Open main menu

Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates/April 2010

This page is an archive and its contents should be preserved in their current form;
any comments regarding this page should be directed to Wikipedia talk:In the news. Thanks.

Archived discussion for April 2010 from Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates.

April 30

ITN candidates for April 30

Death of Gerry Ryan

- Nom - SiMioN.EuGeN (talk) 07:06, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

(Weak) Oppose, a random talkshow host? Nah.  f o x  09:33, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
More than a random talkshow host. He is said to be the person who revolutionized Irish radio. He was considered to be an 'institution'. His programme broke many taboos and was respected by many. Chris Evans from the BBC expressed sadness along with the Taoiseach (Prime Minister) and President of Ireland. (If anyone cares, there is a substantial update)   Cargoking  talk  11:39, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Support since there is a more than substantial update and the opposition's arguments are, with all due respect in this case, unconvincing. His death apparently brought an entire country "to a standstill". Also, the book of condolence signed by hundreds of people on day one alone, reactions from politicians, including current and former heads of state and government. International coverage, for example, in The Vancouver Sun, The Guardian, Australia's Herald Sun, Times of Malta and The Daily Telegraph. It is my belief that this is the death of someone who had a significant contribution/impact on the country/region and was a very important figure in their field of expertise, and was recognised as such (even by broadcasters outside his own country). This person was in the middle of a highly successful decades-long career on national radio, appealed to several generations, had presented their last show less than 24 hours before their death and was not expected to retire any time soon. At the very least they are not "a random talkshow host" if the reaction is anything to go by. But I don't expect this to lead anywhere. --candlewicke 19:41, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Alright, I've made it weak. I still don't believe he's a big enough loss to warrant inclusion.  f o x  22:05, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. Sorry, I just don't see the significance. Modest Genius talk 00:44, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Belgium Burqa ban

Belgium becomes 1st European country to ban the burqa (Washington Post)--Wikireader41 (talk) 01:26, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Support. --candlewicke 02:27, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Oppose as premature. The bill won't become law until the Senate passes it (which is seen as highly likely,, but you never know). Will support when it actually becomes law. --ThaddeusB (talk) 02:36, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Oppose As per above. --yousaf465 09:16, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Goldman Sachs

I hesitate to nominate this since an ill-timed "renomination" took place yesterday; however, there has now been a real development, so I thought I'd throw it out there...

In the original discussion a significant portion of the opposition was based on it being a civil case only. That is no longer the case. --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:14, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure. I'm a lot less averse to the idea now that there's a criminal case, but I'd be inclined to wait fir the outcome of any litigation. That said, I'm not a huge fan of that rule and this could take years to conclude and is news now. All things considered, neutral for the minute. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:28, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose unless/until there's a conviction. Modest Genius talk 20:32, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose DoJ can investigate anything; I'd be likely to support an indictment in this case, but not just the opening of a probe. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 20:36, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
Support this is a huge story regardless of whether a conviction happens or not.--Wikireader41 (talk) 21:10, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
Actually I'm inclined to agree with Brad- an investigation doesn't mean much, but I could get behind posting an indictment despite the convention for only posting the results of litigation. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:37, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
I don't think most ITN people understand the way this works. The major impact comes when the story first breaks, which in this case was last week with the SEC lawsuit. Today's news from the Justice Department, while significant, is not the key thing -- I believe the US attorney's office said they always review high-profile cases like this to see if it falls under their jurisdiction. (Although if it gives us reason to finally put the Goldman thing up, so much the better.) There's probably not going to be a conviction. Goldman is probably going to come to a settlement with the SEC in which it will pay a fine and probably make no admission of wrongdoing. That will have far less of an impact on the markets and on government than last week's announcement of the SEC lawsuit. It was the charges that led to the evaporation of billions of dollars in market value and that got Congress all worked up. That's why pretty much the entire world media made it such a huge story and why Goldman executives were testifying to Congress on live TV the other day. When the settlement comes, it will be "old news" and probably not have nearly the same impact. We should have these things on ITN when the break (assuming there's quality Wikipedia content to link to), because that's when people will be coming to Wikipedia searching for information on the topic. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 23:43, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
The entire world media?[citation needed] HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:49, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
I'm with HJM and Brad on this. I think our rules for court cases are a bit too strict, and I could support posting the notice of a formal indictment, but a simple "police" invesigation is not enough. Goldman Sachs is not a living person, so BLP doesn't strictly apply, but the presumption of innocence in criminal prceedings is not there for nothing! Physchim62 (talk) 00:07, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Comment the point here is NOT that Goldman Sachs is guilty or innocent. the reason i think it belongs because it meets WP:ITN & is a very significant 'news' story 'widely' reported by world media and likely to be of interest to readers 'all over the world'. I tried to actually look up how widely this was reported and here is what I came up

North America

[1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]

South America [7]


[8], [9], [10], [11], [12]


[13], [14]


[15], [16], [17], [18]



Oppose We never highlight criminal cases unless a verdict has been reached. HonouraryMix (talk) 07:41, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Oppose per HonouraryMix and the fact that it's just opened. We can't set the precedent of putting every opened case up.  f o x  09:35, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Oppose per the many users above who have stated that we only list verdicts on ITN and not charges --Daviessimo (talk) 16:19, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Support I have no idea where the 'we only post verdicts' thing is coming from, a far as I'm concerned, we post it when it's in the news, which seems to be right now. Random89 18:04, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Expo 2010 Shanghai China

Expo 2010 Shanghai China. Every significant news agency will show the expo. This picture is good for the main page of . --Dialogue.zh (talk) 06:54, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

We have this item down below with good enough support.--yousaf465 07:01, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
I removed your picture from this page. It is copyrighted and fair use is only allowed in articles (and then in a limited set of circumstances) - Dumelow (talk) 08:20, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Spinoloricus cinzia

Scientists discover Spinoloricus cinzia, the first animal species to be named that does not require oxygen at any point during its life. Source Rabbit Seasoning (talk) 01:18, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Support. Interesting discovery, though the article could use a little work- another paragraph or two would be nice. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:20, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose - unfortunately the discovery was announced back on April 9, so its too stale to post at this point. --ThaddeusB (talk) 02:38, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
I added some more info to the article. I just found out about this subject today, and I do hope that the lateness of my nomination does not prevent it from being included. Rabbit Seasoning (talk) 02:59, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
ITN items go up in reverse chronological order. Unfortunately this item is older than the oldest one currently on the template, so can't go up. I would encourage you to take it to WP:DYK though. Modest Genius talk 20:50, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Oppose If you can add another 1,249 characters of prose, it will work well as a DYK hook, but it is a little too stale for ITN at this point, sorry. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 08:42, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

April 29

ITN candidates for April 29


Nom: article will need a bit of work (which I'll do tomorrow if no one else does it first), but this appears to be a highly significant drug approval. --ThaddeusB (talk) 02:49, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
Support its the first cancer vaccine approved by the FDA.--Wikireader41 (talk) 02:56, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. Maybe not as significant as DCA, but a major step forward in cancer research approval. ~AH1(TCU) 23:54, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
Comment: article is updated and ready to go. The Wall Street Journal says "The approval of Provenge is a dramatic development in the fight against cancer and could pave the way for a host of similar therapies" [20] --ThaddeusB (talk) 02:25, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Any more remarks? -- tariqabjotu 11:44, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Support as above, this is a big step forward. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 12:09, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Oppose, a treatment that costs 93,000 USD and extends someone's life four months? Calling this a vaccine is a little strange- not in a clinical sense- but in the traditional layman's understanding of a treatment that prevents disease. It's not the "first cancer vaccine", just the first of its type, and in general, I'm against putting commercial stories such as this on the main page- it serves to give even more free publicity to the company. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 12:14, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Oppose If it really costs $100k and only extends people's life by 4 months its not that impressive or value for money for anyone but the very rich. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 12:52, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
I don't think the cost is very relevant. The first of anything is usually very expensive, and many existing cancer treatments cost in excess of 10,000 per month, so the cost is not excessively out of line with existing treatments. --ThaddeusB (talk) 13:44, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Comment this really is the first commercially available cancer vaccine. the theoretical concept that it may be possible to immunize your body against cancer has been around for a hundred years. this is the first time it has been shown to work. hopefully it will lead to new category of cancer therapeutics. to put the survival statistics in perspective few treatments for advanced cancer have been shown to prolong life by 4 months on the average. the cost though stunning for non US readers is par for the course in US. would we have rejected an ITN item in 1903 about Wright Flyer just because it flew 125 feet in its first flight ?--Wikireader41 (talk) 13:22, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Except to most non-technical readers, Gardasil was the first. (Yes, I know, not really, it's an HPV vaccine not a cancer one. But to the average layman...) --Bradjamesbrown (talk) 13:30, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
Gardasil is a vaccine to prevent a viral infection (HPV) which in some cases may lead to cancer. Hepatitis B vaccine was the first vaccine against a virus which can cause cancer Hepatocellular carcinoma. BTW Gardasil has not been proven to prolong survival by even one minute.--Wikireader41 (talk) 16:12, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

China stabbings

Oppose fortunately, nobody was killed in this attack. Also, these seem to happen every week in China. ~DC Talk To Me 19:42, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. Sounds serious enough despite the lack of death. --candlewicke 20:47, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose Even if there were any death, the event is not notable beyond novelty. FixmanPraise me 23:52, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose on the basis that there have been three attacks of a similar nature in the space of a week (another one occurring this morning [21]) --Daviessimo (talk) 09:14, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose The one of these to post would have been the eight deaths last month; these are too common and too individually-insignificant at this point. The only thing that might work at the point would be something like 2010 school stabbings in the People's Republic of China. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 09:27, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

World Expo 2010 opens

Strongest support - this is the largest world's fair, possibly event, in history. The opening ceremony will happen in a few hours. Many heads of states will be there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hyperspacing (talkcontribs)
Support - although I believe it doesn't actually open until tomorrow. --ThaddeusB (talk) 19:07, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Support Happens 30 Apr., which is today in the PRC. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 19:15, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Yes but it doesn't open at midnight :-p --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:17, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Support this seems like a big deal. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 19:49, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Strong support. This should be in ITN/R. Roast chicken costs 1160 Yuan each! ~AH1(TCU) 23:55, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Agreed that this should be a regular posting. For those who are interested: big ones like the this universal expo in Shanghai are held every 5 years. A smaller specialized expo is held in between those five years. by Hyperspacing
Support Can't say more.--yousaf465 02:13, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
Note: The event doesn't officially open until Friday night in China (several hours from now). As such, lets hold off on posting "Expo 2010 opens" until it actually does. --ThaddeusB (talk) 02:35, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
Support - significant event so definitely ITN worthy, although I agree with Thaddeus that we should wait until it officially opens before we post it --Daviessimo (talk) 09:10, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. The opening ceremony has begun. May I suggest this photo of the Expo Axis main building as a front page picture? Arsonal (talk) 14:13, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
Yes, this is good for the front page.--Dialogue.zh (talk) 16:45, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
--Adjectpiture (talk) 16:47, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
  • Posted. Cenarium (talk) 15:30, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
    • I have removed the item. The Expo 2010 article has not been updated at all; it still looks like the event will be happening in the future, even in the "Opening ceremony" section. -- tariqabjotu 15:41, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
      • Noting that I updated the article and Tariqabjotu re-added the item. Cenarium (talk) 18:24, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Oil slick in Gulf of Mexico

I know we featured the original incident, but this seems a highly unusual event, it's being compared to the fires in the aftermath of the first Gulf War and is attracting a lot of media attention not just in the US. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:15, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. especially since the US military seems to have been called in to help.--Wikireader41 (talk) 14:44, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Note: I've made a small update at Deepwater Horizon drilling rig explosion#Oil leak. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:19, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Just coming across that Gov. Jindal has declared a state of emergency in Louisiana, and that the spill may reach land Friday evening. Support Bradjamesbrown (talk) 17:33, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. I've seen the US Coast Guard describe it as the largest oil containment effort they've ever undertaken. (Not yet, the largest spill by number of gallons, but it covers a huge swath of ocean.) Dragons flight (talk) 17:50, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Comment looks like this has the attention of POTUS Obama Administration Escalates Response to Gulf Oil Spill--Wikireader41 (talk) 18:21, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Support, significant spill and the article looks good. Modest Genius talk 19:17, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Support, Perhaps somehow include the US Military involvement in the feed, and perhaps the fact that the leak is still uncontrolled? I'm not sure how long is too long for these things, these are just thoughts. It should go up in some form regardless.Aalox (talk) 19:27, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Update should now be sufficient for ITN criteria, but I'll keep working on it. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:13, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. SWAT teams have been sent in. The spill is five times larger than previously thought and could take months to cap off completely. A hurricane in a few months' time could seriously damage the surrounding areas with oil. ~AH1(TCU) 23:57, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. Surprised this isn't up already. That blob is now bigger than Rhode Island. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 00:14, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Posted While I think the inclusion of the size of the spill looks a bit unwieldy on ITN, I think it's extremely important to the story; hence, I put it in. -- tariqabjotu 00:21, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
I don't think that size is correct, actually. The Telegraph says, "The slick is estimated to cover an area 105 miles by 45 miles, or 4700 square miles." That would be true if the slick were a rectangle, but it's not. The Wall Street Journal and CNN are saying 600 square miles (actually not as big as Rhode Island). -- Mwalcoff (talk) 00:38, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
Links? On what date? Because that's a significant difference. Even if it's not taking up the full 105 mi by 45 mi area, 600 sq miles is practically nothing of that. A lot of sources also mention "almost the size of Jamaica", which is much closer to 4700 sq. mi. -- tariqabjotu 00:55, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
CNN: "Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal on Thursday declared a state of emergency ahead of the oil slick's arrival, warning it covered as much as 600 square miles of water."
Wall Street Journal (from 7:51 p.m. Eastern tonight): "The slick spans about 600 square miles."
If you look at photos (as in the WSJ article) you can see the slick takes up only a small portion of the 105 mile by 45 mile "rectangle" you would draw from its greatest north-south and east-west distances. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 01:37, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

The bit should imo be reworded to make mention of the oil reaching the coast, controlled burning is not that significant. Suggestion: "The oil spill resulting from the explosion of the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico reaches Louisiana coast." Cenarium (talk) 15:20, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

No objection here if you want to go ahead and do it- the blurb's probably a little outdated now. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:33, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

April 28

ITN candidates for April 28

China stripped of 2000 Olympic medal

China was stripped of a bronze medal in women's team gymnastics in Sydney for using an underage athlete. Controversy that has been around, really big in 2008. US will now take the medal. NYT. Grsz11 12:20, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Oppose That this took a decade is the story, not that it happened. The People's Republic cheated, got caught, and because they had the 2008 Games just now is getting called on it. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 14:18, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

First bio-artificial trachea in humans

Is this important? --candlewicke 21:03, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Russia releases Katyn doccuments

Nom. There was strong support to post a joint memorial of the Katyn Massacre by Polish and Russian officials but that was probably bumped off by the Polish president's plane crash. I submit this event as a good hook to the Katyn massacre, which has been a key issue in Poland–Russia relations.--Johnsemlak (talk) 18:05, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
It should be noted that they were declassified and put in the national archives in 1992. They have just digitised them and put them on the web - Dumelow (talk) 19:37, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
That's correct. The move is primarily symbolic, but an important gesture.--Johnsemlak (talk) 19:40, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. The Katyn massacre is now probably more familiar to most people due to recent events. --candlewicke 20:11, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. As I recall, it probably would have gone up if it hadn't been overshadowed by the plane crash, which, quite rightly, bumped it off. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts?
Oppose - The only justification to publish this minor document release seems to be that the previous (much more significant) gesture got overshadowed. IMO, that is not a good enough reason to post this. --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:46, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose per ThaddeusB. --PlasmaTwa2 21:46, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. Even without the plane crash, the release of these documents would likely still have been siginficant. ~AH1(TCU) 22:50, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose per ThaddeusB. Putting them on the web is not news. De-classifying them in 1992 was news.--Chaser (talk) 16:56, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Cape Wind approved

I'm throwing this out there for debate. It's making headlines across the country. The article could probably use a better update though. ~DC Talk To Me 16:50, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Neutral, leaning towards support. It is an interesting item, but I'm not entirely sold on it. It doesn't seem all that groundbreaking to me. --PlasmaTwa2 17:01, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose, seems overly local to me, and not a particularly significant installation in world terms (although it's larger than any wind farm currently operating, several are under construction already that will be bigger by the time Cape Wind opens). Plus the opening/inauguration would be better than the political approval. Modest Genius talk 17:30, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
maybe when it actually opens. It would be a lot better to say first offshore wind farm has opened rather than approved. -- Ashish-g55 17:40, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose per Ashish. A lot can happen between approval and actually opening. --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:05, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
I agree with "the late Senator Edward Kennedy". The BBC is only able to find seven sentences to write about this? "This project fits with the tradition of sustainable development in the area" and "State Governor Deval Patrick has argued the farm is key to local efforts" suggest this is exactly that. --candlewicke 20:08, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose - "nation's" first, yeah, but Denmark and stuff already have hundreds. Not internationally important by a long shot.  f o x  20:19, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. More or less per Fox. If it was the biggest or had some other extraordinary claim to notability, I'd be fully in support, but one offshore windfarm is a little underwhelming. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:50, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Support -- Example of quality Wikipedia content? . Literally in the news? . Of interest to many readers? . Encyclopedic? . Seems to meet all the criteria to me. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 00:37, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

It's the 'Of interest to many readers' bit that has the problem. There's nothing special about this wind farm, so it won't interest many people. Besides, the ITN criteria are not as simplistic as you imply. Modest Genius talk 01:09, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
That's a pretty heavily populated area up there in a part of the world where a lot of people use the English Wikipedia, so I think it would be of interest to many readers. And I kind of think the article wouldn't be the subject of as many news stories as it is if they didn't think it was interesting to a lot of people. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 02:30, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose Although this is great initiative from a Nation too dependent on blood oil and black coal, but I don't think we need this on ITN. Even-though I'm big fan of Wind and solar power but again I think we can leave our personal preferences.--yousaf465 02:10, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose also per fox. That the U.S. is going to build something that other countries already have built isn't all that significant. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 06:47, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

April 27

ITN candidates for April 27

KHL Champion

In Ice Hockey, Ak Bars Kazan defeats HC MVD to win the 2009-10 KHL Gagarin Cup.

Nom. This is the second most significant ice hockey league after the NHL. It is an international league with teams in 4 countries and players from over 10 countries.--Johnsemlak (talk) 15:16, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
I don't think I understand a word in that sentence. -- tariqabjotu 15:18, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Russia (and other former Eastern Block nations) has funny names for sports clubs. AK Bars is an Ice Hockey team from Kazan, a city in Russia. HC MVD means Hockey Club of the Ministry of Internal Affairs (essentially the club is backed financially by the police--not an unusual practice in Russia). KHL means Kontinental Hockey League. Of course, all this would be explained in the linked articles.--Johnsemlak (talk) 15:43, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose not that significant. ~DC Talk To Me 15:29, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
support per Johnsemlak -- Ashish-g55 15:34, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
To add some context here, the KHL was created when the Russian Superleague expanded into three neighboring countries (It has a team in Riga, Latvia, Minsk, Belarus and Astana, Kazakhstan) and 21 teams in Russia. It's definitely a lower level league than the NHL but it does have a number of NHL-caliber players. I would compare this item to the Nippon Professional Baseball, the Japanese Baseball League. We posted the winner of that in a single blurb along with the MLB champion last year.--Johnsemlak (talk) 16:23, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Support per Johnsemlak. --PlasmaTwa2 16:27, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Weak support as an international competition, though I'm not finding any real evidence of interest outside the CIS. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 16:33, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Weak oppose doesn't seem terribly significant and I opposed the IPL below (though if I had to choose between the two, this wins hands down). HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:42, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Weak oppose, even as a big ice hockey fan (and player) myself. We currently have two hockey stories per year (stanley cup, and olympics/world champs); I'm not sure we could justify a third. This would indeed be the best option if we did decide on three. Modest Genius talk 17:42, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Support since there's apparently support for a third ice hockey item. Modest Genius talk 19:59, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Neutral since now there isn't any. I'll stop changing my !vote now! Modest Genius talk 16:41, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Weak oppose per Modest Genius. Grsz11 17:50, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Support, with admission of bias as a huge hockey fan. This has the international significance everyone here loves. The captain of Russia's national team from the olympics is on the championship team. Random89 17:51, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Support - 2nd most important professional league after the NHL. --ThaddeusB (talk) 19:47, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose this is nowhere near populariity/commercial success of IPL. if we dont think that is deserving of ITN certainly this is not --Wikireader41 (talk) 20:08, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Support with no bias at all and include on ITNR as well. The Tri Nations (rugby union) (less countries) and the Six Nations Championship (two more countries) are already there. --candlewicke 20:18, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
That makes it eight supports. I think that's enough for it to be posted? I'll add this to ITNR as well. --PlasmaTwa2 00:36, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Don't. There's significant opposition.  f o x  20:24, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
It looks like the supporters have given a stronger argument for inclusion to me. Most of the opposition is based around the IPL not being posted. --PlasmaTwa2 01:34, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Strong oppose: Just few days back there was nomination for IPL season 3 and it was turned down saying the quality of league is not good. I would certainly like to know how come suddenly the same argument does not feature in this case? I suppose both games - ice hockey & cricket have limited presence across globe (as compared to soccer & tennis). Both the nominations are league games - ice hockey one gets passed through why not IPL? --GPPande 08:13, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Another point for opposing IPL nomination was the league had no interest outside Indian Sub-continent (let me remind you - it consists of 4 major cricket playing nations) and still considered unimportant. As compared to that - Gagarin Cup is played only in Russia. I think there should be detail discussion on this matter. --GPPande 08:21, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Well I would suspect the main difference is that in Ice Hockey the NHL and KHL are the two primary leagues and we already list one so there a valid argument to list the other. With twenty20 cricket the IPL is one of several domestic Twenty20 cricket leagues/cup and including the IPL by itself is, well, just like including the NHL without the KHL. --Daviessimo (talk) 08:49, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
I don't get what you mean by primary league? Is it based on fan following or revenues or most number teams participating in league/cup? If that is so then IPL satisfies all those criteria while other Twenty20 leagues do not. I think IPL is the most important Twenty20 league after the Twenty20 World Cup. --GPPande 13:37, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
The KHL and the NHL are not the "two primary leagues". The NHL is the sole primary league. Just because the KHL considers itself a competitor doesn't actually make it a reality. --Smashvilletalk 13:51, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. Do we also include the Japan Series champion because it's the second largest professional baseball league? We don't include the champions of the World Juniors, which is a more important hockey championship, so why should we include a championship from the glorified Russian Superleague unless we also include the champions from the other major leagues in Europe - notably, SM-liiga, Elitserien andCzech Extraliga? --Smashvilletalk 13:47, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
Last year we posted the winner of the Japan series, as I noted above. It was included alongside the World Series winner in the same blurb.--Johnsemlak (talk) 14:16, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
@GPPanda--Would you support this item if the IPL champion were also posted? Btw, the KHL does have 3 of it's 24 teams outside Russia.--Johnsemlak (talk) 14:16, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
I am not against any sport/cup/league games. All I am saying is similar rules should apply to KHL as were applied for IPL. Also, to your second point, last year - IPL was moved to South Africa because India did not provide security for the event due to General Elections. IPL does have huge fan following even outside the subcontinent especially in South Africa & UK. Last year this venue shifting news was posted on ITN. See here. Also, this might surprise you, but IPL winners for 2009 were also posted. See here. The what changed in 2010 to block IPL on ITN? Answer is simple, quality of the league/cup came into picture. So either the new rule be dropped for both IPL & KHL (in that case both be featured) OR KHL should not be featured. --GPPande 10:21, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
If we posted the Japan Series then I'll change to support. --Smashvilletalk 16:51, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Reconsideration of previously rejected matters

Arizona immigration law Not to beat a dead horse, but in addition to condemnation from President Obama, we've not got a boycott brewing against Arizona and Mexico putting out a travel advisory to its citizens warning of "an adverse political atmosphere" for its citizens in the state. Also, an voters' initiative campaign to repeal the law may be beginning. I think this is still fresh enough to put up (maybe not on top) if we want to reconsider. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 22:29, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Goldman Sachs I think we really dropped the ball on this one, but we have an opportunity to put things right with the company's CEO today denying wrongdoing to a US Senate committee. This could give us an excuse to put up a Goldman item now if we wanted to. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 22:29, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Oppose both. The first is too local, the second is not that fantastic or surprising given the recession as I said below. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:45, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
I don't want to restart the debate... but how is the Goldman thing "not that ... surprising given the recession?" Fraud (what Goldman is accused of) happens during good times and bad. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 22:48, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
And I'd like to point out: Google News hits for Goldman -- more than 5,000, and still it's the top story there and in many of the world's media. Google news hits for waragi -- less than 100. I know that's not the only criterion but holy cow, this is getting surrealisticly absurd. The name of the page is "In the news" people. "In the news." -- Mwalcoff (talk) 23:01, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
And what the heck, I'll mention this now because I never got a chance to respond to the accusations that the Arizona story was "too local" below. The Arizona story is not a local story anymore. It's a national, indeed international, story, with non-Arizona politicians like John McCain, Jeb Bush and the head of the California Senate weighing in. It is far less "local" of a story than the Austrian election or the latest clash in Darfur (tragic but not really news according to the "Man bites dog" theory). Oh, and the Arizona story has more than 7,700 Google News hits. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 23:01, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Non-Arizona politicians like Arizona Senator John McCain? -- tariqabjotu 00:07, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Oh, that's right, he does represent the Grand Canyon State. I meant that he's not a state-level pol. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 00:14, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
So a few Mexicans don't like it and a few big shot DC politicians are weighing in. So what? By the time anything comes of it (other than words) everybody will have forgotten and last time I looked on various news websites, some guy opting to be shot instead of a lethal injection was getting much more attention. As to Goldman, I'm confused now since people seem to have been arguing for the inclusion of a civil lawsuit, a drop in market value and now fraud. I can't support a nomination if I don't know what it's for, but I oppose the civil case (because it civil, not criminal) and I oppose the market value line. Also, Google news hits are a very inaccurate measure, especially for American stories because the American media is simply larger than that of any other country. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:16, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Both the Arizona story and the Goldman story were the top stories across nearly the entire U.S. national media, and some of the international media, when I proposed them. And I just checked my TV, and they were talking about Goldman on almost all of the news channels. As I mentioned on the talk page (where, as usual, hardly anyone noticed), if something is a big deal to The New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, LA Times, USA Today, Associated Press, NBC, ABC, CBS and CNN, I think we can assume that it has enough importance and interest for ITN. I'm sorry if I wasn't clear enough in explaining why the Goldman charges were important. I used the drop in the company's stock price to show the impact of the charges, but it was the charges themselves, not the drop in the stock price, that was the story and continues to be the story. But if you think that it's normal for a company of Goldman's size to drop more than 10% in a day, you're completely wrong. Regarding Google hits: It's true that the US has the largest media in the English-speaking world, but that's because most native English speakers, just like most English Wikipedia users, are American. There's nothing wrong with featuring more US items than items from any one other country. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 23:31, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
I'm neutral on both matters, leaning to support on the Arizona one. I'd just like to reply to Mwalcoff saying that there isn't anything wrong with featuring more US items because most users are from America. I don't believe that that is entirely correct, because that argument would never work for another country. If someone came on here and said we should be able to put on a few more British and Canadian items (because they are the second and third largest nationalities of viewers) - not as many as America, mind you, but a few more than normal - quite frankly, it wouldn't fly. --PlasmaTwa2 00:25, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I never said we should have more US items just to have more US items, although I think adjusting our standards so as to not exclude so many highly prominent national US items would make sense. And I have argued in favor of more UK and Canadian items. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 00:36, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

would Support both. If these stats are to be believed WP page views by Country US is certainly where most of our audience is. However it would seem that it would be very politically incorrect for me as an American to say that we should carry more stories from US in ITN. as it is Americans are thought to be arrogant and self centered ;-)--Wikireader41 (talk) 00:35, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
So let me get this straight mwalcoff. by your analysis only news that either happens in america or world news that matters to americans (a lot) should be posted? btw oppose to both for reasons already discussed in previous discussions. -- Ashish-g55 00:54, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
That is not what I said at all, and if you were to read what I posted on the talk page it would be very clear that that is not what I meant. I said an item that is nearly unanimously considered a top story by the entire U.S. national media should be deemed to have met the "importance" criterion for an ITN item. At no point did I say those are the only things that should be posted. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 01:05, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
the newspapers you listed are all american newspapers and obviously they will all cover the same topics (that is how newspapers normally work). So every single national news and quite a bit of local would be covered by all every single day (can prove it quite easily too). if its not they wouldnt be called newspapers. and in talk page you said items that are given "extremely" prominent coverage by the national media of the UK, Canada or Australia. So if its that extreme then most likely it also matters to americans... So yes ur analysis indirectly does mean what i've said above. -- Ashish-g55 01:17, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Run-of-the-mill items are not given highly prominent play by the entire U.S. national media. It generally takes a pretty big deal to be the top story everywhere. It's different in Canada, when something like the shooting of a police officer in Winnipeg can be the top story in the Globe & Mail, National Post and CBC and CTV national news broadcasts. That's why we need to require a higher level of prominence for a story in the Canadian media before we can say, "That must be important enough for ITN." -- Mwalcoff (talk) 01:30, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
First one is bit "not so international" and second one well it did trigged the crisis if I'm correct.--yousaf465 07:47, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose both, just as I did the first time around. Arizona is a local story, and Goldman is politicians playing politics, both full of sound and fury but rather lacking on concrete effects. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 11:57, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose as they are just a condemnation from President Obama and a denial of wrongdoing to a committee from the United States. --candlewicke 20:21, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. The Arizona immigration law is not just a local story. The Guardian has run one or more stories on it every day this week, see these search results. Le Monde has run stories on it here and here. China Daily has run several stories on it, see the top entries of this search list. And so on. The article itself includes citations from newspapers from India, Israel, England, and Canada, as well as from all over the United States. The article itself is quite solid, I think most editors would agree. Wasted Time R (talk) 03:38, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Support. The first is a story which has received international attention, and the second is part of the travails of a global company which has affected markets internationally. --CalendarWatcher (talk) 06:05, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose Just because a story has received international attention, doesn't mean it's notable. The immigration law concerns, directly, one state in one country. This isn't a law directly covering, say, the whole of the United States or the European Union. Goldman Sachs, to quote someone else above, is "politicians playing politics". HonouraryMix (talk) 09:04, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Greek bonds downgraded to Junk

Greek bonds downgraded to junk status. 1st EU country to have this happen.(BBC)--Wikireader41 (talk) 18:42, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Support - we could do with combining this with Greece's request for financial help from the E.U., which was nominated a couple of days ago --Daviessimo (talk) 18:56, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Support, naturally. Agreed too with Davie.  f o x  19:29, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. --candlewicke 20:28, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Support as above. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 20:41, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Comment I have updated 2010 Greek debt crisis which could be used.--Wikireader41 (talk) 20:58, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Comment, as I read it, this is only one of the ratings agencies which has downgraded as far as junk status. Still, it is an ongoing story, and probably a significant one. Physchim62 (talk) 21:38, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. Even if it's only one agency, it's far from an everyday event, especially for developed country and EU member. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:48, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Comment. Update looks good- certainly sufficient to meet ITN criteria. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:50, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. We should mention stocks dropping in Europe and the US (and probably in Asia tonight), as well as the simultaneous downgrade of Portugal by two levels. I think we need some kind of a kicker to help explain why this is important, since most people (at least in America) would say, "Greece? So what?" -- Mwalcoff (talk) 22:29, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
i dont think americans are that self-centered as you make it sound. An EU country's bond being downgraded to junk is important enough. i dont think we need to supplement by saying stocks went down 1-2%. which happens on almost daily basis for one reason or another. But i do agree with Daviessimo and support for combining it with the EU loan request since thats a consistent major news. -- Ashish-g55 22:45, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Oh Eun-Sun

Nom: Significant accomplsihment. Article will need as bit of work, but I'll address that later today. --ThaddeusB-public (talk) 13:39, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Comment - There is a dispute over whether she actually reached the peak of one of the 14, which could be problematic --Daviessimo (talk) 18:54, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Sudanese general election, 2010

The election was 2 weeks ago, but official result is just out. President Omar al-Bashir and his party won. ... (talk) 13:04, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Support per ITNR. --candlewicke 20:29, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Supportas per candlewicke.--yousaf465 02:44, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Posted - Dumelow (talk) 12:48, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Sierra Leone introduces free healthcare for women and children

(BBC). Sierra Leone has introduced free healthcare for pregnant and breast-feeding women and children under five. A big step in a country with the highest under five mortality rate in the world. Healthcare in Sierra Leone would seem a good target article - Dumelow (talk) 11:07, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Support though unfortunately I don't have any time to perform the update. --candlewicke 20:14, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
I have written a bit about it at Healthcare_in_Sierra_Leone#Free_healthcare_scheme - Dumelow (talk) 21:48, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose - good news for Sierra Leone women and children, but I'm not seeing much international significance. --ThaddeusB (talk) 19:51, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. Maybe not as significant as the American move, but significant nevertheless. ~AH1(TCU) 22:52, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Smoke bomb in Parliament of Ukraine

Nom - SiMioN.EuGeN (talk) 08:49, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Support Important story for both Ukrainian democracy and Ukrainian-Russian relations --ADtalk 13:08, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
I think the central article could be Russia–Ukraine relations -
Support. Thousands of demonstrators, smoke bombs, eggs and umbrellas, punches and handkerchiefs. This does not sound like an ordinary day of work. --candlewicke 20:22, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Comment--we already posted the agreement between Russia/Ukraine on the Sevastopol base.--Johnsemlak (talk) 14:57, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

40 year old border dispute between Norway and Russia settled

The settlement of a dispute between Norway and Russia over the maritime border in the natural gas rich Barents Sea was announced in Oslo today during Russian president Medvedev's state visit. __meco (talk) 10:31, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately none of our articles even describe this conflict which is one of the two most important outstanding issues between the countries, the other being pollution from a Russian nickel plant. __meco (talk) 10:31, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
This seems to be a rather obscure diplomatic event to the average WP user. It's not getting a lot of media coverage (even in Russia).--Johnsemlak (talk) 14:48, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. Channel News Asia, The New York Times, Deutsche Welle. --candlewicke 20:27, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Comment. Made a link to the new article Russia–Norway border. Oceanh (talk) 01:00, 28 April 2010 (UTC) (w/later revision)

April 26

ITN candidates for April 26

Air Arabia flight makes emergency landing in Pakistan

Air Arabia Flight 521 made an emergency landing at Karachi Airport due to a fire in the cargo hold. Smoke was reported coming from the cargo hold and the pilot decided to divert to Karachi, Pakistan. The plane landed safely at 4:10pm local time. There were no injuries amongst the crew and 155 passengers [23] --Saki talk 08:24, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Oppose Emergency landings are surprisingly uncommon, I've been through a few. While it might get coverage, this event shouldn't even have an article, per WP:AIRCRASH. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 08:37, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Manuel Noriega extradited to France

Former dictator of Panama, Manuel Noriega is extradited from the United States to France. Grsz11 23:28, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Support -saw this on the news this morning. If this was an average Joe, I would say no, but Norriega is a former (de facto) Panamanian leader --Daviessimo (talk) 06:58, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Comment Anybody else on this one? It seems Manuel Noriega has been updated substantially. Grsz11 22:28, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. --BorgQueen (talk) 02:51, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Any objections...? --BorgQueen (talk) 07:37, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Posted. --BorgQueen (talk) 10:41, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Belated support. Modest Genius talk 11:48, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
For the record, I can live with it, so call it support. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 11:54, 28 April 2010 (UTC)


Belgium's King Albert accepts prime minister's resignation over language row. Would love to give a source, but has just broken. —  Cargoking  talk  16:54, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

  • Support once we can confirm it. ~DC Talk To Me 16:55, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Support when there's an update. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 16:57, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Support - What's the target article for the update? Belgian federal government suggests it should be Leterme II Government, which doesn't exist. --ThaddeusB-public (talk) 17:03, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
And we have a source: Belgium's King Albert has accepted the resignation of Prime Minister Yves Leterme's government after the collapse of the ruling coalition, officials say.  Cargoking  talk  17:14, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
SupportWas also nominated earlier. --yousaf465 17:40, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Support the story in general, but suggest that we wait untilthe naming of a new Prime Minister before posting. Commentary in the Spanish press suggests that the wait will not be too long. Physchim62 (talk) 17:45, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Support Very important story. Truthsort (talk) 19:24, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Comment New Pm will be new item I think. What do you think ? --yousaf465 02:58, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
I agree with a couple of the comments above; waiting for the new PM might be best since, as I pointed out, the outgoing gov't doesn't even have an article. --ThaddeusB (talk) 03:33, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

The article Leterme II Government has now been created. No idea if it is sufficient for ITN, but it's a start... A new PM may well remain unknown for months (elections in June, and then probably months of negotiations before a new government is formed). Fram (talk) 09:20, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

A little more prose would be good, but I support the story, obviously- changes of heads of governments, especially when there's a crisis, are inherently ITN-worthy. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:40, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
This is ITNR, is it not? Support.--Johnsemlak (talk) 14:44, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

"Player of the Year"

Is this important enough? --candlewicke 04:58, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

No, we don't post league awards. ~DC Talk To Me 05:03, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
A global award, perhaps, but not a domestic one. Oppose. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 07:59, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose.--Johnsemlak (talk) 15:52, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Diocese of Scranton, Pennsylvania has new Bishop

Diocese of Scranton -- (talk) 20:46, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Oppose very local item, don't you think? --PlasmaTwa2 21:05, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose concur with Plasma. SpencerT♦Nominate! 21:11, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose The death of a Cardinal got turned down last week; the installation of a Bishop (not an Archbishop or Primate) is definitely too local, and an event that happens far too often anyway. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 01:55, 27 April 2010 (UTC)


Noma in Copenhagen is named |the best restaurant in the world. yorkshiresky (talk) 21:17, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

It's not every day (or ever, basically) we get a chance to post chance to post a culinary story, so I am willing to support given that an extensive update takes place somewhere - presumably in an article about the list (Restaurant (magazine) Top 50). I do not believe any other ranking would come close to the prominence of this list. --ThaddeusB (talk) 22:21, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose It would be nice to get a different type of story up there, but this is the wrong one. I don't know how restaurant rankings fare, but this is still a matter of opinion, more so than almost any other "best" list. Note that the restaurant doesn't even have a three-star rating from Michelin (it's two stars). And I feel part of the listing thing is just a marketing scheme; surely Noma hasn't changed a whole lot in one year, but they must jumble up the listings to make things interesting. Lastly, this doesn't seem to be getting a lot of attention from the media. -- tariqabjotu 00:29, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
The list is chosen by a 800+ member committee chosen for their culinary knowledge. Restaurant is just the publisher of the results - their editors don't personally pick the winners. --ThaddeusB (talk) 00:54, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose It's more of DYK type.--yousaf465 02:59, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose--Johnsemlak (talk) 03:21, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. "It's more international than it ever was, it doesn't just feel like this London-based thing any more". If ITN can have the richest man in the world then why not the best restaurant? --candlewicke 20:18, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Because richest man in the world is quantitative, and best restaurant is qualitative. -- tariqabjotu 20:40, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

April 25

ITN candidates for April 25

Indian Premier League

Chennai Super Kings defeat Mumbai Indians to win the third Indian Premier League tournament.

Significant coverage in international media CNN, Sydney Morning Herald, Al Jazeera. I think this can be an ITNR. SPat talk 09:25, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Strong support: I have even nominated IPL for ITNR on talk page. I think this should be added to WP ITNR as it is just once an year event and one of most watched event across cricketing world. --GPPande 10:13, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
strong support. also add to ITNR -- Ashish-g55 13:11, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Support and add to ITNR.--Johnsemlak (talk) 14:38, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
bolded article should be 2010 Indian Premier League instead -- Ashish-g55 14:55, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Support - major tournament of a very popular sport. 2010 Indian Premier League is the correct article to link to. The update appears to be 3 sentences of prose, which is probably sufficient, however I would prefer a bit more. I would also support ITNR. --ThaddeusB-public (talk) 16:22, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose We haven't any record of posting it earlier if I'm correct, I will quote the ICC's chairman in this reagrd "IPL is an India's Local tournament...". Also it has got too many match fixing and other controversies that I don't think neutrality tag is going any where soon. --yousaf465 17:42, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
since when are local tournaments off limits (i would rather not give examples... i can though)? If you look at the players that participated in tournament with the flags besides them then you will see its not that local either. And it was posted last year. -- Ashish-g55 18:27, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Strong support would support placing in ITN/R. this is a truly international tournament whether Pakistani's are invited or not. --Wikireader41 (talk) 21:55, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose because of league quality. Half the best internationals are not there because of international duty, and also, 63% of the playing positions are reserved for Indians, so you have the situation where top-5 world-ranked players such as Daniel Vettori and Muttiah Muralitharan are sitting on the bench while uncapped 20-yo Indian players with less than a year in first-class cricket are playing because of a quota. The quality of play is significantly below international standards at world cups, champions trophy etc. It is far from being the highest standard of the sport. YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 00:26, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
The top three teams from last year's IPL went to the 2009 Champions League Twenty20 and came 5th, 6th and 10th out of 12, if you use points and net run rate as the criteria. While other domestic club tournaments go up such as NBA, UEFA Champions League, they are clearly the top league in their sport with 90%+ of the best players actually on the park, not sub-par quota players. YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 00:39, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
i'm not exactly sure how international duty or 63% of the playing positions are reserved for Indians or that the players somehow came 5th, 6th and 10th matter to why IPL should go up or not (and have you looked at the big names that actually did play?). Its a highly prestigious league watched by 1.5 or so+ billion people around the world... The fact that people from around the world wanna play but are restricted alone gives it quite a bit of notability. -- Ashish-g55 00:49, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Because the standard of competition is far from the highest in the given field. 1.5_billion assumes that everyone in the cricket world watches, which they do not. If popularity is the determiner of whether it goes up or not then ITN should be filled up with Britney Spears, Lindsay Lohan etc and the results of American Idol or The Biggest Loser ahead of a parliamentary election. YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 00:52, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
i did not assume entire cricket world watches it. that would make it around 2.2 bil... -- Ashish-g55 01:02, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Where do the 2.2 billion come from. There are 1.4/5b in the subcontinent. another 100-150 million in Aus/RSA/UK. Where are the other 600m? YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 01:04, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Strong oppose, and strongest possible opposition to ITNR. See Wikipedia_talk:In_the_news/Recurring_items#Cricket:_IPL for discussions that were held last month on exactly this topic. This is a domestic league with virtually zero interest outside the subcontinent, and is in no way the highest level of the sport (nor even the particular format). Modest Genius talk 01:22, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
'Zero interest outside the subcontinent'? I find that a bit of an exaggeration. Certainly it involves players from outside the subcontinent. It's broadcast all over the world. Even if we only count interest there, the 'subcontinent' includes at least four very populous countries.--Johnsemlak (talk) 03:27, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
I was waiting for User:YellowMonkey comments, anyway this years edition was blocked in half of the subcontinent Pakistan talks of boycotting IPL 2011, Champions League and Cable operators to boycott IPL telecast the actually did it.--yousaf465 02:55, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Comment since when did Pakistan become half the subcontinent ??? IPL is one of the fastest growing sports leagues in the world 'and by a vast distance the most commercially successful cricketing venture since Victorian Englishmen first started charging people to watch'[24][25]--Wikireader41 (talk) 03:47, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose as YellowMonkey and Modest Genius say, this isn't the 'international' competition that some people try and claim it is, and while it does have a number of talented players, it is also missing a number of talented players. The strict media controls make it idfficult to watch the sport outside of India, particularly if you can't watch it live. Maybe the winner of the Champions League Twenty20 should get posted on here, but not just the IPL. Harrias talk 05:54, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose - we have the 2010 ICC World Twenty20 occurring in a few weeks, which is a far bigger interntational event that should be posted. I would also agree that we are better posting the winner of the Champions League Twenty20, which features the winning teams from all of the major domestic twenty20 leagues, of which the IPL is only one league --Daviessimo (talk) 07:13, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Comment Guys we got some really bad news just as some of us suspected Indian Premier League rocked by match-fixing claims against 27 players.--yousaf465 07:56, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Support per above. --candlewicke 20:32, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Well, I was going to abstain, but in the light of the match-fixing allegations, strongest possible oppose- it's not the highest competition in the sport, the figures of billions of viewers are disproportionate and an exaggeration, the quality of play is, as I understand it, not much better than English county cricket and now it seems the play wasn't even honest. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:39, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose per YellowMonkey and HJ Mitchell. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 20:43, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
i still dont understand what honesty has to do with it going up or not, they are only allegations. i just find it interesting that NCAA is somehow more internationally notable/more watched than IPL (i dont think i need to even prove that thats not true). but i guess when it comes to posting sporting events in north america ITN criteria's dont really apply. -- Ashish-g55 21:04, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Well all the baseball, ice hockey and basketball in the world does gravitate to the MLB/NHL and NBA; they play in the US leagues and leave their home leagues, and choose club over country, unlike the IPL because the internationals have not chosen club over country and are absent representing their country (and rightly so). As for NCAA I didn't support that basketball one, and as far as swimming goes, most of the swimming world (US, Europe, the few Africans and a minority of Japanese and Australian) do go through NCAA because there is no money in the sport (apart from Australian/Asian funding and communist conscription) and the free uni is actually worth more. The NCAA swimming is actually closer to World/Olympic standard than IPL is to international cricket. And as for this red herring about "popularity" and "notability", sporting merit has long been the criteria for ITN, not money/spam/advertising machine/TV figures. Even second-tier tennis tournaments or cycling classics (above the rest but below grand slams/tours) eg Cincinnatti, Indian Wells, Monte Carlo, Barcelona, Queens etc, or Paris-Roubaix, Liege-Bastogne-Liege, Paris-Nice have a higher turnout % of the top players than the IPL. You are India's answer to Mwalcoff and this "US Champions=World Champions" whether you are a NRI/PIO or not. YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 01:28, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Easy with the ridiculous personal attacks. You do not know where i am from nor am i trying to represent any country here. if you knew me any better then you would not have thrown around random accusations of me being India's answer or whatever. There are 5 supports i see above besides me... and my point was NCAA basketball was posted regardless of whether you supported it or not. And this not being posted only shows how north american sports dont need the same criteria as others. I will stop here since decent conversation most likely wont take place any more. -- Ashish-g55 05:57, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Ok time out... To be fair to Ashish, his userpage states he is Canadian and unless there was some mad invasion last night, Canada is not part of India! I would also have to disagree with the assertion that NCAA sports are always top level. The only reason the NCAA item was posted is because, as with a lot of US items, a load of users who never normally comment on a story all of a sudden appeared to proclaim their support and accuse those who opposed of some form of anti-American Euro-Asian-communist conspiracy. At the end of the day, people outside of America have heard of the likes Michael Jordan or Shaquille O'Neal and I'm fairly certain its not down to the prowess in college. On the subject of the IPL, I think many opposes have touched on this, but the fundamental issue for me is that the importance and popularity of this tournament outside the subcontinent is being hugely overblown and given that it is not the top level of twenty20 cricket (and thus can't get included on that ITN clause ;) there is no convincing argument for this to be included. --Daviessimo (talk) 07:12, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, on hindsight posting NCAA was a bad idea. –Howard the Duck 12:34, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Perhaps that's true but the NCAA item was supported overwhelmingly by mostly users who do regularly post at ITN/C and there weren't any accusations of "anti-American Euro-Asian-communist conspiracy", or even just anti-Americanism. Anyway, I think the NCAA is mostly irrelevant here. --Johnsemlak (talk) 17:12, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
"And as for this red herring about "popularity" and "notability", sporting merit has long been the criteria for ITN, not money/spam/advertising machine/TV figures." I don't agree with this premise. I haven't seen any ITN criteria that make sporting merit the single or even primary criteria for choosing sports items. We tend to prefer sports events with an international profile--that's the criterion I see applied most often. However, I believe that the economic impact and popularity of sports should be considered when evaluating sports items along with sporting merit. If sporting merit were the single consideration, then we should ax the Ashes from ITNR since its a competition between only two countries which aren't at the top of the world cricket rankings. However, we post that series due to its cultural significance and its popularity.--Johnsemlak (talk) 16:55, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

British government ordered to pay $650 million to Iran

By an international arbitration court in The Hague. Strangely, this seems to have been overlooked by the British media. Ha'aretz, Press TV, ABC News, Ynetnews, Sify. --candlewicke 02:13, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Please start a wikipage for this arbitration case. It's hard to say Yes or No without first reading what you want to showcase on ITN/MainPage. --PFHLai (talk) 03:26, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
I don't know what to do with it or where it belongs. I was just looking for the thoughts and opinions of others. --candlewicke 03:42, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Perhaps a new section in Iran – United Kingdom relations? --PFHLai (talk) 03:46, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Done. Thanks. ;-) An international arbitration court in The Hague rules that the British government must pay $650 million in compensation to Iran. --candlewicke 04:12, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Support This is an odd bit and surely anathema to the UK administration. I'm for it. __meco (talk) 06:10, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Support Obviously British media will not report it. Anyway I think update the article and then post it. Just post it now.--yousaf465 07:44, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Support Bradjamesbrown (talk) 08:05, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Weak support. Not an every day event, but hardly Earth-shattering either. The blurb should make it clear why the compensation is being paid: something like: The United Kingdom is ordered to pay Iran $650 million owed from a cancelled 1970s weapons contract. Physchim62 (talk) 08:14, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Switch to Oppose per Dumelow below. Physchim62 (talk) 14:49, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
It is being reported in the UK Telegraph and Independent. I suspect it is not getting much coverage because the Telegraph says the court case was decided in April last year and the MoD is now waiting for Iran to officially apply to get its money back. In addition Iran will not actually receive the money, it will go into a holding account totalling a billion dollars that cannot be transferred to Iran due to EU sanctions. Finally the money will not affect the UK as the government allocated £486 million to the High Court in 2002 prior to the judgement and it has only been ordered to repay £390 million. In summary: it happened a year ago, the funds are available but Iran has not asked for them and will not legally be able to receive them - Dumelow (talk) 10:13, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Support: Significant decision concerning relations of the two countries. --GPPande 10:17, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Clarification? In light of what Dumelow has said, and the changes he made to the article, what's the story here? The case was decided a year ago and the article doesn't make it clear what is relevant and news in April 2010. -- tariqabjotu 10:52, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose - evidently the actual event that happened yesterday was that it was revealed the British government is now stop refusing to pay the year-old judgment. That isn't a big enough event to make ITN, in my opinion. Also 650 million is peanuts to the government. As near as I can tell, the event has drawn almost zero international coverage at this time. --ThaddeusB-public (talk) 16:30, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

London Marathon

The Boston Marathon was recently posted after one record was broken. Several world records for running were broken here, according to the BBC. Princess Beatrice of York became the first royal to complete it as well. --candlewicke 02:06, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

What would be the target article?--Johnsemlak (talk) 02:30, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Support posting the real results: Tsegaye Kebede wins men's in 2:05:18; Liliya Shobukhova wins women's in 2:21:59. That is, assuming an appropriate target is found and updated. Oppose posting the many novelty "records" broken.--ThaddeusB (talk) 02:57, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Comment I get the impression you didn't read that BBC article, Candlewicke. -- tariqabjotu 03:00, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Support the major results if an article gets an update; but all the so-called "records" are utterly meaningless. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 03:02, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Support but the winners only. On a side note, perhaps the Boston, NY, and London marathons could make it to ITNR. Other major ones could be added too (the three I've mentioned are what I'd consider the biggest, but I'm not an expert on the field). ~DC Talk To Me 03:06, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
I concur that those are the biggest three and are ITNR worthy. --ThaddeusB (talk) 03:12, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
It seems a bit arbitrary to just choose those three. If we are going to pick some to put in ITNR, I would assume we should pick all 5 marathons in the World Marathon Majors. --TorsodogTalk 13:52, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
So, what happened at the 2010 London Marathon? Please stick at least a decent paragraph or two of prose (+Refs) to summarize what happened this year into the London Marathon article. With no updating, we have no updated wikipage to showcase on ITN. --PFHLai (talk) 03:23, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. I don't think this merits displacing other items of real news from their spots on ITN. __meco (talk) 06:13, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. Per meco. --GPPande 10:17, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Comment--The five World Marathon Majors are New York, Boston (posted just this April), Chicago, London, and Berlin. It does make sense to post all five as a matter of consistency. However, I personally think that's probably too many marathons to post every year--1-2 seems to be enough to me. Marathon articles aren't particularly well developed incidentally I've noticed. That said, I really don't know enough about the sport to say which marathon to choose. Boston is the oldest marathon by some distance. The New York one is also very important however (the London marathon was inspired by the New York marathon as mentioned in is article). It'd be good to get some comment by someone with some expertise in the matter. On this year's London marathon, we still need a decent target article.--Johnsemlak (talk) 15:32, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

In my estimation the level of prominance goes: Boston, London, New York, Berlin, Chicago. Boston and London get a lot more coverage than the other 3. As such, I would support Boston+London; Boston+London+New York; or all 5 as ITNR. --ThaddeusB-public (talk) 16:37, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
All five seems fine to me. ~DC Talk To Me 16:43, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
I don't know about New York and Chicago- Berlin generally goes up because it's a fast course and records are typically set there. SpencerT♦Nominate! 21:13, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. Meco's rationale is weak in that we aren't supposed to be opposing items based on a preference for the position of current items and we're going to be due an update before long anyway. Personally, I think we should post all 5 of the major mrathons- it's only 5 a year after all and we already posted Boston. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:00, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Comment: We still need an update. I don't think adding substantial prose to London Marathon is justified, so teh options are are a stand-alone 2010 London Marathon page or an update to the individual runner pages. If people express a preferance, I'll be happy to do an update this evening. I also agree with the comment above - our marathon coverage in general is pretty weak. --ThaddeusB-public (talk) 16:40, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
I'd say to update the winner's pages. That's how we worked it for the Boston Marathon. ~DC Talk To Me 16:43, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
I'll work on it. I prefer working on biographies anyway. Can we find a way to work in List of winners of the London Marathon, which is FL? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:47, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Something like '''[[Tsegaye Kebede]]''' [[List of winners of the London Marathon|wins]] the Men's [[London Marathon]]; '''[[Liliya Shobukhova]]''' wins the women's event. could work. --ThaddeusB-public (talk) 16:54, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
I decided to create 2010 London Marathon in light of a comment in the Telegraph that "nobody remembers the winners". It probably needs another paragraph or so before it can be posted. There are plenty of free images on Flickr, but I've yet to see one that would be really useful for ITN. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:00, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
  • 2010 London Marathon should now be in a postable state. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:28, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
    Looks good. I'd post it myself, but since I voted I'll leave that to someone else. --ThaddeusB (talk) 22:25, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
    P.S. In a couple hours we'll have more space again when the new FA rolls on, so the complaint about bumping a recent story will be moot. --ThaddeusB (talk) 22:28, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Posted. Nice work everyone. A bit short of time at the mo so if someone else wnats to update the pic pleas ego ahead - Dumelow (talk) 23:22, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Death of Alan Sillitoe

- Nom - SiMioN.EuGeN (talk) 14:06, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Oppose. Don't think the boy was one of the most prominent writers of his time at all, and the article has little on his actual death.  f o x  14:30, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
For those who don't know: BBC  f o x  15:51, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the link, Fox. I'm afraid I have to go with an oppose based on that and the quality of our article. An interesting gentleman, most definitely- interesting enough that I might do some work on the article, but I'm afraid his death is just not significant enough for ITN. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:59, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Oppose--not that prominent of a writer. No major awards won.--Johnsemlak (talk) 16:05, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Oppose I don't see a significant level of prominence. Truthsort (talk) 16:16, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

50 dead in post election violence in Sudan

(BBC) 50 people have died in after a company of 120 men of the the South Sudan army came under attack by nomadic Darfuri Arabs. Sudanese nomadic conflicts (an article probably familiar to ITN regulars) is a possibility for an update - Dumelow (talk) 13:11, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

On second thoughts I think I'll start a new article (and link it to the other one), there seems to be enough sources about this - Dumelow (talk) 13:20, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
I am working on it at 2010 South Darfur attack - Dumelow (talk) 13:37, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. Appears to be a significant attack, even for Darfur. However the article should probably be expanded further. ~AH1(TCU) 13:53, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Support on expansion.  f o x  14:29, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Support.--Johnsemlak (talk) 16:05, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Support posting eventually. I raised an NPOV concern I raised with Dumelow here. Admins should check this before posting. Input from others appreciated. resolved --Chaser (talk) 16:14, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Support Man that is a lot of deaths for this. Truthsort (talk) 16:18, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
I would support (basically per Truthsort, also because the election had received a reasonable amount of international coverage before it happened), but I don't see an update worthy of the name. If we post this, we have to be clear why it is important and we have to give our readers details: without that, there's no point in adding it to the Main Page. Physchim62 (talk) 14:53, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Austrian presidential election, 2010

A presidential election is to be held in Austria - Dumelow (talk) 23:36, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Comment. The incumbent president, Heinz Fischer, is almost certain to be re-elected: he has about 80% approval ratings, including in voter intentions. His re-election is almost "not news", although we do have free images of him ;) Discuss! Physchim62 (talk) 01:36, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
support regardless -- Ashish-g55 06:59, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
If I understand correctly, the President of Austria is a figurehead. That, plus lack of surprise in the win, and the general lack of media coverage as far as I can see leads me to Oppose, though if we must do as per ITNR then that's that.--Johnsemlak (talk) 11:42, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Lack of media coverage? I've just gone through all the bare URLs and there is coverage going back to early 2009. --candlewicke 03:23, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Weak oppose per the article- "Though theoretically entrusted with great power by the constitution, in practice the President acts, for the most part, merely as a ceremonial figurehead." HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:27, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
But what about the Queen? "She is politically neutral and by convention her role is largely ceremonial" :-) --candlewicke 03:23, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Support but after the results have been published.--Avala (talk) 14:33, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Support. --candlewicke 18:40, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Support After some significant cleanup is done to that article; all but one reference is a bare URL. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 22:41, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Problem solved, whew! :-) --candlewicke 03:23, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

I think this one is ready now. Heinz Fischer (pictured) wins the Austrian presidential election, 2010. --candlewicke 03:45, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

I would prefer:
File:Fischer Heinz 20040416 P4160034.JPG or File:Heinz Fischer, Technisches Museum Wien, 2009a.jpg are probably better images to use, rather than the one in which he is ostentatiously looking away from the rest of the Main Page! Physchim62 (talk) 14:22, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
@Candlewicke. When I mentioned the Austrian president was a figurehead (a word from our article) I knew the Queen comparison would come up. Elizabeth II is the queen of hundreds of millions of people and has been for over 50 years. Any change of the UK monarch would be the largest global news item by some distance. Absolutely no comparison with the President of Austria, a figurehead leader of around 8 million whose election is generating very little media coverage. I favor a general policy that we don't post the elections of only figurehead/ceremonial leaders and we consider the Queen to be an exception. We post A LOT of elections and changes in heads of state. I don't object the the policy generally but I think we can draw a line somewhere.--Johnsemlak (talk) 14:48, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
I was just thinking of raising exactly that point of WT:ITN ;) The other example is the Pope, who is Head of State of about one square mile, but whose death would be a no-brainer for ITN. This presidential election is not a no-brainer: that doesn't matter either way, as long as we recognize the fact. Physchim62 (talk) 14:57, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
The pope is, of course, the head of one of the world's largest religions, so I don't see that as a problem.--Johnsemlak (talk) 15:23, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
The death of the Pope should, IMO, produce two ITN items- the death of Benedict XVI, and the election of his successor, events that will be separated by at least a week, with no real upper bound. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 15:35, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Posted, although I got to say the update is a little weak. But it is an election, so I'm not sure what else there is to say. I probably would have opposed this nomination myself, but the people appear to have spoken. -- tariqabjotu 18:20, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

South Park depictions of Muhammad get censored

I'm not sure why no one has bothered to nominate this story which broke four days ago. I certainly think it merits an ITN spot. South Park controversies#Censorship of the depiction of Muhammad and several other articles have been updated with this. __meco (talk) 11:40, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Really? I think its spot at DYK is good enough. This is a story that has caught attention worldwide, but it seems primarily because it's an OMG-Muslims-angry-again story. It's quite obvious that this is nowhere near the scale of the Danish cartoons; it's just one group that no one has ever heard of making grandiose threats and a television network being over-cautious in response to them. And, as I said, it's the media jumping all over an otherwise non-major story. But kudos to the writers of 200 (South Park) (the article, I mean). -- tariqabjotu 11:49, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
I disagree with you. The Islamist onslaught on the core Western value of freedom of expression now has taken its latest toll as perhaps the least authority-conforming bastion also cowers to their terror strategy. I think South Park constitutes a milestone in this respect, and a very sad one indeed, one that warrants general attention. __meco (talk) 13:14, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
You didn't even attempt to hide your editorialization. Further reason why this shouldn't be on the Main Page; we're not here to make a point. -- tariqabjotu 01:07, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Any debate on the nomination is moot at this point. Items are sorted by the date they occurred, not the date posted. Thus, even if this was approved instantly, it wouldn't make it on to the template. --ThaddeusB (talk) 13:20, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
I beg to differ, its an ongoing story so technically its still occurring. The law was passed recently but the reactions and other developments are all very recent, its taken a national presence afterwards. Maybe I can rephrase or re-write the heading?--Theo10011 (talk) 13:31, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
How can the nomination window have expired on this story? The episode aired on April 21, and its posted on the news portal on the 22nd. __meco (talk) 13:40, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Because all current stories occurred on the 22nd or later. As it so happens, we have had an unusally large number of stories go up the last few days.--ThaddeusB (talk) 15:06, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
I'm not so familiar with ITN guidelines, but do they actually prevent this from being posted out of chronological order if a consensus were to gather for it? __meco (talk) 15:10, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
I suppose anything could happen, but if posted it would have to be at the very bottom of the list which means it would drop off as soon as another story was approved. --ThaddeusB (talk) 18:09, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Propose blurb:

__meco (talk) 13:55, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Oppose. The censorship of one TV series is not significant enough for ITN. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:58, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Sorry I should have indicated my comment above was for Thaddeus for moving my suggestion about the Arizona Immigration law below, merging it with the older post and not about South park. As for the south park news item, its not notable enough, and the story has been overshadowed as well, so I would Oppose, sorry.--Theo10011 (talk) 14:05, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
What to you mean the story has been overshadowed? __meco (talk) 14:08, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Ok let me rephrase that, the story is of lesser prominence now than before when episode 201 aired, almost 4 days later. The episode that started the controversy is more than 2 weeks old, the threat- about one and a half week, from what I have seen, after Comedy central's censorship there were no news-worthy developments, only reactions. this is ofcourse overlooking what someone already mentioned above, its a TV show, the notability of the story could be easily questioned especially for a Non-US reader. Thank you--Theo10011 (talk) 14:18, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
You vastly underestimate the circulation of this series worldwide, and of the ongoing news coverage this story is garnering. Go on Google News and try searching in different language editions and you will see this. __meco (talk) 14:32, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Trust me when I say this Meco, I dont underestimate south park's world-wide popularity, being a loyal viewer myself, currently there are 1800 sources covering the story on google news. Its just that the story wasn't notable enough, compared to some of their previous complications and controversies, it was an empty threat on some random forum that faded away. The voter above for example stated the exact same two concerns as well.--Theo10011 (talk) 14:38, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
The issue isn't whether the threat was real or not, but how the network decided to act, and reactions to that cowering. __meco (talk) 14:48, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose, I don't think this is quite notable enough for ITN, and it's a little stale now unfortunately.  f o x  14:28, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
I encourage you to go on Google News to ascertain that the coverage is worldwide and ongoing. __meco (talk) 14:34, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Was the story of the British teacher naming the teddy Muhammad put up?  f o x  15:24, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
The coverage is worldwide, yes, but so are many news items in the entertainment industry. Let's wait and see if this censorship actually causes something significant to happen, such as large scale protests, or drastic changes in government policies/laws regarding TV broadcasts. If it does nothing but incite a few loud mouths to talk louder, sorry, oppose. --PFHLai (talk) 15:25, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Obvious Oppose Just a simple case of censorship to respect another religions sentiments. Not a major event by any standards. --yousaf465 15:42, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
oppose for some obvious reasons stated above. although not for ITN, it is a major story on more moral standard... with issues against censorship, terrorism etc we will probably hear about this for long time. but wikipedia does not need to deal with that nor should it. -- Ashish-g55 01:30, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose A case of censorship on a TV show is not that notable in the grand scheme of things. HonouraryMix (talk) 14:12, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

April 24

ITN candidates for April 24

April 2010 tornado outbreak

  • 11 deaths confirmed so far, with much damage being reported in the deep south. As of 545pm Central time, over 40 tornadoes have been reported April 24th alone. Ks0stm (TCG) 00:21, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
I might support, but I don;t know much about tornado seasons. How uncommon is this for the US? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:29, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
For April, pretty uncommon; for the sometime during the season, not all that uncommon. That said, I support a blurb for the April 24 outbreak which has killed at least 9 people. --ThaddeusB (talk) 00:34, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Fair enough. I'll support this given that it seems out of the ordinary. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:39, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Is 9 a particularly large death toll for a tornado? --candlewicke 00:40, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Meh. There will be worse outbreaks over the summer. Weak oppose. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 00:44, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
If our list is accurate this will be the most fatalities from a US tornado since May 2008. Granted 2009 was a particularly light year for tornadoes. --ThaddeusB (talk) 00:57, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Neutral. If we post this, we must be clear as to why it is unusual. Tornados are not uncommon, and they can be deadly: why is this outbreak different from the others? Physchim62 (talk) 00:54, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Because 11 deaths and over 90 reported tornadoes within 3 days is unusual, especially in April. The last outbreak of this size was the February 2009 tornado outbreak in terms of deaths and the May 2009 derecho series in terms of number of tornadoes. Ks0stm (TCG) 01:43, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Last year doesn't make it seem particularly unusual... We would not normally post a story along the lines of "building collapses, 10 people killed" or "10 people killed on the roads of Somecountry yesterday": both are (sadly) far too common. Physchim62 (talk) 01:55, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Given that the United States averages less than 100 deaths a year from tornadoes since 1998, this could very well account for a tenth or more of the tornado deaths in the United States this year. Ks0stm (TCG) 02:36, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Could or will beyond any doubt? --candlewicke 02:39, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Most likely will, but it's still possible that it won't as we don't know how the rest of the season will turn out. If you go by the statistical average for the last ten years, it's almost for sure that it will. Ks0stm (TCG) 02:42, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

This has been the worst severe weather of the year thus far in the US, and this outbreak isn't even over! Truthsort (talk) 04:35, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Support. This is a major outbreak and the biggest one this year (even bigger than the unusual one in January)! How about "Large tornadoes strike Yazoo City and Durant during a tornado outbreak, killing at least 11 people and causing extensive damage."? ~AH1(TCU) 14:08, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose there will be worse outbreaks later in the summer. Posting an item in April because it is the biggest one of the year so far makes no sense. --PlasmaTwa2 20:36, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Update one of the tornadoes has been preliminary rated as EF4 with a phenomenal 149 mile long path. Ks0stm (TCG) 01:37, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
That definitely makes the event more unusual, but I already voted support once. :) --ThaddeusB (talk) 02:51, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

World Chess Championship 2010

moved to Wikipedia:In the news/Future events/2010#May 12

Death of Peter Porter

He is "recognised as one of the best poets of the second half of the 20th century" The Independent. "One of the finest poets of our time [...] In Australia he was considered English, and in England he was considered Australian" The Guardian. He won several awards including the Whitbread prize for poetry (1988), the Queen's Gold Medal for Poetry and the Forward Poetry Prize (2002) plus many more. He was also shortlisted for the T. S. Eliot Prize. Better Than God was published last year and The Rest on the Flight: Selected Poems is forthcoming so he was still active at the time of his death and beyond it. Obituary in The Daily Telegraph. --candlewicke 01:18, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Maybe, but the article is a stub. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:40, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Support - notability really exist - SiMioN.EuGeN (talk) 06:30, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Support--Wikireader41 (talk) 13:42, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
I admit a complete lack of knowledge with the subject matter, bit the fact the the majority of his article is just a list troubles me a bit as it suggests no one cared enough to write about him. Random89 16:28, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose - ordinary death of someone is not exceptionally notable. As near as I can tell, the death appears to have attracted very little international attention. --ThaddeusB (talk) 17:49, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose - This seems staggeringly non-notable.--WaltCip (talk) 19:24, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose per above. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 20:21, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
CBC, The Sydney Morning Herald --candlewicke 00:38, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Lotfi Raissi

Airline pilot Lotfi Raissi, falsely accused of being involved in the September 11 attacks on the United States in 2001, wins his legal battle for compensation from the British government after "nine years of hell". (BBC) (The Guardian) (The Age) (The Scotsman) --candlewicke 01:24, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Oppose. From what I gather, this was pretty much inevitable. The real story would have been his release imho. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:40, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose per WP:BLP if nothing else. "Man accused of worst crime of 21st century, not guilty, given compensation" isn't the kind of story I want on the main page. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 01:52, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose per HJM--Wikireader41 (talk) 13:44, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

April 23

ITN candidates for April 23

80 deaths in Uganda

We only have 100 words of prose, with only 1 bare URL as a reference. Let's wait and allow the article to grow a bit. Stubby pages should be avoided. Also, pls add to P:CE first, per Wikipedia:In the news#Procedural. Thanks. --PFHLai (talk) 18:38, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose for now, however I promise I'll reconsider if the article is sufficiently improved. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:45, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Comment: I do not believe the incident is notable enough for an article. The material would be better merged into waragi then left as a stand-alone article. --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:22, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
After a look for references, I have to say I agree this needs to be merged. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 20:26, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. I added it to the portal yesterday but didn't expect anyone to notice it. Now I have found the time to update it. 80 people die from blindness and multiple organ failure after drinking waragi (pictured) in Kabale. --candlewicke 02:36, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. This is a rather unusual wine safety incident. ~AH1(TCU) 14:10, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Is it going to be posted before time runs out? --candlewicke 18:58, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
The consensus still is pretty weak, IMO. And the page is awfully short for a stand-alone article, especially one featured on the main page. --ThaddeusB (talk) 19:19, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Concur as to the quality of the article- it only has 4 lines of prose- as to the consensus, I'll support if/when it's improved if that helps. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:24, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
If this is posted (I'm neutral), I think the blub should specify that it is methanol poisoning that killed the people: it is a well known hazard of drinking home-made spirits. Physchim62 (talk) 19:38, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
The article has a lot more than four lines of prose. The update alone is twice that. --candlewicke 20:09, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
I was referring to 2010 Uganda mass poisoning, which is the article mentioned in the nomination. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:39, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Yes the bold article must be this. - SiMioN.EuGeN (talk) 20:51, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
I wouldn't say it must be, but it would make sense. It still needs work, though, before it's even worth linking to it from ITN never mind bolding it. Two paragraphs of well sourced prose and a little bit of a lead section would do nicely. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:57, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
I still see no justification for the existence of 2010 Uganda mass poisoning, so I am against linking to it. If there is any unique material there it should be merged to waragi and redirected. (I have started a merge discussion.) I am neutral on an update linking only to waragi. --ThaddeusB (talk) 21:15, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
The article waragi has been updated sufficiently for some time now. Waragi can be the bold article as mentioned above. A separate article is not really necessary. --candlewicke 23:21, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Agreed that waragi is sufficiently updated. I do not object to it making ITN. --ThaddeusB (talk) 00:06, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Posted Not sure about the picture though. Is that a specific brand of waragi in that picture? It's okay for an article about waragi in general (with the poison case as just a section), but we don't want to inadvertently suggest that that's the poisonous waragi right there. -- tariqabjotu 00:34, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Police officers killed in shoot-out

Seven people, including six police officers and a civilian, are killed and two other officers are injured in a shoot-out with suspected gang hitmen. (BBC) (CNN) (The New York Times) I don't know if there is an article yet but one usually appears. --candlewicke 00:00, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Mexican drug violence is, sadly, hardly news any more. Oppose unless a pretty good article appears, and then I'd just commit to reconsidering. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 01:55, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Arizona passes America's strictest immigration bill

This is currently the lead story on Google News and Yahoo News and the websites of The New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal and L.A. Times and is "above the fold" at Apparently the law will require immigrants (presumably only noncitizens) to carry immigration documents with them and allows authorities to make the immigrants produce them on demand -- the first time people in the U.S. will have to carry identification documents by law. It will also "require police to question people about their immigration status if there is reason to suspect they are illegal immigrants" according to the article on Gov. Jan Brewer. Although a state law, this is clearly a national story; President Obama criticized the law, which is very unusual for state legislation.

Yes, I know we rejected a Brazilian state law story below, but that was not really "in the news" in the English-speaking world.

Unfortunately, there is no article on the law yet, as far as I know. There are a few paragraphs about it in the Brewer article. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 21:47, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Also the lead story in Reforma of Mexico City, La Jornada of Mexico City, etc. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 21:51, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. This does not appear to be an unusual level of restriction on immigration, and is rather local in scope. Plus there's no article. Modest Genius talk 22:20, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
I'll give you the "no article" (yet) point, but if it was "not ... unusual," do you think it would be the lead story of every major paper in the country? -- Mwalcoff (talk) 22:48, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
I don't know. Are the actions of a single American state of 6 million people more important than a single Brazilian state of 20 million people (Toyota Corolla discussion below)? I'm unconvinced, particularly due to the very large difference in population, and disagree that being in the English-speaking world is more important (if that is the case the majority of ITNs would be from a very small part of the world). There is already an explosion on the Main Page so the U.S. is being represented at the moment. Considering Mexico borders this part of the United States and the topic is immigration I'm not fully certain if this featuring in the Mexican media increases its importance. --candlewicke 23:36, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
I don't know if it's a fair comparison, because the immigration law is a major national story in two countries, and I don't know how much media attention the Toyota story got even from the national media in Brazil. Even if we were to compare apples and apples, we have to consider that 52.9% of English Wikipedia users are in the U.S. and 0.6% are in Brazil. That doesn't mean Brazilian items should never be on ITN or that 53% of ITN items should be from the U.S., but it does indicate that we don't have to treat a U.S. item like a Brazilian item. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 23:42, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Oppose it's a state law that has no impact on U.S. policy. Also, it may not withstand its first legal challenges.Shinerunner (talk) 23:54, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Oppose State law- though in a border state. (If Rhode Island had passed this law, it wouldn't be making this much news) We've seen this before; the legal challenges are surely being written as we discuss this, some court will accept it, and by the time it's either struck down or enforced, everyone not involved will have forgotten. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 00:16, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Oppose per Shinerunner - no significant effect on U.S. federal policy.--WaltCip (talk) 04:08, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

I know that this has previously been suggested and rejected on account of only being a state issue, but the reaction to the law is gaining momentum. It has been the one of the top 3 stories on google News with over 3000 sources and gaining [26] . It has garnered strong reactions from President Obama and the hispanic community among many others, with the climate bill currently being delayed [27] to make room for Immigration discussion. I have added to Wikipedia article about the law with relevant information in Arizona SB1070. I think the story deserves another consideration, since it has taken the center stage nationally and might lead to further important developments. Thank you.--Theo10011 (talk) 12:26, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Tip: You may want to cite 10 news articles from at least ten countries from all six inhabited continents, then we'll see... –Howard the Duck
What? really? is the Austrian presidential election suggested above more relevant, are there 3000 stories linking to it. Anyway, here are some relevant News articles CNN BBC New York Times AP Sydney Morning Herald Vancouver sun (not all six continents but close).--Theo10011 (talk) 13:24, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

23 April 2010 Baghdad bombings

Support. --candlewicke 19:39, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Comment: article is currently 1 sentence long, so more text will be needed before it is mainpage ready. --ThaddeusB (talk) 19:44, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. I'll have a go at expanding the article now. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 19:59, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. I don't think this deserves ITN. Bombings in Iraq occur frequently with death tolls in multiple dozens. They have very little political impact, except of course cumulatively. __meco (talk) 20:23, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. I don't necessarily disagree with Meco, but 58 fatalities seems fairly high. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:13, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Support 69 is a lot of deaths in one day. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 23:33, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Note: Several bombs detonated in several areas. The article describes at least five bombs, though there seem to have been several more as well. --candlewicke 23:39, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Support - notable event.--Avala (talk) 16:30, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
The story is probably ITN-worthy, but the wikiarticle, merely with <120 words of prose, needs some beefing up before being showcased on MainPage. Stubby pages should be avoided. --PFHLai (talk) 18:24, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
I agree - the article is still too short for my tastes. --ThaddeusB (talk) 02:37, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
I'll try to expand the first thing in the morning (approx 8 hours from now) to make it ITN ready if no one else steps up in the mean time. --ThaddeusB (talk) 04:53, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Article is ready to go now. Note that it has been renamed April 2010 Baghdad bombings since the violence continued on the 24th. Death toll stands at 72 for Friday's attacks plus 13 on Saturday. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:04, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Posted -- tariqabjotu 18:31, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

World's first Full Face transplant

BBC. Team of 30 doctors and 22 hour operation is what it took to do a total face transplant. pretty encyclopedic if u ask me. Will add to article in a bit. -- Ashish-g55 18:39, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Comment: There is at least one previous claimant to "first full face transplant". Thus if this goes up, which I support given that the article is sufficiently updated, I would prefer it use the wording "most comprehensive face transplant to date". Article will, at minimum, need a proper lead in addition to the update. --ThaddeusB (talk) 19:54, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Support Calling it the "most comprehensive face transplant to date" doesn't really make it sound like news. Is there a way to figure out if this one truely is the world's first full? --PlasmaTwa2 00:02, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Greek government seeks activation of EU/IMF bailout

The Prime Minister of Greece requests activation of a €45 billion (US$61 billion) EU/IMF bailout in response to a continued fiscal crisis. --RA (talk) 10:34, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Support - Came here to nominate myself... Last time it was discussed people said wait until it is accepted; it has been accepted now. Could use a larger update though. --ThaddeusB (talk) 12:24, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
I wouldn't post 2010 European sovereign debt crisis in its current state. The lead is far too long and the references are a mix of inline refs and raw external links - Dumelow (talk) 13:00, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
It's an awful article from a MOS perspective. I actually thought this subject would have an article of its own by now. Maybe Economy_of_Greece#2010_debt_crisis? I've added the same text I added to the sovereign debt article. --RA (talk) 13:05, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
I would have thought it would have its own article as well. I agree that Economy_of_Greece#2010_debt_crisis is a better link at current. --ThaddeusB (talk) 13:35, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
I've amended the suggestion text above. --RA (talk) 14:00, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Support with the economy of greece link Modest Genius talk 22:22, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Comment I think the update is a little weak. -- tariqabjotu 22:32, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

X-37B launched

The prototype of a military orbital space plane, the X-37B, is launched from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station. Hektor (talk) 03:59, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

  • Support with modifications, event is WP:ITN/R and it seems like quite a lot of people are interested in this one. I think the text should include a link to X-37B OTV-1, which is the main article for this mission. How about An Atlas V rocket launches a prototype military orbital space plane, the X-37B on its maiden flight." --GW 10:05, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Support with GW's modified blurb. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 19:16, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Support, maiden flight of a significant new spacecraft Modest Genius talk 22:23, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Toyota Corolla outlawed

"One of Toyota's most popular cars". An acceleration problem was "putting in danger the lives of occupants". BBC. --candlewicke 01:39, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

  • Oppose - the actions of a single Brazilian state aren't ITN worthy. --ThaddeusB (talk) 02:32, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Support that state, Minas Gerais, has about 20,000,000 residents, or more than 55 or so countries. And the Corolla is the world's most popular car. ~DC Talk To Me 03:42, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose: Just because the state has a huge human population does not mean every news from its local newspaper would go up on ITN. How many of the state residents already own or plan to buy Corolla? Does this have any implications on Brazil-Japanese relations? We need to judge the news based on its impact. --GPPande 07:32, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose. The recalls, etc., are ITN worthy (and an ITN post already appeared in January), but I'd say this is only a minor addendum to Toyota's problems and not by itself worthy of another post. Dragons flight (talk) 07:37, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose We've already posted the major events in this saga. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 23:34, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

April 22

ITN candidates for April 22

Grenade attack in Thailand

Thai protests have turned violent again as tensions continue to rise: [28] Top story on BBC, #2 on Google News currently.

Article updated. --ThaddeusB-public (talk) 17:58, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Concur- it's about time we put these ongoing incidents up, and this is as good a time as any. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 03:09, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose. The situation in Bangkok evolves so fast the window for this item has expired. __meco (talk) 20:25, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Posted -- tariqabjotu 22:30, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Now, that was a strange order of events. Is this your idea of a consensus adequate to post an ITN item? __meco (talk) 09:08, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
There were four supports and just one oppose. Further, your oppose seemed to be based on the fact that the event is no longer timely. I presumed that was in regards to the point about "rising tensions", which no longer, at least according to the article, appear to rising. So, I change the wording to a "peak" in tensions, which does not necessarily indicate that the peak is still continuing. But, to answer your question, yes, it is my idea of adequate consensus for ITN, which requires that we address items within a relatively short period of time, unless no consensus is clear. -- tariqabjotu 13:21, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

SDO First Light

Is this worth putting up. Solar Dynamics Observatory released some of the most detailed first pictures of sun with a massive explosion. we will also have the image for free since its by NASA. The story is being reported widely and internationally Star CNN NAT Geo CNET Australia Voice of Russia Scotsman etc. -- Ashish-g55 17:36, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Oppose, because we already posted the launch. Nice images though. Modest Genius talk 12:14, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Pakistan bans neon signs

Pakistan has banned neon signs and extended the official weekend in response to growing Energy crisis(BBC)--Wikireader41 (talk) 15:42, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

As worded, that sounds like a DYK hook... Is the serious side of this updated anywhere? --ThaddeusB (talk) 22:15, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
I have started an article on Pakistan national energy policy which can be used.--Wikireader41 (talk) 23:01, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Now there's a little more context, the background story here looks interesting. A country in such an energy crisis that it's banning neon signs and extending the weekend, it could be ITN-worthy. I'm relucatant to decalre support until the article is developed a little, though. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:09, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. Sounds rather serious. --candlewicke 01:25, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Support Some of the most significant measures have been announced in this meeting.--yousaf465 04:24, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. Even as humorous as the neon sign angle may sound, the proportions of the Pakistani energy crisis is now so dire it is surely bordering on threatening the political stability of the country. Perhaps we should unfocus the neon sign ban to make this look less like an DYK item? __meco (talk) 07:08, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Well not that serious that it will result in political unstability, atmost it will result in a resignation of Water and Power minster. Pakistanis are really generous in such cases. --yousaf465 07:32, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Comment i think the focus on neon signs shows the gravity of the situation and seriousness of the resolve. how about this blurb,

Pakistan announces new Energy policy which extends the official weekend and bans neon signs to conserve electricity in face of a growing Energy crisis.--Wikireader41 (talk) 14:45, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

I think it can be shortened by skipping the phrase "to conserve electricity." I don't think anything would be lost. But it won't go up unless more people voice their support.. __meco (talk) 15:23, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Three supports plus the nominator, one possible support, no opposes at all at this stage. --candlewicke 19:38, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Well, it certainly should have been posted ahead of the grenade attack in Thailand... __meco (talk) 09:09, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Posted, regardless of anything to do with Thailand - Dumelow (talk) 09:56, 24 April 2010 (UTC)


Breaking news: the Belgian government has fallen. Obvious ITN, I suppose. (talk) 10:17, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

I hope this is a joke and just a reference to the Burqa banning.  f o x  10:21, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
This is not a joke. The Open VLD announced a few minutes ago that it will leave the government. Prime Minister Yves Leterme has just arrived at the royal palace, presumably to tender the resignation of the cabinet. (talk) 10:22, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
It will need an article, anyway.  f o x  10:25, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Shouldn't this be on ITN/R?? ;) Physchim62 (talk) 11:28, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Yes this is going to be true, Burqa is doing it's magic. Google news--yousaf465 13:24, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
The king hasn't accepted the resignation. So let's wait and see what happens. Modest Genius talk 14:15, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Support if resignation accepted. Wikireader41 (talk) 14:47, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Support regardless of whether the resignation is accepted. It is news in either case. Thue | talk 20:43, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Well, if the resignation isn't accepted, then a new government will be formed, which would also be ITN/R material: I think we need to wait and see what happens for the moment. I don't see an article, which should be at Leterme II Government under the normal naming system for Belgian government articles. Physchim62 (talk) 21:47, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose unless the resignation is accepted If the resignation isn't accepted, he stays PM, so not enough of a grand noteworthy changes happens. However, if the resignation is accepted, obviously it should go up. On an aside, am I the only one who thinks Leterme's making a habit of offering his resignation? This is like his 5th or something over the course of his two terms in office. HonouraryMix (talk) 23:08, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
This Headlines say Belgian government collapses after party quits coalition.--yousaf465 07:47, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
"[The Open VLD] leaves a little opening for negotiation" Le Soir Physchim62 (talk) 08:04, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Let's wait till there's actual, significant change. Political posturing shouldn't be on ITN, imho. --PFHLai (talk) 18:28, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

April 21

ITN candidates for April 21

Black Sea Fleet

Viktor Yanukovych and Dmitry Medvedev agree to extend by a further 25 years (until 2042) the lease between Kiev and Moscow that allows Russia's Black Sea Fleet to be stationed in Ukraine. (BBC) (The Daily Telegraph) (The Guardian) --candlewicke 22:38, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Support in principle, significant regional agreement. Is there an article with an update anywhere? Modest Genius talk 23:12, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Support As per Modest Genius.--yousaf465 07:39, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
The agreement still needs to be ratified but in principle I support. The updates are there. --Tone 07:46, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Wasn't this already expected? I don't see a big deal here. This is just a renewal of lease. Its not closing an existing military base or opening a new one which are typically associated with some dramatic political events. --GPPande 08:38, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Support This settles, at least apparently, a very contentious issue with ramifications for the global balance of power. __meco (talk) 08:46, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Posted. Using Russia–Ukraine_gas_disputes#2010_gas_agreement as the target article - Dumelow (talk) 11:10, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Oops. I switched it to Black Sea Fleet, whilst the other article covers the agreement in more detail it is tagged for several issues - Dumelow (talk) 11:20, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
I left the image of Samaranch up for the time being as he has been up for less than 24 hours. We can switch to Yanukovych later if needed - Dumelow (talk) 11:23, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose as per GPPande. This is just a preservation of the status quo.--Johnsemlak (talk) 16:54, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

First Arab smoking ban

Syria becomes the first Arab state to implement a ban on smoking in public places. "A country where people light up even in hospitals". --candlewicke 21:53, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Sad news, these smoking bans have always seemed over-the-top to me. But support. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 22:03, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Bahrain does not count? According to List of smoking bans, they banned smoking in 2008. Somehow, I oppose here as there are almost 100 countries on the list already. --Tone 22:12, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
This is common of course but does the first Arab state count for anything? I don't know about Bahrain but the source says Syria is the first. --candlewicke 22:31, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
I honestly don't see why Syria's smoking ban is more of an ITN item than, say, Florida's. "First in the Arab world" doesn't do it for me. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 23:07, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose as cruft. Modest Genius talk 23:13, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose interesting, sure, but not major news. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 22:49, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Microbial ecosystem living in toxic asphalt lake

discovery that life lives in the liquid asphalt lake Pitch Lake. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:28, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Link? Article? Any information at all? Modest Genius talk 23:14, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. The article is just a preprint at the moment, it needs to be accepted before ITN can cover it. Physchim62 (talk) 23:28, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

End of Lorena Ochoa

Lorena Ochoa

This is news worldwide. She will be "greatly missed". The Globe and Mail article describes her as "probably the best-known athlete in Mexico who is not a soccer player". She has been number one for three years and is 28 a very young age for this to happen? --candlewicke 15:44, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

  • Oppose. She's just retiring. Athletes retire all the time. I mean, they all have to eventually. --Smashvilletalk 16:19, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
  • She's young, very young. I was in New York last September for Kim Clijsters who did the same thing and returned to win the 2nd biggest prize in Tennis, and Justine Henin almost did it in Melbourne this year. While surprising news, if she's anything like the Belgian tennis players, she'll be back. Either way, it's surprising, not ITN significant. Oppose Bradjamesbrown (talk)
  • Well, we all have to die eventually too but that doesn't stop the deaths of relatively old people appearing on ITN... --candlewicke 16:35, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Death is final; retiring at 28 is anything but. How many times did Michael Jordan "retire"? Bradjamesbrown (talk) 16:47, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Or Brett Favre?--Johnsemlak (talk) 18:12, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Retiring as the number one ranked player is certainly surprising, though it does happen more with women athletes it seems. I'd probably oppose. --Johnsemlak (talk) 18:19, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Not really that surprising, considering that she took over the ranking because the previous #1 retired. And they're the only two in the four-year history of women's golf rankings. --Smashvilletalk 19:40, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. The only time I would support the retirement of an athlete would be if they were clearly the best that had ever played their sport (eg Wayne Gretsky). Modest Genius talk 20:50, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. I don't believe an athlete's retirement is signifcant enough for this. Truthsort (talk) 21:39, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose, I thought she had died the way this is worded! Definitely not a big enough event for ITN.  f o x  10:22, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Lorena Ochoa#Retirement has just one sentence! C'mon, guys. Where's the wiki-update/expansion? --PFHLai (talk) 18:32, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Juan Antonio Samaranch

  • The former president of IOC died. I believe he qualifies for ITN. --Tone 12:03, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Naturally support - SiMioN.EuGeN (talk) 12:19, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Strong support. He effectively created the mega-Olympics as we know them now. Also a somewhat controversial figure (especially here in Catalonia, although he is being buried with all the due honours), which makes the biography that much more interesting to read! Physchim62 (talk) 12:24, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Strongest possible support, as per Physchim--Johnsemlak (talk) 13:22, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Support per Tone. --GPPande 14:25, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
came here to nominate... obvious support -- Ashish-g55 14:26, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. Obviously an important figure in his field, big news. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:27, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Ok, apparently this item has support. But I can't post as long as the update is one line long and I don't feel comfortable with NPOV tag in the criticism section. When this is fixed, I'm ready to post. --Tone 14:54, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
The tag looks like drive-by tagging to me rather than a fundamental issue. I'll work on the update. hopefully I'll have it ready to post before too long. Apologies to Ashish, btw, it must have been an edit conflict. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:59, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Support--Wikireader41 (talk) 15:01, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Obvious support. 1980 - 2001 is a long time to be at the top of anything. --candlewicke 15:16, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Posting now the article is fixed. --Tone 15:37, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Gulf of Mexico oil platform explosion

Are exploding oil rigs sufficiently dramatic for ITN? BBC News At least 11 missing for the moment, and an unknown number of injured. Physchim62 (talk) 11:51, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Support if the incident has any effects on crude oil supply. --GPPande 14:25, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Support, but wait until the status of those 11 is clarified a little.  f o x  10:23, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. The rig sunk today at 10:21 a.m. CDT. Beagel (talk) 20:36, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. This was a front-page story in the Wall Street Journal today -- "Blast Jolts Oil World" was the headline. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 22:52, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Support rare event, decent article, and dramatic, freely-licensed picture. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 23:00, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Dorothy Height

Comment: article is in only fair condition with many {{fact}} tags. Needs some serious work before being worthy of consideration. --ThaddeusB (talk) 01:01, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose, I think death at 98 is expected. Was she active at the time of death also needs to be considered. --GPPande 14:25, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Sri Lankan parliamentary election, 2010

Support. --candlewicke 00:18, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Support--Wikireader41 (talk) 02:26, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose not significant, especially amongst our readers. Also note, that while Parliament chooses a Prime Minister, he isn't the head of government. ~DC Talk To Me 03:44, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
just wondering... how did you reach the conclusion that this news isnt significant, especially amongst our readers... -- Ashish-g55 04:00, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Common sense, get some. And I'd support if the PM were the head of government, but he's not (the President is). ~DC Talk To Me 04:04, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Obvious support rules say so WP:ITNR.--yousaf465 06:29, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Support - As someone who comes from a country with a parliamentary system I can fully state that even though a PM leads and represents his party, in a parliamentary election you are voting to elect a political party into power and not one person. Thus, in a parliamentary election the important outcome is not who is the PM, but rather which party has won a majority of seats in parliament and, as such, holds the majority of power --Daviessimo (talk) 07:04, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Support per ITNR. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 18:45, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Support while DC had a point in that the President of Sri Lanka is the head of government and has a high level of executive power, more even then the French system let alone Westminster-style government, however the Parliament of Sri Lanka is still the legislative body and still serves an important role. We do after all put up the US mid term elections. Nil Einne (talk) 11:28, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

April 20

ITN candidates for April 20


Suggesting an update of current blurb to bump it back up to the top since it is still the number 1 or number 2 story most places, and will otherwise fall off ITN soon:

--ThaddeusB (talk) 13:29, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Oppose I think by the time it falls of ITN, its time will have come. The fact that the event is, for the most part, over is not a story in itself. -- tariqabjotu 16:56, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Bump __meco (talk) 18:37, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Support the bumping.  f o x  18:41, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. I have to agree with Tariq, it's had plenty of time on ITN, it's time we let it drop off. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:21, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose per Tariq and HJ; also, there's no guarantee that the problems won't return, so bumping just at the moment when things are getting back to normal seems counterproductive. Bumping of ITN stories rarely gets any more hits for the underlying articles. Physchim62 (talk) 19:43, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose unless something majorly new happens. Just let this drop off as normal. This is big news for those (like me) who got stuck waiting for airports to reopen, but otherwise the story has happened. Modest Genius talk 20:53, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Northern Cyprus presidential election, 2010

The election will likely be between Mehmet Ali Talat, who is involved in reconciliation talks with the Cypriot government and Derviş Eroğlu who takes a more hard line approach - Dumelow (talk) 23:36, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

The results are in and Derviş Eroğlu has won without the need for a run off. The article needs some work though - Dumelow (talk) 10:03, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
I haven't supported the general elections of 'partially recognized' states before but they have been posted so posting this (assuming the article is updated) would follow precedent. That said I oppose.--Johnsemlak (talk) 11:23, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
When in past, election results of a partially recognized states were posted? I think posting results from countries like Taiwan should be fine. --GPPande 11:59, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
It's fairly normal (if the article meets the standards). I'll dig out some past examples for you. Physchim62 (talk) 12:10, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
We did the Northern Cyprus parliamentary election, 2009 (posted 2009-04-21), for example. We also do "elections" that are such in name only, see North Korean parliamentary election, 2009 (among others). Physchim62 (talk) 12:14, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Strong oppose. "Northern Cyprus" isn't even partially recognised- nobody recognises it except Turkey and even they only recognise it as de facto independent. In addition, the article is a bit of a state. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:21, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose This isn't the Republic of China, which the vast majority "recognises" in practice though not officially, or the Republic of Kosovo which is recognised by ~67 countries (counting the ROC), including most of the EU, Canada, the US, Australia, and Japan. If Turkey ever shut off the flow of support, Northern Cyprus would collapse in a month. And, as HJ mentions, the article is currently tagged for cleanup. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 13:45, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Well, provided that the future of the island depends quite a bit on who is elected, this is of international importance nevertheless (regardless on the recognition status). Still, the article needs to be in good shape, otherwise there's no point in discussing. --Tone 13:47, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. Because: (i) don't really want to judge it on how much it is recognised, (ii) it is happening, (iii) Northern Cyprus has been posted before. --candlewicke 13:48, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Support Just as candlewicke said we are supporting it just because it is happening. We don't need to get in this recognition debate. We have already seen enough of it in Iran nuclear summit, where some people went on to express their personal opinion, which was certainly not required. It look like more of Iran bashing than comments on ITN candidate. So I think we should treat this one as a normal ITN item.--yousaf465 13:59, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
I'd be fine with that, but, from my limited understanding "Northern Cyprus" isn't a country, a sovereign state or anything else. It has no official status and even Turkey only recognise it as part of Turkey on paper. This is about as significant as an election for the trustees of the local parish church, but at least the latter is recognised by someone! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:58, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Comment - we posted the results of the 2009 Abkhazian presidential election, which is similar in being a barely recognised state. However, the article needs a fair bit of work --Daviessimo (talk) 15:07, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
I'm not expert on these politics but our article states clearly that Northern Cyprus is recognized by Turkey as an independent state, not part of Turkey. It also states that N. Cyprus gained de facto independence from Cyprus. Seems to be at least as 'partially recognized' as Abkhazia. --Johnsemlak (talk) 17:51, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
support per Johnsemlak above. our article says its independent so saying otherwise isnt really upto us. If the reasoning for oppose is that it is not independent then it should be discussed in the article discussion itself. we should not reject it based on our POV. -- Ashish-g55 17:55, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose, if we start adding in elections for every state only recognized by a couple countries, then that's all we'll be putting up ever. Oppose confirmed through bad state of article. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 19:40, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
How many "countries" are there that aren't widely recognized? A dozen or so? I can't imagine its much more than that. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 19:52, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Wikipedia lists 10 that aren't UN members (if you make it into the UN, you are generally widely recognized even if not universally). --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:48, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose it's not recognized. If me and my friends get together and vote me President, do I get on here too? ~DC Talk To Me 20:37, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Do you have 265,099 friends? --candlewicke 00:15, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Take a look at, its not exactly like that... -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 21:02, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose dont think this is ITN worthy or of broad enough interest.Wikireader41 (talk) 21:53, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose Doesn't quite have the recognition to get on the ITN. Truthsort (talk) 23:53, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

CommentAs ThaddeusB mentioned Wikipedia lists 10, and we do feature elections from other partially recognized states such as China(I think this will raise some eyebrows but this is how it stands. Hopefully they are not linked to china-bashing.)--yousaf465 06:20, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

To be fair the vast majority of countries recognise China, whereas only Turkey recognises Northern Cyprus. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 18:46, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
The PRC is also a UN member state. That's a completely different situation. A better comparison would be Taiwan. Taiwan is a fairly established de facto independent nation of over 20 million. That said, while it's population is small and it only is recognised by one nation, N Cyprus is fairly established as well having existed in its current state for over 30 years.Johnsemlak (talk) 19:47, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
So do we feature elections from Taiwan.--yousaf465 07:36, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

April 19

ITN candidates for April 19

G20 meeting


On April 20 & 21, there is a meeting of the Labor and Employment Ministers of the G-20 at the Frances Perkins Building in Washington, D.C.

Death of Abu Ayyub al-Masri

Supposedly one of the top players, if not the top one, in al-Qaeda in Iraq, so this seems like a big deal. -- tariqabjotu 19:34, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

support. this was an important strike. Wikireader41 (talk) 22:23, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose Al-Qaeda lieutenants are like roaches, one dies and there's always another to take his place. (I was reading an article about that phenomenon this weekend, but darned if I can remember where.) Unless they get the top dog, I don't see it as that significant. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 00:36, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Support a minor but significant development for Al qaeda in Iraq, and please don't insult cockroaches. Enlil Ninlil (talk) 01:38, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose per Brad; unless it was the main guy I wouldn't consider it. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 03:48, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose per Brad and Wizardman. I wouldn't support for an equivalent figure in the Iraqui armed forces, or the U.S. forces in Iraq either. Physchim62 (talk) 09:24, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose My god, at least 50 of these guys had to have been killed in the past decade. Nothing to see here. Truthsort (talk) 23:54, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Boston Marathon

The Boston Marathon is the world's oldest marathon and one of the world's oldest annual sporting competitions.--Johnsemlak (talk) 18:55, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
Support why not? Let's get some stuff not relating to funerals or volcanoes up there. ~DC Talk To Me 19:21, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
There's also a picture of the men's winner we can use here (and it's even from this marathon)! ~DC Talk To Me 19:26, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
Support probably the most prestigious marathon in non-Olympic years, and the win was in course record time. Article could use some expansion though. --ThaddeusB (talk) 19:30, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
Support as above. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 22:28, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
Suppport. Is it on ITN/R? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:36, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
Strangely, I don't see any athletics (track and field) events on INTR. --ThaddeusB (talk) 00:01, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
That's because the biggest prize in those sports is the Olympics. But there may be a case for eg. the World Championships and the major marathons (not sure we can justify all the big five) Modest Genius talk 20:58, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Comment Just one more paragraph. Please? Pretty please? -- tariqabjotu 22:47, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
I'll try to expand it w/in the next ~4 hours if no one else does. --ThaddeusB (talk) 00:01, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Expanded and ready for mainpage. --ThaddeusB (talk) 01:36, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Support per above .Wikireader41 (talk) 22:59, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
Support Sufficiently updated now. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 02:28, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Toyota fine

Car maker Toyota has agreed to pay a record $16.4m (£10.7m) to US safety regulators following the recent safety concerns. The fine is the largest to ever be handed out by the US transportation department. (BBC) (Reuters) - JuneGloom07 Talk? 15:09, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

  • Support we've posted these stories before about Microsoft, now it's Toyota's turn. ~DC Talk To Me 15:42, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
oppose since we already posted recalls. fines were to follow... and most likely since this was a global recall there will be fines from europe/japan too. -- Ashish-g55 15:47, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
Yea, because we never post stories relating to the same subject. That'd be like posting someone's death and his funeral. (On a non-sarcastic note, I think this story is especially newsworthy because the fine is the largest ever on an automaker. However, I'd say it'd been ITNable even if it weren't a record) ~DC Talk To Me 15:55, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
Comment - we didn't post the £250m + plus fines handed out to BAE Systems back in February by the Serious Fraud Office and the US Department of Justice, which kind of makes the figures in this instance seem rather small. That being said , Toyata continues to pop up in the news with ongoing problems (such as this), which means there is probably continuing interest in the story. --Daviessimo (talk) 16:25, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
Interesting. I'm not sure why that didn't get posted, or even attract much discussion. But one mistake shouldn't lead to another. And as you said, there is definitely interest in the story. ~DC Talk To Me 17:44, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Suicide of Edwin Valero

Venezuelan boxer, had a record of 27-0-0 with 27 KOs, 19 in the first round. –Howard the Duck 12:40, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

  • Support sad story. Former world champion. Getting a good amount of coverage in the US (especially for boxing), and I can imagine it's getting big coverage across South America. ~DC Talk To Me 14:41, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Support if article is better sourced. Death is of an exceptional nature and is drawing international coverage. The murder allegations and suicide are well referenced, but the material about his boxing career (most of the article) is not. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:52, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
Comment - the article is still tagged for weasel words and needs a tidy. If fixed I would probably support --Daviessimo (talk) 16:28, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
Reminds me of the 2009 suicide of German footballer Robert Enke which didn't get posted, and which I opposed, though I'd say that was a close one or me. By comparison, this suicide is a bit more notable with the murder allegations. Also he was a world title holder. Weak support when article is fixed. --Johnsemlak (talk) 19:00, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Posted -- tariqabjotu 22:58, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Strong Oppose Absolutely does not pass the death criteria at WP:ITN. In no way is he a "very important figure" and the short article is nowhere near B-class. Reywas92Talk 00:46, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Strong oppose Boxing with its rigging and choosing of who to fight etc, and 4-5 different rival leagues, means that a guy can be lower than the top 3-4 in his event and be "world champion". Are we going to include a guy who came fourth in some event at the World Champs in swimming in athletics once? If this guy was good he would have beat up every one else and unified all these crowns, and then held them for some extra period of time by beating the others off. Sure he also seems to have killed his wife, but there are quite a few minor figures out there who have done murder suicides, or sometimes just committed suicide due to a custody dispute YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 01:20, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose per YellowMonkey, nowhere near unique or all that important. The fragmented titles in boxing make a title like 'world champion' hard to assess. --Bradjamesbrown (talk) 01:31, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Unposted with all due respect to Tariqabjotu. There's not remotely consensus on this one yet. --Smashvilletalk 02:09, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
    • Okay, but I base decisions on what people have said at the time, not on what has not yet been said... -- tariqabjotu 03:16, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
With respect to the death criteria, surely a world champion of his division would qualify as "a very important figure in their field of expertise, and was recognised as such" One quibble I have wiht the article is I can't understand what title he held, if any, when he died. He was undefeated. Did he relinquish the WBC Lightweight title?--Johnsemlak (talk) 03:20, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Not to mention that other than the death date, the article barely even touches on the fact that he's dead. --Smashvilletalk 04:01, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
    • Meh... this sucks. With the rate all of this is going, we can't post any boxing blurbs while we'd have at least one hurling blurb per year. Say goodbye to Mayweather-Mosley. Weeee. –Howard the Duck 03:24, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
      • @Johnsemlak Valero was targetting Pacquiao, who is in a heavier weight division, so he might have had to relinquish the title. –Howard the Duck 03:24, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose I really couldn't figure out why he was up there in the first place. His blurb was even more uninformative as it just talked about his death and nothing else. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 03:46, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
@HowardtheDuck--that info really should be in the article I think. There really should be an explanation of why he wasn't holding a title if he was 27-0 when he died. I do sympathize with the wish to get a few more boxing articles posted as it is a big sport, but the sport's disorganization that YellowMonkey referred to is a problem. As far as I can see at the time Valero was WBC champ Juan Manuel Márquez was the holder of the lightweight WBA and WBO titles. So he had been one of two 'World Champions' for a year which is fairly notable.--Johnsemlak (talk) 08:52, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Vacating titles undefeated seems to be a "normal" occurrence for good enough boxers. Most of the time, no one's good enough for them at that weight division so they go the next division, which means they won't be able to defend their original titles in a specified number of days so they have to be vacated. For example, of Manny Pacquiao's seven division championships, he currently holds 2, defeated in 1 and vacated 4. –Howard the Duck 11:28, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

I've updated the article to indicate that he had vacated the title in order to fight at the Light welterweight division. I do think this guy deserves another look. 27-0 is a good record, even if he was never an 'undisputed' champion of his division. Very few boxers finished their career undefeated. Plus the unusual nature of his death. In addition, his death will certainly have a present-day impact on boxing.--Johnsemlak (talk) 17:17, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Oppose No offense, but I just don't think he was a significant figure even in boxing, much less globally. Truthsort (talk) 23:56, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
For someone "not a significant figure", he sure gets ~4x as much press as the Sri Lankan prime minister designate, which of course made it to ITN. –Howard the Duck 13:02, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Death of Sotigui Kouyaté

Found this on the front page of BBC News. Worked on The Mahabharata in 1983. Has won a major award at the Berlin International Film Festival and honoured by the French government at the Cannes Film Festival, both as recently as last year but is he important enough? --candlewicke 01:34, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

I might support. The article isn't bad in that what's there appears to be well sourced, but it'll need an update and some cosmetic changes. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:45, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose ordinary death of a person who is not exceptionally notable. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:54, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose death wasn't unexpected, nor was he one of the world's most well-known actors. ~DC Talk To Me 16:11, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose as per above.--Johnsemlak (talk) 19:01, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Death of Tomáš Špidlík

I'm inclined to oppose on this- he wasn't a hugely notable individual, his death doesn't seem unexpected and the article is a state. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:50, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
Eh, oppose though mainly based on the state of the article, barely updated and inadequately sourced. Even if updated, I'm not sure I'd get behind a Cardinal that wasn't a Bishop or a upper-level member of the Curia. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 00:55, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose ordinary death of a person who is not exceptionally notable. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:54, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose per above. ~DC Talk To Me 16:11, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose The death of a Cardinal doesn't cut it for me (unless it's this one).--Johnsemlak (talk) 19:03, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

April 18

ITN Candidates for April 18

World's youngest ruling monarch becomes of age

Xinhua. Also on CNN. --candlewicke 15:18, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Support - Rukidi IV of Toro - SiMioN.EuGeN (talk) 15:23, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Interesting but seems a bit trivial. He's a figurehead monarch so I'd say oppose.--Johnsemlak (talk) 15:27, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
So's Queen Elizabeth II, I think a monarch coming of age/being coronated probably is worthy of posting on Wikipedia so Support. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 16:01, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Support. Interesting, a little different and not an everyday event. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:09, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Strong oppose, sub-national entity, not a sovereign nation. Plus the general procedure is to post successions, but not coronations, inaugurations or 'coming of age's. Modest Genius talk 16:11, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
It's an interesting story but I'll have to go with oppose per the comment above. --Tone 16:18, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
HM Queen Elizabeth II rules 16 nations, even if largely on paper. Rukidi doesn't even rule one. Oppose Bradjamesbrown (talk) 17:37, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose per MG. --PlasmaTwa2 18:22, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Oppose. Per Modest Genius. __meco (talk) 21:17, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Robert Mugabe

Several events going on in Zimbabwe for the 30th anniversary of independence. Robert Mugabe has for "the first time [...] issued an unprecedented appeal for an end to politically and racially driven violence in Zimbabwe". There is also the jailing of four women to coincide with the two-day holiday; they deny any wrongdoing. --candlewicke 15:01, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

The 30th anniversary itself is probably notable enough for ITN, but not the other stuff. However, since it's top of OTD, I'm going with oppose. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:12, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
My understanding is that anniversaries themselves are generally not posted on ITN.--Johnsemlak (talk) 15:24, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Definitely more suited to OTD, where it is already listed. Modest Genius talk 16:12, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Re-nominating Dow Live Earth Run for Water

Oppose Not really seeing the significance. Looks like an attempt to ride the success of three years ago, and doesn't look like the story is catching. This is the closest to significant coverage from a real press source I could find, and it holds Dow's feet to the fire over their record. The concerts were significant, this is much less so. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 18:18, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose at least in the Canadian news, there has been absolutely no talk about this and Toronto is one of the cities. Only time I ever hear about this is on itn. --PlasmaTwa2 18:24, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Support THis is big event, the main world cities joined. The host cities are: Buenos Aires, Cape Town, Chicago, Hong Kong, Jimbaran, London, Los Angeles, Manchester, Melbourne, Mexico City, Milan, Minneapolis, New York, Lisboa, Rio de Janeiro, São Paulo, Singapore City, Stockholm, Toronto and Washington, D.C. --Dialogue.zh (talk) 14:41, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

President of Poland Burial

Late president of Poland Lech Kaczynski is buried at a state funeral at Wawel Cathedral in Kraków.[30][31]
Crnorizec (talk) 20:54, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

  • This should go in the news sometime after 2pm CET. Crnorizec (talk) 20:54, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. Normally I'd oppose, but the death of almost 100 people, including over 40 notable people and an incumbent head of state is so rare that we can justify giving this prolonged coverage. Update should go in his article with a few lines in the plane crash article but it doesn't need its own. Mentioning the volcano is over-complicating things. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:32, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. This is an unusual case and there is the disruption being caused by the volcano, Merkel, Sarkozy, Obama, etc. which means it is even more unusual. Considering the amount of articles Wikipedia has on the volcano (there were at least three earlier) I think an article on the state funeral is no harm. This has been done before for other important people, Ronald Reagan, Omar Bongo, Pierre Trudeau, etc. --candlewicke 02:01, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. --Wikireader41 (talk) 03:37, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 03:47, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Death and state funeral of Lech Kaczyński. --candlewicke 05:13, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
That article's so full of tags it look's like a Macy's clearance sale. The article has been nominated twice for speedy deletion. Is there any way of quickly clearing that stuff up? Otherwise, Support, though I agree this must be a special case as we've already covered the President's death. Yes there were 40 other people on board but I believe none of them were notable enough for ITN mention individually. The problems with the funeral due to the volcanic activity are also interesting (is that in the article?).--Johnsemlak (talk) 05:36, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Strong support - The article is nominated for speedy frustrating. - SiMioN.EuGeN (talk) 06:30, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
All either of you had to do was remove them - I couldn't because I created it and it told me not to but that others could and I could have done without any more complications which might occur as a result (even though the tags were added before I had any chance to expand it which was incredibly frustrating wondering how many times it was going to be nominated for speedy deletion before anyone did something about it). --candlewicke 14:43, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
The volcano problems are mentioned in the "dignitaries" section - Merkel stuck in Italy, Australian Governor-General sranded in the United Arab Emirates, etc. --candlewicke 14:47, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Support - I've removed the tags as not only has Candlewicke done a great job in fleshing the article out from when they were put on, but there is also a strong precedent for an article in this type of case. The user is question who added the tags waited a grand total of 2 minutes before putting the first tag on the article and at that time the article only contained two sections that linked to other articles. He could have done with waiting because it was also Candlewicke who did a great job with Death and state funeral of Omar Bongo --Daviessimo (talk) 07:00, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Neutral I'm really doubled minded over this. It's funeral of head of state, on the other hand should we post post it, as I think we have already posted the news about his plane crash.--yousaf465 07:40, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
What hell we waiting for? Who will post? - SiMioN.EuGeN (talk) 10:45, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
We're waiting for the funeral mass to start, which is at 12:00 UTC. Physchim62 (talk) 10:58, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

oppose its been posted before on the crash (as yousaf stated), no need to repost it. there are more pressing issues today — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lihaas (talkcontribs)

Comment Once it's finished and the article has been translated to past tense, I believe this should be added. -- tariqabjotu 14:17, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Support I've no problems with putting this story back up. This funeral and the volcano are the top news of the day. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 18:20, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
They are buried next to Józef Piłsudski — TFA on 5 April 2010, five days before they died... --candlewicke 19:27, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Regards. - SiMioN.EuGeN (talk) 19:57, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

April 17

ITN candidates for April 17

April 2010 Kohat bombings

- Nom - SiMioN.EuGeN (talk) 14:32, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Oppose. Article is two sentences long. I might reconsider if it's improved sufficiently. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:35, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
Support if someone does the work to make a respectable article. Oppose otherwise. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 19:59, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
Support when expanded. --candlewicke 20:02, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
  • 41 people died and people are opposing this?? If someone in the United Sates gets a papercut, it makes the frontpage but this dosen't? -- (talk) 20:32, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
The article now says "the United Nations temporarily suspended operations" if that makes it more appealing. Still needs expansion though if it is to have a chance. --candlewicke 20:54, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
People are opposing based on the state of article, not the nature of the news. --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:57, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
Support when expanded. Wikireader41 (talk) 20:58, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
I've done what I can with this article; it's no longer a two sentence sub-stub, but information actually about this incident is rather sparse. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 00:37, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Support as article is now expanded. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 01:06, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Support (struck my oppose above) but the article still needs work- there are only ten lines of prose, but it's certainly much better than it was thanks to Bradjamesbrown. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:26, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
  •  Y Posted - article is now sufficiently developed to hit main page. --ThaddeusB (talk) 01:49, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Iranian nuclear summit

support Just as important as the Washington summit because it deals with the repercussions of the ongoing global nuclear debate and is in a sense a follow up to the START for a more global franchise as well as a build up to the upcoming NPT review conference. Should set the stage for another fight (a la the Copenhagen climate conference) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lihaas (talkcontribs)

Support The Tehran International Conference on Disarmament and Non-Proliferation, 2010 has participation from both the IAEA and two Security Council members (China and Russia), so I believe we should present this item like we did with the US-sponsored conference. The conference starts today and lasts through tomorrow. __meco (talk) 10:37, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Oppose. If Iran declaring itself to be a nucelar state was not considered important enough for a listing, then clearly, neither is this. MickMacNee (talk) 15:18, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

The two hardly compare. That was hot air rhetoric. This is an international conference with significant participation as mentioned above and in the article. __meco (talk) 15:27, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
Read the article. To dismiss what happened in that week as 'hot air rhetoric' is absolute nonsense. MickMacNee (talk) 15:34, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Support per Lihaas and Meco. An international conference involving a large number of countries and a controversial topic. As relevant as the one in Washington. --candlewicke 20:01, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Oppose unlikely to be of any consequence.Wikireader41 (talk) 23:53, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Note: Day one highlights include President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad calling for the establishment of an independent body to oversee nuclear disarmament and Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Supreme Leader of Iran, describing the United States as an "atomic criminal" and calling for the US to be expelled from the international nuclear system. This is now "in the news" from London to Sydney. Did anything like that happen in Washington? --candlewicke 02:09, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
No. but will support the article in ITN when US does get declared and 'atomic criminal' and expelled from the 'International Nuclear system'. that woud be big news ;-) Wikireader41 (talk) 02:32, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
It's difficult to comment on this one and maintain NPOV but I don't think this one is automatically as notable as the conference in Washington. Certainly Ahmadinejad making hyperbolic anti-US rhetoric is not notable. Oppose.--Johnsemlak (talk) 05:51, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
But look at the context. It's an international conference with major powers participating. __meco (talk) 07:06, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Support - I think if two of the the big 5 NPT countries are attending this is notable. Also France and the UK were invited but chose not to attend. Its only the US who have been snubbed --Daviessimo (talk) 07:11, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. Ahmadinejad's sarcastic bombast is nothing unexpected or newsworthy. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 07:20, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Support Large enough attendance. It might be controversial from western perspective but I think we can ignore that. Otherwise we will see more of this Talk:Main_Page#Euro.2FAmerican-centric_news. I think this will balance with the Washington conference and will absolve the ITN of any bias towards a particular region. Pakistan also sent a delegation if my info is correct. "Ahmadinejad's sarcastic bombast" Huh! I don't think this kind of comment was needed in ITn.--yousaf465 07:25, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
According to our article, the attendees were nearly all non-heads of state (compared with the Nuclear Security Summit which had dozens of heads of state and the heads of state of all the major players, except arguably Israel and Iran). The article is incomplete on this, admittedly, but it says, for example, that Russia, the biggest nuclear power to attend, sent only its deputy foreign minister.--Johnsemlak (talk) 12:45, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Ahmadinejad asking for "the establishment of an independent body to oversee nuclear disarmament" doesn't sound like a "sarcastic bombast". It is so easy to focus only on the negative. CNN also said he wrote a letter to Obama a few days ago (surprising quote from CNN: "The Iranian leader urged cooperation between the Islamic republic and America"), this too seems to have been lost in the rush. --candlewicke 13:40, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. Of the nine countries where it is known who was sent to the conference, three are the heads of state. Although the US did not attend, this is obviously a major conference. Being in the international news shows its significance. ~AH1(TCU) 13:45, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
How notable is this conference if we don't even know who has attended? At the very least the article is far from adequate.--Johnsemlak (talk) 14:10, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

(Edit Conflict)

