it's embarrassing that this isn't on the front page already"), so I don't see how one can reasonably assert that he was impartial. And that wasn't the sole factor in the decision to pull the blurb. I've seen a number of worthy blurbs not posted because some users played the politics game better than others. And rather than seeking to counter the nonsense, you decided to join in. And now you're bragging about it. The difference is, I openly admit that I had to resort to such cheap tactics to get something posted. Or you could have simply updated the article. If I hadn't, the nom probably would have lingered for days before being dismissed as being outdated. ...if no one had bothered to update the article, as in years past. —David Levy18:27, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Actually Scorpion, Resolute and I were planning on updating the article with the sole purpose of getting it placed on ITN, so that fear is rather unfounded. --PlasmaTwa219:36, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Damnit, my team looked like fools all night long, and even I'm not this angry! At any rate, I've cleaned up and referenced the game summary section, so I trust we no longer have any great concerns now? Resolute15:16, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If it's now sufficiently updated, there's no need to pull it. That said, Scorpion should probably be aware that attempting to manipulate the ITN process is disruptive, and I would hope he has no intention of engaging in such behaviour in future. I'd hate for that kind of poor conduct to become the norm, or to rise to a level that required sanctions. – NULL‹talk› ‹edits›00:19, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
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]
Oppose Not a sovereign state. We rejected San Marino for dubious reasons, we should reject this for much more sensible ones. They're not independent, they're not suitable for the front page doktorbwordsdeeds08:40, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on the grounds that they are not a sovereign state, nor is this a sovereignty referendum. We did not post the results of the 2012 Quebec election where the sovereigntists returned to power, so it would be a double standard to post the results of a similiar-sized region of Spain. --PlasmaTwa208:45, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Although the independentistas are expected to take sixty percent of the seats between them, the Main independence party lost seats it was expected to hold and the total is less than the two-thirds that was hoped for as a psychological boost to the cause. μηδείς (talk) 17:18, 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]
I am very sympathetic to an oppose here on the grounds that such fires are police blotter material, not encyclopedic material. But surely this has got to be an exceptionally large toll even then? I clicked on your link, IP98, thinking I'd get some statistics. Why am I looking at an image from google maps? Will I see the people have horns and tails? Or are being attacked by dragons? μηδείς (talk) 02:48, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated 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):[8] 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[citation needed] 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):[11][12] 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):[17][18] 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 [20] 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." [21] --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]
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: