Open main menu

Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates/December 2010

< Wikipedia:In the news‎ | Candidates

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.


December 31

Portal:Current events/2010 December 31

Beijing Subway expansion

Lines 15, Changping, Fangshan, Yizhuang and Daxing are opened for operation in the Beijing Subway, adding 108 km of new tracks to the system. GreyHood Talk 15:17, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

  • Support as nominator. Such a huge expansion of a rapid transit system is a rare event, and perhaps the largest single expansion in history. It's a 50% growth that places Beijing Subway among the very largest metros of the world, on the fourth position just a few kilometers behind the New York City Subway. GreyHood Talk 15:17, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support per above. This sort of thing hasn't been nominated before and should have been. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 15:55, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Support. Seems significant, underrepresented topic for ITN, and the Beijing Subway article seems rather good. However, if that's to be the bolded link, the '2001–present: rapid expansion' section needs updating - at present the update is only in the lead. Modest Genius talk 16:50, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
I've done the minimum update. GreyHood Talk 18:33, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
The new paragraph is unreferenced. Modest Genius talk 18:38, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
A reference provided now. The total length of expansion is slightly modified in the blurb. GreyHood Talk 19:04, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Anyway, I think that the Beijing Subway may be bolded instead of one of its sections. GreyHood Talk 19:04, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support. 50% increase placing it at fourth in the world is definitely a large upgrade. The Chinese railway blurb already on ITN should be bumped out, though. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 17:01, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Support. Major subway expansion. ~AH1(TCU) 17:05, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support - subway expansion.--BabbaQ (talk) 17:51, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
  • I like this one but update still needs a little work, as per Modest Genius above. Plus it could be a bit longer. I remember riding the 'Dragon', as I vaguely remember the Beijing metro being called, in 1996 and back then it consisted of 2 lines.--Johnsemlak (talk) 18:42, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support - per above and agree that it should replace Chinese railway blurb already on ITN. Jusdafax 22:03, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
    • The railway blurb is down the template anyway, and the subway news should take the place at the top. GreyHood Talk
      • Hmm. Should it bump out the Euro story? I find it a little more important internationally. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 04:21, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
        • In chrohological order, this should be placed below the Euro story. In case the news run too fast, the Euro should be dumped out - it has been there for quite a time, and the adoption actually affects directly far less people than the expansion of the Beijing Subway (compare the population of Estonia with that of Beijing). GreyHood Talk 11:22, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
  • Support on update. Looks newsworthy enough to me.  狐 FOX  01:26, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
    • Comment The Beijing Subway article and all the line articles have been updated. It's ready to post. GreyHood Talk 11:22, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
Ready to post. However, the blurb is a bit long, is it neccesary to list all the new lines? --Tone 12:38, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
Change the beginning for just "5 new lines" and that's it.
5 new lines are simultaneously opened for operation in the Beijing Subway, adding 108 km of new tracks to the system. GreyHood Talk 13:10, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
That's fine, posting. --Tone 13:25, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Hainan Eastern Ring Railway

The Chinese have opened a new High Speed Rail line on Hainan island. It was suggested on DYK that this could be posted on ITN. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 09:41, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Oppose I'm sorry, but posting every new High Speed line in China doesn't seem appropriate to me as there are so many. This one isn't in the 4+4 high speed lines and it doesn't appear to go through particularly challenging terrain. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 09:51, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Weak Oppose A major event for China and for Hainan, but indeed there are too many High Speed lines already and it is not clear if this new line is exceptionally interesting in some way. GreyHood Talk 15:17, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose - I just supported the subway expansion, so we gotta draw a line on rail articles somewhere. Jusdafax 22:06, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Aung San Suu Kyi meets with opposition leaders

Burmese opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi meets with opposition leaders who broke away from the National League for Democracy party. Kaldari (talk) 01:20, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

  • Support as nom. This is significant as she was just released from a decade of house arrest and the world is watching to see what she's going to do in response to the military dictatorship in Burma. (She is also a Nobel Peace Prize winner.) Kaldari (talk) 01:28, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Question: What are the implications here? I understand she was at the top of the party, which was forced to disband a few months ago, but other than that, what will these talks do? EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 01:36, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
    • No one is sure, but the speculation is that she may try to reunite the opposition in some form or fashion. Kaldari (talk) 01:46, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
I know I'm supposed to be on wikibreak (which I will properly be come the new year) but I'm going have to break it here to oppose. So what? Dissidents meet with their parties quite often. Just because she's won the Peace Prize in the past doesn't make her more special for meeting her party. Strange Passerby (talkcontribs) 02:10, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Aung San Suu Kyi isn't just any dissident. She's the democratically elected head of Burma who was never allowed to assume office due to the military dictatorship. Kaldari (talk) 02:21, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
That's not our call to make. Don't get me wrong, I agree with your apparent personal POV regarding Suu Kyi and Burma. But ITNC can't operate based on people's own POVs. Strange Passerby (talkcontribs) 02:36, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. I just can't see what the significance is. 'Opposition politician meets with other opposition politicians' isn't ITN material. Modest Genius talk 02:48, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose for now based on the above unless something more significant occurs later. Her release was posted just last month. There is no shortage of suitable nominations either and from what is stated here it just doesn't yet seem to have had as much impact as at least three of the more recent nominations - the Estonian euro, Tunisian protests or Israeli presidential rape conviction. --candlewicke 05:09, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Oppose I don't see what the significance of this is. This is just a meeting. No tangible results have occurred. Franklinville (talk) 22:20, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

December 30

Portal:Current events/2010 December 30

Euro for Estonia

  • Estonia adopts the Euro as currency on Januari 1, 2011 ending the use of the Kroon currency, Estonia becomes the 17th country to get the Euro.--BabbaQ (talk) 20:17, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Euro for Estonia, (BBC)
  • Support A significant event. Despite the recent problems with the stability of Euro and Eurozone somebody still joins the party. And Estonia does it even despite it is facing serious economical problems. GreyHood Talk 20:38, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
Comment. ITN isn't a race for getting the most nominations. This is only happening two days from now, and it was already at WP:ITN/FE. No rush. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 20:38, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support - As nom.--BabbaQ (talk) 20:40, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
Support, but this nomination should be at WP:ITN/FE, not here. Modest Genius talk 20:44, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
less than 72 hours seems reasonable enough The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 22:15, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
I would consider less than 24 hours to be reasonable, and everything else should go on FE. That's why we have it after all. Maybe this is another nudge to get the bot to import events from FE when they go live. Modest Genius talk 00:10, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Support. Very significant, since the change of the currency is like to change a national symbol, and it has been ITN topic.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 20:51, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
Support per above. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 22:07, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
Support per above The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 22:15, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
Support per above. Kaldari (talk) 01:29, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Haha, I guess we're posting now then. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 01:48, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
And why on earth is up on Dec 31. Apparently nothign is done yet and going out in Talinn for a new years eve party means you were be spening the euros. At anyrate, where "in the news" as pect. I guess the rules that say "support" voteds need a reason dont matter when it suits an admin? (where at least 4 votes dont mention why)
Furthermore "Former Israeli President Moshe Katsav convicted on rape charges" has got WAY MORE SUPPORT than this. why isnt that up as more topical? or do activist admins opnly put up waht they like?(Lihaas (talk) 01:54, 31 December 2010 (UTC));
The template hadn't been updated in 2 days, so I assumed whoever usually updated it is on vacation or something. I thought I would do a good deed and give it a refresh so people don't have to stare at that dead guy's face for another 24 hours. I followed all of the instructions given at Wikipedia:In the news/Administrator instructions, which don't mention any prohibition against listing future events. Instead of being thanked, I get immediately reverted and accused of being an activist admin!! Well, I guess I won't bother doing any more good deeds around here. Try reading WP:AGF some time. Kaldari (talk) 02:05, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
And for the record, this item only had one fewer support votes than the other one, so I don't see how it had "WAY MORE SUPPORT" unless "WAY" means 1. I just happened to miss counting one of the supporting votes for the other item since it was in a reply comment instead of in the usual place. I guess I should apologize for that, but it was an honest mistake. Kaldari (talk) 02:10, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
come on, just a little new years eve pre-drunk reverly and neocon name-calling ;)
Anyhoo, for the votes you also need reasons though, and the one below has more support, that was waiting to go up. also future events are for futuree dates ;)Lihaas (talk) 01:54, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Instead of moaning perhaps update the article on that Israeli boy? Just a thought.  狐 FOX  02:33, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Ah! now whos attacking? ;)
ill leave that for the hewbrew hordes ;) they got their sources.Lihaas (talk) 01:54, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Support, interesting, especially given the recent talk of the of the Euro failing. Abductive (reasoning) 07:28, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Support. I'd say any country switching its currency is ITN worthy.
Suggest: Estonia adopts the Euro as currency, ending the use of the Kroon.--Johnsemlak (talk) 09:56, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
'adopts the Euro as currency'? That implies the Euro could be adopted as something other than currency (paperweights, perhaps?). How about the simple change 'as its currency'? Modest Genius talk 16:53, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
We have an overwhelming support here, so the first admin that comes around after midnight (Estonian time) can post it. --Tone 11:13, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
FWIW Estonia is on +2 UTC so at 22:00 UTC that we can post it. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 12:06, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Posted a couple of hours late. --Mkativerata (talk) 00:13, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
Shouldnt I recieve a ITN notice. Just asking.--BabbaQ (talk) 00:36, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
For suggesting something days too soon, and that was already on Future Events anyway? Go ahead and give it to yourself if you really want it, that's perfectly acceptable. Modest Genius talk 04:12, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
Modest Genius, relax your feelings.--BabbaQ (talk) 19:39, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
There's no requirement for it to be given, several moderators have commented. Sometimes you get it, sometimes you don't.--Johnsemlak (talk) 17:17, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
OK.--BabbaQ (talk) 19:39, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
I've stopped giving them out but I don't have a problem with anyone else giving them out instead. Nor do I have a problem with self-awards. --Mkativerata (talk) 22:47, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
OPPOSE till I see new materials added. Right now, there's hardly any new text added. Most updating edits have been the change in tense. I'm leaving the blurb on MainPage hoping to see some new texts after the public holidays. --PFHLai (talk) 07:38, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
A good point, I can't believe none of us noticed it before. Removed for now. --BorgQueen (talk) 08:09, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
The problem is that the article was edited substatially right after Estonia joined. The whole section about Estonia was removed on the basis that they had already joined the Euro and didn't need to be in an article on Euro enlargement. Here's the previous revision: 1.--Johnsemlak (talk) 07:25, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

2010 Tunisian protests

A rare series of protests. (a) the protests have been going on for some time, (b) they have been fatal, (c) there have some extreme injuries, including people setting fire to themselves and electrocuting themselves, (d) it is the worst unrest the country has faced this decade, (e) the president has given a national television broadcast vowing to punish the protesters, (f) the president has now reshuffled his cabinet, (g) a Nicolae Ceauşescu comparison. --candlewicke 17:14, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Support, but wait. The protests are seemingly having an effect on the Tunisian government, but so far, only a cabinet shuffle has occurred as a result. Let's wait a few days for more developments; maybe the president will resign? EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 17:28, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

The nomination was intended to focus on the protests. The president may resign, though that does not seem to be certain at this point. If the president were to resign that would be significant on its own. But protests in the country are rare (the sources describe the country as a police state and the president has been in power for 23 years). Coverage has been ignored in the national state-controlled media, with reports of Tunisians finding out about events from websites and friends in other countries - such as Algeria. Surely this is at least to Tunisia what the previously posted 2010 French pension reform strikes is to France? Even France has had more recent protests than Tunisia. --candlewicke 23:22, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

I agree wholeheartedly with the fact that the protests are notable on their own (which led to my support), but I'm saying that if these protests actually lead to something bigger (be it a fatal police intervention or, as we are speculating, a resignation of some sort), that leads to a very notable, if not unprecedented event. Of course, we could post the protests now in case it doesn't escalate, but I'm certain something will occur. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 01:25, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
True... though right now a resignation is just speculation and it may never occur. We only know that it is serious enough for a respectable journalist (assuming he is as he has his own article) to compare this to the end of Ceauşescu. But the circumstances of the protests seem unprecedented as you say, and that is all that can yet be told. The article is now much more detailed than earlier. --candlewicke 05:17, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Weak support, as this seems to be major unrest (but noting that we cant post every set of protests). Probably best to post as soon as consensus is reached, rather than waiting for something which may or may not happen. Modest Genius talk 16:56, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Agreed, it's been a few days now, and today is day 13. Another death as well, caused by police confrontations. Might as well wing it now. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 05:51, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
Support in principle. Seems notable and article is OK. It covers a region we don't feature often. However, could someone suggest a blurb?--Johnsemlak (talk) 18:44, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Posted "Demonstrations over unemployment and poor living conditions are held in various cities in Tunisia." for now. Pls revise as needed. --PFHLai (talk) 01:40, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Death of Bobby Farrell

Was a founder, performer, dancer of Boney M.. His death is unexpected. He died at age of 61 in a hotel in St Petersburg, Russia. - EugεnS¡m¡on(14) ® 13:57, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

I'm not familiar with who he was, so I can't really get behind or against this nom, but obviously the article needs expanding... Nightw 14:20, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose, considering the quality of the article. --Tone 14:55, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose: one of those bands where the profile of the whole far outstripped that of any of the parts, and while the group were popular, they were hardly innovatve or influential. He would be a long long way down any list of the most important music performers of the last 30 years. Kevin McE (talk) 15:19, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. The article is in a terrible state.--Johnsemlak (talk) 17:18, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose Article is dreadful: "Soon spread rumors about a young man talented Caribbean that inspired the audience with his haunting and skillful way of dancing." wackywace 18:33, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. This is only getting mainstream media attention because it's a slow news week. Hardly a major figure in music. Modest Genius talk 16:57, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Former Israeli President Moshe Katsav convicted on rape charges

Former Israeli President Moshe Katsav convicted on rape charges[1] Crnorizec (talk) 08:15, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Support when updated a bit more. --BorgQueen (talk) 09:48, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
Support We recently posted when the sitting prime minister of Iceland was charged with misconduct over his role in the country's finance scandal. Altought Katsav is no longer incumbent this one is a verdict (although it will surely be appealed) and a momentous scandal by any measure. __meco (talk) 13:29, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
Support in principle, however, the article needs some work. It would appear that around half of the bio article is dedicated to this scandal, the ratio could be improved... [[--Tone 14:55, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
Support since it is conviction against a former head of state and the report receives respectable attention in the media.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 15:15, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
Support. A conviction against a former head of state. Jorge Rafael Videla's conviction was posted even more recently than Iceland. --candlewicke 17:06, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
Comment. The President of Israel is a figurehead position, with the PM holding the real power.--Johnsemlak (talk) 17:15, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
Still a rape charge on a person who had such a high position. So I support. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 17:24, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
We have dealt with rule which identifies only the elections of a head of state as enough significant, so I don't see any obstacle to use it here. The real political power is then minor, also not related with the current topic.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:28, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
Whats a good US equivalent? Vice President? Speaker of the House? Either of those occurred we would post them The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 22:57, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
Vice-president, I suppose, since the speaker of the Knesset is the one to replace him in the event of death. According to the article, he signs every law and treaty passed and assigns federal judges and members for various organisations. So I don't think his role could even be categorised as "minor". EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 01:45, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
I wasn't objecting with my point, I was just saying he's less important than the title 'head of state' might imply. Anyway, I support as per above.--Johnsemlak (talk) 05:54, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
No worries, I wasn't trying to direct that comment toward you. Because, frankly, it is a minor role in comparison to the prime minister. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 18:16, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
Support. Major international event that received widespread news coverage. Nsk92 (talk) 23:38, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
Support, should post as soon as possible.  狐 FOX  01:57, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Comment Update is as poor as updates get. -- tariqabjotu 01:59, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Expanded a little. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 04:34, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

All over the international media now. Suggest: Former President of Israel Moshe Katsav (pictured) is unanimously convicted of rape, sexual harassment, committing an indecent act while using force, harassing a witness and obstruction of justice. I think that is all of them and probably more balanced than focusing exclusively on the rape. --candlewicke 05:47, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Now consensus seems to be clear. Posting soon. --BorgQueen (talk) 10:21, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Can anyone upload his picture and replace the current image on ITN? Thanks. --BorgQueen (talk) 10:30, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

December 29

Portal:Current events/2010 December 29

Jyllands-Posten attack uncovered

  • Five suspected Islamist militants are arrested for planning to attack newspaper Jyllands-Posten in Denmark. --BabbaQ (talk) 22:12, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Support - As nom.--BabbaQ (talk) 22:13, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Nah good work though by the intelligence agencies. —KRM (Communicate!) 22:38, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose The General consensus is that plots uncovered by Law enforcement are generally not ITN material. Plots foiled (or botched) in the execution are ITN (Like the shoe and underwear bombers) are ITN material on case by case and sucessful attacks are almost always ITN material. The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 22:51, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Slight support. I agree that botched plans aren't very notable, but this one was linked to the controversy in 2005, which was quite a big deal. Then again, maybe I just have a bias. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 01:00, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
Meh. This single-ref section is the only update. As far as I can tell, we haven't featured any previous attempted attacks related to the cartoons, although I can't figure out what the fourth one was. I'm inclined to oppose posting this.--Chaser (talk) 02:20, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose - per RA. Not ITN-worthy in my view. Jusdafax 02:52, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

December 2010 Queensland floods

This is a developing story and I just started the article. I don't know how notable it is but the BBC article says it's the region's worst flooding in decades and 1000 people have been evacuated, including an entire town. Being evacuated from your home is a lot more traumatic and life-effecting than travel delays and so forth, generally.--Johnsemlak (talk) 12:38, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Support seems notable for 1000 to be evacuated. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 13:15, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. As far as I remember, not so long ago the nomination of the 2010 Balkan floods was rejected on the ground that there were no casualties. And that was also the worst flooding in decades and over 12,000 people were evacuated. GreyHood Talk 13:53, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
If you check the archives, the Balkan floods only got one oppose, so I don't think it wasn't posted simply because there weren't any deaths. The nomination just didn't get much traction.--Johnsemlak (talk) 15:00, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
I've checked the archives of course. If a nomination doesn't get much traction than it is simply not interesting enough, or perhaps a few oppose comments summarize pretty good why the entry should be rejected. Anyway, I don't see how the flood with only 1000 people evacuated and only one country affected may be of exceptional interest given the recent precedent of much more serious international flood being ignored and not posted. GreyHood Talk 15:28, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Greyhood, I wasn't suggesting you hadn't looked, sorry if it seemed otherwise. I was just providing a link.--Johnsemlak (talk) 17:49, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Oh, relax please, there would be nothing to take offense at, even if you was suggesting it.   Now I may follow your over-polite style and say sorry for not providing that link myself in the first place. GreyHood Talk 18:03, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
It doesn't help that Australia is 1) in the middle of nowhere (hence weather patterns on their area will only affect them, considering also its large size), and the population is too low. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 15:40, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Comment To make my position clear I must say that in my opinion we should avoid strict application of stare decisis. The precedent with the 2010 Balkan floods should not once and for all decide the fate of this nomination and possible future nominations of the flood kind. But still the numbers of people affected by the current Australian disaster are too few in comparison with the earlier Balkan floods in December, and the precedent could be used for the comparison. I've voted support back then, and I'll change my opinion for support here as well, in case the scale of disaster grows and more population is affected. GreyHood Talk 18:17, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Comment according to the BBC its the biggest flood for 150 years, this doesn't seem like a small incident. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 18:42, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Support: a major developing story in a major part of the English-speaking world. Nightw 04:09, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose, minor, forgettable, nobody died. Abductive (reasoning) 15:25, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
Comment. A large portion of the flooding occurred from Tropical Cyclone Tasha. ~AH1(TCU) 21:53, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
Support. This was quoted as covering an area about the size of Britain and Germany combined. Pretty widespread and still in the news. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 17:05, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

The number of people evacuated is now in the "thousands". Over 200,000 people are affected (EDIT--not necessarily evacuated). BBC. The article is still developing, we might be able to post soon but apparently the worst of the flooding is still to come.--Johnsemlak (talk) 19:28, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Support We ignore our Down Under Editors too much, this is one of their biggest crises in years. I am shocked We have 200,000 people evacuated which is easily comparable with New Orleans evac before Katrina The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 23:26, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
Support. Just to clarify - 200,00 people have not been evacuated just affected by the flooding. Also for those that think this event is minor - it is one of Queensland's worst natural disasters, world coal prices have been affected, it could possibly reduce Australia's GPD by 0.5% and lives have been lost, at least two drownings, which are associated with this event. Regardless, the live lost rationale for notability is a poor criteria. It would of meant the Apollo 13 incident would not of made it to the Main page News section. - Shiftchange (talk) 01:13, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
This is still in the news after three days and is reportedly getting worse in some places. The article is now in a decent state.--Johnsemlak (talk) 19:16, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Comorian presidential election, 2010

Results for the Comorian presidential election, 2010 should be released today. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 04:34, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Support, head of state this time; article is in somewhat good shape (and will probably be better once results are out). EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 05:22, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
The article needs expanding a little in addition to the results. Nightw 09:49, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Ikililou Dhoinine has been elected according to the BBC. Support as (a) it is a presidential election, (b) there is some controversy with the opposition alleging fraud. --candlewicke 04:24, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Comment. Still needs a good update before going up. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 05:49, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

December 28

Portal:Current events/2010 December 28

Somali pirates releases German ship

  • Somali pirates release a German ship with 22 crew, eight months after it was seized near Oman.--BabbaQ (talk) 23:26, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
Another one? This happens all the time. Is there something particularly notable about this one? Modest Genius talk 23:50, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Eight months I guess.--BabbaQ (talk) 23:53, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Oppose unless ITN criteria are loosened. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 00:06, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
ITN criteria are always open for discussion on a case-to-case basis. But this isn't one of those times, because, it's not exactly notable. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 04:10, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Ultimatum to Gbagbo

  • The ECOWAS West African bloc sents an ultimatum to depose of current leader of the Ivory Coast, Laurent Gbagbo, after a meeting with him and threatens to remove him by military intervention if he refuses to cede power to Ouattara. Al Jazeera Mail & Guardian South Africa UN Dispatch
    Huge implications for Côte d'Ivoire, the entire West African region and world chocolate prices. ~AH1(TCU) 21:11, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
I thought about this too, but it would probably be best to wait until either Gbagbo leaves, or ECOWAS invades. Also, your 'world chocolate prices' is a rather ridiculous addition (as if cocoa prices are comparable to loss of life) Modest Genius talk 22:09, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
I agree, let's wait, whatever happens next will be a more relevant story for ITN. --Tone 23:07, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Israeli discovery

  • Israeli archaeologists reportedly discover human remains from 400,000 years ago, challenging the theory that humans originated in Africa.--BabbaQ (talk) 20:38, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
Support. Nice post-Christmas story, perhaps ancient Mesopotamia is older than we thought. ~AH1(TCU) 20:51, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
Support - as Nom.--BabbaQ (talk) 21:42, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose Its a new theory based on a single tooth that looks like a modern human There is no empirical evidence outside of the tooth. The Associated Press has done a good write up on it. He admits several time further that more research needs to be done to either prove or disprove it. This is not a Paradigm Shift simply an author reporting an anomaly. The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 21:49, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
Good point. It would definitely take empirical evidence to thump the theory that humans originated in Africa. It would be interesting to find more remains around the area which would support these new remains, however. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 04:08, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Weak oppose. Sounds interesting and significant, but it's only a premise, since it's new discovery, and its potential is only a hunch.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 22:57, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
its only significant if he is able to back up his theory in future peer reviewed papers with more evidence than his current tooth. The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 02:34, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. Nothing has been proven yet. Grandmasterka 02:12, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose, typical science hype. Likely timed to compete with Denisova hominin news. Abductive (reasoning) 15:28, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

The Ashes

England are almost certain to win the 4th test tonight (on its 4th day) and retain The Ashes for the first time in 24 years. This is an ITNR event and I cannot see the point of waiting until the end of the 5th test to post it (While the Aussies could win it to draw the series England will still keep the Ashes, having won the previous series). Suggest: "In cricket, England win the fourth test against Australia to retain The Ashes for the first time in 24 years". Obviously updates will be required to relevant articles before posting - Dumelow (talk) 11:16, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Support extremely notable. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 11:22, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
Cricket bores me silly, but I'd have to support, in due time, as it is a regular for featuring here. However, it is the result of the series, not the fourth test that is relevant, and we need to use clumsy phrasing because of WP:VNE issues and the insistence that blurbs are presented in the present tense as though they were headlines. First win after a long break could be worth noting, but first "not losing after winning the previous one" for a long (but not record breaking) time is perilously close to statscruft. So: In cricket, The Ashes are retained by England in a test series against Australia. I suspect that it would be more grammatical to say The Ashes is, as it is the name of a (singular) trophy and a (singular) series, but euphony and common practice give The Ashes are. Kevin McE (talk) 11:43, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose - cricket is a sport that only interest certain countries as most countries dont play it (sutch as my home nation) so I dont think this news places on ITN.--BabbaQ (talk) 15:45, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
Virtually every single country doesn't play American football either, yet we include the Super Bowl in ITN. Try again? EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 16:51, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
For such an international event this sure has pretty low page views. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 03:34, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
I hope you don't grade an event's international significance based on Wikipedia page views... that's just weird. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 04:13, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Not exactly significance, but interest; anyway sporting events are rarely significant at all. Page views are just one way of determining if plenty of people care about things. (BTW w/ England retaining the Ashes we could see a spike in views). –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 04:32, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Yeah but the Superbowl is the highest level championship of American football while the Ashes is simply a contest between two nations, (which, btw, aren't particularly highly ranked at the moment. Wouldn't the 2010 South Africa India test, the 1-2 teams in world rankings, be a better item (it doesn't have an article that I can find anyway)? Or the Cricket World Cup, which is and ITNR event as well. The championship of several football leagues such as the Premier League or La Liga, which are far more notable in global terms, are not on ITNR. Anyway, this debate was had in 2009 and I think the arguments for the Ashes are convincing but we should concede this goes as an exception to most of our policies regarding sporting events and I do find objections understandable. Still, support and we should post it as soon as England retain the Urn and as soon as there's a proper update.--Johnsemlak (talk) 19:43, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
It's at Indian cricket team in South Africa in 2010–11. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 03:38, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
support WP:ITNSPORTS event nuff said The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 15:51, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
Support, very notable ITN/R event. Wait until tests are over, obviously. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 16:51, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
Obvious support per ITNR. The question is whether to post it tomorrow (when England take an unassailable lead) or after the final Test. I notice ITNR says 'Every entry applies to the conclusion of the tournament or series' which suggests waiting until after Sydney. Modest Genius talk 16:57, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
If we wait until Sydney it won't be "In the News". -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 17:16, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
Of course it will, because then the tournament will be officially won by England. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 19:04, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
No, not really. The trophy will officially be "retained" by England if they win tonight. To "win" the series, we would to wait until the final Test to conclude. The actual "news" item, however, is who actually wins/retains the Ashes. Hence tomorrow (if England win) will be the day to "break" the news. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:07, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
This is how it always happens, you don't always have to wait until the last game in the Premiership before you know which team leads it, and its announced when its mathematically certain that a certain team has won. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 19:12, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
Surely it's worth waiting to see if the series is won by England or drawn? England have not won yet. Just because the trophy stays with the holders in the case of a draw, doesn't stop the draw being a different result to an England win. Modest Genius talk 19:45, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
Definitely. If England lose/draw this one then we shouldn't post it now. But that is pretty unlikely. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 19:53, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
All the coverage that I've read suggests that the objective of both teams is to win (or for England, to retain) the Ashes. This I say we post as soon as this result is known.--Johnsemlak (talk) 19:57, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
But that's exactly my point: a series draw (thus retaining) is not the same as a series win. Modest Genius talk 20:03, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
Hence the original blurb "England retain the Ashes"... (my paraphrasing) which, after all, is by far the most important thing here... The Rambling Man (talk) 20:06, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
Support the exception to the rules here being that if England win tonight, they take an unassailable lead which leaves them holding on to the trophy no matter what. So, as Eraserhead says, the news will be (hopefully) tomorrow, not in a week or so's time. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:32, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
wait till the series is over, regardless of who wins the tournament is NOT over YET and its customary to wait.
rant: stupid bloody aussies, disgracing their fellow colonies...(Lihaas (talk) 20:59, 28 December 2010 (UTC));
If the news is that we "retain" the Ashes, it should post (hopefully) tomorrow. If you want the final result (e.g. Ashes is drawn 2-2 and England retain the Ashes (although they retained them a week ago)) then that seems a little odd. Poor old Ponting....! The Rambling Man (talk) 21:08, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
Wait, This may be news tomorrow and if England do win I believe that it is very worthy news as all of the English speaking countries outside of North America will be following this. Bjmullan (talk) 21:10, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
I don't think many are arguing against including it at ITN, but the question is when, and the nominator is suggesting "when/if" England win tonight, thereby retaining the Ashes and thereby rendering the final Test match a dead rubber, hence entirely and utterly irrelevant. (Just in case we lost by an innings and 400 runs, of course...) The Rambling Man (talk) 21:15, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
The BBC are clearly indicating that if England win it will be a series 'victory'. That should be the time to post, as it represents the primary result of the series. The details of what the final score of the series is is not particularly notable.--Johnsemlak (talk) 21:29, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
No it will not. When they win tonight, it will make it 2-1 with one Test to play. 2-2 would be a series draw, and England would indeed retain the Ashes but it would still be a draw. Winning in Melbourne does NOT result in a 'series victory' as you suggest. Modest Genius talk 22:12, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
I think John is referring to the BBC's headline on that article, namely "England close in on Ashes victory in Melbourne". We win tonight, we retain the Ashes, it's an overall victory, regardless of what happens in the fifth Test, and that's why it'd be news tomorrow, not on January 7. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:15, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
Support and wait until the games are completed. --PlasmaTwa2 21:50, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
Comment I think perhaps there's a misunderstanding on what the actual news item here is. If England win tonight, they retain the Ashes, that's news. If England win tonight and then lose by a mile in the final Test, England still retain the Ashes, but it won't be "news". Regardless of what ITNr says, and there's a good chance it doesn't adequately deal with contests like this (e.g. World Series appears to end when one team gets enough wins to claim the title, so this never happens there) If people here are suggesting we wait until (possibly) 7 January to declare this result, then I'm baffled. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:00, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
A similar situation exists with e.g. Formula One, where the world champion is often decided before the final race (it went all the way this year) and the various football leagues e.g. Premier League. I can't remember what we did the last time such a situation arose. Modest Genius talk 22:16, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
I think a review of the suggested blurb is in order, i.e. "England retain the Ashes"... that would be accurate 100% no matter what, and it would be "news"... The Rambling Man (talk) 22:18, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
I agree with Rambling Man. We're loosing sight of what's notable here. Either England or Australia winning the Ashes is notable. ALL media covering this are regarding an England win tomorrow as a series victory. The final series result, 2-1, 2-2, or whatever, is a minor detail and not particularly notable to anyone except Ashes aficionados.--Johnsemlak (talk) 22:28, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
@Modest Genius, there is no point in repeating the error just because we've done so before, tonight is the right time to post it if England win the series. It seems rather silly that we'd need to have an RFC on posting sports event when they happen rather than when the series ends... -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 22:41, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
But we won't know tonight whether they've won the series or not... Modest Genius talk 22:44, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

───────────────────────── If England win they will have retained the ashes. That is winning as you cannot draw the Ashes. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 22:45, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Winning and retaining are distinct series results. They even have different colours on the plot on List of Ashes series. Yes, both result in England being awarded the trophy. But they're still different things. Modest Genius talk 22:48, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
Retaining the trophy is the only thing that matters. Perhaps this is too subtle for non-cricket fans, but that's the way it is. I would oppose the result being announced on ITN on January 7, because that's meaningless. Winning the series is meaningless. Retaining the trophy or winning it (if you don't currently have it) is the be-all and end-all. And please read the blurb, that England retain the Ashes. Not that they win the series, they retain the Ashes.... The Rambling Man (talk) 22:51, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
Since I'm listening to TMS right now, and have done for every day of every Test of this series, I find the implication that I'm incapable of understanding because I'm not a cricket fan rather presumptuous. I still think it's better to announce BOTH at the end of the series, when we know the actual result, rather than now. Modest Genius talk 23:49, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
Which one do you think is going to make the lead story on the BBC's website? -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 00:09, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Both, actually (assuming England win in Sydney). But I've made my opinion plain, no need to continue. Modest Genius talk 02:43, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Or any website? Perhaps this should be "Was in the news..." The Rambling Man (talk) 00:35, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Support, but wait about half an hour (currently 258-8). We should note the retention too. Sceptre (talk) 00:51, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Support Retention of the Ashes confirmed - first time in nearly two decades. Since retention is confirmed now, and because the Ashes is listed as an ITN-worthy sport, I think it's justified to be putting it up now. Franklinville (talk) 01:03, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
First time retained in 2 decades? what? its been retained for over a decade, and nevertheless 2 decades of over a 100 is not much. no need to rush to judgement. Plenty of stories that are in the news and not posted on ITN, or posted later (ie- elections!)
as for the whole english world, rubbish! sensible people (ie- south africa and india) have better things to do! ;) (note- the real ashes ind-pak (even some aussie said that))Lihaas (talk) 20:59, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
I was referring to England retaining the Ashes, which is a first within the past two decades. Franklinville (talk) 21:01, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Support, obviously notable, and it's on WP:ITN/R. Nightw 09:35, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support First time in 20-odd years, that England have retained the Ashes in Oz. The most notable sporting event of the last few years, bar none. Tough luck, Ponting! Lugnuts (talk) 09:42, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Comment well, the result is clear (England thrashed the Australians) and the blurb is correct, England retain the Ashes. We have a red banner, anything stopping this being newsworthy? The Rambling Man (talk) 11:59, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
The update is good as well.--Johnsemlak (talk) 15:02, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Posted.  ƒox  17:20, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Could we use a picture of the urn?--Johnsemlak (talk) 17:55, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Did we really want the version that emphasises the fourth test rather than the series, that raises the old chestnut of whether a sports team should be treated as a singular or plural noun, and which emphasises statscruft that is not even a record? Kevin McE (talk) 17:56, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Change England have retained the Ashes, but have not yet won them nor the test. The newsline should be "England retain the Ashes". Possible results are still that England win the test and thus the Ashes, OR, a draw in which case England have neither won the test, nor the Ashes, but retain them by default. The current headline is premature, though may be true later. Chemical Engineer (talk) 18:03, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
    • Wrong. The blurb is 100% correct. We won the 4th Test, we retained the Ashes. Whether we "win" them in the fifth test or not is now irrelevant. You can't win something you already retain. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:07, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Discovery of Homo Denisovans

"Researchers announce the discovery of "Homo Denisova" relative of homo-neanderthalus based on remians found in Siberia cave. Nat Geo "

Re-nomination from the 23rd by The Resident Anthropologist. Had sufficient support and article expansion and was a very interesting topic. It's been ready for three days or so and the bot archived it just now. Could we post this now? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ericleb01 (talkcontribs)

Thank you The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 02:46, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

I am pasting the archived text below. Nergaal (talk) 03:08, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Support - count me in. Consensus is clear. Jusdafax 06:03, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
Ok, posting. Holidays, yes...--Tone 08:53, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
A claim (that Denisova is a distinct species) that is not supported by either Denisova hominin or Homo#Species has now been displayed on the Main Page for more than 24 hours, although it was pointed out at WP:Errors within an hour. What possible credibility can an encyclopaedia with that little concern for truth have? Kevin McE (talk) 10:10, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Hence why the blurb says "a possible Homo species". We aren't directly assuming anything, but the Nat Geo article is clear on the fact that it is a possibility. Not sure though if any source in the actual article actually mentions this, though. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 05:53, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
Perhaps you should check the timings of edits before you make smart alec comments like that: the word possible was added more than 5 hours after my comment was posted here. Kevin McE (talk) 10:40, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
I was just commenting on what I saw at the time of my comment. Chill. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 17:30, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
Lack of apology noted Kevin McE (talk) 21:01, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Text from previous discussion
archived text

Researchers announce the discovery of "Homo Denisova" relative of homo-neanderthalus based on remians found in Siberia cave.Nat Geo The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 03:36, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Support any type of hominid discovery deserves ITN status. Nergaal (talk) 03:47, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Support. Very interesting find and would probably fill in some gaps in anthropology once further analysis is completed. EricLeb01 (Page |Talk) 03:50, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
I see we have the Denisova hominin article. --BorgQueen (talk) 07:56, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Support per Nergaal.
Blurb: Based on the remains found in a Siberia cave, researchers announce the discovery of the "Denisova hominin", a relative ofNeanderthals and ancestor of modern Melanesians. GreyHood Talk 12:18, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose - We have had too many kind of these articles in ITN. Time for something else.--BabbaQ (talk) 13:19, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Jorge Rafael Videla article seems more like a ITN worthy article right now. Atleast in my book.--BabbaQ (talk) 13:21, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
I don't think we have too many of these types of articles. If anything I think many people want to see more science articles (except space launches maybe) on ITN instead of the usual politics/disaster/sports news. There's no reason we can't bave both the Videla item and this item on ITN.--Johnsemlak (talk) 14:13, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Agreed!--BabbaQ (talk) 15:03, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Indeed after a literature review it does appear a Hominid has not been discovered since 2008. This is arguably the most important Anthropological discovery of 2010, its either this the Blombos Cave pressure flaking, the Koro language (India) or the Neanderthal genome project interbreeding evidence.The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 15:18, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Support. In general, such discovery receives more attention than the discoveries related to other species. We had few familiar discoveries related with other species in the template, which implies that this could not be avoided.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:25, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Wait a second. The species was announced back in March, also posted on ITN back then. What is new this time is the fact that they interbred with modern humans. Well, this is also a story of ITN interest... --Tone 15:17, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Of course it is. Since other discoveries were posted, this is far more significant.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 15:44, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Support. Important discovery of close human relative. ~AH1(TCU)16:42, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
  • I would say that the important part of this story is that they bred with Homo sapiens, so the blurb should probably reflect that. I'm not a fan of the current proposed blurb. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 21:59, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Blurb: Based on the remains found in a Siberia cave, researchers announce the discovery of the "Denisova hominin", who bred withHomo sapiens and was an ancestor of modern Melanesians. If too long, either the part on the cave or the part on Melanesians may be cut out.GreyHood Talk 22:32, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Remove the Melanesians part and its ready to post. I am too unfortable of with the misuse Misuse of "Scientific Findings" implied by it. There were far more people that had the DNA they only had the most DNA shared The Resident Anthropologist(talk) 23:24, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Researchers announce the discovery of the Denisova hominin, a Homo species that interbred with Homo sapiens. Nergaal (talk) 23:47, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
or: Researchers announce the discovery of a new Homo species that interbred with Homo sapiens, Denisova hominin.Nergaal (talk) 23:50, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Thank you, sorry I am picky. I like the first one personally The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 00:18, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Question: The Wikipedia article has been here since March. I know that there has been some increased notice in the press, but it's not like the discovery is actually new. How does this information affect the addition of this item in the In The News page? Corvus cornixtalk 23:55, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
That's what I am saying. The proposed blurb is outdated, the announcement took place in March. So it is about Melanesians and we have to form a blurb about that. Willing to post when there's a good suggestion. --Tone 00:00, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
The story is the interbreeding with sapiens. The second version above emphasizes that. Nergaal (talk) 00:02, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
Bone head move on my part in the nom The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 00:18, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
  Note: Is there any reason this has not been posted? appropriate copyvio free updates have been added. We are two days in the Red!!!The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 22:51, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
Really, why this hasn't been posted yet? GreyHood Talk 13:04, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
Wondering the same thing right now. Pretty neat story, and the timer is going to go red once again. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 03:59, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
Perhaps the admins were enjoying their Christmas weekend :) Hope they'll soon come back from the party. GreyHood Talk 10:27, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

December 27

Portal:Current events/2010 December 27

Northeastern US snow

  • Yeah, snow clogs again the Bos-Wash area. I am just curious it the outcome will be different from the Europe one before. Nergaal (talk) 18:29, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
Does the nominator wish to give a reason as to why this weather event is ITNworthy, or is it purely to be argumentative as the nomination suggests? And if Boston/ Washington DC is what is meant, why use some obscure code to make most of the world outsiders to your nomination? Kevin McE (talk) 18:33, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose unless those in Europe are posted as well - which in this case are more significant, as it always snows in the North East US. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 18:48, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, oppose unless it is significantly worse than the European storm. Otherwise it would be quite hypocritical. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 18:52, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
Comment. This storm underwent rapid deepening, attaining the minimum central pressure of 961 mb, comparable to the 1993 Storm of the Century. This recent storm needs an article, and it's expected to bring yet more flooding and blizzard conditions to hard-hit Atlantic Canada. ~AH1(TCU) 19:13, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
And? The entire New England and Atlantic Canada region gets one comparable to this every winter. Yes, an article was needed (located at 2010 Boxing Day Blizzard), but for the same reasons we have an article for these storms. Not notable, and not news. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 23:04, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
Comment the other option would be to loosen the general posting criteria, which I would be in favour of, but which would require an RFC. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 19:15, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
Flat Oppose Not unprecedented. The European "storm" is actually the conditions of the season in general. It hasn't been this bad there in a long time. This is just another nor'easter in North America. --Kitch (Talk : Contrib) 21:34, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. It's winter. It snows. What else is new? C628 (talk) 22:27, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. Nothing new or unusual here, is there even an article? Also, this whiffs of WP:POINT. Modest Genius talk 22:30, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. It's winter. It snows. What else is new? C628, hit it on the head The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 22:42, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
Pile on oppose Oh the weather outside is frightful, But the fire is so delightful, And since we've no place to go, Let It Snow! Let It Snow! Let It Snow! Cheers--Wikireader41 (talk) 02:23, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
Hehe worst rationale ever The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 02:58, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
Article alert. December 2010 North American blizzard. Brought snow as far south as northern Florida and gave a rare White Christmas to parts of the southeastern United States while outer NYC saw 50 cm (20 in) of snow and Atlantic Canada has now gotten its fourth Monday winter storm in four weeks and some areas have already recieved 40 cm of snow in New Brunswick. ~AH1(TCU) 20:50, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
And I can personally attest to that, but like I said, this isn't extraordinary weather. The article has been there for a bit as well. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 04:16, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
That doesnt change the fact that if the European similar weather problems wasnt published on ITn then this one shouldnt be either. We cant have an "America is more important than everyone else"-policy.--BabbaQ (talk) 20:51, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Khodorkovsky found guilty again

Khodorkovsky found guilty on embezzlement charges. This will effectively prolong his prison sentence, which was supposed to end in October 2011.[2] Crnorizec (talk) 10:09, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Oppose. His initial arrest would probably have gotten my support, but this additional charge doesn't really change anything other than his release date, which is 2017. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 19:00, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. Big news topic currently, but the event itself is not a game changer and the importance of the news has been rather blown up. The outcome of the trial was pretty much expected; if the result was different I'd vote support of course. GreyHood Talk 22:27, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

December 26

Portal:Current events/2010 December 26

Death of Carlos Andrés Pérez

The Former Venezuelean president dies. - EugεnS¡m¡on(14) ® 16:59, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

  • Support Good article, notability as former head of state. Beef up the mention of his death, though. --Kitch (Talk : Contrib) 22:10, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support. Two mandates and seemed somewhat influential in Venezuelan politics. Good article though, which is key. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 22:58, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support. per kitch--Wikireader41 (talk) 02:40, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
Updated. Posting soon. --BorgQueen (talk) 13:19, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
What's the relevance with Miami? EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 18:49, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
He went into exile when Hugo Chavez came to power, settling in Miami, where he died. --Kitch (Talk : Contrib) 21:29, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
But if we are going to add such details, why add the place of death when you could have added the cause of death instead, which is much more important? To know where he lived when he died isn't really necessary. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 23:07, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
He was 88, at the stage of his life, the cause of death isn't that important -- the fact that he lives in exile is notable: most retiring heads of state live at their home countries, except in exceptional circumstances. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 12:59, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

Death of Salvador Jorge Blanco

The former President of the Dominican Republic has died in Santo Domingo. (The Washington Post) The article isn't in good condition. --candlewicke 16:05, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Weak oppose I'd be more willing to support if the article were cleaner. --Kitch (Talk : Contrib) 22:08, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
Support if article is expanded and sourced, which probably won't happen. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 22:58, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

December 25

Portal:Current events/2010 December 25

Disappearance of Joanna Yeates

  • Police keep on searching for Joanna Yeates a 25 year-old architect who disappeared in Bristol on December 17 and whom is believed to be abducted.
I added this to the ITN nominations as a new article has to be added to the IT section sson, and this new article about a widely reported british disappearance could be a good addition perhaps. Quite some time since we had a crime article up perhaps. This disappearance is on every single UK-newspapers frontpage so it might be suitable for ITN.--BabbaQ (talk) 19:29, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
Support - as nom.--BabbaQ (talk) 19:29, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose another case of Missing white woman syndrome nothing yet to suggest she hasnt eloped with a secret boyfriend to a Brasilian Beach. The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 19:41, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
Other than they found her dead body Christmas morning I suppose. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:19, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. I find it difficult to believe this "is on every single UK-newspapers frontpage" [sic] considering the majority aren't even printed today. In the grand scheme of things, some quine's disappearance isn't that important, anyway.  f o x  20:22, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. Tragic but non-notable (probable) crime. I don't see why we should even have an article. Modest Genius talk 00:11, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose having an article. Grsz 11 04:41, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose This is surely notable and deserves an article, but it has no international impact and isn't of interest outside the UK. --Pontificalibus (talk) 17:17, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose per all the above, would be worth waiting to find out what actually happened. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:19, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose Very limited coverage of this case outside the UK. Philip Cross (talk) 18:35, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose Neither the incident nor the person are notable enough. --Kitch (Talk : Contrib) 21:14, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

South American recognition of Palestine

Ehh, borderline oppose. Just one recognition. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 02:43, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
Comment: The "100 countries recognition threshold" was crossed a long time ago. This is one event out of an entire month of similar events. In this December alone, four South American states extended recognition, and Norway and Chile upgraded their representatives to embassies. Uruguay hasn't recognised it yet, it's scheduled to make those arrangements in January.
In any case, the article that focuses on recognition of the State of Palestine is Foreign relations of the Palestinian National Authority, which has long-term issues and will never be ready for posting on the main page. Nightw 04:47, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
That four new nations recognizes Palestine as a full worthy state, before only having relations with the PLO have to be seen as a atleast possible ITN worthy story.--BabbaQ (talk) 13:24, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
Four new nations? Your nomination seems to indicate there's one new nation...  f o x  20:23, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
Those four announced earlier this month. Ecuador announced on the 24th. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 04:35, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose, we're not a news ticker and I doubt Ecuador will be the last to get behind Palestine.  f o x  20:23, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

New Treatment for HIV

  • The new experimental drug, called VIR-576, reduced the amount of HIV infection in the blood by as much 95 percent in an early-stage trial of 18 patients. [3][4] Crnorizec (talk) 01:56, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose Interesting, but the critical words here are "experimental" and "early-stage trial". Definitive conclusions are needed over the power of this drug before this can be put on ITN - for now, it's still in the trial phase. Franklinville (talk) 02:53, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. This isn't the only fusion inhibitor that can treat HIV. Maraviroc and enfuvirtide are already clinically approved, so this isn't a new method. Feezo (Talk) 10:39, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

GSLV failure

Weak support, mostly because the GSLV article seems decent and the timer is way overdue. Though those boxes at the top of the articles seem weird - is there really a need for a 'recent launch failure' template?!? Modest Genius talk 00:13, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
Support. Images (required) of the failure looked like Challenger. ~AH1(TCU) 01:32, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support. Heard it on CBC radio. GSAT-4's failure was posted. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 04:28, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Uh, was going to support but reading the article it's pretty, dunno, inane and full technical details. Could I ask for a bit more clarification as to what's notable here? Was this an attempted 'first' for India in any way? How often do failed satellite launches happen? Manned space flights are pretty standard ITN fare, but satellite launches are aren't.--Johnsemlak (talk) 06:11, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
Looking at the article again it has no information on any significance of the failure--i.e. impact on India's space program (other than a mention that it's the second consecutive failure), reactions from politicians or space officials, or anything else really. The article gives no context for this event. Oppose.--Johnsemlak (talk) 06:41, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose unfortunately such failures are not uncommon when new technology ( for the country) is being developed. Missile Technology Control Regime means India needs to develop everything from scratch.--Wikireader41 (talk) 03:15, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
Uhh, what? Failures are uncommon for India when it comes to sending technology into space; they've only had three failures in 15 years of satellite launching, which included over 30 satellites, and this is the first time it exploded mid-air. That's over a 90% success rate. And what does the MTCR have to do with this? EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 03:57, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
Support Would make for an interesting science/technology thing on ITN, despite it being for a failure. Plus, with it being an explosion that wasn't the result of a bombing, it has the potential for high interest (otherwise why would there by such shows as Destroyed in Seconds). Ks0stm (TCG) 17:31, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose such failures are indeed not uncommon in rocketry, especially with new types of launch systems under development. And it is unclear so far if this particular failure is extraordinary in some way. GreyHood Talk 18:03, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose It was just another communications satellite, and nobody was harmed. Not nearly notable enough. --Kitch (Talk : Contrib) 21:16, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

December 24

Portal:Current events/2010 December 24

New Lao Prime Minister

Thongsing Thammavong is named as the new Prime Minister of Laos, a day after the unexpected resignation of Bouasone Bouphavanh. Nightw 04:53, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Oppose, not the head of state.--Johnsemlak (talk) 05:20, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose - per Johnsemlak.--BabbaQ (talk) 13:41, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
Support, is the head of government. Included on BBC News. The Laos article describes it as "a member of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), East Asia Summit and La Francophonie" and Foreign relations of Laos describes further international involvement. --candlewicke 20:01, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
Support, head of government following a resignation. These should be covered under ITN/R. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 22:14, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
Weak support, unexpected change of power in a populous nation. Modest Genius talk 00:15, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
I'll drop my earlier objection as the PM in Laos is the main power figure. However, all the relevant articles need a great deal of expansion. So I'll remain opposed.--Johnsemlak (talk) 05:44, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
Support Laos is a reasonably significant country, this should be posted. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 08:06, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

To echo my previous point, the article Thongsing Thammavong has one paragraph and one reference. It's a long way from being ready IMO.--Johnsemlak (talk) 10:37, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Oppose He is a head of government, which does meet notability, but the articles aren't nearly significant enough. --Kitch (Talk : Contrib) 21:20, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

New Tuvaluan Prime Minister

Willy Telavi is elected the new prime minister, after Maatia Toafa is ousted in a vote of no confidence. Nightw 04:53, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Oppose no Google News hits at all (and only 6 for the ousting), very low international significance, very low population. If this is posted the population of Tuvalu (all 12000 of them) are several orders of magnitude more likely to get posted than anyone else on earth. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 08:47, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose as per Eraserhead.--Johnsemlak (talk) 10:27, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
Comment if there is an actual full election, and some international coverage then I'm prepared to go neutral. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 10:54, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose - per all above.--BabbaQ (talk) 13:41, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
Support if some international coverage can be found to update the article. Perhaps there isn't much as it has just been announced. --candlewicke 19:57, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
Support per ITN/R. Needs a better article though, which is key. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 22:19, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. This isn't on ITNR, which lists heads of state, not heads of government. Tuvalu is tiny, we really don't need to be covering every twist and turn of their politics. Besides, the articles for both men are very poor. Modest Genius talk 00:17, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
So, should we be skipping out on UK elections, because the head of state is the Queen? How about most of the countries in the commonwealth? The head of state is symbolic in many cases, including here. We should be deferring to the head of government in these cases, and ITN/R should be modified for this, because we are rejecting many elections on this dumb basis (Laos is a perfect example), while posting US midterms which are not even near the head of state. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 05:03, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
I'll agree with you about Laos but Tuvalu has 10,000 people. And we covered their election earlier this year. This is ITN, not a Tuvaluan politics blog.--Johnsemlak (talk) 05:45, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
Posting Tuvalu's elections at least means they get some coverage, posting anything more isn't really something we've done for the US (i.e. their supreme court judges), who are vastly more internationally significant than Tuvalu. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 08:32, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
U.S. judges are internationally significant? Seriously? Nightw 09:05, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
Given the US is one of the most important countries in the world and makes up 25% of GDP their most important court is definitely internationally significant. And they've made a lot of historical decisions over the years, such as Roe v Wade and Brown v Board.
And while technically US precedence doesn't apply to other countries I'm sure they have great influence over decisions made in other courts around the world. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 09:17, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
You're logic makes no sense. Having a large GDP doesn't make anything inside that country internationally significant. It only makes its GDP significant. The decisions the US makes are only internationally significant if the decisions are internationally significant. The DADT ruling was internationally interesting because of the fact that it was the only civilised country still applying such stupid logic. But it didn't change anything anywhere else. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 22:45, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
This Tuvalu vs US judges debate is hardly worthwhile. a). International significance is not an ITN criterion; b) Arguing that the appointment of a Tuvalu PM is internationally significant is absurd beyond belief. The reason this gets traction at ITN is because we have a tradition (backed by ITNR) of reporting all changes of head of state and national elections no matter how small or insignificant the state is. (assuming article updates) This changeover was not via election and the PM is not the head of state, so IMO it does not meet the criteria at ITNR, though admittedly it's a technicality. However, given that our criteria for national succession/elections is actually very open, I'd say its reasonable to draw the line somewhere.--Johnsemlak (talk) 10:30, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Western Europe snow problems

  • Large-scale disruption continues in Western Europe after heavy snowfalls, with traffic and flights,bus and train transportations basically at a stand still.--BabbaQ (talk) 23:43, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support - as nom.--BabbaQ (talk) 20:56, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support per reasoning in last nom: international coverage and significance, and very disruptive for residents. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 22:21, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose - not really true, not very interesting. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 22:28, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose, nothing that major weather wise. Whilst it has been extremely frustrating for those of us who could not travel because of it, it's not a major thing in world terms. Modest Genius talk 00:19, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Comment:I guess it is the never ending "America" issue ones again. Had this been snow problems that had effect on America then suddenly it would have been of world interest but not when it comes to "little europe". Im not saying its anyone in this discussions fualt but it is a general problem for Wikipedia that American news are graded higher than any other. Just saying.--BabbaQ (talk) 00:24, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
    • What utter rubbish. The last time tons of snow fell on the U.S. (last year) that wasn't posted. Unless I missed something. (Except for the one that happened in D.C. since it snows rarely there.) –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 03:10, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
      • "A blizzard produces record snowfall, causing power outages and at least 5 deaths in North America.", Wikipedia:ITN archives/2010/February. Algebraist 03:54, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
        • I laughed pretty hard. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 04:30, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
          • That was the exception, that was when the time D.C. had a record amount of snowfall. Compare this
          • So, Europeans were bitching about cold weather in winter? –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 09:17, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
          • That NA blizzard was posted because it broke numerous records. If similar notability can be demonstrated with the Europe storm then it should be posted. Otherwise, I agree fully with HTD, rubbish and all, plenty of storms in the US that cause plenty of disruption don't get posted.--Johnsemlak (talk) 04:36, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
            • Broke numerous records in the region. So what? We rejected the cricket record a few days ago because "Cricket is full of statistics" and records are broken all the time. What's the difference? Besides, snow accumulation of this kind is common in North America, whereas this area of Europe is not, so we're comparing apples and oranges. And it's definitely not rubbish, because everything is literally "at a standstill". I live in a region in Canada where this doesn't even compare to some of our top ten storms of any given season; but I'm not going to let that systemic bias get in the way of recognising a disastrous event like this. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 05:10, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
Blah, blah, blah. A lot more snow fell in Russia than in Western Europe and nobody gives a crap about that. And I believe we have posted weather incidents in Europe. Oh, and ITN posted TWO cricket records earlier this year.--Johnsemlak (talk) 05:29, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
Again, you're comparing apples and oranges. Russia has TONS of snow every year as well. That's why people don't give a crap about that. And OMG, TWO records? That's outrageous! We're in the red 50% of the time, but that's better than too much cricket on ITN. Right? </sarcasm> EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 22:51, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
So basically you're saying that large scale snow is notable only if it hits Western Europe?--Johnsemlak (talk) 05:43, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
Well, no, obviously. That would be just as flawed. A certain storm is notable only when it is unusual for the region in which it hit. The Afghan blizzard a while back was very notable, even though the same storm in the States wouldn't of have had such a disastrous effect. That's all I'm saying. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 05:52, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

New railway to Sichuan

  • The Yichang-Wanzhou Railway, China's most difficult to build and most expensive (per kilometer) rail line to date, opens for regular operations, providing a much faster link between Sichuan and eastern China. Times of India -- Vmenkov (talk) 16:26, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
  • I'm up for supporting this, it is a big deal and appears to have been a huge engineering challenge to complete. It cuts the journey time between Wuhan and Chongqing (two of China's largest cities) from 22 hours to 5 hours. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 17:48, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose local news, now international significance. Nergaal (talk) 19:22, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
Agree with Nergaal, Engineering achievement for china, but no record being broken from what I see. To put it in perspective the distance *from A to B would be about the equivalent distance as from New York to Boston. So indeed very local or at best regional. The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 19:45, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
You guys realise that 45 million people live in the directly controlled territory of the two cities being linked by this line? And that its doubtful that a similar line in Europe (such as the new Swiss tunnels under the alps) are any more of an engineering achievement?
Of note I would support a new railway line from New York to Boston - it'd be definitely worthy of posting. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 20:18, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
well I wouldnt if its just a rail line but I'm open to being persuaded. The article and the few news sites I can find it on are not exactly impressive other than being really expensive. Can you exactly what is special and what separates it from other rail lines around the globe? The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 20:23, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support Major infrastructure projects are actually much more important in terms of world history than the usual ITN stuff like deaths, minor disasters, regular sports events etc. GreyHood Talk 20:45, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support Major engineering effort: Out the line's total 377-km length, 288 km runs on bridges or in tunnels. And it is a part of a major railway route in China, affecting 100s of Millions of people. Crnorizec (talk) 23:55, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support I wonder what is local here, since it's major in global views with its financial and organizational scope.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 00:08, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support Well, it is "local", in the sense that the Channel Tunnel is "local" to Britain and France (whose combined population is a lot smaller than that of Sichuan Basin and Hubei). Actually, the oft-repeated "speed-up from 22 to 5 hours" claim for the Wuhan-to-Chongqing travel time is a bit premature: the 5 hour total travel time will only be achieved in a few years' time, once the 2 other connecting high-speed segments, the Yuli Railway (Chongqing-Lichuan) and the Hanyi Railway (Wuhan-Yichang) have been completed as well. However, the Yiwan Line is the key component of this future system, as it is the most difficult section of the route. Even as it is, the present line is a remarkable feat of engineering, and will still give a big speed-up for travel between Hubei and the Sichuan Basin. Historically, the Sichuan Basin (todays's Sichuan province + Chongqing municipality, home to way over 100 million people) has been very isolated from the rest of China (and the world) by difficult-to-cross wide mountain belts on all sides, and this railway is, literally, a major breakthrough in ground transportation between this region and eastern China. I am pretty sure that by any measure involved - the amount of construction work done (in PPP-adjusted dollars, length of bridges and tunnels, etc), the amount of passengers to be moved annually, the number of previously unserved people in the regions (Enshi Tujia and Miao Autonomous Prefecture and adjacent counties) who will now have access to a railway service - the Yiwan line may greatly exceed such well known projects of the early and late 20th century, respectively, as the BC's famous Kettle Valley Railway or the US Northeast Corridor high(er)-speed upgrades (Acela Express). By some measures, it may even exceed the Channel Tunnel. And all of those certainly made lots of front-page news in their respective countries for years. (And yes, I certainly think that a major infrastructure project in BC or the NEC area would be just as worthy of the front page.) I rode both the former KVR trail and parts of Badong County, so I think I can compare the terrain... -- Vmenkov (talk) 00:36, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the broader explanation, but I used rhetorical question to express my support. It's clear that it's somehow local, but the view of its importance is surely global.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 00:49, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
  • I will express conditional support here based on the explanations above. I agree with Greyhood's point that infrastructure achievements are very significant and long-lasting. My only reservation would be that the Yiwan line is not actually finished, and will eventually connect Shanghai to Chengdu, which seems a bit more dramatic, but I'll accept the argument here that this is the most important part of the line. As an aside, I would regard the 2006 Qingzang railway as far more significant in terms of an engineering feat (that, admittedly may be wrong, but I had read in several sources in the 90s that this railway was virtually impossible) and in cultural terms as it links Tibet to the rest of the world by rail.--Johnsemlak (talk) 04:16, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
Fully agree with the above poster that the Qingzang railway was a lot more newsworthy than this (and most other) rail lines, by virtue of its much greater visibility on the map (the first ever railway in a huge region), altitude records, political significance, and just sheer exoticism, even if its actual cargo and passenger volume is probably rather slight compared with the lots of unsung Chinese or Indian mainlines (due to Tibet's comparatively low population). Obviously, a transportation infrastructure project does not has to be that famous to qualify for being mentioned in our "in the news" page. If I were asked what makes a project newsworthy, I would suggest that any newly built or greatly overhauled system that makes a significant change in the available transportation options for several millions of people anywhere ought to qualify for inclusion. For example, I think that NYC's Second Avenue Subway, a new tunnel under the Hudson, Tampa to Orlando high speed rail line, if any of them were ever to be built, should all qualify, as would the electrification of Caltrain, a new major TGV line, or a major international airport/regional hub. Perhaps this suggested threshold is a bit too low for some people, but I'd rather read about a new subway system in a big city, than say, about yet another terrorist attack or a pop music sensation. Vmenkov (talk) 05:41, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Clashes in Pakistan

Not article yet, but hope soon.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:12, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Anarchist bombing

  • Anarchist are linked to bombings in the Swiss and Chilean embassies in Rome.[7] Truthsort (talk) 04:11, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
Support - Sounds interesting. Notable.--BabbaQ (talk) 13:42, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

December 23

Portal:Current events/2010 December 23

Côte d'Ivoire

Oppose. I don't think this is so significant in the aftermath of the election crisis to be posted in the ITN template. The country was suspended from the African Union which was more global news and perhaps has become the most serious consequence of the crisis, but it was rejected of posting due to its regional character. Thus, I'm inclined to vote oppose for this.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 15:16, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Support. 173+ people killed. ~AH1(TCU) 16:41, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
but not because World Bank stopped funding them and we already posted the initial spat of violence and its ousting out of the African Union. The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 17:00, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
But we could integrate the death toll into the blurb, as it is something which makes the situation a bit more notable. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 18:36, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Wait The violence is not related with the World Bank's proscription, and I wonder how you can compound both things.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 20:44, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Hmm, I was just about to propose a blurb for that, but I see what you mean now. It would be awkward to merge the two. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 03:45, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
Support´- per resident anthropologists reasoning. and as per nominator.--BabbaQ (talk) 17:27, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Support. We didn't post its suspension from the AU because of a lack of an update, but support was pretty strong for posting. We could definitely compensate with this, as it has similar implications. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 18:36, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Comment Since here another topic is discussed I propose to separate it or comment about the World Bank only. I support the new violence which caused high death toll, but merged in a blurb with the World Bank no.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 20:52, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Yes this article suggestion seems to have been granted enough support to be ITN.--BabbaQ (talk) 20:59, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
I don't think so. There is one vote support for another topic and I don't see clear statement of your vote as nominator.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 22:00, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
Eeeh?--BabbaQ (talk) 22:10, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
Wait This is still developing. One of two things needs to happen to make this ITN-worthy: Either Laurent Gbagbo resigns and accepts that Alassane Ouattara won, or ECOWAS intervenes as threatened. In the meantime, keep up with the election article, or make a new article about the post-election drama. --Kitch (Talk : Contrib) 21:23, 27 December 2010 (UTC)]]

Discovery of Homo Denisovans

Researchers announce the discovery of "Homo Denisova" relative of homo-neanderthalus based on remians found in Siberia cave. Nat Geo The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 03:36, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Support any type of hominid discovery deserves ITN status. Nergaal (talk) 03:47, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Support. Very interesting find and would probably fill in some gaps in anthropology once further analysis is completed. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 03:50, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
I see we have the Denisova hominin article. --BorgQueen (talk) 07:56, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Support per Nergaal.
Blurb: Based on the remains found in a Siberia cave, researchers announce the discovery of the "Denisova hominin", a relative of Neanderthals and ancestor of modern Melanesians. GreyHood Talk 12:18, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose - We have had too many kind of these articles in ITN. Time for something else.--BabbaQ (talk) 13:19, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Jorge Rafael Videla article seems more like a ITN worthy article right now. Atleast in my book.--BabbaQ (talk) 13:21, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
I don't think we have too many of these types of articles. If anything I think many people want to see more science articles (except space launches maybe) on ITN instead of the usual politics/disaster/sports news. There's no reason we can't bave both the Videla item and this item on ITN.--Johnsemlak (talk) 14:13, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Agreed!--BabbaQ (talk) 15:03, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Indeed after a literature review it does appear a Hominid has not been discovered since 2008. This is arguably the most important Anthropological discovery of 2010, its either this the Blombos Cave pressure flaking, the Koro language (India) or the Neanderthal genome project interbreeding evidence. The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 15:18, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Support. In general, such discovery receives more attention than the discoveries related to other species. We had few familiar discoveries related with other species in the template, which implies that this could not be avoided.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:25, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Wait a second. The species was announced back in March, also posted on ITN back then. What is new this time is the fact that they interbred with modern humans. Well, this is also a story of ITN interest... --Tone 15:17, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Of course it is. Since other discoveries were posted, this is far more significant.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 15:44, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Support. Important discovery of close human relative. ~AH1(TCU) 16:42, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
  • I would say that the important part of this story is that they bred with Homo sapiens, so the blurb should probably reflect that. I'm not a fan of the current proposed blurb. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 21:59, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Blurb: Based on the remains found in a Siberia cave, researchers announce the discovery of the "Denisova hominin", who bred with Homo sapiens and was an ancestor of modern Melanesians. If too long, either the part on the cave or the part on Melanesians may be cut out. GreyHood Talk 22:32, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Remove the Melanesians part and its ready to post. I am too unfortable of with the misuse Misuse of "Scientific Findings" implied by it. There were far more people that had the DNA they only had the most DNA shared The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 23:24, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Researchers announce the discovery of the Denisova hominin, a Homo species that interbred with Homo sapiens. Nergaal (talk) 23:47, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
or: Researchers announce the discovery of a new Homo species that interbred with Homo sapiens, Denisova hominin. Nergaal (talk) 23:50, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Thank you, sorry I am picky. I like the first one personally The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 00:18, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Question: The Wikipedia article has been here since March. I know that there has been some increased notice in the press, but it's not like the discovery is actually new. How does this information affect the addition of this item in the In The News page? Corvus cornixtalk 23:55, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
That's what I am saying. The proposed blurb is outdated, the announcement took place in March. So it is about Melanesians and we have to form a blurb about that. Willing to post when there's a good suggestion. --Tone 00:00, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
The story is the interbreeding with sapiens. The second version above emphasizes that. Nergaal (talk) 00:02, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
Bone head move on my part in the nom The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 00:18, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
  Note: Is there any reason this has not been posted? appropriate copyvio free updates have been added. We are two days in the Red!!! The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 22:51, 25 December 2010 (UTC)
Really, why this hasn't been posted yet? GreyHood Talk 13:04, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
Wondering the same thing right now. Pretty neat story, and the timer is going to go red once again. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 03:59, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
Perhaps the admins were enjoying their Christmas weekend :) Hope they'll soon come back from the party. GreyHood Talk 10:27, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Maatia Toafas vote of no confidence

Tuvalu again?--Johnsemlak (talk) 02:54, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
The last one was Tonga. I'm not sure we've done Tuvalu yet. Or Tahiti or Tokelau for that matter. --Mkativerata (talk) 02:58, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
The Tuvaluan general election, 2010 was posted on 29 September. 1--Johnsemlak (talk) 04:04, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Wait for the actual elections, because otherwise, the oppose party will come by again and slam it down for being an insignificant piece of land or something. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 03:32, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support. The ousting of a nation's prime minister is notable enough. --candlewicke 04:11, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Tuvaluan politics has already been posted fairly recently. This recant event gets six--count 'em--six Google News hits. There's been no article update so far, which I think speaks somewhat to the lack of notability here. Tuvaluan politics has minimal or no impact elsewhere, I am afraid. And at the very least since a new PM is going to have to be elected/appointed we should for that.Put me in the Oppose party.--Johnsemlak (talk) 04:42, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support, but delay: the vote for the new PM will likely take place on Friday (according to Radio New Zealand International), so it may be wise to delay including the story until then. Fishal (talk) 05:26, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Comment--A far more significant item (in terms of newsworthiness) is the Belarus presidential election nominated below, which I believe is ready to be posted.--Johnsemlak (talk) 06:48, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose, it has a population of 4, it has no international significance, virtually no hits on Google News and its election has already been posted this year. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 19:48, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose per Eraser. Nergaal (talk) 21:05, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Jorge Rafael Videla

Former head of state of a world player convicted of Crime against humanity? seems good ITN material. But his article has big NPOV notice tag. I'm taking a look at it now to see what the issues are... so oppose at the moment. The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 01:18, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Support This is pretty important for all of Latin America. The NPOV tag was mainly because of lack of citations on the "image abroad" section, that isn't very relevant to the news. Fixman (talk!) 02:41, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Even so both tags should be resolved before linking to the main page. --Johnsemlak (talk) 02:48, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Done. I just removed the troubled section altogether; the claims had been tagged for more than one year already. --BorgQueen (talk) 08:19, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Support significant, when a former head of state is sentenced to life imprisonment. Crnorizec (talk) 03:13, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Support. Life imprisonment for a former head of state is obviously notable. Article needs a quick update though. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 03:30, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Support - Support as nom.--BabbaQ (talk) 10:04, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Support as per above.--Johnsemlak (talk) 14:59, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Support This sounds important, and life imprisonment of a former head of state is an ITN topic.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 16:11, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Comment: Seems like we have reached a sort of concensus for it to pass ITN. Good!--BabbaQ (talk) 17:28, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Yes, but the article has to be updated a bit more. --BorgQueen (talk) 18:00, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Done. C628 (talk) 19:15, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
And fixed up a bit. Ready to post. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 19:27, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Posted. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 21:52, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
    I don't know if anyone else has noticed the large tracts of unsourced negative information in the article... --Mkativerata (talk) 01:04, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
Hmm, I agree with that. I had thought that the problem was dealt with because the tag had been removed.--Johnsemlak (talk) 04:35, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

December 22

Portal:Current events/2010 December 22

"Unprecedented" South Korean live fire drills

  • BBC: "Exercises have been held at Pocheon before, but this would be on an unprecedented scale, the spokesman said" and "The BBC's Kevin Kim in Seoul says this is the largest winter live-fire exercise ever conducted on land here."
  • Al Jazeera: "South Korea will hold its largest-ever live fire drill near the military border with North Korea" and "involving the largest number of personnel in a peace-time exercise" and "similar drills had been staged previously on more than 50 occasions, but the scale this time was unprecedented."
It hasn't happened yet but maybe if/when it does? --candlewicke 06:13, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
Then we'll cross that bridge when we get there. Until then, no story, thus no ITN candidate. Oppose on technical grounds.--WaltCip (talk) 07:03, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose Unless of course, war were declared. Nergaal (talk) 07:11, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
A point of clarification--the two countries are technically at war now.--Johnsemlak (talk) 09:51, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
Indeed thay have never stopped being at war, they signed an armistice not a peace treaty in 1953. Thus they have technically been at war for 60 something years. That being said, I have to oppose unless North Korea unambiguously attacks the south over this drill The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 14:57, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
And NK returns fire [sarcasm] LOL Sending Faxes thats so 80s The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 17:19, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
Actually, North Korea withdrew from the armistice in 2009, so they are technically fully at war again: [8]. Thue | talk 15:14, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. Live-fire drills are not newsworthy. If they were, North Korea would be in ITN on a daily basis. --Kitch (Talk : Contrib) 15:25, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose as per comments above. —  Cargoking  talk  16:25, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

This incident has heated up considerably. N Koreans 'ready for sacred war'.--Johnsemlak (talk) 15:00, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

At this point, it will probably happen. Maybe we should wait for something a little more notable. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 18:42, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Wait for the shot heard round the world, so to speak.--WaltCip (talk) 19:18, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

December 21

Portal:Current events/2010 December 21

Death of Enzo Bearzot

BBC Is a coach who won the FIFA World Cup important enough for the Main Page? There seems to be very few of them and they don't seem to die very often either. --candlewicke 06:04, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

  • Maybe if he had been the coach of a FIFA team at the time of his death, but probably not here because it's been 25 years. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 20:13, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support - Big name in the field of sports. Death notable,.--BabbaQ (talk) 23:04, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose per my personal factors for ITN deaths: (a) Was the death unexpected? No. (b) Was the deceased active in his field at the time of his death? No. (c) Does the death impact current events? No. (d) How significant was the deceased? Significant, but not overwhelmingly so - certainly not to the extent to outweigh (a)-(c).--Mkativerata (talk) 23:07, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Other than the very significant triumph in 1982, Bearzot doesn't seem to have had any notable accomplishments. I'd generally expect a manager to have an exceptionally accomplished career for their death to be notable enough for ITN.--Johnsemlak (talk) 02:53, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

New START Treaty

The U.S. Senate is expected to ratify the treaty later today. BBC DC 20:40, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Note that the treaty's signing was posted, but ratification by the Senate wasn't assured because of Republican objections. DC 20:43, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Bilateral treaty which essentially only affects two countries. I think a treaty of this kind with a more "nuclearly-unstable" country would attain a better level of notability. We've already got the DADT pass anyway. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 22:36, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support Bilateral treaty yes, but one of the most significant bilateral treaties in the world. It is true that we have only recently posted another Congressional item, but that is to be expected in these exceptional circumstances when the Democrats are trying to ram as much through (and I don't mean to say that in a bad way) before they lose their numbers. --Mkativerata (talk) 23:11, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support one of the most important treaties of the year. Nuclear weapons are kinda a big deal. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 23:16, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
    • Yes, nuclear weapons are a big deal, but this one is only being signed because START I and START II are expiring. It's kind of like when you're extending the lease for your car; sure, it's a new lease, but your car hasn't really changed. So, should you be making a big deal every time you extend your lease? Besides, the Convention on Cluster Munitions was much more important. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 01:52, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose Do treaty ratifications ever make ITN? I know signings do, but I've never seen a ratification before. --Kitch (Talk : Contrib) 23:25, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support - The ratification is notable and newsworthy because it was in doubt. Obama's signing it is not. Agree with EH that nukes are a big deal, and these two countries have the most nukes. Jusdafax 00:08, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose for now As the final vote has not occured The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 00:28, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose let's remember that this is just a renewal of the old START which existed until now for 20 years. The reason it got so much publicity is the exercise of the new balance of power in the US Congress, and that's no news. The voting is not over yet, but even if it were... Crnorizec (talk) 01:08, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
Support when passed this is huge, and is not just a ratification of the previous one. The agreement is: the number of strategic nuclear missile launchers will be reduced by half. The clock is moving 10 minutes away from midnight! Nergaal (talk) 02:46, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
I would be inclined to say two minutes, with the whole North and South Korea issue, but yeah, definitely a good move on their part. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 03:47, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose: If we posted the signing that's enough in my opinion. Also, as far as I'm aware, the Russian government has still to ratify it. So... what? We post the ratification by the U.S., and then also the ratification by Moscow later on? Bit of an overkill on one story... Nightw 10:25, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
Support. Russian government enjoys a vast majority support in the parliament, so the ratification by Russia is assured and not that interesting. Everything depends on the U.S. ratification. GreyHood Talk 13:31, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support if passed and pending article updates etc. Fairly big implications internationally and domestically in the US. I agree the the fact that the Russian Duma also has to ratify it is a complication, but there's little or no indication that they will oppose their President, so I'd say that since US Senate opposition was the main obstacle, we can post that. We also posted the signing, but this is fairly large news too. And certainly a bilateral treaty reducing nuclear weapons of the two largest nuclear armed states affects more than just two countries.--Johnsemlak (talk) 10:43, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support when ratified and article updated.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:05, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support per [9] and [10] confirmation of ratification.--Metallurgist (talk) 21:04, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
The article is now updated. Suggest:
The United States Senate ratifies the New START arms control treaty with Russia.--Johnsemlak (talk) 02:07, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support, now that the article has been updated. Marcus Qwertyus 02:43, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Comment: Could people please provide rationales for their votes per WP:NOTAVOTE? I personally won't mind if it goes up (despite my oppose), but this isn't a head count. Actually, this is happening a lot lately... EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 03:37, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Most of the supports have reasons behind them. Sometimes it's hard to come up with something that wasn't already mentioned above.--Johnsemlak (talk) 04:08, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose until the Duma ratifies it as well. Fishal (talk) 05:05, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Any further comment on this one? IMO we have a rough consensus currently, though we could wait until the Russians ratify it (most likely in January). However as stated above ratification by the Russian legislature is expected to happen without incident (it does not only need to be ratified by the Russian Duma, but by both houses of Russia's bicameral Federal Assembly).--Johnsemlak (talk) 17:36, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Looking at the proposed blurb, it does sort of seem a little US-centric (as if the American ratification is the only important aspect of the bill). Perhaps we should wait the extra month for the Russian ratification and post then to display a bit more equilibrium. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 18:45, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
We'll, that's what happened, but does anyone want to take a stab at the blurb? IT's not that US ratification is the only thing that matters, it's that US Senate ratification was the main obstacle.--Johnsemlak (talk) 04:41, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
The treaty isn't in affect unless both parties ratify. Why would we post this if it doesn't mean anything? Nightw 04:32, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Iraqi government

Following deadlocked elections earlier this year, Iraq's parliament has agreed on a new government BBC. DC 20:40, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Was just going to nominate this. and the article is updated (substantially after the election), as is al maliki's and the PM's page.
  • Modest support. No change regarding the head of state, but still significant looking at the so-called "nine-month deadlock". EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 22:41, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Support Iraq is a key interest to countries round the world. Even Al-jazeera sounds pretty upbeat on this The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 00:25, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
Support - The disfunction in Iraq may well continue, but the formation of an actual government after nine months is big news and quite ITN-worthy. The article(s) being updated is a major plus. Good refs, global interest. Jusdafax 12:46, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

What article would we link to, and is there a blurb? I can't find any mention in the Current Events Portal.--Johnsemlak (talk) 13:28, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

lets renominate for context: (dont know how this got support then!)
Incumbent Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki heads a new coalition government following an election.
alternatively one can add despite not winning a plurality.(Lihaas (talk) 17:55, 22 December 2010 (UTC)).
Looks good The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 00:46, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

2010 Bonin Islands earthquake

7.4 magnitude earthquake hits Japan. - EugεnS¡m¡on(14) ® 17:44, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Oppose there have been 3 higher magnitude quakes this year, and all of them in significantly more populated areas. If any of the 2000 inhabitants of Chichi-jima were affected significantly, or somebody from a tsunami, then maybe yes. Nergaal (talk) 17:52, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose for Big quake yes, We require some impact for ITN. NPR says no immediate reports of Damage or Injuries. The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 23:32, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Milo Đukanović

  • The prime minister of Montenegro is to step down. We should keep an eye on this. --Tone 09:58, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support and when we word it we should include the fact that this is his 6th term which makes the event more notable.--Avala (talk) 12:12, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support when he resigns. Until then it's only a canard.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 12:31, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
It seems that he resigned - [11] --Avala (talk) 13:56, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Thank you Avala. Now it sounds significant, just to update the article.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 15:24, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Do we know when and how a successor will be chosen (re-election, line of succession, etc)? The BBC article only has a vague indication that He has proposed Finance Minister Igor Luksic as his successor, Reuters news agency reports1.--Johnsemlak (talk) 16:25, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Correct. Igor Lukšić, who was Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister, takes the office.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:02, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
P.S. Detailed information about the succession is not revealed yet.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:10, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Milo Đukanović, who led Montenegro to independence from Serbia, resigns as Prime Minister of the country.
    • Support when his article is updated. The BBC just confirmed his resignation. --Kitch (Talk : Contrib) 18:36, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
      • Strongly oppose the wording - gee Montenegro was never part of Serbia, it was part of the state union with it on equal basis, so he couldn't lead Montenegro to independence "from" Serbia. So that wording is completely incorrect and I would avoid considering that he also led Montenegro to that union previously ie. independence of Montenegro is just part of his long political career that saw many changes in policies. I propose "Milo Đukanović, resigns as a Prime Minister of Montenegro in his 6th term. He is succeeded by Igor Lukšić." or "Milo Đukanović, who served multiple terms as a Prime Minister of Montenegro resigns. He is succeeded by Igor Lukšić.".--Avala (talk) 19:15, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
        • I agree with Avala. The proposed blurb is inappropriate, since the country became independent after the dissolution of Serbia and Montenegro on 5 June, 2006. My suggestion is to undermine succession by Igor Lukšić, because it's not so relevant nor even as the resignation of the Deputy Prime Minister Svetozar Marović, who was the only president of Serbia and Montenegro, and comes along with the resignation of Đukanović.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:41, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support. Not head of state, but once was. Stepping down from such a high position is always notable anyway. Article will have to be updated a little more. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 22:27, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
    • I think head of government has equal notability to head of state. --Kitch (Talk : Contrib) 23:26, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
      • Heh, tell that to a few people here and they'll throw a fit at you. I mean, I personally agree, but it's useless for me to argue when this place is ruled by simple-majority votes. Ugh. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 03:40, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support as per above. If you think the independence is more interesting in the blurb, maybe this is more appropriate:

Milo Đukanović, who led Montenegro to independence from the union with Serbia and Yugoslavia, resigns as Prime Minister of the country. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crnorizec (talkcontribs) 01:17, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

  • Comment. Why not just keep it simple and say Milo Đukanović, former president of Montenegro from 1998 to 2002, resigns as prime minister of the country. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 01:57, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
Posting. Skipping the fact he was the president once as this is not of direct importance for the blurb. Also, I will not add he is to be succeeded by Lukšić, as his article has no update. --Tone 07:59, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
Given the fact that Luksic becoming PM is not an ITNR item and probably not notable enough on its own, I'd say I agree with leaving it out.--Johnsemlak (talk) 10:30, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
Comment The blurb looks so... bland for such an important event. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 20:40, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Lunar eclipse

Support Really lacking prose. Only complaint could improve on that The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 03:50, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose - Visible from North America, ergo U.S.-centric.Support but also update the article. Curiously, the next occurrence of an eclipse merged with a winter solstice is quite a long way from now; about eighty years.--WaltCip (talk) 05:35, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Support when updated. "... the first total lunar eclipse to occur on the day of the Northern Winter Solstice (Southern Summer Solstice) since 1638, and only the second in the Common Era." That's certainly significant enough for ITN. --BorgQueen (talk) 08:57, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose Is there anything significantly different about a solstice eclipse? It might be visible (that is, not visible) for a couple of minutes less than a lunar eclipse on December 14th, but otherwise it is just a co-incidence. There will be 2 more lunar eclipses within the next year, so it seems fairly routine. Kevin McE (talk) 09:23, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose per WaltCip. First Halliburton, now this? But seriously Support. It's of interest to our readers, and rarely falls on the winter solstice. DC 09:29, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Support, we haven't had a full eclipse for two years already. The coincience with the solstice is rare but it does not strike me as something really exceptional. The article is in good shape. Suggest posting when it starts. --Tone 09:56, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Support but the winter solstice part is meaningless IMO. Plus there will be some fantastic pictures and pretty pictures on the main page is a plus. -CWY2190(talkcontributions) 10:35, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
It has already started. Blurb please? --BorgQueen (talk) 10:44, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Posted. The article isn't exactly in the best shape but meets the minimum, and the timer was 2 days old. --BorgQueen (talk) 11:47, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

"A new landmark for individual success in African football"

According to The Irish Times. I know this is just the continent and maybe not every year but maybe now that it is a new record? Thought it was worth nominating anyway. The person's article is in good condition too. --candlewicke 03:51, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Oppose all but the World Player of the Year. We didn't post the Asian one when it was awarded either. So what if he's won it for the 4th time? There aren't that many top African footballers at his level so it's not exactly surprising that he's winning it often. Strange Passerby (talkcontribs) 04:04, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

December 20

Portal:Current events/2010 December 20

Yulia Tymoshenko charged with misusing funds

BBC. Former head of government (indeed, the one immediately preceding the current head of government) of a major Eastern European country. She's claiming the charges are politically-motivated, so maybe worth waiting on this one? Strange Passerby (talkcontribs) 03:03, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Oppose: She is charged as fmr. PM with misuse of carbon credits funds to pay out pensions during the financial crisis... A lot of politicking there, definitely not an ITN material for now. Crnorizec (talk) 08:20, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose unless she is arrested, although we didn't include the Ivo Sanader situation so there isn't much of a precedent for that either.--Avala (talk) 12:23, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose per above. Same charges are not unusual, which does not make it something special to be posted.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 12:29, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose High likelihood of political motivation. Tymoshenko was a major part of the Orange Revolution in 2004-05 that overthrew then-Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovich, who is now the Prime Minister. --Kitch (Talk : Contrib) 18:31, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Comment: Yanukovich was a then-Presidential candidate who rigged the elections but who is now the President.--Avala (talk) 19:16, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose for now. If she is convicted or at least arrested then we should revisit it. Tymoshenko has been a very high-profile politician for years and such an event would be pretty notable whether it was politically motivated or not.--Johnsemlak (talk) 10:50, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

New species of Mistletoe

Kind of a Christmassy item here. A new species of mistletoe, Helixanthera schizocalyx, found in northern Mozambique has been confirmed as new to science. It has also been identified and determined to be vulnerable to extinction. BBC, MSNBC - JuneGloom Schmooze 22:15, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

  • Support - Nice science topic, legit discovery and quite timely! Thanks for suggesting it. Jusdafax 22:37, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
  • OpposeThis is perfect for the xmas DYK instead.μηδείς (talk) 23:02, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support why not? New discovery that is a timely fit for Christmas. Makes as much sense as posting the burning of a giant horse or whatever it was last year for Christmas. --PlasmaTwa2 23:55, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support; I seem to recall new species being frequently posted. C628 (talk) 00:30, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support Good article, great timing. Plus it'll be nice to see Kew gardens get some exposure. RxS (talk) 02:08, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support timely. Nergaal (talk) 02:52, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose pending clarification – haven't we only traditionally posted new species if they've been published in a peer-reviewed journal? I don't see where that is the case here, can someone please clarify? Strange Passerby (talkcontribs) 03:34, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Comment I'm neutral myself on this, but I'd like to note that the discovery was in 2008, and that is not news. Scientists have confirmed yesterday that it was new, though, and that's what the story is about. So be careful with the blurb. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 04:04, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
comment Well, I am unsure, the story is based on this press release and this seems to be the publication at Kew.org which is part of Royal Botanic Gardens of the UK. So it seem to jinge on the credibility Britain's Royal Botanic Gardens and whether its enough for ITN purposes. The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 04:05, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

I have both created the article Helixanthera schizocalyx - (no, no peer reviewed source is available) - and nominated it for DYK [12].

This is interesting but one new species of mistletoe out of 1,000 hardly merits ITN weighting, and the opportune timing of a press release hardly amounts to notability on a world-wide scale.μηδείς (talk) 04:12, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

thats highly disruptive and WP:POINTY. The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 04:31, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Creating an article on the mistletoe which didn't exist is "highly disruptive and WP:POINTY"? Really? Wow. If he creates the article, he's also free to nominate it at DYK. They'll reject it if it goes up on ITN. There's no disruption here at all. I suggest you choose your words more carefully. Strange Passerby (talkcontribs) 04:44, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Wow. Thanks, Strange Passerby. The guidelines require one to point to or update an existing article when posting an ITN. For those who may not realize, since the red link is now blue due to my effort and not the nominator's, no such article existed when the ITN nomination was made. If anything, it would have been even more bizarre of me to nominate an article for DYK which didn't even exist yet.
In any case, I will be happy to see the article on the front page wherever it appears.
But I still oppose it as a Christmas ITN nomination as both (1) undue weight and (2) due its having no inherent relation to the date other than the Kew publicist's clever press release copy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Medeis (talkcontribs) 06:43, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
ITN doesn't always include items of world-wide notability, in fact more times than not that kind of wide spread interest doesn't exist. This is a good subject, and the timing is good. No reason not to include it. RxS (talk) 04:54, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Opppose per Medeis. Also there were so many other species discovered, more notable, that we didn't cover.--Avala (talk) 12:16, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose If anything, it should be a one-off thing for Christmas Day. Maybe if they can make a worthwhile article, it would fit better as a Did You Know? tidbit. --Kitch (Talk : Contrib) 18:28, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose, per medeis, per the fact that plant species are found all the time in tropical regions (if it were in Europe, now that would be interesting!), and per the fact the name is not in fact scientifically valid until it has been formally published under the ICBN, which it has not. Circéus (talk) 01:12, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
SUPPORT for friday (and no i dont mean saturday)(Lihaas (talk) 18:00, 22 December 2010 (UTC)).

Terror plot

12 people in Britain are arrested in a suspected terror plot.[13] Truthsort (talk) 20:08, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

These things are fairly common and I think the rule of thumb when it comes to ITN is that attempts make it (see attempted Times Square bomber) but plots usually don't. Also, I'm not sure this would merit an article. DC TC 20:45, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
Hm. I think I'll Oppose simply because they were arrested on suspicion of a terrorist plot. Now if this was an actual terrorist attack that had been thwarted, then I would definitely support. As DC says, that's essentially been the precedent. Nothing has actually happened in this particular instance. --Dorsal Axe 21:23, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose It takes a very serious crime by highly notable person to have their arrest featured on ITN. As the individuals are not notable prior to the arrest and at best the crime is conspiracy to commit terror I cannot support. The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 23:06, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Extreme winter conditions in United Kingdom

The United Kingdom is experiencing its coldest December in 100 years, with snow causing frequent airport closures, and 10 deaths reported thus far.

  • The Met Office made the declaration today, with the current average temperature for the month nationwide being -0.7 °C, almost 3 °C colder than average. They stated it will likely end up being the coldest December since recordkeeping began in 1910, with no end to the cold in sight. --Kitch (Talk : Contrib) 18:16, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
    Can this be broadened to include winter conditions and disruption throughout Europe?--Johnsemlak (talk) 18:19, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
    How many other countries in Europe have broken historic records? I know it's been an unusually cold winter, but I don't think other nations have experienced quite the extremes that the UK has. --Kitch (Talk : Contrib) 18:24, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
    Here is the article about the ongoing winter in Europe. The snowstorms with extreme conditions hit most of the West European countries in November, which was rejected two weeks ago due it wasn't winter, though it is less common then such conditions in December. However, I support this nomination with broader information about the extrema reached in whole Europe.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:01, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
if January is also coldest in 100 years will we post that too? its winter... its cold... speaking from toronto i may carry a bit of cold bias but not too much has happened due to cold except some flight delays. i dont think its ITN material yet. -- Ashish-g55 19:07, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
Looks like we're entering a pointless discussion here. We'll update the ITN template with the report when the sufficient amount of information will be gathered. Until then, its scope concentrated on the United Kingdom and Ireland only is not enough.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:22, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
Really, I think the only way this should even be considered is if it causes widespread death and disruption for an extended period of time (more so than now). I don't think having temperatures just below freezing is notable, but if it causes a lot of chaos then it is. Then again, like Ashish I have a severe cold bias, only I am from Saskatoon and I have it way worse (I would kill for -0.7 weather). --PlasmaTwa2 19:25, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
Comment. Both cold and warm temperature records have been set. For example, during the weekend there were several warm temperature records in Newfoundland and Nunavut as a result of the unusual jet stream blocking pattern and the "Warm Arctic-Cold Continents" pattern that has occurred only four times (including 2009-2010 and 2010-2011) in recorded weather history. I can suggest a blurb should this get any supports. ~AH1(TCU) 19:38, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
I'd say if a 100 year old cold record has been set and there've been 10 deaths, it's pretty significant.--Johnsemlak (talk) 01:58, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose not only that it is local, it is also not that severe when compared to natural disasters that usually end up on ITN.--Avala (talk) 12:17, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
That's true but generally we consider how rare the type of disaster is. Certain types of disasters, say boat sinkings or tropical storms, are rather commonplace and we try to discriminate which ones to post. Cold weather, of course, by itself is not rare; however if the winter is in fact breaking very significant records then I think it should be considered even if was a small number of deaths..--Johnsemlak (talk) 13:59, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support. Very significant international coverage due to the massive transportation delays. But even if we can't broaden it to some of Europe, "UK and Ireland" is an "international" event. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 20:37, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

December 19

Portal:Current events/2010 December 19

Mexican Oil Blast

[14] Its pretty bad 27 Dead, 52 injured, 30 homes destroyed, over 83 damaged. Burning oil flowing down the Street like lava all in the middle of one of the Continent biggest city. needs an article I think though. The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 23:56, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Support. It was oil and gas and the explosion caused by theft. The Mexican President is getting involved in the investigation. Certainly requires an article. ~AH1(TCU) 01:55, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
Definite support. Significant deaths relating to an oil blast and large impact radius (three miles). I see that it's on the front of news websites as well. Just need an article. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 03:49, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose Even if there was an article, it'd be a stubby news item with little potential for growth. RxS (talk) 04:42, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
Build the Article --Kitch (Talk : Contrib) 18:17, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
Article created. See 2010 Puebla oil pipeline explosion. ~AH1(TCU) 21:26, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

2010 BBC Sports Personality of the Year Award

The ceremony is currently in progress, the winner of the main award is to be announced in the next hour or so. The blurb could be padded out with the following related links:

I've never seen a 'personality' type award nommed for ITN, there are none listed at ITN/R, so this very much a throw it out there and see what happens. I don't know how much international coverage this gets, but it gets wall to wall coverage in the UK for weeks, and it is very much the 'Oscars' for British sportspersons, and it also includes an Overseas Sports Personality of the Year award too, and the Lifetime Achievement Award is also open to foreigners. I would say it is certainly the most prestigious and respected award outside of their actual sporting medals/titles, and for the minor sports, certainly more high profile in terms of coverage. The main awards page recorded 2,400 views yesterday, the day before the ceremony, so that gives an indication of reader interest. MickMacNee (talk) 19:57, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Oppose This is familiar with Time Person of the Year award, which was rejected few days ago. I have higher regard for BBC than Time, but the topic is mainly concentrated on sport, which reduces its significance.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 20:52, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose as most of the winners listed here are British and the recipient of the titular award "must either be British or reside and play a significant amount of their sport in the United Kingdom" according to Wikipedia. The award doesn't seem to be very international after all. --candlewicke 21:29, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
I didn't say it was, although you can clearly see Rafael Nadal got an award, and I doubt he plays that much tennis in Britain. I said I didn't know how much international coverage it got. MickMacNee (talk) 22:17, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose there are several "Sports person of the year" awards. CBC just came out with theirs, shall we put that one up too? --PlasmaTwa2 21:30, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
I don't know, you tell me. Who is the Canadian equivalent of David Beckham for example? Is there even an article here for them? MickMacNee (talk) 22:17, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, you didn't nominate Beckham. You nominated McCoy. And there is a article for the winner of the Canadian equivalent of this award, by the way. --PlasmaTwa2 22:27, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
I nominated it before the winner was annnounced actually, not that AP McCoy is not deserving, but I can appreciate how some people will never have hear of him. Even though he is the most succesfull jump jockey in the world, ever. And I meant an article on the awards, not who won it - Canadian sport would be in a pretty crap state if your best sportsperson wasn't even deserving of a biography here. MickMacNee (talk) 22:36, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Bing. --PlasmaTwa2 22:47, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Wow, I didn't realize Ferguson Jenkins was Canadian. But how has Gordie Howe never won this award?--Johnsemlak (talk) 19:17, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

This indicates that lots of other countries have one too. --candlewicke 21:39, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

I don't recall claiming in the nomination that this was the only one in the world. I am quite sure there are thousands of British/American 'things' that get posted on ITN that have their equivalents around the world. MickMacNee (talk) 22:17, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Pointless support this is another item, that while not super important could be posted so that we keep ITN moving faster. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 22:25, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

  • Support and put on ITN/R because it is rather amusing to see who the Brits can drag out of the woodwork and parade as their top sports personality. Would have been particularly hilarious had ITN been around in the late 1990s (Darren Gough? David Batty? Or would they have saved face by giving it to that rower dude 10 years in row?). No, in all seriousness (please take the previous sentence as light-hearted jabbing), Mick MacNee has done a good job with the article and I very much hope the 2010 article survives AfD, but I don't think a national, as opposed to international award, has the requisite degree of ITN significance. So oppose. --Mkativerata (talk) 22:51, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
The beauty of it is, we don't have to guess who "the Brits" would have given the award to in the 1990s, because every winner since 1954 is already listed on Wikipedia. Winners at the time included such obscure figures as Lennox Lewis, Damon Hill, Linford Christie and Michael Owen, although because baseball and hand oval aren't big in Britain, there's unlikely to be many names on there the Yanks will recognise. 87.112.151.26 (talk) 23:26, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose minor award of no international interest.--Wikireader41 (talk) 22:58, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. National-based award, as much as the BBC likes to parade it, it's not of international interest, even the overseas personality award. Strange Passerby (talkcontribs) 00:57, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose less notable than Time's person of the year, which was shot down lately. No one even nominated Drew Brees, who both the AP Male Athlete of the Year and Sports Illustrated Sportsman of the Year. DC TC 06:12, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
Strong Oppose If Time Person of the Year doesn't belong here, then this certainly does not. Put it in Portal:Current events/Sports where it belongs. --Kitch (Talk : Contrib) 18:19, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose, it is not an international event, I doubt it's significant anywhere outside the UK.--Avala (talk) 12:18, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Belarusian presidential election, 2010

Support per WP:ITNR. It is also less common to be re-elected to a fourth consecutive term.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 20:46, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Support per above and recent developments. Thousands of protesters smashing windows with intent to storm a government HQ is a significant event. Plus an opposition candidate has been "seriously injured". --candlewicke 21:34, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Wait and see how things develop further regarding the violence. Definitely should go up but I think we could wait a while on this one. Strange Passerby (talkcontribs) 00:58, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
Wait This looks like it's going to be bigger than an election story. RxS (talk) 04:39, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
Reword this Considering the riots and arrests in its aftermath, the wording of this idea appears to be a major POV violation. --Kitch (Talk : Contrib) 18:20, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
Support, both the nomination and the rewording. —bender235 (talk) 13:25, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
Support and keep the wording concise, let the readers decide if it was overwhelming or not. The same goes for the other side, who would add a bit on protests. So just say "Incumbent president of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko is re-elected to a fourth term", nothing more, nothing less.--Avala (talk) 12:11, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Support per Avala. GreyHood Talk 13:23, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Comment--the article needs a better lede section.--Johnsemlak (talk) 15:13, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Fixed--Avala (talk) 13:04, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
Can someone post this now? It's ITN/R and it's sufficiently long. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 20:33, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
Ok, posting the generic blurb. --Tone 08:56, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

2010 European Women's Handball Championship

Support I reckon this a significant event since it's the European Championship, and the sport is dominantly popular across Europe.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:09, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Support as nom.--BabbaQ (talk) 19:13, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose Only a continental championship. Worlds are enough for this sport. Courcelles 21:38, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Yawn for the fourth time. Nergaal (talk) 01:46, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Weak support - if there isn't anything more important then add it.--Avala (talk) 12:19, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
Agreeing with that.--BabbaQ (talk) 17:05, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Sachin Tendulkar becomes the first cricketer to reach 50 Test Match centuries

Sachin Tendulkar hits his 50th Test Match century and passes 14,500 Test Match runs in the process. BBC News Lugnuts (talk) 14:59, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

  • Support this is truly exceptional landmark [15]--Wikireader41 (talk) 16:15, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose we put too many cricket records up already. When's the last time a feat from another sport made it? Perfect games don't make it here. DC TC 16:24, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Because no one outside of the US cares about rounders baseball. Tendulkar has achieved a feat that is unlikely ever to be beaten (certainly not anytime soon). Maybe you'd like to nominate something from another sport? Lugnuts (talk) 18:20, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Japan doesn't care? Latin American doesn't? Get a life. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.82.64.17 (talk) 19:31, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose the "this will never be beaten" argument holds no weight. There have been several records in the past few years that could qualify for that and they were not put up. It seems like there have been several new records in cricket this year, as well. --PlasmaTwa2 18:45, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
And as the DADT issue proves, ITN strictly avoids having two closely related threads within a short time. Oh, wait a minute... Kevin McE (talk) 19:29, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose Cricket is a very statistical sport. So milestones get passed and records get broken very often. That's particularly the case in recent years when the frequency of matches has increased. So we should be careful to only post the most significant of all feats. For batsmen, that would be breaking the barrier for most runs of all time or retiring ahead of Bradman's average, etc. This is a big achievement but in cricket there are many big statistical achievements. --Mkativerata (talk) 19:34, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
  • I think we've had two cricket records posted this year so far. Many of us can't judge how significant these records are unfortunately. In reading the BBC article I can't tell if this 50 test centuries is an all time record or what exactly. Anyway, it appears teh main accomplishment is that he reached a milestone number which isn't normally ITN material here. I'll Oppose.--Johnsemlak (talk) 19:39, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose when cricket records get broken more often than athletics world records. Nergaal (talk) 01:47, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support See this [16]. Only Ponting is a probable candidate and he has a very slim chance. For someone else to break it, it will take at least 20 years. That's not something happening often. - manya (talk) 04:39, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
But he already became the record holder some time ago, now he's just adding to it. This is just a milestone, albeit a significant one. My suggestion on a Tendulkar item would be to post his retirement, which will represent a more permanent state of his record.--Johnsemlak (talk) 05:10, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
Shall we post Brett Favre also? DC TC 06:13, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
Well, Sachin Tendulkar is India's greatest sportsman ever. He has a status in India equivalent to Babe Ruth or Micheal Jordan. In spite of his incredible career, Favre doesn't have that kind of status in the US.--Johnsemlak (talk) 08:08, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support Ponting & Kallis are the closest (on 39 & 38) but they are 36 & 35 years old and are highly unlikely to play long enough to reach 50 centuries. Noone else still playing (i.e with a number of centuries to their name already) has a realistic hope of matching this.
Tendulkar is an exceptional player and it has taken him 21 year to reach this milestone. The number of Test matches being played having gone up is a significant factor, but given that a Test match takes five days the number cannot really go up any more. Hence the theoretical minimum is 21 years before this milestone is reached again, a more realistic estimate is more like 50 years, when another equally exceptional player comes along.
Also I think it is significant that Tendulkar is the first player to reach this milestone in well over 100 years of Test cricket and that he is more than 20% ahead of the next person. FerdinandFrog (talk) 13:30, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose while 50 centuries is a nice headline, arbitrary threshholds, no matter how logical these might be to animals with 5 digits per upper limb, are discouraged. Any record was established a long time ago: this is reaching an arbitrary number on an arbitrary number of occasions. The difference between getting 99 runs and 100 runs is no more than that between getting 36 and 37, whether it is the 42nd time or the 50th time this has happened. Kevin McE (talk) 13:51, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
By the logic of ignoring multiples of ten then we would not give Main Page preference to events on their centenary. Are you proposing that as well? FerdinandFrog (talk) 16:52, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose, per Kevin McE. If Tendulkar had just broken someone else's record, that would be one thing, but this is merely an arbitrary numerical milestone. —David Levy 14:08, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Former Italian economy minister Tommaso Padoa-Schioppa dies

BBC. Founding member of the European Central Bank and Cabinet minister in Romano Prodi's government. The BBC calls him "one of the intellectual architects of the single European currency", pretty notable imo (even more so with the current Eurozone crisis). It seems that he was healthy and died from a suspected heart attack, so that should clear the regular hurdle regarding a tendency to oppose deaths due to "old age". Strange Passerby (talkcontribs) 14:43, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Was he still active when he died? Nergaal (talk) 03:50, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
The BBC article states he was an active advisor to the Greek government on the current economic crisis. Strange Passerby (talkcontribs) 04:21, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Federal judge rules health care mandate unconstitutional

WP:DENY The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 00:00, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. We should wait for the Supreme Court verdict, which the article says is now inevitable. Also, this happened nearly a week ago now anyway. Plus, the ramifications of this particular ruling is vague--other federal courts have ruled in favor of the health care legislation. Bottom line, wait for the legislation to actually be overturned (by whichever branch of government--Congress could try to repeal it as well).--Johnsemlak (talk) 05:24, 19 December 2010 (UTC)<>
See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Grundle2600 The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 00:00, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

December 18

Portal:Current events/2010 December 18

U.S. Senate votes to overturn 'don't ask, don't tell'