There are international conferences all the time -- International Postal Union, World Health Organization, Inter-Parliamentary Union, World Bank and ad hoc gatherings. They are usually only ITN-level newsworthy when heads of state attend or they lead to significant international agreements. I don't see this conference on the front page of the New York Times, Chicago Tribune, Toronto Globe & Mail, Der Tagesspiegel, Der Tagesspiegel, Jerusalem Post, La Repubblica, El Pais, etc. The only newspaper at Today's Front Pages that carries the story on Page 1 that I've seen is an Iranian paper. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 13:55, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
(Response to Candlewicke) -- Sarcastic bombast is clearly what is. The Western countries are accusing Iran of building a nuclear bomb, so Ahmadinejad is smerkingly trying to turn the tables around and make an issue out of the Western countries' own nuclear weapons. Regardless of what you think of the issue of Iran's nuclear program, this is a propaganda exercise, nothing unexpected or ground-breaking. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 13:55, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
I don't actually think anything of Iran any more than I think of the United States on this issue and don't see how it is clearly one way or the other. The statement "Regardless of what you think of the issue of Iran's nuclear program, this is a propaganda exercise, nothing unexpected or ground-breaking" is contradictory as you are asserting that your thought is correct and using terms such as "sarcastic bombast" and "propaganda" which are hardly helpful. It may or may not be propaganda but why is anything which is offensive to the United States considered in this way? And, depending on your point of view, perhaps similar announcements from the United States are considered propaganda by some people elsewhere? Is it really a big surprise that this is not on the front page of the American or Israeli newspapers? Do ITNs even come exclusively from the front pages of newspapers? The same goes for the multiple anonymous IPs who have tried repeatedly to wipe all mention of the conference from Portal:Current events. Why? It took place. Regardless of how the American or Iranian media are reporting on it, other countries are too - Australia, France, the United Kingdom, countries in the Middle East. (I say this with complete calmness, not in an aggressive way, just in case the mistake is made). I remain entirely indifferent, I do not see why the Washington one is more important, I do not see why this one is more important. But one was posted and there seems to be a lot of difficulty with the fact that the other even exists to the point where the whole thing is dimissed as sarcastic? That I don't understand. --candlewicke 20:00, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Comment The article still makes it sound like the event has not happened yet. This needs to be updated. (Also, copyediting is definitely in order...) -- tariqabjotu 20:02, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Candlewicke -- My views on this matter have nothing to do with whether the conference is "offensive to the United States." This simple is not a big-deal event; it is simply grandstanding. I'd feel the same way if it was a U.S. politician doing the same thing, and there's no way we'd have a similar item from Washington on ITN. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 21:11, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Comment totally inconsequential grandstanding by Iranian dictator. that we are discussing putting this conference in ITN is beyond me . we recently had BRIC conference and don't recall even that being considered[32]. WP should not become a soapbox for despots. Yousaf465 there have been plenty of stories from Pakistan in ITN recently. and you insist on bringing the issue of US/european centricity here.Wikireader41 (talk) 22:54, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
"Dictator"? "Despots"? Again, why the aggressive language? I'm not saying he's a saint but how can such hatred lead to an unbiased conclusion? BRIC could've gone up too if it had been nominated. What does this even have to do with Pakistan or how often Pakistan features on ITN? Pakistan and Iran are not the same. --candlewicke 23:13, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
I'm no fan of giving Ali Khamenei a lick of publicity, but apart from that, the article is lengthy, but almost completely out of date, and unusable in its present state. 24 nations attended, but only two of the permanent five showed- the Russian Federation and the PRC, both sending deputy ministers. The Washington summit drew four of the five heads of state of the P5 (Including Russia and the PRC), and a head of state or head of government from every continent. The Tehran conference isn't of the same level, all opinions on the current IRI regime aside. Oppose Bradjamesbrown (talk) 00:26, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
Well as Candlewicke has already said Pakistan and Iran not the same, if you see they are from two different regions, Pakistan being in South East Asia , while Iran belong to Middle east. We could have considered the BRIC if somebody could have nominated it. For comparison of Washington and Iran conference, China only participated on Pakistan's request in Washington and Pakistan only participated due to some special reasons. So I think in terms of of importance both were similar. On funny side American President Obama didn't knew whether Pakistani Prime Minister or President was attending, he kept on calling our Prime minister, PresidentYousaf Raza Gillani. --yousaf465 04:48, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
I was commenting on the fact that both Iran and Pakistan are not in America/europe and Yousaf was implying that ITN is still America/euro centric !!!! Last time I checked Pakistan and Iran shared a long border and Baloch people will certainly disagree with Yousaf. cheers Wikireader41 (talk) 14:12, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
No no not at all I never said or meant that. For more I will comment on the error page. Will link it with this.--yousaf465 06:50, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
A common argument in favor of this item is that it is of equal importance with the Washington conference, which we posted. The simple fact is that it was attended by far fewer countries and by generally low level delegations and NO heads of states of major nuclear powers. Russia sent a mere deputy foreign minister and our article doesn't say who, if anyone, attended from China. That's in comparison with 50 some-odd heads of state who met at Washington. Even if that conference had no significant result, the meeting of so many heads of state is quite notable. I don't see how they Tehran conference had any particularly notable results. Not to mention the article is far from adequate as has been stated.--Johnsemlak (talk) 15:34, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Conference of no relevance except as a rant, and this is hardly like the holocaust review one YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 06:52, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

April 16

ITN candidates for April 16

Turkish Cypriot presidential election live televised debate

"All the president hopefuls" gather them together on "the last day of propaganda". It is a two-hour TV debate between seven candidates which will be broadcast live. --candlewicke 21:57, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Oppose as blatant sour grapes over the UK debate. Not the first in the country's history, no major international attention, domestic politics. Modest Genius talk 00:44, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
When is the next Kiribati presidential election? LOL –Howard the Duck 05:16, 17 April 2010 (UTC)Northern Cyprus
Oppose - I would also point out that the debate in question is for hopefuls in the Northern Cyprus presidential election, which as a sovereign state is only recognised by Turkey. We post the winners of elections in disputed territories and unrecognised states but there would be no way we could post a TV debate for a country that doesn't exist to 99% of the world. --Daviessimo (talk) 07:10, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
"Blatant sour grapes"? It's just a nomination. It is most likely a coincidence that this happened near the time of any UK debate. --candlewicke 19:51, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
COnsidering political debates were not even nominated before (I think the U.S. presidential debates were not even nominated), this nomination is rather odd... –Howard the Duck 02:30, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
I don't think I've been in the position to nominate anything similar before. But I saw this when I was checking how far south the volcano was so I nominated it. --candlewicke 15:22, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose Even though I generally support partially recognised states, this just isn't all that significant. Maybe the winner, but not the debate. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 19:56, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Goldman Sachs charged with fraud

Goldman sachs charged with fraud over Collateralized debt obligations by SEC.( Wikireader41 (talk) 19:23, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Oppose it's just a civil charge. If the Justice Department brings criminal charges, maybe. But then again we usually only post the outcome of legal proceedings. ~DC Talk To Me 20:16, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Civil or criminal, I might support the outcome of these proceedings if they were particularly notable (completely unexpected result, massive [ie enormous] fine etc) but not just the charge. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:46, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Support. Something like $12 billion in market value was wiped out after the announcement when Goldman stock plunged. That's a big deal. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 21:37, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

oppose much bigger companies go up and down in value on daily basis. and nothing has even happened yet. getting charged by SEC doesnt mean much -- Ashish-g55 21:50, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Comment the importance of this story is not in the fact that any charges were filed but the impact it had on worldwide stocks.This is not about one company.[33]Wikireader41 (talk) 22:25, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Comment -- There are few companies "much bigger" than Goldman Sachs (before today it was probably among the 50 biggest in the world and 25 biggest in the U.S. by market capitalization), and it's very rare for a company of that size to drop by a double-digit percentage in a single day. And as Wikireader41 points out, the impact was not limited to Goldman but had repercussions for many stocks. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 22:34, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
market losing value may have been noteworthy 2 years ago. but couple 100 points drop around the world isnt much anymore. there were even bigger drops on jan 22, then again feb 5... Goldman went down 12% even RIM had 15% drop in december. thats just how market works, there is a chain effect for every bad news. I will support if the fallout continues next week however. -- Ashish-g55 23:57, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
The potential implications of this are huge and far reaching (for example its possible GS owe the British Taxpayer almost £1bn [34]). However, until any criminal charges are brought, this cannot and should not go up. Even then, there is a precedent to only list an item when a verdict is given and, as such, I will oppose for now... --Daviessimo (talk) 07:20, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Just want to point out this is the lead story in today's New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, Wall Street Journal, Chicago Tribune and Philadelphia Inquirer. But I suppose we know better than the entire American media what's important. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 00:52, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Not to mention The Economist, Business Week , Forbes, The Guardian, Dawn etc. everybody except WP had this story on their main page. I guess we are special here at WP and follow our own tune ;-)Wikireader41 (talk) 01:07, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Support; Affected markets worldwide and widely reported internationally. Take the damn UK election debates story off of ITN. Colipon+(Talk) 01:20, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
As I think has been said above, the effects on the market would probably have been ITN-worthy before the recession and everything that went with it, but the news isn't so sensational (for want of a better word) in the light of it as it would have been before. I've no real objection to posting the results of the litigation, though. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:26, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Support: Even though sentimental, the charges have caused the global markets see sharp downfall on Monday. I would say, put it up on ITN. --GPPande 14:06, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Un commission report

Un commission conducting the inquiry on Assassination of Benazir Bhutto has submitted it's report.--yousaf465 06:14, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

If there is not 1 mention of the report on the page linked how can this go on the front page? Perhaps a section about the UN Report (not to mention Scotland Yard also issued their's today) can go over the details.
Support. This seems quite important and deserves at least to have further discussion. BBC - "could have been prevented", "bungled". --candlewicke 19:54, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
Support when articles contain current information. ~AH1(TCU) 14:07, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

President of Kyrgyzstan

well, it helps to add the story to the above. never mind now, ive done it for you.
Strong support big event. in essence its another [unspoken] revolution that has been won — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lihaas (talkcontribs)
Support: Change in leadership of the country qualifies ITN. --GPPande 13:01, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Didn't the change in leadership happen a few weeks ago with the coup? Is it really news that he's finally resigned? The opposition has been in control of the state for some time now.--Chaser (talk) 13:51, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
ya but there was nothing official. he refused to leave leadership before. either way support -- Ashish-g55 13:52, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
In any case, this is a significant development. The riots article and Bakiyev's article have been updated. Ready to post. What shall the blurb include? --Tone 14:36, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. Official resignation of a head of state.--Johnsemlak (talk) 15:10, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

As a result of popular protests in the north and capital of the country President Kurmanbek Bakiyev officially resigns after he leaves Kyrgyzstan for Kazakhstan. Is this ok? --Tone 18:12, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

President Kurmanbek Bakiyev officially resigns after he leaves Kyrgyzstan for Kazakhstan. would be good enough, we already posted the protests before i believe -- Ashish-g55 18:17, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Ok, I always like to have a second opinion before posting. --Tone 18:30, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Support though already up so not needed. Formal change in head of state.Bradjamesbrown (talk) 19:40, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

April 15

ITN candidates for April 15

Drought in China

This is an ongoing event, but so far has not been nominated for ITN. The dust storms occured mostly in March, but the drought in southwestern China continues, see 2010 China drought and dust storms. ~AH1(TCU) 00:31, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Obama gives his much awaited speech on the future of NASA

Wikipedia article: Barack Obama space policy speech at Kennedy Space Center

"By the mid-2030s, I believe we can send humans to orbit Mars and return them safely to Earth, and a landing on Mars will follow." So not until mid-2030s just to get to orbit. Beyond that before any landing. Obama sets Mars goal for America, Obama Details Revised NASA Vision Qurq (talk) 20:25, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Suppport. In the mid 2030s when NASA man has actually orbited Mars. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:28, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
there is no way to post this and not have it look sarcastic. Obama cancels Constellation program as it was too slow for an unplanned mission that may or may not achieve mars orbit in 25 years. yay -- Ashish-g55 20:39, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Two decades to the day from Gagarin to the first flight of Columbia. 25 years for... what? I agree with Ashishg and HJ Mitchell, oppose for the next couple decades. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 20:42, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose for the plain reason that it's just too early to give any sort of concrete plans. Speech vs. shuttle launch, the shuttle will win.  f o x  20:45, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose - It's reminiscent of Kennedy, but without any real (financial) backing, I'm not sure whether this is newsworthy.--WaltCip (talk) 20:57, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose A relatively minor policy speech. --Kitch (Talk : Contrib) 12:01, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

GSLV failure

All orbital launches are technically WP:ITN/R items, and I feel that failures are particularly notable. This was also a fairly significant launch as it was the maiden flight of a new variant of the GSLV rocket, and the first Indian launch with an indigenous cryogenic upper stage. --GW 11:52, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

  • Support: Major disappointment for ISRO. --GPPande 13:51, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Support major event & GSAT-4 appears to be adequately updated. --ThaddeusB-public (talk) 13:54, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Recommended text: "The GSAT-4 satellite is lost in the failure of the maiden flight of the GSLV Mk.II, India's first rocket with an indigenous cryogenic upper stage.", or something similar. --GW 17:16, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. I don't usually like space launches, but this failed launch seems to be a bit out of the ordinary. Physchim62 (talk) 17:31, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Support, for reasons above. Do we want to wait a little before posting to allow the Iceland story a little more time at the top, or shall I just go for it?  f o x  17:35, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
You can always post it below the Iceland story while the Iceland story is pictured, given that they refer to the same day. We seem to have free images for this story, so things will even them selves out in a few hours. Physchim62 (talk) 17:57, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Good point. Posting.  f o x  19:09, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

UK general election debates

The first debates for the British general election in history have taken place. It's extremely notable in the UK, and may have some notability in the US (to contrast with the presidential debate system that's taken place over the past fifty years) too. Sceptre (talk) 21:40, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Support this first one only, and never again. The debate itself wasn't anything spectacular, but it's the first that has ever been held in the UK. No-one will remember the content, but its existence is historic. Modest Genius talk 22:57, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. Per MG, though- this one and this one only. This is unprecedented in the UK even if the debate itself was boring. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:01, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Support Its the first ever UK election debate featuring the failure of the frozen second stage leader in the UK's attempt to test a new variant of its government launch vehicle. MickMacNee (talk) 00:34, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose Too local. It's not as if the Uk invented the idea of televised debates in the run up to national elections. This "story" has all the elements of "Fog in channel; continent cut off" Physchim62 (talk) 00:47, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Ah, I'm sorry. I forgot this page was the "In the news (in America)" page. Still, this is way more notable than a landslide in Italy, and possibly notable because we're relatively late to the game. It's not as if there's going to be a flood of UK politics stories in the nex month; there'll only be two at the maximum: this and the election result, and with the amount of rampant pro-US systemic bias on the main page, I'll be surprised if the election result gets a look in. Sceptre (talk) 00:57, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Can we please try to avoid turning this into a nationalistic debate? —David Levy 01:05, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Yes, let's. Physchim, to address your point, if we were discussing "three men go on TV and have an argument" I'd agree with you, but this is about the historic significance of the debate taking place, so we wouldn't be discussing this in 4/5 years. This is the first time in a British election that the three most likely candidates for prime minister have had a televised debate. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:12, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
And my point is that such debates are standard election-campaign fodder in many other countries of the world. The UK hasn't had such debates before, as the sitting PM (from either of the largest parties) has always refused to take part; but the idea of the debates is not in itself novel. This "story" is just about the petty details of a national election campaign: the important result will come on 6 May. Physchim62 (talk) 01:31, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
The fact that it's the first debate is precisely why it's ITN-worthy. I/We don't want it for all of them; just this one. And this actually did have a measurable effect on the election; the Lib Dems did get a massive boost from the debate and might push it into hung parliament territory. Sceptre (talk) 01:53, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
I thought it better than the American debates, I must confess. Anyway, off topic, I say support for this only: this was the very first PM debate ever held by Britain. Pretty notable. HonouraryMix (talk) 00:51, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. Of interest to many users. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 00:55, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Support on a one-off basis. My knowledge of UK politics is limited, but this appears to be a highly significant development. —David Levy 01:05, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose Big bloody deal. The PM debates everyone in Parliament every Wednesday. So this is different now because it wasn't on a Wesnesday? Or was it on a Wednesday but not in Parliament? Or did it involve some people not in Parliament? God save the Queen. Nutmegger (talk) 01:25, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Comment The article could use a more substantial update. -- tariqabjotu 01:46, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Support for being the first ever, oppose if ever nominated again. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 03:14, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Support as this is the first time it has happened. And in many newspapers and TV stations the story seems to be forcing into second place the story about the entire UK airspace being closed and all planes grounded, which tells you how significant it is here. I do agree with the above comment that the article needs improving, however - it doesn't yet seem to have any detail on the debate last night. Sadly I'm at work so can't do anything about that myself till later on. SteveRwanda (talk) 08:33, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose We report the results of elections, not the processes of electioneering. Voters in the UK do not get to vote for a Prime Minister, but only for a local MP. Such debates in most other countries would not be proposed: this is systemic bias. Also little added since the debate actually took place: one sentence and a handful of refs to a winner declared by unspecified criteria. Kevin McE (talk) 09:46, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
They would certainly not be proposed if they were regular items. If they happened for the first time, after decades of vehement opposition to them, then sure. Modest Genius talk 16:44, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. Kevin McE says it well. Would this even be posted if had happened in the United States? And nothing particularly notable seems to have happened. This is nowhere to be seen at where the focus is on air travel chaos, the Chinese earthquake and apparently the UK is selling its fourth largest city which sounds much more interesting... --candlewicke 13:46, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
This is probably the least accurate piece of analysis I have read in a long while, would Nixon/JFK have been posted, yes - it has not been off the UK rolling news channels and websites for 22 hours, nothing happended? - how about the unprecidented swing in the polls. Selling Liverpool? what are you talking about? Its the american owned football club that is up for sale - not the city. Utter garbage. Leaky Caldron 17:26, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
For info, the stories you see on are ranked depending on where you are browsing from, so the rankings you see are not the same as others do. Modest Genius talk 16:44, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Kevin McE refers to leaders debates as if countries begin them all the time, harldy the case. He refers to lack of update. That's hardly stopped much worse entries before. At least this was actually a nomination with an update. He says there are unspecified winning criteria. Blatantly wrong. Nothing particularly notable happened? The third party leader was declared the unanimous winner in the first ever television leaders debate of a country which has for 60 years been a two party state. The incumbent PM got his ass handed to him on a plate. The pretender to the throne universally dissappointed. One poll today puts the Lib Dems one point behind the Conservatives in the predicted election result, a 16% swing. Its unheard of. I could go on and list the ample evidence of international interest, but we all know that is a hit and miss way of securing a listing, although nobody knows why. This is ITN strikes again tbh. Stifle should have put some space factoid in it, guaranteed success that apparently. MickMacNee (talk) 14:20, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
And I don't know what version you are looking at, but the debate is still the second top story on Front Page News. The first is on ITN already, so that was hardly a relevant comment. MickMacNee (talk) 14:25, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
The only vaguely plausable part of his comment is that in the UK we don't elect PMs directly, but who is he trying to kid if he thinks people in the UK at a general election are actually voting for a particular MP and not a party, and by extension a PM. MickMacNee (talk) 14:32, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
I've no idea why MickMacNee has decided to try to launch an attack on my comments, rather than simply present a support comment for the proposal, but seeing that he has done so, I shall respond.
Kevin McE refers to leaders debates as if countries begin them all the time...: I didn't specifically refer to them at all, I simply said that this is a form of electioneering, and as such something that we don't report in ITN.
He refers to lack of update: incorrect, I commented on the paucity of the update. The quality of the updated content is described as one of the main grounds for evaluating candidates, and so I consider it entirely reasonable to draw attention to this shortcoming. If he has seen what he considers to have been bad examples of the application of this in the past, that is scarcely grounds for the inclusion of this item now.
He says there are unspecified winning criteria and I still see no evidence at the article, nor in the articles cited in the article, that define what "winning" such a debate means. A debate can be won if it is immediately followed by a vote among the audience as to who they most agree with, but the vote is not until 6 May.
the debate is still the second top story on Front Page News: media outlets in the country where the debate took place scarcely provide evidence against a charge of systemic bias.
who is he trying to kid if he thinks people in the UK at a general election are actually voting for a particular MP and not a party, and by extension a PM: this overlooks the 1/3 of UK voters, including all Northern Ireland voters, who routinely vote for a party who have no meaningful chance of providing the prime minister. Kevin McE (talk) 15:18, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. agree with Kevin and Candle, this would not be posted even for US (it would be a more controversial basically... lots of opposition and supports). Systemic bias exists for both US and UK (a little less for UK i guess), but its still better to avoid this. -- Ashish-g55 13:59, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
It would have been posted in a heartbeat if it were the US. Yes that's a bad thing, but we all know nobody is about to address that at ITN/C anytime soon, especially not for dross like college football or domestic legislation. And in actual fact, hardly any countries hold leaders debates, so it is hardly an issue of excluding other coutries anyway. I am perfectly happy with 'first ever leaders debate' of any significant country becoming an ITN/R, as it appears are most people commenting. MickMacNee (talk) 14:29, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Support has been in the top 2 rolling news stories on BBC since midnight. Would have been even greater had it not been for the volcano. Major error of judgement not to include this. Leaky Caldron 16:29, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Strong Support this is the first televised debate in the history of the UK? And it's not on the main page already? I don't think most debates are notable, but come on, this is an obvious one to post. ~DC Talk To Me 16:54, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Posted - the consensus is that the historic nature of the debate overrides the fact that ITN doesn't usually cover pre-election activities. --ThaddeusB (talk) 18:09, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Strongly Oppose; Please remove it from ITN asap. I am surprised to see that this was posted despite so much reasoned opposition. User Thaddeus has seriously erred in judging that there has been a 'consensus' here. Nothing establishes this debate's notability aside from its inaugural nature, but the fact that it's happening for the first time is not a good enough reason in and of itself to make it noteworthy. Happening-for-the-first-time does not equal "historic". Conversely, if it wasn't the first time this has happened, and there were notable political results, reactions, then perhaps it is ITN-worthy. But the reasons for not having this on ITN doesn't stop there - this event has no international impact, it is not particularly newsworthy globally, it ostensibly has not even altered the election scene in Britain substantially, and it just looks really, really inappropriate admidst the rest of the news stories - which outweigh this story's notability hundredfold. Colipon+(Talk) 00:57, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

April 14

ITN candidates for April 14

Volcanic cloud disrupts European air traffic

The air space over Northern Norway has been closed due to the plume of the ash cloud from the Eyjafjallajökull volcano on Iceland. As this cloud moves air traffic over larger parts of Europe may also be shut down. __meco (talk) 20:01, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Wait to see what the effects are. It's potentially significant, but still a bit early. Physchim62 (talk) 20:05, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
I agree, however, this is a very rapidly developing situation, so we should be prepared for how it develops. Norwegian authorities warn that the air space over the entire country may be closed in a matter of hours. __meco (talk) 20:10, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
Support - air travel into and out of the UK is severely affected now as well [35] - major British international airports such as Liverpool, Glasgow, Manchester, Birmingham, London Stansted, Ediburgh and Newcastle have seen cancellations or closures, which will in turn affect thousands of flights across the globe. I think incidents such as British Airways Flight 9 means authorities are taking no risks... --Daviessimo (talk) 06:49, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Support' Unusual event, major impact on air travel in northern Europe. Mjroots (talk) 10:06, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. Big news over much of Europe. UK airspace will be totally closed from 1100 UTC, Belgian and Dutch airspace from 1200 UTC, Danish airspace from 1600 UTC. Much of German airspace is also expected to be closed. DutchNews Libération Bild Physchim62 (talk) 10:55, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Support I think the widespread scope of this event now warrants ITN mention. --Kitch (Talk : Contrib) 11:11, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Posting. --Tone 11:25, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

"Scandinavia" includes Finland, is that affected?  f o x  13:38, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

I think it's more important that the locations include all the areas affected, not that all of the areas within the locations mentioned are effected. -- tariqabjotu 13:55, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Well the way it's worded at present makes it seem Finland is affected (and arguably the Faroes, but I don't think there is an airport there anyway).  f o x  14:12, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Oh, yes, there is ;-) However, we'll have to update the blurb as the other countries are closing their airspaces. --Tone 15:43, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Learned something today ;) An update definitely on the cards, but not until later tonight, I feel.  f o x  17:37, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Why not until alter tonight? There is support for my suggestion of "northern Europe" in a related discussion on T:MP. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:53, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Death of computer journalist Guy Kewney

Guy Kewney, highly influential journalist on computers for last 40 years

"He was the first computer journalist, and was there right at the very beginning." Gracious, infuriating and funny: Goodbye Guy, and thanks, PC Pro (blog) - Jon Honeyball

Obituary: Guy Kewney, BBC

Headlines: Guy Kewney dies at 63, Los AngelesNews Today (talk) 17:29, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

I might be inclined to support the story, but the article would need some improvement. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:39, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose - ordinary deaths only need to be on the main page if the person is extremely notable, which I do not believe is the case here. --ThaddeusB (talk) 19:13, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose per ThaddeusB. Not seeing the extraordinary notability to put it on the front page. 00:07, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. For journalists, they need to be at least Bob Woodward level by my criteria. Physchim62 (talk) 01:00, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. Everyone knows ITN is British-centric; why pretend it's not? Nutmegger (talk) 01:27, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Shoaib-Sania nikkah )Marriage

This event is getting more news coverage than any other event in Southeast Asia. Both Indian and Pakistani media is give it top priority. Geo Tv has even got a special page for it | Shoaib-Sania ]--yousaf465 13:59, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Strong oppose. I wish the happy couple a long life together, but this is simply not ITN material. Physchim62 (talk) 14:15, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
Strong oppose Sad part is that even BBC and CNN had featured this on their front pages this week, however, ITN rejects items deemed trivial SPat talk 14:32, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
I'll have to agree with oppose here. --Tone 14:25, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
ya i'm sorry but two people getting married isnt really big news doesnt matter how much media coverage it gets. -- Ashish-g55 14:46, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
Is this some kind of joke? How come WP should showcase wedding on main page? --GPPande 15:08, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
Well, I remember we've once discussed the case where a king gets married (for example prince William if he were the king at that moment), that seemed to be somehow ITN-worthy. But this is not the case here. --Tone 15:22, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
ok fine a british monarch can be an exception but tennis player not so much. Media just loves this stuff. if we followed it then we would be posting a new blurb everytime tiger woods sleeps with someone other than his wife. -- Ashish-g55 15:30, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
I've seen Mirza play, and if she gets her mental act together and settles down, she can go up on ITN as a Grand Slam champion in a few years. Sitting Sovereign gets married, fine, that creates a Queen or Prince Consort. Tennis player, even one with the potential of Mirza, no. Oppose. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 15:56, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
Well it's not only Sania here, there is Shoaib also, this wedding is almost being officially celebrated here in Pakistan, with everybody from President to the Leader of opposition participating in some way. Pakistan's minister for population welfare, Firdous Ashiq Awan, has appointed the newly wed couple as ambassadors for population welfare. Look at the media coverage it is getting internationally Pakistan cricketer Malik weds India's tennis star Mirza MSNsport. It is being celebrated as far as Canada. Mock wedding are bing conducted all over Pakistan.--yousaf465 02:44, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose it's just a celebrity marriage, plain and simple. Few weddings are important enough to merit posting on ITN (British Royals, a sitting US President). ~DC Talk To Me 03:17, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Approve for Arabic, Punjabi and Hindi ITCs, not for English. --Kitch (Talk : Contrib) 11:18, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Arabic? -- tariqabjotu 12:32, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
You missed it Kitch it should have been Urdu instead. Well fun aside, I'm moving it to WT:ITN, we can discuss it further there.--yousaf465 06:23, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Maha Kumbh

An estimated two million people will bathe in the Ganges today at Haridwar in northern India, as the culmination of the Maha Kumbh festival, celebrated every twelve years. BBC News Physchim62 (talk) 11:04, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Tentative support. As it does not happen every year. --Tone 11:26, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
Two million is a lot of people, even by Indian standards! Physchim62 (talk) 11:51, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Support: Major event of Hinduism. Maybe we should have it in ITNR also. --GPPande 15:07, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
Support is cleaned up and updated. Would support ITN/R, but I wonder if that page will even exist by the next time this comes around. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 16:25, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
Support this is a major event. support placing in ITNR Wikireader41 (talk) 01:05, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Support The Maha Kumbh is considered to be the largest gathering of mankind in the world. Definitely newsworthy. --Nosedown (talk) 00:53, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Suggested blurb:

About two million Hindu pilgrims gather in Haridwar, India, for the Maha Kumbh festival.

--Nosedown (talk) 00:57, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Note: No update to Kumbh Mela (to which Maha Kumbh redirects) has been made yet, and I don't currently see any mention of 2010 Ganges bathing. --ThaddeusB (talk) 04:17, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Support if/when updated. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:09, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Comment the article hasn't been updated (by me) because I haven't been able to find any confirmation of the figure of two million. If anyone else wants to have a look then please do so. Physchim62 (talk) 21:44, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
I have updated the article some. per NY times source on April 14 alone 10 million people bathed in the Ganges. the year to date number is quoted at 40 million by AFP. the blurb could be

About ten million Hindu pilgrims bathe in the Ganges in Haridwar, India, for the Maha Kumbh festival. Wikireader41 (talk) 23:48, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

What's there is good, but I would prefer it if the update were a little more substantial. I'd offer my services, but I'm afraid I don't have time atm. As to the blurb, I suggest "at least" or "approximately" in pace of "about" but otherwise it sounds good. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:58, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
I have added some more. 2 citations say that this is the largest religious gathering in the world. so another suggestion for blurb is

Approximately ten million Hindu pilgrims bathe in the Ganges in Haridwar, India, for the Maha Kumbh festival, which is thought to be the largest religious gathering in the World. Wikireader41 (talk) 00:46, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Cheers for the update, I was obviously looking in the wrong places! I think the name should be Maha Kumbh Mela. If we are going to say that it's the biggest human gathering in the world, we should say it straight, not "thought to be": the only other gathering which gets close is the Hajj. Physchim62 (talk) 00:55, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
I think you are right. here are 3 more sources who call it the largest religious festival in the world.[36][37][38]. Wikireader41 (talk) 01:54, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

2010 West Bengal storm

31 dead in India, 50,000 destroyed homes - SiMioN.EuGeN (talk) 07:46, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
At the moment the article is too short, support when expanded. --Tone 11:26, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
Now we have 68 deaths - (AFP) (Press Trust of India) (Al Jazeera) - SiMioN.EuGeN (talk) 12:46, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Support: Significant event not covered much on mainstream media. --GPPande 15:06, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Support death toll now exceeds 100 persons. [39] --ThaddeusB (talk) 19:25, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Note: article is in poor shape, but I'm working on it now. Should be mainpage ready w/in an hour.--ThaddeusB (talk) 19:39, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
Article now cleaned up and expanded. I have also renamed it 2010 eastern Indian nor'wester since the storm affected multiple states, not just West Bengal. --ThaddeusB (talk) 21:06, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
The article is fine now but why don't we just call it a storm? There is no good article that would explain the term nor'wester, apart from a disambig. --Tone 21:19, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
I'm not sure if you meant in the blurb or the article title, but if you want to rename the article that is fine by me. --ThaddeusB (talk) 00:07, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Posted No way I was putting "nor'wester" on the Main Page though. -- tariqabjotu 23:05, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
I do not understand why is Bangladesh in the blurb? The nor'wester had struck the eastern part of India and almost all casualties were in India. --Nosedown (talk) 00:52, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

2010 Qinghai earthquake

About 300 people are killed in an earthquake in Qinghai province, China.[40] Major event, several casaulties SPat talk 06:19, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Rubber stamp support. Post right away! __meco (talk) 07:03, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
No need to support or oppose - per ITN/R - SiMioN.EuGeN (talk) 07:05, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
Just out of interest, which criterion on WP:ITNR does this qualify under? Support on it's own merits anyway. Modest Genius talk 01:10, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Posting, the article is in good shape already. --Tone 07:07, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
Obvious support Physchim62 (talk) 09:22, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

April 13

ITN candidates for April 13

Nuclear Security Summit (2010)

I am surprised nobody else nominated it. Any supports? It is said to be the biggest political thing held in Washington DC in 60 years. —  Cargoking  talk  20:45, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Support as above. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 20:57, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
Support, possibly with blurb: "Leaders of 40 nations agree to a plan designed to keep nuclear weapons out of terrorist hands at the Nuclear Security Summit." (LA Times) --ThaddeusB (talk) 01:54, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
Support per the above. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 04:19, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

April 12

ITN candidates for April 12

Pulitzer Prize

The Washington Post wins four and The New York Times wins three Pulitzer Prizes and Hank Williams earns posthumous recognition.

  • Support -SusanLesch (talk) 22:08, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Support, major award, though the article could use some more prose. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 00:07, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Support when sufficiently updated. I'm surprised this isn't on ITNR. --ThaddeusB (talk) 00:31, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Added a couple sentences to the lead, so this is updated. -SusanLesch (talk) 00:54, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Support. Significant prize. ~AH1(TCU) 02:52, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
Posting. Omitting Williams because the blurb would get really awkward as it is proposed above - feel free to alter it. --Tone 12:50, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
Heh. This one got in easily. The last time this was discussed, the result was its removal at WP:ITNR... –Howard the Duck 04:31, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
I missed this one, but I would have weak opposed. It's only open to newspapers in the US (not other countries or forms of journalism), and if we're going to post it regularly we need to select a 'headline' category, as we do for eg. the Oscars. On the other hand, I can't think of a bigger journalism prize we should have instead. Oppose ITNR without further discussion. Modest Genius talk 01:21, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Live Earth

The Dow Live Earth Run for Water started on April 18th. The host cities are: Buenos Aires, Cape Town, Chicago, Hong Kong, Jimbaran, London, Los Angeles, Manchester, Melbourne, Mexico City, Milan, Minneapolis, New York, Lisboa, Rio de Janeiro, São Paulo, Singapore City, Stockholm, Toronto and Washington, D.C.. --China Dialogue News 06:34, 12 April 2010 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by China Dialogue News (talkcontribs)

Leaning oppose, but that image is tagged as copyright, so can't be used on the main page. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 14:44, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
Support posting on April 18 without image. The Live Earth (2007 concert) was a major international event that was significant enough to be broadcast worldwide and played on all seven continents, and noteworthy enough for ITN. The event this year, the first after the cancelled 2008 event, is planned to be another significant international one. ~AH1(TCU) 02:55, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Devolution of Justice powers to NI/Car bomb explodes outside MI5 HQ in Belfast

*Policing and justice powers will be devolved to Northern Ireland from 12 April following a deal agreed by the DUP and Sinn Féin. This was a political stalemate that has existed for years. —  Cargoking  talk  16:20, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
Carried over from here. —  Cargoking  talk  16:31, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
The DUP and Sinn Fein have agreed do devolve policing and justice to Northern Ireland, and agreed to reform handling of parades. Strikes me as an important step in Northern Ireland history. [41] —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:38, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
Agreed, but this still has to pass a vote in the Northern Ireland Assembly on 9 March. We might want to wait until then - Dumelow (talk) 12:44, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
It's certainly big news in NI, but does it travel? You have to explain an awful lot of history and UK constitutional law before you get the significance. Even then, it is really just a return to what would be a "normal" situation in the UK, at least for policing, with the police under local political control and not central political control. The devolution of justice responsibilities is similarly fairly banal, as Northern Ireland is a separate jurisdiction and so has a self-contained courts system. There's a bigger UK story breaking at the moment, one that got pages of coverage in the Spanish press this morning as opposed to the odd paragraph for the NI deal... Physchim62 (talk) 14:12, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
Please make any further comment below here:
US President Barack Obama joined premiers Gordon Brown and Brian Cowen in proclaiming the significance of the deal.  Cargoking  talk  14:35, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
Moved from ITN/C
I think this is a pretty big event given the long history of the troubles in Northern Ireland. I would say if it were to go up, it's probably best to wait until the 12th April when power will actually be handed over, but I thought I'd put it out for discussion now --Daviessimo (talk) 21:38, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
Interesting. I was considering nominating this earlier. George W. Bush has been involved and it's big news in the UK. I'd say it's notable enough, but I;d be inclined to wait til April when it comes into force. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:02, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
Support now or then. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 23:17, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
Support Very major hurdle has been crossed in peace process. HonouraryMix (talk) 01:25, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
Weak oppose, as I have before. This is really just a domestic issue, with no international significance. It means that Northern Ireland has the same local political control over its police force as the rest of the UK, and also an administrative responsibility for its (separate) judicial system, as Scotland has. Not really earth-shattering unless you personally lived through the Troubles. Physchim62 (talk) 13:42, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
Support as above. It has international significance in the same way that Israel-Palestine and Kashmir (among others) do. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 13:45, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
Comment I'd like to remind people that all this chit-chat is meaningless if there's no article associated with this. -- tariqabjotu 08:29, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
I presume the relevant article to be updated is Department of Justice (Northern Ireland). I'll move this discussion to future events as I think this will be better returning on April 12th --Daviessimo (talk) 08:38, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
  • The devolution of justice powers was nominated in the past, but it was decided we should wait until today when it actually occurs. It marks a huge step forward in the democratic devolution process in NI and means the Northern Irish will have control over their own police forces/courts etc for the first time in almost 40 years. The car bomb is believed by police to be a dissident republican protest linked to the devolution of justice powers [42] --Daviessimo (talk) 07:26, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
Support I think this a terrorist incident in UK after a long period of time.--yousaf465 08:26, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. The Real IRA has claimed responsibility. --candlewicke 09:10, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. I have copied previous discussion to the top. —  Cargoking  talk  16:29, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
David Ford. --candlewicke 17:29, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
I propose, in my usual bossy way ;)
I don't think the car-bombing is significant. Physchim62 (talk) 18:17, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
Both articles – David Ford and Department of Justice (Northern Ireland) – need updating before this story can see the Main Page. Physchim62 (talk) 18:19, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. Significant step in NI history. I'll see what I can do on at least one of the articles. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:47, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Hungarian Parliamentary Elections

Posting. Election results are ITN/R and the article is updated. --Tone 10:56, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
Umm, just a note to say this is the first round (although it is still a victory). can we add first round to the main page?
They have already won absolute majority which is an event of itself. The second round will just assign the percentages. --Tone 11:49, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

2010 Merano train derailment

  • A landslide has caused a train to derail in north Italy, killing 11 people and injuring 25. BBCCNN - JuneGloom07 Talk? 12:34, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. Europe's (and Italy's) worst train accident in some time. The article seems to be long enough and is referenced. A landslide causes a train to derail in Merano, Italy, killing several people and injuries dozens of others. --candlewicke 16:14, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
The article is in good shape, ready to post after one support more. --Tone 19:51, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
Support as above. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 19:56, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
Support as well. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 19:57, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
 Y posted. --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:27, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
Thanks everyone, totally unexpected! I'd have thought the Real IRA bomb would have got the nod over this. There I was thinking that ITNs were harder to get than GAs! Mjroots (talk) 20:48, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

April 11

ITN candidates for April 11

Saudi Arabia and Vietnam

Support Once the relevant articles are updated. Candlewicke I think you can do the job.--yousaf465 08:18, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Greece Loan

  • I'm surprised that this hasn't been listed before, but the Eurozone nations have agreed on a 30bn euro loan deal for Greece, if they want the money [43]. As of yet they haven't formally requested help, but given that that have 300bn Euros worth of debt there's a good chance they will. Should we list now (as in the Eurozone nations offer to loan Greece 30bn to help it in its current financial crisis...or wait until Greece formally asks for help? --Daviessimo (talk) 19:14, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
Well, definitely not until they actually ask for it. --candlewicke 20:09, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose unless accepted. Not sure in case they take it, 30,000,000,000 Euro just isn't that much money anymore. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 00:05, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Hungary electiosn

  • Strong support election results usually make it to the front page and this was a landmark because "Jobbik won 16.7 per cent of the vote, more than three times as much as any other far-right party since the country's return to democracy from communism in 1990." Some future trends being forecasted here (especially int he light of the last EU elections)
Just updated it with results from the first round

April 2010 Solomon Islands earthquake

Oppose for now, doesn't appear to be any significant damage/casualties. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 15:57, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

2010 Masters

  • It is listed on ITNR as one of the four golf majors, so as long as a prose update is forthcoming, this should be listed on ITN --Daviessimo (talk) 08:31, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
    • Support Sporting event with international significance, ITN should be updated with the winner info when the winner is known, something like "John Doe wins the 2010 Masters Golf Tournament in Augusta, Georgia" or something similar. --Jayron32 20:15, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
It's over, Phil Mickelson wins, his third title at the Masters. Support. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 22:58, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
 Y Since this is on ITNR and the article has been updated, I've posted the story. --ThaddeusB (talk) 01:49, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
No, no, no. This event is basically only watched in the United States and Canada, maybe the UK, along with a handful of loyal golf fans in other countries. Even cricket has greater international exposure. Typical Wikipedia systemic bias. Colipon+(Talk) 03:37, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
its pretty funny how u compared it to 2nd most watched sport in the world. i hope above comment was sarcastic because it really shows lack of sports knowledge. if it wasnt sarcastic then please go see the amount of masters tournament coverage in pretty much any country's news papers/sites. -- Ashish-g55 04:32, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
What do the Chinese watch anyway? That supposedly #1, right? –Howard the Duck 11:12, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
I do apologize for my ignorance on cricket. It is, indeed, the second most watched sport in the world. Apparently golf ranks eighth. Also, there is no need for the insensitive swipes about Chinese people. If we put the Masters on the ITN, will be do the same for British Open? For U.S. Open? For the PGA Championship? Correct me if I'm wrong, I don't recall major golf tournaments being listed on ITN. Colipon+(Talk) 11:57, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
That was not a swipe on the Chinese people. I was merely asking what the Chinese people watch, since if Indians watch cricket, and that's #2, what the Chinese should watch should be #1.
As for golf, see WP:ITNR#Golf. –Howard the Duck 12:03, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

───────────────────────── The #1 is going to be Soccer. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 19:58, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

  • Support: I don't watch, nor am I interested in golf in any way shape or form, but this seems to be a big enough tournament to warrant inclusion at ITN.  f o x  11:09, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. Colipon, yes we WILL post each of the other golf tournaments you list - they're on our list of recurring items at WP:ITNR. Modest Genius talk 22:29, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Fabian Cancellara

Probably going to told off, but this Swiss cyclist has just won the Tour of Flanders and Paris-roubaix in consecutive weeks. The two most famous cobbled classics. Cycling is a very big sport throughout Europe and there are Americans, Australians and Canadians on the ProTour as well nowadays YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 00:34, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Support. This seems to be an important achievement. And he has a picture! --candlewicke 22:07, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
Support if its not too late per YellowMonkey. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 21:06, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

April 10

ITN candidates for April 10

Shroud of Turin goes on public display for the first time in 10 years

According to the BBC, "The shroud is expected to draw some two million visitors to the northern Italian city over the next few weeks". Millions of people believe it is important, it is kept in a bullet-proof case in Turin Cathedral and the Pope is even going to make a flying visit to inspect it. --candlewicke 19:30, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

  • Support. Appears to be notable enough. ~AH1(TCU) 23:59, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Interesting story (and the Shroud itself is super interesting), but I don't feel it is a big enough development to hit the main page. --ThaddeusB (talk) 01:19, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose The Catholic church decides to show a 13th century forgery - very possibly in order to distract attention from the over 200 raped deaf boys and other victims who are also, and more legitimately, in the news. I fail to see the notability of this. KillerChihuahua?!?Advice 06:39, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose While I love the history behind this, "Very old object put back on public display" isn't really that big of news. First time ever displayed would be, but not after a mere ten years. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 09:49, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Bronisław Komorowski becomes Acting President of Poland

Shouldn't this be mentioned in some way on the Main Page? --candlewicke 16:09, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Probably in the same bit as the other Polish thing, but I think it's maybe too detailed as it is.  f o x  16:11, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
I think this should be put up as its own item. The one about the plane crash is crowded enough. --PlasmaTwa2 20:36, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
Support as separate item. ~AH1(TCU) 00:00, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
Support separate blurb. Even if we were setting ratio decidendi, how often do 40-odd notable people, including the incumbent head of state die in on incident? On another note, can we work in somewhere that a week of mourning has been declared? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:11, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. It's a necessary and automatic consequence of the plane crash. Possibly worth mentioning in the plane crash blurb, but I don't see why this should count as a event needing a separate posting. Dragons flight (talk) 01:34, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
support 2 separate events here. one giant blurb doesnt make it any better. -- Ashish-g55 02:14, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose per Dragons flight. The two items would lead anyway to the same set of articles. --Elekhh (talk) 02:29, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
Support - Two events; this is noteworthy in its own right as identifying who is now leading the country. KillerChihuahua?!?Advice 06:41, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
Given that succession is immediate and automatic, I really don't see the argument for how this counts as "two events"? In addition, you can't explain why he is president without mentioning the plane crash, so if this is included, it really should be part of a long plane crash blurb. Dragons flight (talk) 08:21, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
I'll add a second sentence to the present blurb. --Tone 11:44, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
That works; thanks. KillerChihuahua?!?Advice 20:54, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Tony McCoy "finally" wins the Grand National

I know next to nothing about horse racing but "Tony McCoy" and "Grand National" ring a few bells. The Daily Telegraph - "a famous victory". --candlewicke 16:03, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

It's his first win in the 15 years he's tried, according to the BBC. But he was favourite...  f o x  16:15, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
I'll support as long as the article is updated sufficiently. At the moment, the results table has not been completed and the article lacks prose. As an aside, why are no horse races listed at ITNR? --Daviessimo (talk) 17:12, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
Support if sufficiently updated, with prose. --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:21, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose nothing that only in the event of a Triple Crown does ITN/R contain horse racing. (And considering the amount of attention the sort gets, I feel that's about right.) We've got an ITN/R sports story to put up in around 13 hours, so this would mean putting two up in rapid succession. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 09:52, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
But it is a bit odd that we list pretty much every major sport and a lot a minor ones, but we don't have any horse races. Also, there a are multiple triple crowns and they are only achieved once every 30 years or so. I said it last year, but why not just select the 3 or 4 horse racing events that are followed around the world and list them instead. I mean most sports enthuisiasts have heard of the Kentucky Derby, Melbourne Cup, Grand National and Prix de l'Arc de Triomphe. --Daviessimo (talk) 10:34, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
At absolute minimum, the Kentucky Derby should be listed every year; Grand National would probably be 2nd, and I would certainly support its yearly inclusion as well. --ThaddeusB (talk) 18:09, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
Most of the ITNR events tend to be familiar even to people who don't follow the sport. Anecdotally, I would note that I'm familiar with the Kentucky Derby, but have never heard of the Grand National before this. So I would hope to see further justification (probably not here) before adding the National to ITNR. Dragons flight (talk) 18:33, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
Whereas I have heard of the Grand National and have never heard of the Kentucky Derby. "The Grand National is watched worldwide by over 600 million viewers". Further, I looked up "Kentucky Derby" and in the "History" section it mentions the Epsom Derby which I have also heard of. The Kentucky Derby seems to be based on/inspired by the Epsom Derby and is younger than the Epsom Derby which is apparently "Britain's richest horse race, and the most prestigious of the country's five Classics". Is the Kentucky Derby very important at all? It just seems to be part one of three races. It isn't even the oldest in the United States (apparently that is Travers Stakes and the Grand National is several decades older than this, never mind the Kentucky Derby). I would rate the Kentucky Derby at least third but I must be missing something as everyone seems very enthusiastic about the Kentucky Derby and not at all enthusiastic about the Grand National. --candlewicke 19:57, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
From the article: "The Kentucky Derby is ... widely considered the most prestigious horse race in the world". No citation naturally, but that's in line with my perception that it is the best known horse race in the US. Being American, I'm unsure of it's international importance though. Dragons flight (talk) 20:07, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
Apparently when Queen Elizabeth attended the Kentucky Derby in 2007 she considered it one of the highlights of her life. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 22:48, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
Since when has been age the primary factor in posting events? What's next? The NCAA Basketball getting in because NCAA Basketball made it? LOL. –Howard the Duck 06:46, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Thai protests

Is there an article for that?--DAI (Δ) 12:48, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

I haven't heard of this at all. News links?  f o x  13:28, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
No. 2 story on BBC News at the minute. Physchim62 (talk) 13:34, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
Support with blurb "Nineteen people die after violence breaks out between government forces and protesters in Thailand." New article, 2010 Thai political protests, started with info from National United Front of Democracy Against Dictatorship and updated to reflect this significant development. --ThaddeusB (talk) 18:08, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
"worst political violence in 18 years" [44] --ThaddeusB (talk) 18:47, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. An international (Japanese) cameraman is among the killed. ~AH1(TCU) 00:02, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. I've just moved 2008-2009 Thai political crisis to 2008–2010 Thai political crisis and added a new section to describe the current events and a section in the introduction. A suitable link for this news feature would be to the main section 2008–2010 Thai political crisis#2010 "red shirt" opposition supporter protests. Feel free to modify the title (and of course any of the article) if you think it will improve things. As some of the largest political unrest in Thailand for decades this should definitely be in the news on the main page. Kernow (talk) 05:38, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
As noted above, there is now an article (2010 Thai political protests) specifically on the these protests. Any blurb should link to that article (which links back to the ongoing political crisis). Thank you, however, for adding a blurb to that article. It is definitely helpful to have a summary there as well. --ThaddeusB (talk) 06:35, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
Ah yes, thank you for pointing out the specific article. Kernow (talk) 06:39, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
Support Very notable. KillerChihuahua?!?Advice 06:42, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
Posting. --Tone 11:42, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Crash of the plane of the Polish president

Naturally support - it's the worst news in 2010 - SiMioN.EuGeN (talk) 07:58, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
Absolutely. Death in office of a head of state is ITN/R. Physchim62 (talk) 08:13, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
Article started at 2010 Polish Air Force Tu-154 crash. I can't do much on this as I've got a wedding to go to today. Mjroots (talk) 08:14, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
Please update to reflect confirmed death e.g. below  Chzz  ►  08:20, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Polish President Lech Kaczyński and wife Maria die in a plane crash in Western Russia
  • I guess we should add that the entire Polish state delegation, on the way to commemorate the Katyn massacre, was killed in the crash.