  • "In a landmark for gay rights, the Senate on Saturday voted to let gays serve openly in the military, giving President Barack Obama the chance to fulfill a campaign promise and repeal the 17-year policy known as 'don’t ask, don’t tell.'" [17] --BorgQueen (talk) 21:04, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
The Don't ask, don't tell article is fairly extensive. Just needs some updates. --BorgQueen (talk) 21:07, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Support a notable step forward for gay rights. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 21:11, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Support definitly a notable step forward..as stated above.--BabbaQ (talk) 21:12, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Weak support, I'd support more if it was on the President's desk. Marcus Qwertyus 21:15, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Support but Slow down Wait I think we should wait and utilize the President Obama signs for the blurb. I agree this should be on ITN but lets make a pretty blurb with White house PD image of him signing it. The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 21:18, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
I am fine with waiting until Obama signs it. However I understand that it is a certainty, since it was a campaign promise of his, therefore the bigger news is that it has been passed by the Senate, IMO. --BorgQueen (talk) 21:21, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
It boils down to a WP:LIKE arguement but I really dont wanna count the chickens before the eggs hatch. Thats the mood right now here at Moodys. The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 21:52, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Support. The lame ducks did something good. Obama has already reiterated his intention to sign. Dragons flight (talk) 21:29, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
What "suggestion above"? ;-D It is just a section heading, not a blurb suggestion. Anyway, I think we better off without the Obama part. Unnecessary, and sounds like WP:CRYSTALBALL. --BorgQueen (talk) 21:44, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Support - major news story, a bit worried about blurb length though. Jusdafax 21:42, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Is DADT well enough known internationally that we could just omit the explanation of what repealing it means?--Chaser (talk) 21:41, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
I would prefer to include short description. As its Sad reality we have people in the states who dont know what it means. The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 21:58, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Is this actually that notable internationally? Anyways, this should not get posted before Obama signs it. Nergaal (talk) 22:37, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

I just added it; Obama signing the bill, while needed to make this law, is a foregone conclusion and not nearly as newsworthy as what the Senate did today. --mav (reviews needed) 22:56, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Photo - I was going to upload one from C-Span, but it looks like they have a non-commercial clause to their copyright policy. Any suggestions? --mav (reviews needed) 23:25, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Comment - I must say, the whole "paving the way for gays to...." is really unencyclopedic sounding. "Paving the way" is more of a saying than a descriptive, and should be rid of. Vrinan (talk) 23:26, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Suggestions for improvement are welcome. But that wording was needed to avoid having to mention that the bill needs to be signed into law and then there will be a check with the military brass, change of policies, and a 40 day waiting period. --mav (reviews needed) 23:31, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
how about ...which prohibited openly gay people from serving in the U.S. military." Not that I have any particular preference one way or the other. --Mkativerata (talk) 23:33, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
So fixed. --BorgQueen (talk) 23:38, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, this might be a bit of a fail on my part. Should "prohibited" be "prohibits" because the law has not yet been repealed? --Mkativerata (talk) 23:39, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Yes, I think so. Fixed again. --BorgQueen (talk) 23:43, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Oppose, as we posted this months ago when it passed an earlier stage of legislative process. Kevin McE (talk) 23:31, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Actually, that's not exactly accurate. We posted a federal judge ordering the military to stop enforcing it. That wasn't legislative, and never actually went into effect happened. This is officially making it illegal. Grsz 11 23:47, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
OK, don't expect me to try to follow details of a story irrelevant in the vast majority of the world. But the justification for posting that was that it would allow the change in the law, and so this still seems to be essentially a duplicate posting. Kevin McE (talk) 23:55, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
That ruling wasn't to legalize legislation to repeal DADT. It made DADT illegal for about a month but then a judge overturned the decision. Marcus Qwertyus 01:45, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Support. "Landmark" as stated in the nomination and a wide range of international coverage from the UK to China, from Qatar to Bangkok... --candlewicke 00:25, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Plus, it concerns the United States, which is woefully under-represented on Wikipedia. 87.112.151.26 (talk) 00:55, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
OH U. LOL.  f o x  01:12, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Support, landmark ruling.  f o x  01:12, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support obviously. --Jayron32 01:49, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Wait for official signing. Much more symbolism when the president signs, since, as mentioned above, this was a goal for him. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 02:09, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

NOTE Who posted this prematurly? The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 02:15, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Added here, by Mav (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA). Strange Passerby (talkcontribs) 02:58, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Who made such an intervention despite never having contrbuted to discussion or admin's actions at ITN previously, which IMHO is exceedingly disrespectful to this subset of the Wiki community. It is rare for posting to be only 2 hours after nomination, esp when there is some doubt expressed, but as a newbie, to this project, he/she presumably doesn't know normal practice,but didn't allow that to impede action. Kevin McE (talk) 08:35, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support I agree with Eric above that this should appear upon its signing into law and not at this preliminary venture. My76Strat 02:16, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Support major step for the gay rights. Doesn't matter if Obama hasn't signed the bill, this is what he campaigned for. The Senate was the real last step. Crnorizec (talk) 02:34, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Belated support, the case is attracting international attention and while it is a domestic law, it affects the U.S. military which is involved in a number of different major conflicts and thus has the potential for international impact. Strange Passerby (talkcontribs) 02:58, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Strong support. Landmark legislation. Normally, I'd agree we should wait until Obama signs, but Obama has already stated his intent to do so so I think it's fine (we should update the blurb when Obama signs it). It is a bit complicated by the fact that we already posted a related judicial ruling, but we couldn't predict at that point that there would be a conclusion like this. And realistically, there hasn't been that much US-centric news on ITN lately.--Johnsemlak (talk) 04:23, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Apart from Richard Holbrooke and Halliburton, presumably. 87.112.151.26 (talk) 11:33, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
This is posted without having been signed (and god knows it will be challenged in the courts), and based on the whims of "activist admins" the Kyrygz PM was not posted even though the admin said he would with support? What the heck is wrong with this admin judgement on ITN? Does anything matter here?(Lihaas (talk) 09:02, 19 December 2010 (UTC));
I have to agree with Lihaas that sometimes the criteria for/when to post a new item, as well as the admin behavior here is inconsistent, and this is discouraging. Crnorizec (talk) 11:13, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
It will be challenged in the courts? Any evidence for this? DC TC 16:26, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
It would be extremely difficult to make a case against the the repeal. I could think of a few ways but none that would be likely to have make it past a judge must less make it to an appeal. The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 19:15, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
What difference does it make if it would be challenged in courts? DADT was a discriminatory policy that was already deemed unconstitutional in court, and now that it's been repealed there's no way it can be re-instituted, simply because it is discriminatory. Crnorizec (talk) 20:19, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
I strongly feel that the user who posted this prematurely should be advised that this is generally not considered good form around here. I know it was done in good faith, but still, it's pretty clear that the discussion had far from run its course. While there is the generally accepted convention that once an item is up, it stays up, the best course of action is always to wait before doing anything. --Dorsal Axe 21:34, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
There is no mandatory wait period before an item can be posted. Plus, the even after posting there's still a consensus that it belongs there. DC TC 21:43, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
I never said it was mandatory. The discussion was far from over and people were still debating whether or not to put it off until Obama signs it into law. Not even two hours had passed. And I didn't not say anything about consensus at all. I'm just saying that, although an item generally isn't removed for being posted prematurely, it is highly advisible not to act with such haste. --Dorsal Axe 22:36, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Eurozone's stability mechanism

  • Eurozone countries have agreed on a new stability mechanism. It does not sound like big news, but when you think of it, this should be a big step against letting the euro fail. Nergaal (talk) 04:44, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Comment - I see that the agreement does not include any pledge of financial support from France or Germany. Jusdafax 10:33, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Comment - a lot of "have to" and "should" in the article, but no real deal. The problem of EU is that they have a single currency and separate fiscal policies. That's schizophrenic. Until they agree to common fiscal policy (i.e. messing with each others budgets), there can be no serious and permanent commitment to a bailout plan. Crnorizec (talk) 13:02, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Nigeria drops Cheney/Halliburton corruption charges for $250 million

Support when updated - corruption charges against a former U.S. Vice President is certainly significant. But which article? --BorgQueen (talk) 06:06, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
I am thinking Cheney at the moment, but am having to update the article since it has no mention of the $250 million settlement. Jusdafax 06:10, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Ok, please do update then. Thank you :D --BorgQueen (talk) 06:42, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
  Done - Have updated the lede and body of the article. I didn't add a lot of detail, but it's there in both places. Jusdafax 06:52, 18 December 2010 (UTC) Note: an editor is trying to remove the sourced addition, saying it is a BLP vio under WP:COATRACK. I have reverted it back in. Jusdafax 07:14, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Weak support. Since this involves criminal charges and the former US Vice President I'm inclined to support this. __meco (talk) 09:53, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
I will wait for more supports before posting... I am not familiar enough with our current WP:BLP policy to make a judgment call. --BorgQueen (talk) 13:21, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Support seems significant. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 13:44, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Support I recall that we included him being charged, it is only fitting that we include the charges being dropped. And these were significant charges. Vrinan (talk) 14:21, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Comment - not to mention the quarter billion dollar settlement. That's what ramps up the notability factor, in my view. Jusdafax 15:00, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Additional comment - I see a couple editors have now removed all the material from the Dick Cheney article. "Not notable for his career," one writes, the other says "Why the hell is this in the lede?" Really! Jusdafax 18:59, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
I've updated the Halliburton article; I think it is better to feature it instead, perhaps partly to minimize BLP concerns. --BorgQueen (talk) 19:11, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Expanded a bit further. Posting soon. --BorgQueen (talk) 19:33, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

2010 Fifa Club World Cup

Oppose, joke of a competition, no real meaning in these events (especially if a team from the Congo are in the final).  f o x  21:20, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Support this is definitely not a joke of a competition (at least not more than football at the Olympics). Technically the actual equivalent of the World Series which is actually contested internationally. We did not have many sports updates lately and this is notable enough. Nergaal (talk) 22:26, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose I'm inclined to think that if one can win a competition playing two matches and defeating Seongnam Ilhwa Chunma and TP Mazembe, the competition isn't really ITN-worthy. --Mkativerata (talk) 23:36, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose Glorified friendly/money raiser. Winning the events that get the clubs into this competition is a major honour, but this is not considered a high priority in the season's goals for any major club. Kevin McE (talk) 23:39, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
You're greatly exaggerating by saying that this competition isn't a priority. Inter Milan took this competition very seriously, as European clubs did before. They played their best available squad. This isn't like the Carling Cup or the FA Cup where the top teams play reserves until the final. It's believed that Inter's board delayed sacking coach Benitez so as not to risk creating problems for the club in this competition.--Johnsemlak (talk) 04:30, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Support as this seems to have been a notable achievement for African football on what sounds like a world stage.
The achievement of TP Mazembe is discussed in this BBC article (it says they are the first African team to reach this stage). The headline describes inspiration being given to one of the world's largest and most populous countries and it says "a wave of optimism is spreading" across the country, with special TV and radio programmes, and the front page of the L'Avenir newspaper saying, "Whatever the outcome of the final, TP Mazembe has already entered the world football pantheon in its quality as either Champions or runners-up of the World Club Cup".
But I don't know what is meant by "especially if a team from the Congo are in the final"? Why is this negative? If they've never done this before (and if a team from Africa has never done this before) then surely it is a positive event for sport? --candlewicke 00:45, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
This article in The Times of India says the final has only been contested by European and South American teams throughout its 50-year history so that must mean an African team playing in the final is all the more historic? '"We want African football to take off," N'Diaye said. "I believe it's pioneers like us who should play that role. Whatever happens, we owe it to ourselves to be the pride of all Africans."' --candlewicke 00:52, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
African (and Asian, Central/North American, Oceanian) clubs have only been invited into the competition since 2005 (plus one previous time), so it's scarcely a case of success after decades of trying. FIFA threaten teams who do not put out a strong squad with exclusion from competition that does matter to them, so the team make-up does not prove the profile of the event. Although it is true that the BBC reported the game, its headline is given a lower profile than an 18 year old Blackburn Rovers centre back needing a knee operation. The stadium was only about 85% full for the final, scarcely the hottest ticket in town. The article that Candlewicke actually refers to is about the semi-final, and only indexed under the African football subsection of the BBC's sport site. Either the WCC is ITN worthy or it is not (and it has never been thought so before): to say that it is worthy this time because the plucky little African team managed to reach the final (where they were beaten easily, according to the BBC report) is patronising. Kevin McE (talk) 09:00, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Support. I'm not quite buying into the oppose arguments above. Like it or not, this is, as its name suggests, the World Cup for club teams. The winning team are considered the world champions. Clearly a notable event and should really be on WP:ITNR. Strange Passerby (talkcontribs) 04:34, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
For now I will oppose as the article has too little prose text. However, I do believe the CWC is notable enough. The field of competition may not seem that strong, but that is simply because the teams involved are unfamiliar to most of us--all the participants except the host club were continental champions. It might have appeared to be a greater triumph had the South American Internacional not been upset before the final but I agree that the African club's success should be viewed as a further sign of notability rather than a sign of the tournament's lack of significance.--Johnsemlak (talk) 04:41, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Strong support if Inter holds an open-bus top parade when they come back to Milan; otherwise, strongest oppose possible. (since everyone is supporting/opposing strongly). –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 06:40, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose, Im into football but have never heard of this competition. Dont think this is a ITN worthy sport news.--BabbaQ (talk) 16:18, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
If it counts for something, this had a ton of more views than the handball championship you suggested. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 18:08, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Support – It is, quite simply, the crowning of a world champion football club; the tournament includes the champion club of each continent and is organized by football’s world governing body. Why should anything else be required? MTC (talk) 20:42, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Well, there has been some "unrest" now as well, involving confusion over China and Japan. It also says the semi-final game was the "biggest upset" in the event's history. --candlewicke 22:27, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Question: Has Inter come back to Italy already and were there throngs of screaming ultras at the airport? –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 22:45, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
@Candlewicke--this event has a very short history so the 'greatest upset' tag has minimal notability. @Howard--can't find anything on Inter celebrations other than a bunch of pictures of players holding the trophy, and all this news about Inter planning to sack their manager. Anyway, while I support this item the article still only has 1 1/2 paragraphs of prose text.--Johnsemlak (talk) 05:05, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
The reason I asked is, if their fans don't even bother to show up at the airport to greet their club's "monumental victory," then why should we? Is it freezing cold in Italy now? –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 09:20, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support - very notable event, one of the most notable events in club football actually.--Avala (talk) 12:20, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

December 17

Portal:Current events/2010 December 17

Barbara Picower returns $7.2 billion from Madoff scheme

Support as nom. Marcus Qwertyus 21:02, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
Support Notable, about a current subject.--BabbaQ (talk) 22:15, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
Support - Notable indeed... that's a lot of dough to just "return." I can't think of anything like it. Interesting and different. Jusdafax 23:41, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
I agree fully with you.--BabbaQ (talk) 23:44, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
The article has to be expanded. --BorgQueen (talk) 04:49, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
We could link to Jeffrey Picower for awhile while the article is constructed. Marcus Qwertyus 04:57, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
The Madoff investment scandal article is an even better, more relevant bet. -- tariqabjotu 05:07, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Agree, the Madoff article seems the best bet unless the Picower article gets a quick, substantial upgrade. Jusdafax 05:19, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
The article Recovery of funds from the Madoff investment scandal is even better, it seems. --BorgQueen (talk) 05:26, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
It's very good as well. Even the Jeffrey Picower article isn't bad. Still, the 'Recovery' might be the best choice. Jusdafax 05:41, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Support when any of two articles mentioned above gets updated. --BorgQueen (talk) 10:15, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Support It's really notable, since the scandal indirectly shook most of the financial markets in the world. And this could be a slight measure of its extent.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:57, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Comments: I wish I could update it myself but I am not good with finance-related topics. Could someone please update the article? Thanks. --BorgQueen (talk) 14:54, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Comment - I think the updated blurb at the top is good. Jusdafax 19:15, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Support - A remarkable willingness to do the right thing. Dragons flight (talk) 21:27, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
This article is short perhaps, but its about a very notable news and subject. In my opinion this article should be the next one to be on ITN.--BabbaQ (talk) 22:35, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
  • I would post, but neither article is up to date. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 04:33, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Kyrgz PM named

Government chosen after more than 2 months of coalition talks with the plurality party's leader chosen as speaker (not sure if consensus wants to incldue that). We included the australian election results thrice, including at resutl time and when gillard was sworn it, Kyrgz after all is an important geo-strategic country for various countries and is more relevant with the Afghan situation.(Lihaas (talk) 19:08, 17 December 2010 (UTC));
Support per ITN/R, obviously. But the election should be bolded, as Atambayev's article isn't that great in comparison. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 21:45, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
Struck to Oppose per below; head of state has not been changed. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 17:05, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Support Clearly as a recurring item.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 21:49, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
Support per nominator.--BabbaQ (talk) 22:14, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
Comment - the stub-class article could use some work. Jusdafax 09:20, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Though the basic info is there. Posting soon. --Tone 09:50, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Is the "chosen" Prime Minister the Head of State in Kyrgyzstan? I am under the impression that would be the elected President. Jusdafax 10:30, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Actually, you're right, the president is the position with more power. I thought the idea was to feature election article but we did that in October already so no need to repeat. --Tone 13:42, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
it still had support over here from 3 people. and the aus. election were repeated multiple times.Lihaas (talk) 19:08, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose - Per above, the President is head of state in Kyrgyzstan, not Prime Minister. Jusdafax 14:55, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
we also have 2 artciles ready and its way past 24 hours since an admin was ready to "post it soon."Lihaas (talk) 19:08, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose since it is not the head of state. Nergaal (talk) 22:32, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Strong support - so what if it is not a head of state, we include the head of government as well.--Avala (talk) 12:21, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

2010 European Women's Handball Championship

I second that. --Tone 15:10, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose: Was that really a suggestion that we should post a team's winning a semifinal? Oppose for result of final as well, although European Championship effectively is the world championship: only one bronze medal in 40 World Championships (men's and women's) has been won by a non-European team. It would b noce to think that the World Champs next year would be considered. 81.156.181.2 (talk) 19:35, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
Iff they win the final this could have a decent shot since it would be their first. Nergaal (talk) 22:35, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Blake Edwards

American film director Blake Edwards, known for The Pink Panther, Breakfast at Tiffany's and 10 dies at the age of 88. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:18, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

  • Oppose per my own factors for ITN deaths: (a) the extent to which the death was unexpected (including consideration of the deceased's age); (b) the extent to which the death impacts current events; (c) the extent to which the deceased was active in his or her field at the time of death; and (d) the significance of the deceased's achievements during life. (a) to (c) aren't met here and (d) isn't overwhelming. Plus, reluctant as I always am to have any death on ITN, two at the same time is something to avoid unless in extraordinary circumstances.--Mkativerata (talk) 02:23, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support, Mkativerata's unique and idiosyncratic personal criteria aside, he's a huge, transcendent figure in the world of filmmaking in most of the English speaking world. Any criteria which would have put Leslie Neilson on the main page would certainly apply here... --Jayron32 03:15, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Slight support. I don't know the guy and I'm not familiar with his work (nor how popular the Pink Panther was), but I see that he has received an Academy Honorary Award in 2003, which is quite a significant achievement. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 03:58, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
Comment: The article wasn't in a great state when he died. Two references? --candlewicke 04:54, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose per Mk. Nergaal (talk) 09:02, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support - Noted director of numerous notable fims over four decades. The major honorary Academy Award indicates overall importance in film history; you don't get one with having had a truly significant career. Article appears to have been upgraded in the last 48 hours, and is suitable. Jusdafax 09:30, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Marginal support, esp when compared to proposal below. At least this retirement is permanent, and Edwards has higher international profile than King. Announcement of death was actually on the news broadcasts (in UK), unlike King retirement. Kevin McE (talk) 10:12, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose, Mkativerata represents my opinion well. __meco (talk) 10:42, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose. The magnificence of Pink Panther aside, this doesn't really meet the death criteria. MickMacNee (talk) 11:53, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose, per Mkativerata. --BorgQueen (talk) 12:04, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support, very high profile director, with a very long career. Mjroots (talk) 12:10, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

December 16

Portal:Current events/2010 December 16

Larry King's last show after 25 years

Larry King Live broadcasts its final show today. Even the BBC picked up on it, as has the Straits Times, so it's being covered internationally. Strange Passerby (talkcontribs) 15:20, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Support. Last broadcast of one of the most notable political interview programs. The show even has many followers in non-anglophone countries. Offliner (talk) 15:24, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
Support. the above reasonings covering it perfectly.--BabbaQ (talk) 15:42, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
Very strong oppose Seriously? If the broadcaster in question was not American, this wouldn't even have been nominated. 87.112.151.26 (talk) 16:07, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
Says you. The nominator isn't even American. Grsz 11 16:10, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
If I'd been on Wikipedia when Sir Michael Parkinson had his last show, I'd have nominated that too; likewise any show that's been running for 25 years. Strange Passerby (talkcontribs) 16:14, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose A bit of clarification on the "international" criteria: international news coverage is not equal to international significance or impact, for the reason that the IP pointed out above.--WaltCip (talk) 16:27, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
This event appears to be of international interest. Our longstanding wording was "international importance or interest," and even that no longer is a criterion. —David Levy 16:45, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
Support, but only if the article is updated to provide a substantial amount of information about the final telecast.
Please note that my opinion would be (and will be) identical regarding the conclusion of a similarly noteworthy/long-running interview program anywhere in the world. —David Levy 16:45, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
Support per the aboves. We've also posted other TV shows in the past. DC TC 17:03, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose unless a genuine record is being claimed. The evidence of the Straits Times is cited as showing the international interest: I count 90 links on the front page of that site, and this is not among them. International interest is difficult to underestimate. Is this really anything more than celeb retirement? We don't usually even publish retirement of important people. Kevin McE (talk) 17:33, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
We posted the then-retirement of Haile Gebrselassie as the focus of the New York Marathon, and arguably Larry King's more notable. Strange Passerby (talkcontribs) 01:52, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
Support this seems like a notable event, he's a very famous interviewer (I've heard of him and I'm not American) who has been around for a long time - 25 years is impressive. Additionally the timer is red, and we should be posting multiple stories a day if possible to keep the section moving. Can people please stop being so fussy. EDIT: The Guardian have covered it too. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 18:32, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
Support he has conducted over 50,000 interviews in his career and is definitely well known outside of the US. --PlasmaTwa2 20:14, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. We've had several ends of TV series nominated in recent months and only Last of the Summer Wine was posted, because it was some kind of world record. If this is a world record, I'll reconsider, but just being long-running isn;t sufficient for ITN. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:46, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
It holds the record for being the longest-running show in the same timeslot with the same host. Strange Passerby (talkcontribs) 01:52, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
It's not just the length. Larry King's show was influential. I doubt Last of the Summer Wine, as an entertainment program, had any effect on national or international events of significance. Offliner (talk) 22:13, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose He might be important enough to post when he dies. We posted Guiding Light, which started running 1937. Although Larry King Live is a well-known show internationally, 25 years is now way unique in television history. P. S. Burton (talk) 22:16, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
To quote the BBC "Who else interviews Vladimir Putin and Garth Brooks, Tony Blair and Jon Bon Jovi, all in the space of a week or two?". -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 23:03, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
Pretty much any breakfast/morning TV magazine show will move from senior Govt minister, to soap star, to foreign diplomat, to singer/author plugging their latest release every morning. I see no claim that this programme is substantially different from any others of the genre, and its longevity is not such that it establishes any record either. We have all seen programmes resurrected after their apparent "last ever episode", it is an unverifiable claim. As someone else has stated, the broadcaster's death might be noteworthy when it occurs, but a change in TV scheduling is not. Kevin McE (talk) 10:20, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
Support. Show with significant international acclaim and runtime. As mentioned, King has conducted several thousands of interviews, some of which are somewhat notable on their own. It may not have set a record, but it's definitely one of the most renowned news segments internationally, AFAIK. (FWIW, this is coming from a Canadian with a strong opposition to American bias.) EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 22:32, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose I'm inclined to vote oppose, since it's only an end of a television show despite of its influence, which in my opinion is mainly due to the broadcast of CNN. Anyway, it's not sufficient for the ITN template, even if it breaks many records.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 23:22, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
Wait, let me get that right. You're opposing because his show is on CNN? Strange Passerby (talkcontribs) 02:45, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
No, because it's not sufficient enough for the ITN template. The show became popular, probably because it was broadcasted by CNN, and it gained popularity as a CNN program. As I wrote above, it was only a television show, and the records broken aren't any relevant criterion.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 17:16, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
Support. Notable retirement of world-renowned broadcaster. ~AH1(TCU) 23:53, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
Support as nominator. I know it's merely the BBC's selection but this surely shows the show had wide-ranging international impact. Strange Passerby (talkcontribs) 01:52, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
Support the guy has made history in TV interviewing, no-one else has had all those significant figures interviewed in a singe show, and this is why he is famous worldwide. Crnorizec (talk) 02:33, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
Support - I stumbled across this, and I think it's very newsworthy. I'm sure Oprah's last episode will be on here, even though she is certainly much more US-centric. --Hurricanehink (talk) 02:42, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
I'm sure Oprah's last episode will be on here, even though she is certainly much more US-centric. You think Oprah is more US-centric? Really? -- tariqabjotu 03:08, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
Support Very significant, long running, history making show coming to an end after 25 years on the air. This is significant, especially seeing as the host of the show is so widely known and lauded for because of that show. Ks0stm (TCG) 05:05, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
Changing to Strong Support, as it's even being reported on by the other major US news networks, the only exception being Fox News. It's getting a large amount of attention within the US, at least. [18] [19] [20] Ks0stm (TCG) 05:16, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
All that does is show how partisan Fox News are... -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 08:25, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
Strong Oppose This just seems unsuitable for ITN. We never post about "celeb retirements" and I don't see any reason to now. And for the record, I would oppose Oprah's last episode when that day comes too. --Dorsal Axe 10:34, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
Support. I was a caller-in when I lived in the US from 1983 to May 1985 (which is very odd as the article states the show didn't debut until June 1985) so this must be important. Well, if that point doesn't cut it, I think Larry King has stature to make him big enough for ITN on this one. __meco (talk) 10:48, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
He might be, and his death might get a mention on ITN, but he's not so notable that we post the end of his TV series. I thought it was only Obama whose every word was ITN-worthy. ;) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:53, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. This would most definitely be a case of the Bad Kind of systematic bias. We wouldn't post anything like this from any other country, and LOTSW was a bona fide televisual record. On that score, if you have to split the record down into narrow categories like 'longest single using a single host', then we could be posting hundreds of others. MickMacNee (talk) 11:53, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
So are we going to have this posted? We have a clear majority supporting. Crnorizec (talk) 02:42, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
There is a consensus to post, but there's no substantial update to any article. DC TC 02:55, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
I don't see a consensus here... 13/8 just counting the opinions and both sides present relevant arguments... --Tone 09:46, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
The Prince had 16/11 when it was posted, with both sides presenting relevant arguments. We cannot always hope to have a clear majority. Crnorizec (talk) 13:17, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Comparing the both fractions with the least common multiple yields 13/21 = 117/189, and 16/27 = 112/189. There is also another vote "oppose" and two votes "neutral". This is one of the longest discussions in the template, and basing it on a mathematical calculations would not solve the problem.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 13:51, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose - I agree with HJ Mitchell that the ending of a TV show isn't enough. Jusdafax 09:24, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Neutral. I think it's a very notable show, and his interview with Vladimir Putin was a big event. However, a big point for me is that Larry King, as the article suggests, isn't actually retiring and will continue to do TV. Personally, I think the issue of whether or not it's a record is a little overblown. We should concentrate on whether the show was notable enough in terms of it's content and significance.--Johnsemlak (talk) 10:43, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
Neutral. I think the event it notable as the programme was very well known, always had big guests etc, but the programme will practically go on, just in a slightly different format. King isn't retiring, he's still going to be active in the media. For a programme which is supposed to be crème de la crème, the article is curdled. —  Cargoking  talk  10:55, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Strong Oppose When the DADT repeal vote occurred, wikipedia was the first place I turned for details. On the contrary, this is the last place I would come in response to hearing that King's last episode aired. μηδείς (talk) 22:25, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

December 15

Portal:Current events/2010 December 15

Scientists discover that Oncorhynchus nerka kawamurae is not extinct

Scientists discover that the black kokanee (Oncorhynchus nerka kawamurae), a Japanese salmon subspecies which scientists had thought had gone extinct in 1940, was discovered to still have a living population in 2010. Associated Press Lcl456 (talk) 19:26, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Oppose. Even if they exist, it is probably not going to be a viable population anyways. Nergaal (talk) 20:24, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Weak oppose This is a very rare occasion, and I'm inclined to vote "oppose", since it does not receive too much attention. However, we always document related events on the same topic.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 20:50, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose: a vertebrate species re-discovered could be a candidate, but not a sub-species. Kevin McE (talk) 21:05, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Comment Please say had become extinct rather than had gone extinct, which is an ugly colloquialism. 87.112.151.26 (talk) 23:13, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Mark Zuckerberg named Time Person of the Year

Per BBC, Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg is Time Person of the Year for 2010. Strange Passerby (talkcontribs) 13:39, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

  • Obvious oppose I'm tempted to put this in ITN/R under "Events that absolutely should not and will not ever appear on the Main Page, so don't bother proposing it". TIME's Person of the Year is a not an award, let alone one of international interest. It is simply TIME's version of an end-of-the-year issue that virtually every periodical publishes. Their decision on this almost never considers international opinion, catering to its largely American audience that prefers seeing people they love. In other words, this signifies nothing. -- tariqabjotu 16:54, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
i dont understand what did Zuckerberg do this year to be named person of the year anyways. improve privacy settings? lol -- Ashish-g55 17:00, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose as per above. --Dorsal Axe 17:13, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Imagine if Wikipedia had published "You have been named Time Person Of The Year" in 2006. As far as I'm concerned, this is puffery, pure and simple, with no partiality to past and present PotYs.--WaltCip (talk) 17:32, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
    • LMAO! That would have been the best blurb in ITN's entire history. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 20:38, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose. If we publish this, we must publish the same versions of the other periodicals. Hence, the ITN template would become a tabloid of the same topic which is not required. We also don't favor any periodical which thwarts to do with Time so.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 17:38, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose, though with less zeal than others here. I agree with everything Tariq says about Time's MotY but none of that means it isn't notable (though it is of course notable primarily in the US). Many things are notable for the wrong reasons. I certainly think Time's award is more notable than other mainstream magazines so I wouldn't say posting Time MofY means we have to post other publications as well. Ultimately, however, I think TIME simply isn't as influential as it used to be.--Johnsemlak (talk) 19:04, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose... though I can't but wonder how many of these Opposes would be Supports if Julian Assange were named the Person of the Year. --Kitch (Talk : Contrib) 04:13, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose I wrote an article about it on Wikinews, but I don't think it's quite Wikipedia main page material, because while it's news, it's not exactly significant news. I'm surprised the article got chosen for the main page on Wikinews, to be honest...when I wrote it I thought it would just go in the sidebar next to the headlines. Ks0stm (TCG) 04:27, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
    • That must have been obviously your first article on Wikinews :) They publish pretty much anything, starting with "Police officer and community support officer stabbed in west London, England". I am glad ITN still keeps the standard a bit higher. --Elekhh (talk) 11:12, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
      • I don't know where you come from, but in London the attempted murder of a Police Office is still nationally newsworthy. MickMacNee (talk) 11:58, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
      • Yeah, uh, that's national news from where I'm sitting, too.  f o x  19:47, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Futile Support'. This is probably the most notable 'person of the year' award in the world, and Time Magazine has got to be right up there too in terms of worldwide notability. I can only think of National Geographic that is in the same class. I find most of the opposes here to be absolutely bizarre. MickMacNee (talk) 11:58, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Philippines' trial of the century ends

I'm not really half-expecting this will be added, but let's try:

It had ~39.5k views. Now if this happened in a European country... –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 11:08, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

I hadn't heard of this case until you nominated it. Have we ever posted any similar stories? Nightw 12:32, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
We posted the Casa Pia child sexual abuse scandal in September as Portugal's biggest court case in a long time. Physchim62 (talk) 14:11, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Here are some international links: TIME, Gulf News. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 14:18, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Support if it to the Philippines what the other is to Portugal. "Trial of the century" (TIME), multiple deaths, 19 years of uncertainty, main suspect acquitted by "the country's highest court", "shock-waves through the country" (and not a small country either, 12th in the world by population). --candlewicke 15:50, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Support - interesting story, definitely ITN-worthy. The article could use a couple refs, though. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 15:54, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Temporary oppose since considering the obscurity of the event to the readers, the article needs to be in better shape before going up. Nergaal (talk) 20:33, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Weak support. I think this story is ITN-worthy, but I don't want any sort of ITNR-type precident on big court cases: we can consider them one by one, that's what this page is for. Physchim62 (talk) 20:37, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Note: I've already expanded the decision section of the article. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 23:47, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Support, definitely worthy of posting. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 19:05, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Asylum-seeker boat accident on Christmas Island

Up to 40 people are feared dead after a boat carrying around 80 asylum seekers crashed into a cliff on Christmas Island, Australia. Details are still sketchy.[21] Unfortunately, being at work I am unable to devote any real time to creating an article on this. So I thought I'd post it here to get some attention.--Mkativerata (talk) 04:56, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Created a stub Christmas Island disaster but it needs some work. Certainly main page material when developed. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 10:12, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
I think the article title is way too vague. Needs a bit more refining... I was thinking something like 2010 Christmas Island boat sinking might've been better. "Disaster"? Strange Passerby (talkcontribs) 11:06, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Feel free to move it. I thought it more important to create a stub than agonise over the title. Why do you put "disaster" in inverted commas? It is pretty clearly a disaster to me and precedent seems to apply, see November 2009 Cocos (Keeling) Island migrant boat disaster. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 11:29, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, but on its own the word is vague. "Boat disaster" and "disaster" aren't the same; a "Christmas Island disaster" could have been a hypothetical explosion which happened in the 1970s, for all we know. Anyway, getting sidetracked here. Support, major accident with pretty significant loss of life. Strange Passerby (talkcontribs) 11:44, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Support. Big disaster. --candlewicke 15:54, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose as this is not that unusual and the fatalities rate is <50. Nergaal (talk) 20:29, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
But that was more than a year ago and is the only example (so far). --candlewicke 01:51, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
Support. Significant death toll. The boat crash is interesting in itself. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 02:09, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
Support. definite support.--BabbaQ (talk) 15:45, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
Support. Migrant boat disasters are worthy of coverage on ITN. ~AH1(TCU) 23:55, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Suggest: A boat carrying around 70 asylum seekers sinks off the coast of Christmas Island, killing at least 27 people. --candlewicke 05:03, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Posted. --BorgQueen (talk) 10:27, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Henry IV of France

...lost his head, but now it's been found again (BBC News) and published in the British Medical Journal [22]. Maybe not the most earth-shattering of news, but unusual and interesting in my opìnion. Physchim62 (talk) 02:50, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Support Thank you this made me laugh, I dont see any reason to oppose. It meets our level of PR Article to confirm such a finding. The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 03:28, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Support: that's hilarious! And it'll add some "wtf" to ITN for a change. Nightw 04:11, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Comment Not added to the article. Seems insignificant too. Makeemlighter (talk) 05:49, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Support once the article is updated (although I wish this would have been around April 1st). Nergaal (talk) 20:27, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Support: as per the above comments. Crnorizec (talk) 23:05, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Updated, posting soon. --BorgQueen (talk) 11:39, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

December 14

Portal:Current events/2010 December 14

Voyager 1 reaching Heliopause

Yep. Still, it's reaching it and the instruments show there's some difference. In principle, we could post it now and in a couple of years, no harm in that... though we should formulate the blurb well. --Tone 22:06, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
I think this is one of those things where the technical crossing is going to be hard to pinpoint. In hindsight it will probably be extrapolated with more precision, but for now the scientist seem to have observed the first evidence for such crossing. Nergaal (talk) 22:15, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
Blurb suggestion: Scientists confirm that Voyager 1, launched in 1977, has shown signs of having crossed the heliopause. This is from what I understand from the story. They don't know if it has actually crossed, but solar wind speeds are indicating it. Correct me if I'm wrong. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 23:01, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
Seems right to me. Nergaal (talk) 01:00, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Support its seems no brainer. Always nice to have a science news thing for ITN. The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 02:45, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Support Fascinating subject and development. I wonder how many people know there's something still flying and responding to commands that far out. RxS (talk) 05:28, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Support - Merely the further/farthest reaches of human exploration. Support proposed blurb. Jusdafax 06:13, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Posting. --Tone 08:56, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Talk:Main Page#Voyager 1 has NOT reached the heliopauseMaterialscientist (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) removed without discussion. Should not have been removed once posted especially given the reported error wasn't actually an error. Strange Passerby (talkcontribs) 11:03, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
I will go through the refs on the top after writing this. The item was posted with the Voyager 1 article citing no source for the crossing (i.e. citing a source which says it hasn't). Thus no apologies. Materialscientist (talk) 11:12, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Again you seem to have missed the story here... no one is saying it has crossed the line. The blurb merely states, as seen above, that scientists are saying the craft is showing signs of doing so. Strange Passerby (talkcontribs) 11:16, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Negative, it said "signs of having crossed" and cited no refs (I haven't read the refs above this thread yet and would advise working on the article rather than on myself :-) Materialscientist (talk) 11:19, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Read through. It has not crossed it in the sense of crossing a road, but is either approaching it or entered it. Suggest asking specialists at WP:ASTRONOMY before reposting. Materialscientist (talk) 11:29, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Oppose No, Voyager 1 hasn't crossed or entered the heliopause. It has merely entered a region of the heliosheath where the radial velocity of the solar wind has dropped to zero. This does indicate that Voyager 1 is approaching the heliopause, and should reach it in a few more years. In my view, this does not really justify an In the news item. The actual crossing should be fairly sudden and dramatic, in contrast to the gradual drop in velocity of the solar wind that has been observed over the past several years. WolfmanSF (talk) 17:14, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough. So we wait until it's out. --Tone 17:17, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Why it would be sudden and dramatic? Nergaal (talk) 20:22, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Question so people agree this is ITN-worthy, but the problem is a technicality, in specific when the crossing happens. How would you guys define crossing, since it is not clear to me that there will be anything sudden. Nergaal (talk) 09:58, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Patient in Berlin Cured of HIV?

Comment. I must say it's only an initial report which does not content any further explanation, so that's why it's not on the front page. Let see what will happen and then start the discussion about.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:30, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose as it doesn't meet our informal (but generally accepted) criterion of a peer-reviewed paper. Physchim62 (talk) 19:30, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
Support this appears to be real. allogeneic stem cell transplants however carry a mortality rate of upto 30% . here is link to the abstract in Blood [23] so not everybody will be able to get this even if they had an HLA matched donor. first curative treatment for HIV though--Wikireader41 (talk) 21:52, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
I think we should wait for a paper... We should not hurry in such cases. --Tone 22:06, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
the link above is to the paper. you have to have a subscription to download it via link at top right. the abstract is for free.--Wikireader41 (talk) 22:10, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose the gene mutation is already known to result in HIV resistance. The method is not generally applicable. There've been other similar cases of "vanishing" HIV. Crnorizec (talk) 22:32, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
well this is the first time a treatment has caused HIV to vanish and that is the notability. a prior article on this particular patient is available for free[24]. I guess now they are using the word "cure" as he seems to be HIV free for several years now. agree this is not widely applicable though--Wikireader41 (talk) 22:39, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
you are right, but if this CNN news is a follow-up on the same patient from the article, then it is not that fresh news any more, because they also had follow-up on 600 days and it is already noted in the article. It would be a great news if they managed to produce gene mutation without the transplant... Crnorizec (talk) 23:01, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, I'm betting its him. They are really milking this guy for all he's worth... Appears to be third such article on this guy. The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 04:34, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. It's biologically interesting, but doesn't translate as a practical cure for HIV, not in light of the current prognoses for drug based treatment programmes. MickMacNee (talk) 13:27, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Richard Holbrooke

The story is making international headlines BBC The Telegraph Herald Sun (Melbourne) Brisbane Times CBC Al-Jazeera Xinhau DC TC 01:32, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
Support, was obviously at the top of his field when he died, and his death is generating significant coverage. The article could use a brush over, if anyone feels like it, but it's not so bad as to be striked. Physchim62 (talk) 01:37, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
Support; one of the most notable diplomats in the world, death leaves substantial hole in US/Middle East diplomatic efforts. C628 (talk) 02:10, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
Support My initial concerns are overwhelmed by the wide coverage this is getting. Holbrooke's experiences and influences spread throughout the world. Grsz 11 02:14, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
Weak support even though I have never heard of him, he held several significant offices and his death was rather surprising, given CNN originally reported he was alive after surgery. --PlasmaTwa2 02:29, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
Support. Notable diplomat due to his large number of positions. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 02:39, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
Support - Top news story, highly notable per above. Jusdafax 02:54, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

  Administrator note: Some more detail on his death would be nice, since there's no shortage of tributes. The BBC News channel has just quoted Obama, Bill and Hillary Clinton and Tony Blair. And can we cram Dayton into the blurb since that's probably what he's best known for to the public. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 03:07, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

American diplomat Richard Holbrooke, chief negotiator of the Dayton Peace Accords and former Ambassador to the United Nations, dies at the age of 69. Grsz 11 03:11, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
Nice blurb. Still lacking anything substantial in terms of an update, though. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 03:34, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
I added some more info. The update seems sufficient. It could be better, but we've posted about the same with other deaths. DC T•[[Special:Contribut

ions/DC|C]] 08:21, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Support normally I'm against posting about most politicians, but due to the unusual and unfortunate cause of death and significant international media coverage, I think we should post this. --Dorsal Axe 10:51, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
Support he was a prominent US diplomat and helped end the war in Bosnia. Crnorizec (talk) 11:49, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
Posting. --Tone 12:25, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

December 13

Portal:Current events/2010 December 13

Gawker Media servers compromised

1.25 million accounts hosted by Gawker Media (host of a dozen websites such as Kotaku, Gizmodo, Lifehacker, and io9) have had their information released on The Pirate Bay, including usernames, passwords, and email accounts. McDonald's and Walgreen's have also been affected. Somewhat notable due to the number, but just a suggestion. (Slate) (LA Times) (WSJ) (The Guardian) EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 02:36, 14 December 2010 (UTC)