Ouch! at that blurb! How about:

I don't think including reported to or allegedly sounds very good - that what newspapers do. I'd prefer to just say a plane carrying XX crashes in Russia. It can be updated when more information appears --Daviessimo (talk) 08:42, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
Suggest updating as below following several confirmations  Chzz  ►  09:54, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
Support updated blurb. Deaths have been confirmed, as noted. HonouraryMix (talk) 10:09, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
It's a bit of a mouthful, no? Do we need the first lady in there?  f o x  11:21, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
Obvious support. Shocking! Even without all the notable people that is still a lot of dead people. Today's entire recent deaths has been taken over by Poland! When was the last time so many notable people from one country died in one incident? When was the last time Recent deaths even had that many entries? --candlewicke 14:33, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Suggest changing the wording from "Several notable Poles" to "Many notable..." to reflect the enormity of this disaster. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:08, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

  Done --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:19, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Death of Abel Muzorewa

BBC - "one of the most prominent political figures in the turbulent years before the independence of Zimbabwe". Voice of America - "consecrated the United Methodist Church's first black bishop in 1968". The Daily Telegraph - "first black prime minister of Zimbabwe-Rhodesia [...] led his party's delegation at the Lancaster House conference in London in 1979 which resulted in the emergence the following year of the independent republic of Zimbabwe, formerly Southern Rhodesia". --candlewicke 01:43, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

  • The article's updates do not yet include the addition of substantial information regarding Muzorewa's death. I support the item's inclusion if and when a decent Death section (explaining the circumstances and societal impact) is authored. —David Levy 01:55, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
Better? --candlewicke 02:43, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
Support but the article still needs work- the lead is almost non-existent and there are precious little references. Articles on the MP should look a little better than that. I oppose posting it in its current state but support the inclusion of the item. What David said, essentially! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 03:20, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

April 9

ITN candidates for April 9

Nord Stream

Construction of the controversial Nord Stream gas pipeline starts. Beagel (talk) 15:32, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Did we not post something about this earlier? Anyway, I would oppose the beginning of its construction.--Johnsemlak (talk) 10:51, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Yes, it appeared on 8 November 2009 with the blurb "Finland and Sweden give a permit to build the controversial Nord Stream, a natural gas pipeline from Vyborg, Russia, to Greifswald, Germany, in their exclusive economic zones." Weak oppose, let's wait for the inauguration. Physchim62 (talk) 13:36, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

John Paul Stevens

Repeating the blurb:

Support. What's the holdup? This is kind of a big deal. True, it's not as earth-shaking as if (say) Anthony Kennedy or Antonin Scalia retired, but given that SCOTUS changes don't happen too often, I think it's ITN-worthy. Lockesdonkey (talk) 17:04, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

While, I'm tempting to support, I'm not sure his retirement is unexpected (it's been rumored for the last year it feels like). Also, when Souter announced his retirement last year, it wasn't posted (though Obama's nomination of Sotomayor and her swearing-in were). So I guess I'm neutral leaning support/weak support. ~DC Talk To Me 17:10, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. We routinely do not feature the resignations and retirements of politicians etc. Unless there was a real scandal that caused him to resign, I don;t think it's ITN-worthy. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:21, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
  • I'm split. While it's not every day that a Supreme Court justice retires, it's not like this was entirely unexpected (he was 90) —Ed (talkmajestic titan) 17:26, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose - I agree with HJMitchell. Had he resigned as a result of a scandal then that would have been a different story, but he was very old and this is just a run of the mill retirement --Daviessimo (talk) 17:30, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose as above. The retirement was entirely expected, Stevens will be replaced by another Justice of similar outlook, nothing really will change in the world. Physchim62 (talk) 17:33, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Support - a Supreme Court Justice is not a politician. As a side note, it is a pity that Daviessimo feels that a scandal would make it worthwhile, whereas without some salacious detail, he considers it is not newsworthy. This is a sad commentary on modern views; allow me to comment that gossip is not news, but a Supreme court justice retiring will effect everyone in the United States for many years to come, and is most assuredly news. One puppy's opinion. KillerChihuahua?!?Advice 17:37, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Actually, I never said I do not consider it newsworthy, so please don't put words in my mouth. I simply do not consider it ITN worthy. As has been said to death, ITN is not a news ticker and we cannot put every single newsworthy item on the main page of what is actually an encyclopaedia. The notability of one's career has to be pretty high to get a death mention on ITN so why should it be any different for a retirement. --Daviessimo (talk) 18:25, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. Wait until a replacement is confirmed. --ed 18:19, 9 April 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk)
I don't think I'd even support the confirmation of his successor (unless there was something unusual about it). This is really run-of-the-mill stuff which only affects a single country (however large and important that country is). Physchim62 (talk) 18:36, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose--Johnsemlak (talk) 18:49, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose - I added it to the daily Portal earlier today, but didn't nominate it here b/c I didn't feel it was important enough for the main page. A big deal, to be sure, but not even one of the top 3 stories of the day, IMO. --ThaddeusB (talk) 19:54, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose Not unexpected at all, and won't change the ideological make-up of the court. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 19:55, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose per HJ Mitchell, Daviessimo, Physchim62, Johnsemlak, ThaddeusB and Bradjamesbrown. --candlewicke 01:00, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Support -- More than 6,000 Google News hits. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 15:20, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

SupportImportant News--Istcol (talk) 11:25, 12 April 2010 (UTC)


  • American and Russian physicists announce the creation of ununseptium, atomic element number 117.' Feel free to reword. --Natural RX 19:36, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Premature. We should wait for the paper to appear in its full form, rather than just being accepted for publication. I'm underwhelmed by the state of the article as well, but I'll take that up with WP:ELEMENTS so that, hopefully, we can have a decent article to link when the moment comes (probably in 4–6 weeks, depends on the journal). Physchim62 (talk) 19:46, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Support - No opinion on whether it should go up now or when the paper is published, though. --ThaddeusB (talk) 19:58, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Support - The paper was published, see also /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 22:21, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. Important synthetic element. ~AH1(TCU) 00:10, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
Posting. --Tone 11:51, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

April 8

ITN candidates for April 8

Australopithecus sediba

Nom: (New article) This is a pretty major find. Will be the cover story of tomorrow's Science issue. --ThaddeusB-public (talk) 19:08, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Always support good science stories, which this is. We should just make sure that we put an image of some building on ITN so that we don't again draw complaints that we have described some politicians as "a new type of ancient human"... :-) --Tone 19:13, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. --bender235 (talk) 22:21, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Support as usual for major science stories. --Bradjamesbrown is travelling (Talk to my master) 22:41, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Wow, it's a busy week in biology stories! I've checked the article and I have to say Support: not only is this obviously a major find, but the article is well written and properly referenced (which ain't how I usually find them!) Physchim62 (talk) 23:35, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Support.--Johnsemlak (talk) 02:40, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Posting. --Tone 09:52, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Malcolm McLaren

Is the death of Malcolm McLaren notable? BBC  Cargoking  talk  18:35, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm going to support this one. The Guardian calls him "the guiding force behind punk". The Independent holds him responsible for generating the controversy of The Sex Pistols — "McLaren was best known as manager of the iconic UK punk band The Sex Pistols [...] Controversy was always high on the band’s agenda, and it was McLaren, primarily, who ensured they achieved it [...] The band split up after a series of arguments, with members accusing McLaren of mismanaging them and withholding money [...] is regularly cited as being a significant influences in bringing hip-hop to a wider audience in the UK". Eminem and Mariah Carey like him too and they seem to be highly successful. --candlewicke 19:22, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose There are plenty of other managers out there like him. Hasn't really been relevant to a wide audience in a while. And I don't care about the hyperbole newspapers use in their obits on him, because that's what they do. ~DC Talk To Me 19:30, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
They don't do that for everyone. --candlewicke 19:39, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Weak oppose Although I share nominator's assessment of the great impact Malcolm McLaren had on pop music for several years, and I was a fan of his projects at the time, I still think that the overall impact he has had on pop music was too short-lived to place him in the really big league with people like for instance Phil Spector. He was more in a novelty-niche of his own peculiar, although catchy, design. __meco (talk) 19:40, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
There's also Allen Klein, who managed The Beatles and Rolling Stones (and some consider a cause of the Beatles break-up, along with Spector), and his death last July wasn't added to ITN. ~DC Talk To Me 20:02, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Support, but with no prejudice if this doesn't get posted, it's a busy week. There are plenty of othe managers out there like McLaren, but he was the one who did the Sex Pistols and, even if punk didn't last long as a genre in itself, it laid the way open to otyher genres such as indie and death metal, which were far more commercially successful than punk itself. The position of the Sex Pistols in the history of modern music is undisputed, and that is in a large part down to McLaren. My one hesitation is that the story might be too UK-centric, but I trust that other editors will comment on that. Physchim62 (talk) 23:50, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose, not American. Sceptre (talk) 23:57, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. The manager of a band--no.--Johnsemlak (talk) 02:38, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Support Yes, there are other band managers, but ask anyone with a passing knowledge of punk rock or rock music history in general to "Name any band manager", and his name shows up on a very short list (Him, Andrew Loog Oldham, Brian Epstein, Maurice Starr) of band managers who were as well known, or more so, than the bands they managed. Yes, the average band manager would not deserve a blip, but he's no average band manager. --Jayron32 03:32, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose Not influential enough on a world stage. (And please don't bring up Haig, you can't really compare the highest ranking minister of a UNSC permanent member with a band manager.) The press has lots of flowery words for him, of course, de mortuis nil nisi bonum. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 07:39, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Sri Lankan parliamentary election, 2010

An election to all 225 seats of the Parliament of Sri Lanka - Dumelow (talk) 23:28, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Support as per ITNR, when results are in the article; ideally there would be prose text on the results.--Johnsemlak (talk) 03:19, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Probably best to wait a few more hours before posting, but the blurb is correct as of now. At least one seat will have to be recontested following violence, but the overall result is clear. Physchim62 (talk) 14:55, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. We should update the photo as well. Rajapakse's photo is free. --Tone 15:03, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Support per ITNR. --candlewicke 15:43, 9 April 2010 (UTC)


Today's START agreement is mentioned at a below date. —  Cargoking  talk  09:15, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

18th amendment Pakistan

Pakistani Parliament'‎ is going to pass the 18th amendment on Friday. It includes the name change of NWFP, changes in Education rights etc. controversial clause 58(2)b has been removed. Google news.--yousaf465 08:15, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Support. --Saki talk 09:12, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Support Wikireader41 (talk) 16:35, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. I cannot see the large issue in this, particularly not to an international audience. __meco (talk) 18:32, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Support because I believe the following answers the one oppose. Radio Netherlands Worldwide — "landmark bill", "historic", "significant". CNN — "a historic moment". Press TV — "The president will lose his power to dismiss the prime minister and dissolve parliament". And there are lots of others... --candlewicke 19:29, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Do we have an article? I thought about nominating the change in name of the NWFP, but didn't get round to it. To be posted, I think this story needs a good explanation of why it is important. Neutral for the moment. Physchim62 (talk) 23:53, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Neutral as per Physchim.--Johnsemlak (talk) 02:44, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Comment For the time being we may use Constitution of Pakistan. Here we are It has been approved by majority vote vote of 255.18th Amendment approved by majority vote--yousaf465 02:54, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Well, that article still needs an update. That said, I now Support this item when a sufficient update/article is ready. This amendment significantly changes presidential powers of one of the largest countries in the world. Am I right that the head of state will now be the Prime Minister, not the President?--Johnsemlak (talk) 03:27, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
The president will still be the head of state but the role will largely become ceremonial. The prime minister will also remain the head of government but it will be given full executive power. Therequiembellishere (talk) 03:35, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Yes President will now only act as ceremonial Head of state, Pm will have the executive power. For the Update I have asked user:Saki but anyone may update it.--yousaf465 04:26, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Conditional Support: The articles Constitution of Pakistan and President of Pakistan must be updated to reflect the amendment. As it is, I'm surprised there was no mention of this story on either page during the period that the changes were being discussed. Additionally, the ITN entry should mention that the amendment effectively turns Pakistan from a semi-presidential to a parliamentary republic; indeed, might I suggest the following alternate formulation of the blurb:
Pakistan adopts the 18th amendment to its Constitution, stripping the President of key powers and changing its form of government from a semi-presidential to a parliamentary republic. Lockesdonkey (talk) 04:41, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
We do have the article now, Eighteenth Amendment to the Constitution of Pakistan. Somebody please update it. Loadsheding doesn't give enough time to update.--yousaf465 12:57, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. The indicated article appears to be sufficiently updated now. ~AH1(TCU) 00:25, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
The Eighteenth Amendment to the Constitution of Pakistan is passed, removing the power of the President to dissolve Parliament. Leaving a note on the talk page. --candlewicke 13:43, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. Significant step given Pakistan's history and considering and Pakistan is the 6th most populous country on Earth, G20 member and, of course, nuclear power so changes to its constitution and politics can have a significant international effect. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:37, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

British Airways-Iberia merger

British Airways and Iberia have officially confirmed they are to merge, a move that will create the world's third largest airline. Although this was agreed in principle back in November 2009, it is only now that it has been officially signed off. In the past, the precedent has been to list business deals at this point (e.g. the Volvo or Cadbury takeovers). As of yet, no article on British Airways-Iberia exists (which would follow the precedent of Air France-KLM after their merger), but an update can be made at History of British Airways or History of Iberia Airlines --Daviessimo (talk) 07:21, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Support obviously ITNworthy, just need to figure out which article to bold. ~DC Talk To Me 07:28, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Support Although it is interesting that our prior airline story was also about Oneworld. Major cross-border business deal that's been in the air for years- though it spent some time as a BA-American Airlines merger discussion, IIRC. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 08:34, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. This makes them one of the biggest airlines in the world. —  Cargoking  talk  09:16, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Support big fusio. --China Dialogue News 10:41, 8 April 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by China Dialogue News (talkcontribs)
Please suggest a blurb. BA and Iberia merge to become one of world's biggest airline? --Tone 10:52, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
... one of the world's largest airlines. Support.--Johnsemlak (talk) 11:35, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
I'd go for "British Airways and Iberia agree to a merger, creating the third largest commercial airline carrier in the world", as the merger itself will take place over a several month period. I'll look to update the article in a short while --Daviessimo (talk) 11:50, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. Out of interest, do we have an article on the company that this will form? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:05, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Totally unpostable in its present stage, but it's International Airlines Group. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 13:10, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
I've made a small update at History_of_British_Airways#2009_-_Financial_difficulties_and_merger, which should be fine for a listing on the main page. Ultimately the new group won't come into existence until the merger is completed in several months time. Is the update ok? --Daviessimo (talk) 13:34, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
I found it and yes, definitely unpostable and not even worth linking in the blurb but I'll have a look at it alter. Daviessimo's update seems fine, though. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:40, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Posted. Reuters says "third largest airline". If the qualifiers "commercial" and "carrier" are really necessary, please report to WP:ERRORS with sources.--Chaser (talk) 14:48, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Rwandan boat tragedy

"Rwanda boat sinking mars genocide commemoration". A vessel carrying people to commemorations of the Rwandan Genocide on its way to Kibuye has capsized on Lake Kivu. --candlewicke 02:13, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Oppose for now. No confirmed death toll yet and it doesn't look like it will compare with other boating accidents we usually post.--Johnsemlak (talk) 14:46, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

April 7

ITN candidates for April 7

James Hansen wins the Sophie Prize

James Hansen wins the Sophie Prize. [45] [46] [47] [48] [49] --Green district (talk) 12:22, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Hansen article is very good but the prize article is barely a list of winners. De facto reason for oppose from my side. --Tone 11:44, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
That's frequently a problem with awards articles. Oppose for the same reason.--Johnsemlak (talk) 02:46, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

START treaty (2010)

To be signed tomorrow in Prague by Obama and Medvedev, it will limit nuclear warheads and missiles. (It will still leave enough to blow up the world.) Such agreements were considered real big deals in the 80s. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 00:00, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Still seems a big deal to me. Support when signed. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 00:08, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Still leaves enough to blow up the world though... --candlewicke 00:24, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Always will be, as long as there are nations. Still a historic event in the 20+ year thawing of tension between the U.S. and the Russian Federation. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 01:17, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Strong Support once the treaty is signed Modest Genius talk 00:43, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Strong Support. this is a historic event.Wikireader41 (talk) 01:14, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Support as previously indicated. --Elekhh (talk) 02:37, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Support, and I suggest we also mention the announced change in US Nuclear strategy discussed below.--Johnsemlak (talk) 03:10, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Ready to post now that the treaty has been signed. Any suggestion for the blurb? Obama and Medvedev sign a treaty to limit the number of nuclear warheads and missles. Anything more? --Tone 10:51, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Yes, mention the item I have nominated below. —  Cargoking  talk  18:21, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Can I have the final blurb, please? ;-) (too many suggestions these days, but this one really deserves to get on ITN) --Tone 09:55, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Posting basic one, feel free to add. --Tone 17:58, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Polish and Russian PMs commemorate Katyn massacre

In an unprecedented step1 Vladimir Putin has invited Polish PM Donald Tusk to commemorate victims of the Katyn Massacre. This is frankly a stunning development (though it was reported as early as February) and an major act of reconciliation. For those not familiar the short version is in 1940 the Soviet NKVD shot 22,000 Poles, mostly officers, at the Katyn forest in present day Russia. Later on the USSR blamed the killings on the Nazis, and this was the official story until Gorbachev admitted the Soviet's responsibility in 1990. Since then Katyn has been a very large source political dispute between Warsaw and Moscow. Putin making this very public step at reconciliation is very surprising to me and a very significant step in Poland–Russia relations. On Friday, Russian state tv aired an Oscar-nominated Polish film documenting the massacre.2.

Coverage of this has been widespread but low-profile:

One or two of the relevant articles will need an update, which I'll be able to help on later tonight possibly. The Katyn article is the only one I've found with any mention of the latest developments (a one sentence update). --Johnsemlak (talk) 17:17, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

I've updated Katyn article's Katyn_massacre#Present_Day_Developments section.--Johnsemlak (talk) 19:43, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. Important development in a notoriously prickly relationship. Physchim62 (talk) 00:20, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. Why is there such little interest? --candlewicke 20:20, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
I was hoping there would be some interest in a history-related story (one tied to current events). Perhaps it's just been a busy week.--Johnsemlak (talk) 02:41, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Support also - There have been quite a few nominations over the last couple of days and somehow I missed several on this day. There is also the ongoing crisis in Thailand which seems to have been overlooked --Daviessimo (talk) 10:00, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Ready to post. But, I'd like to have a blurb discussion here first. --Tone 18:08, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
This blurb may not make it sound particularly notable but how about In a significant step of reconciliation, Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin and Polish PM Donald Tusk jointly commemorate the 70th anniversary of the Katyn massacre.--Johnsemlak (talk) 18:56, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Seems this never went up, not sure why but obviously overtaken by other unfortunate events Nil Einne (talk) 01:28, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Thailand state of emergency

The Redshirts stormed parliament demanding the prime minister to resign. The PM instead declared a state of emergency. –Howard the Duck 13:55, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Support, the Redshirts have now stormed and taken control of a TV station so the situation seems to be worsening. Is there an article? --Daviessimo (talk) 10:02, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

2010 Kyrgyzstan riots

Support. The article covers a developing story so it needs constant attention. Please, suggest a blurb. --Tone 11:30, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. This has reached a point where we should post it. The article is in adequate shape, and having it on the Main Page will help with updates. Suggest:
The use of live ammunition and the death of at least one person are confirmed by the BBC correspondant in Bishkek. Physchim62 (talk) 11:48, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
As an update, the AP is now reporting 12 deaths (here). Otebig (talk) 11:53, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Updated suggested blurb (+ fixed spelling mistake!) Physchim62 (talk) 12:04, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Support - major story.--DAI (Δ) 12:31, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Interior minister killed?--DAI (Δ) 12:31, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Currently being denied by the Kyrkyz Interior Ministry. Physchim62 (talk) 12:49, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
I don't like "reportedly" on ITN. What about Violent demonstrations take place in Bishkek, with police opening fire on protesters? Ready to post otherwise. --Tone 12:52, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
I personally like "Police open fire on demonstrators in Bishkek, the capital of Kyrgyzstan, killing at least twelve people" a bit better. The figure of 12 was reported by AP journalists on the ground, and I haven't seen any MSM outlets that have questioned that number (if it does turn out to be more, that's covered by the at least). I also think it's good to mention "Kyrgyzstan" in the blurb, since it's a country-wide issue, not only in Bishkek. Otebig (talk) 13:05, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Sure, to mention the country name, I was just being brief. Ok, now that the deaths are confirmed by a reliable source, I think it is ok to include that in the blurb. Posting. --Tone 13:14, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
I find an update is needed —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:15, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
It's about time to update the blurb. Any suggestions? --Tone 11:44, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Maybe "Opposition leaders in Kyrgyzstan take control of government buildings following a day of deadly anti-government demonstrations"? Otebig (talk) 11:52, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Big lizard

  • Support, article, while short, is pretty well sourced.  f o x  10:21, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
  • Is this the one with two penises? We should have free pics of this! –Howard the Duck 11:17, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
  • We would have to go to the forests of the northern Philippines to get pictures of this lizard's two penises, but here's a free picture of the same phenomenon on a rattlesnake, just for you! (having two penises is quite normal for snakes and lizards) Physchim62 (talk) 11:28, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Support. --Tone 11:30, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Support - This is impeccably interesting.--WaltCip (talk) 15:09, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Support Wikireader41 (talk) 19:48, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Support, much better than the recurring 'new dinosaur species' stories.