Support I agree This should be up there Tim Tebow ROCKS!!!!!! (talk) 05:02, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Support seems notable. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 08:31, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Oppose: Web equivalent of buried on page 11 on the three mainstream outlets in that list: not linked at all on front page of Guardian or WSJ, 19th link on LA Times. Makes me wonder what page it is on in the paper edition of these publications. And therefore seems that, at least in the view of these publishers, not eminently notable. It is true that I have often argued that our priorities should be somewhat different from those of the mass media, but I fail to see the additional level of "interestingness" or encyclopaedic importance here. Kevin McE (talk) 08:53, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

I think that the point is that your online security, even when handled by giants like Gawker, isn't as secure as you think. I commented once on Gizmodo and never touched it again, but that still put me at risk of a severe breach of my personal information. Very easily. And there's nothing those 1.25 million people can do about it. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 21:17, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Oppose C-list site, If this was on the "big ones" I might support. Right now its a big hack for sure but really just no affecting people the same as if it was Facebook, Amazon or something that might have serious implications if compromised The Resident Anthropologist (talk) 18:48, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Fork-marked lemur

A new species of fork-marked lemur has been announced—the first new primate species in this genus since 1991. It is also one of the least known types of lemur. I hope to obtain a photo very soon, and I will try to clean up the article more this evening. (BBC) – VisionHolder « talk » 18:51, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

New mammal species is always a good idea for ITN. However, judging from the article, we'd need a separate article with some more details known... --Tone 18:56, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
A new article for the species cannot be created until it has been formally named. I have contacts at Conservation International and know people who report directly to Dr. Mittermeier (the discoverer), so once an official paper is published with a formal description, the article will be promptly created. – VisionHolder « talk » 19:19, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
Support. Apparently it is a significant report which should be documented, since it seems to be a big discovery and familiar report has been already in the ITN template.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:01, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
Support when confirmed and accepted by high level journal, but all I read is about what might happen if it is recognosed as a new species, so for now, oppose. Kevin McE (talk) 19:32, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
Given that Russell Mittermeier, president of Conservation International and author of Lemurs of Madagascar, is behind the discovery, I'm fairly certain that it will be recognized in a month or two—in fact, they are probably just waiting on the journal publication. Mittermeier and his colleagues have been strong advocates of the explosion in lemur species numbers. If you want to oppose on the grounds you gave, that fine. However, will it still be newsworthy when the academic journal article gets published without the fanfare of the news? If anything, we can always re-word the headline so that it's not so certain. – VisionHolder « talk » 19:45, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
In that case, let's wait and publish it then. New species are always welcome but the thing is that the sources should be strong (= paper published). Somehow, I don't feel comfortable with announced the possiblity of a new species of fork-marked lemur At least, that's my preference, I think it will still be newsworthy then, probably even more. --Tone 20:10, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Chinese soup

Interesting archaeological find, 2,400 year old soup. No article yet, but it's getting good attention HuffPost BBC. DC TC 18:42, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Sounds promising... though it's not edible anymore, probably... --Tone 18:56, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
Given that the Chinese throw all the parts of any animal in their soup, it may never have been edible. ;) --Stephen 23:54, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
Support. I respect the archeological findings which seem to be one of the very first of its kind. This remembers me to the discovery of Areni-1 shoe. However, the appropriate article is needed.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:07, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

December 12

Portal:Current events/2010 December 12

Kosovan parliamentary election, 2010

First election since independence, and an irregular one at that. I know its dubious over state sovereingty, but it is a landmark for even a sub-national election. Voting today, results will be updated when released. (as and when the tag will be cleaned.)(Lihaas (talk) 17:14, 12 December 2010 (UTC));

Even if we categorize Kosovo as a quasi-sovereign entity, it would be the world's most important one. Support when we have results. Grsz 11 21:04, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
Comment please explain in the article what is meant about the government overthrowing itself. Wnt (talk) 21:09, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
Support when the results are out and when the article is updated. Crnorizec (talk) 22:36, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose since the country is not UN member and is not on the list of sovereign states. As comparison, the elections in Abkhazia and South Ossetia, which have the same status as Kosovo, weren't mentioned last year.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 23:00, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose per Kiril. --PlasmaTwa2 23:01, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
The Abkhazian presidential election, 2009 was posted to ITN.--Johnsemlak (talk) 23:11, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
Support It is true that Kosovo does not have the requisite recognition to be a sovereign state. I make no judgement about that. But it is clearly a significant part of the world that is recognised by a significant number of countries, and its elections are well-covered. I would say the same for Taiwan, which has a much lower degree of international recognition. --Mkativerata (talk) 23:04, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support per Mkativerata. --Extra 999 (Contact me + contribs) 02:02, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support per Maktiverata, as well. Ks0stm (TCG) 02:04, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support as it is a highly covered election in a conflict hotspot. However, the article needs to be substantially improved. There's a clean up tag, currently, and I agree with the above concern about the section that has a confusing statement about the 'government overthrowing itself'.--Johnsemlak (talk) 07:16, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
Its a reaction to the background stuff that explained and leads up to the quote. The governing coalition voted against the government in order to call a snap election.Lihaas (talk) 17:14, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
Support, and it is on the list of sovereign states. Didn't look very hard. Nightw 09:52, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
Excuse me, but I found it listed only under limited recognition.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 16:16, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
Article expanded and cleaned up, but i would stillw ait for orfficial confirmation first.
Though the aprties section above the table needs a cleanup if a fresh editor wants to have a look at it.Lihaas (talk) 17:14, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
Comment: it should read something like "In the disputed region of Kosovo, xyz party wins the parliamentary election".--Avala (talk) 16:00, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
Referring to it as a "region" will get backlash. It isn't required to identify what Kosovo is. Let the reader click on the link. "In Kosovo" will be fine. Or if necessary, "Republic of Kosovo" in order to distinguish it. Nightw 16:08, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
It's not enough because it would mean putting Kosovo on par with undisputed countries that we place on ITN which it is not. Even for obvious things we have explanation, like "Stockholm, Sweden," in the current ITN, according to your logic everyone knows where Stockholm is and who doesn't, they can click on Stockholm and find out but we still nonetheless have "Stockholm, Sweden,". Region can be replaced with territory.--Avala (talk) 16:17, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
As a comparison for the 2009 Abkhazian election, the blurb was [25] Sergei Bagapsh is re-elected President of Abkhazia. We don't need to clarify with "region" or "partially-recognized". Grsz 11 17:49, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
IMPORTANT: on second thoughts we didnt put Iraq up yet since a government was formed, this government will take a long time to form if it does. shouldnt go up with a plurality as its hypocritical.Lihaas (talk) 17:14, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
It is not relevant at this time if the government will take longer to form (BTW: how did you come up with this? PDK has solid plurality to form a coalition government in multiple combinations...). I propose the following blurb, to follow the usual pattern:
PDK, the party of incumbent Prime Minister Hashim Thaçi, wins plurality in the Kosovan parliamentary elections.
Crnorizec (talk) 23:35, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
Previously the election was not posted becasue the governmetn was not formed as in Iraq.
Also, Might have a plurality but coalition building is not a guarantee. The coalition wont come together as the old partner DLK and others said they wouldnt join with the DPK, lets see if they can be lured in.Lihaas (talk) 17:14, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
What I am missing here is another column in the results table, stating how many seats each party has won. Otherwise, do we have a consensus to post? --Tone 12:54, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
Its not out yet, hence the wait until at the very least the seats are out. Although why post this and not Iraq?Lihaas (talk) 17:14, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
Ah, I thought the results were final already. Well, in that case we should wait anyway. I don't remember what exactly was the case with Iraq, probably it took really long to get the results. --Tone 16:06, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
The official preliminary results are out since yesterday, with 99% of the votes counted. The seat calculation is easy: 100 seats go proportionally to the parties with census of 6%, and the 20 go to the minorities, without census. This means: 38-PDK, 27-LDK, 14-VV, 13-AAK, 8-AKR, SLS-14, 6-JSL. And let's forget Iraq, I don't see how is it relevant to this. Crnorizec (talk) 23:19, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
Support, I definitly support this for ITN.--BabbaQ (talk) 18:22, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
UPDATE: it seems the DPK got the plurality, were just waiting on sources for the seat count.Lihaas (talk) 17:14, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
Comment Are there still any issues holding this up? Grsz 11 22:58, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
other than the sourcing on the seat count, no. but thats a biggie.Lihaas (talk) 17:14, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
What just came up might seriously change the situation - [26] [27] [28] [29] [30] --Avala (talk) 21:22, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

2010 Stockholm bombing

 
Drottninggatan shortly after bombing

It's a very low death toll obviously, and I'm unsure how highly I rate the argument that it's 'notable because it's rare in Sweden' but it certainly is a startling event.--Johnsemlak (talk) 07:41, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

  • Support I'd venture to say bombings in cities such as Stockholm are notable. The article needs some cleanup first, though. Swarm X 07:44, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
    • It's in much better shape now. Let's wait to see how the news shakes out. I think it's international interest and importance stems more from the apparent motive for the bombings.--Chaser (talk) 09:08, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Weak support. With manifest links to islamist terrorism, which is very uncommon in Western Europe, I think this story deserves an ITN spot, though it's admittedly not a very big event. __meco (talk) 09:38, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Neutral according to the BBC it is likely the dead man blew himself up

    "It looked as if the man had carried something that exploded in his stomach," he said on the website of newspaper Dagens Nyheter. "He had no injuries to the face or body in general and the shops around were not damaged."

, which would make the incident rather unnotable as the injuries are minor. Then again, we shouldn't be as fussy as we are about posting stuff, so meh. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 10:32, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

  • Support this seems more like an unsuccessful amateur attempt along the lines of 2010 Times Square car bombing attempt which could have been much worse. the location is notable.--Wikireader41 (talk) 11:00, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support per Wikireader41. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 11:06, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support it's significant since I believe it's the first event of its kind in Sweden, or Scandinavia. Lampman (talk) 11:55, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support per Lampman. Theleftorium (talk) 12:45, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support it's rare that such news comes from Sweden, which while their rarity is a good thing, it makes such events notable when they do happen regardless of death toll. Ks0stm (TCG) 18:05, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support not only rare for Sweden, but rare for most of Europe/North America. DC TC 18:09, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Posted. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:14, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Comment: I passed by there and took an image shortly after the bomb went off (I had no idea at the time what had happened but took a snapshot anyway). --Hegvald (talk) 18:27, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

December 11

Portal:Current events/2010 December 11

December 10

Portal:Current events/2010 December 10

Ivo Sanader arrested

Police say Croatian ex-PM arrested in Austria (AP) Former (previous and of the ruling party) Prime Minister of Croatia - Ivo Sanader, was arrested in Austria after he fled Croatia yesterday to evade arrest on corruption charges.--Avala (talk) 18:08, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Comment: He was not fleeing to avoid arrest, allegedly he was there for a meeting and he was in contact with the journalists after he was stripped of his MP immunity. As far as we know, there is not even a formal indictment. So all the events until now could be only a media frenzy, or, as he claims, politically motivated persecution, until proven otherwise. Crnorizec (talk) 08:40, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
The information on fleeing doesn't have to be added, it is obvious anyway. As for the other part of the comment, I am afraid you are not right, here is the official arrest warrant of the Croatian Ministry of Internal Affairs - Tjeralice SANADER, IVO (1953.) --Avala (talk) 11:12, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
I must agree with Avala, and the source makes it clear. And Crnorizec, please stay tuned on the main topic and don't interpret the following events by your own mind. The ITN template documents reports, but not solved mysteries. Hence, the main report is that Ivo Sanader was arrested, and noting whether he was fleeing or not is a minor thing which doesn't indent any further possibilities.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 01:49, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
Avala said that he fled, and this is against NPOV. The facts are that he was arrested, but there is no conviction, or even an indictment. We normally do not publish news about arrests (recent case with Assange's arrest, for example). Simeonovski, if you want to have personal discussions, go to your kindergarten. Crnorizec (talk) 10:59, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
The media have covered the report noting he has fled (Vuljanić: Sanader je pobjegao da mu ne bi mogli suditi za druge afere or Sanader je pobjegao zbog Fimi-medije, a DORH ga lovi zbog Hypo banke?!), and Avala made it clear citing the official site of the warrant to arrest him. As I told above, we document reports, not personal opinions about the reports. If you think you're right somehow, please cite any source. Else, we couldn't tolerate your sole war against other users.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 11:57, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
"Sole war" is in your head. Facts are that Mr. Sanader is still not even indicted, much less convicted. If some media said he fled, and he says he was on a business trip and on his way back to Croatia, who is to judge this? Please read WP:AGF and WP:NPOV, before taking this any further. Crnorizec (talk) 21:22, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
Could you cite reliable sources of your claims? Until then I cannot regard your comments as useful measures of any sort. And please don't play with the rules.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 21:40, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
Can you cite any reliable source that there is an indictment or conviction against Mr. Sanader? It would be an ITN if he was convicted, but until then all this is not notable for wp itn. Crnorizec (talk) 21:45, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
Excuse me, but we don't talk here whether he was indicted or not. The main report is he was arrested, which was proposed for the ITN template. I even didn't vote "support" to talk about this as a special news. In your comment, you stated that he wasn't fleeing without citing any source, and convicted me and Avala as dealing against NPOV. I sincerely appreciate reliable source which proves he wasn't fleeing.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 22:09, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
He said he was on a business trip, and he said he was on his way back to Croatia when he was arrested. His lawyer stated that he does not fight extradition proceedings and he did not fight his arrest. Until proven guilty, his word is as reliable as any media. I invite you to vote, and stop this pointless discussion. Crnorizec (talk) 22:31, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
Weak support It's not solved yet, and seems to last for a while.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 22:43, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

African Union suspends Côte d'Ivoire

Announced today. The AU also endorsed Ouattara as the winner of the election. --PlasmaTwa2 01:15, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Support the only bigger thing would be to get expelled from the UN, but this is good enough. Nergaal (talk) 02:14, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Support. Suspension of a country from a notable continental organisation. Obviously notable. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 02:25, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Support once the other blurb is removed. Swarm X 03:04, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Support definitely major. Grsz 11 03:08, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Proposed blurb: The African Union suspends Côte d'Ivoire after a disputed presidential election results in two claimants to the presidency.
Hmm, missed the part that the AU backed Ouattara. That means the only one backing Gbagbo is himself. Perhaps a blurb should reflect that he refuses to admit defeat. Grsz 11 03:09, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Saying he "refuses to admit defeat" sounds like a violation of NPOV. I do think the blurb should mention the AU backed Ouattara as the winner, however. Something like: The African Union suspends Côte d'Ivoire and endorses Alassane Ouattara as the winner of the disputed presidential election. I'm not sure if the bolded blurb should be the election article or the AU article. --PlasmaTwa2 05:19, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Absolutely, we can't make it sound like we're biased in any way. Both men do have a legitimate claim to the presidency...one not such a democratic claim, but a claim nonetheless. Swarm X 06:37, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Weak Oppose: given the strong resistence to re-posting Wikileaks in another guise, should we repost this election under another of its consequences? Eritrea, Madagascar and Niger have all been suspended in the last two years, without (as far as I remember) mention at ITN, although but for systemic bias there probably should have been. So what is the trigger here: isolation of Gbagbo's position, or AU suspension? Kevin McE (talk) 07:30, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Support; obviously notable. It should replace the related blurb. Nightw 10:35, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Weak oppose per Kevin McE. I can't support on principle when I'm also steadfastly opposed to "stickying" Wikileaks. If anything is to be done, it should be an update of the present blurb without bumping it to the top (which was done the last time it was updated, for some reason). Strange Passerby (talkcontribs) 11:03, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
It is likely that by the time an admin decides to put this up, the current blurb will already be knocked off by the Nobel Prize item. --PlasmaTwa2 15:48, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Support updating the existing blurb, with or without bumping up.--Roentgenium111 (talk) 13:40, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Support as a suspension from the African Union. If we focus this on the election, I would oppose weakly. Ks0stm (TCG) 17:20, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Support updating the existing blurb. GreyHood Talk 17:31, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Strong support. Important international political event. __meco (talk) 17:56, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose as per Kevin McE's reasoning. Furthermore, we already had the elections and both presidents being announced couple of days ago. Maybe you can update the blurb. Crnorizec (talk) 18:09, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
I don't really see how the fact that it has recently been at ITN is all-important here. This a major development. Similarly, if civil war breaks out in the next few days that will also make for another ITN item. __meco (talk) 18:44, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
But given that AU suspension has not been grounds for posting on ITN before, what is new and compelling? If, on the other hand, this discussion is making the point of principle that any suspension from AU (and presumably ASEAN and comparable co-operative bodies) is henceforth ITNworthy, then I withdraw my earlier oppose. Kevin McE (talk) 20:14, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
I remember a few years ago AU taking steps towards a higher level of integration, similar to that of EU. Presumably any suspension from a significant, large body that has some degree of integration should be posted. I don't know if ASEAN in specific would be similar though. Nergaal (talk) 22:29, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
I don't think the African Union is really as notable overall as ASEAN or some of the other major regional bodies, let alone the EU. It's had three sessions, the last one in 2004. The article on the History of the African Union really doesn't indicate any substantial integration taken among its members.--Johnsemlak (talk) 08:25, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
The notable news here is that they had elections after which they announced two winners, and we had that ITN. The exclusion from the AU is only a mild and symbolic consequence. Crnorizec (talk) 08:47, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
In any case, the article needs to be adequately updated first. --BorgQueen (talk) 10:58, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

  Administrator note: I can't find any mention of the suspension in the election article. We need an update somewhere. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:37, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

2010 Nobel Peace Prize

Liu Xiaobo receives Nobel Peace Prize in absentia. In may seem like repetition since the awarding of the prize has already been featured. But first of all, the ceremony is notable in itself with all the surrounding controversy, and secondly, it gives an opportunity to display the excellent 2010 Nobel Peace Prize article, rather than just Liu Xiaobo like last time. Lampman (talk) 13:28, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Support - also, it's the first time since 1935 that not even a relative of the winner can be present at the ceremony.--Roentgenium111 (talk) 13:38, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Support. I find myself in agreement with Roentgenium, the fact that Liu was not present at the ceremony could and should be the focus here. I see no problem with featuring the Peace Prize article rather than Liu this time around. Suggested blurb: Liu Xiaobo is awarded the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize in absentia, the first time since 1936 that the recipient has not been able to accept the prize. Strange Passerby (talkcontribs) 13:48, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
The blurb needs a little tweaking because of 1991' Aung Su Kyi price in absentia (accepted by her son). I suggest: Liu Xiaobo is awarded the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize in absentia, the first time since 1936 that neither the recipient nor one of his relatives has been able to accept the prize. --Roentgenium111 (talk) 16:07, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Support but international political news; might be worth mentioning the boycott by 20-or-so countries. Nergaal (talk) 17:14, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. The arrest of Assange seems to gain too little support here, and I don't think that the jailed Nobel Prize winner is any better, especially when the awarding of the prize has been reported already. However, the idea of mentioning the boycott of the ceremony by a large number of countries is nice, and perhaps I'd support the blurb if this info is included, since it is a political event itself. GreyHood Talk 17:42, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Support. Staple recurring event. Also, 2010 Nobel Peace Prize has seen considerable development since the announcement two months ago. __meco (talk) 17:54, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Support the article is in great condition. However if we are to mention the boycott, we should just call it a "PRC-led boycott".--PlasmaTwa2 17:57, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose - propaganda. The guy is remotely significant, the only reason he was granted the Prize was to annoy China. Assange is much more significant event these days... Crnorizec (talk) 18:05, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Support getting a nobel prize in absentia heightens the notability beyond what is usual for a nobel. the boycott should also be mentioned.--Wikireader41 (talk) 18:32, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Support given the rarity of the occasion and the significant media coverage it is attracting. --Mkativerata (talk) 19:48, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Strong oppose This seems to be a blown bubble used only to cheek China and the report about the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize has been already mentioned in the ITN template, which indents no repetition.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 20:15, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Support', certainly "in the news". Not quite sure what the comments about Assange really have to do with this particular story. Rob (talk) 21:15, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
The media compares the two actually. I suppose they are both in jail. --candlewicke 00:48, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
The consensus seems to be clear. Posted. --BorgQueen (talk) 10:46, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
Could you please add a reference to Carl von Ossietzky, like "[...], the first time since Carl von Ossietzky in 1936 that neither the recipient nor any of his relatives has been able to accept the prize."bender235 (talk) 11:54, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
It is not necessary, is it? The blurb is too long already. --BorgQueen (talk) 12:01, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
Belated oppose. Most mainstream media have gone on a rampage comparing China and Nazi Germany, without bothering to do much research or provide any sort of balance on the issue. Certainly resembles propaganda and anti-China fearmongering. Of course because of Wikipedia's systemic bias I can't do much about it now, but it's just funny how things like this get posted because people think it occupies moral high-ground. Colipon+(Talk) 22:33, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
I think those claiming this Nobel Prize is a bit of an anti-China move have a point. However, I think it still is notable--the controversy exists whatever your views on whether the recipient was deserving of the award. Support.--Johnsemlak (talk) 13:14, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

───────────────────────── Support per Johnsemlak. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 13:27, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

December 9

Portal:Current events/2010 December 9

Floods in South America

Colombia, Venezuela, and now Panama. Heaviest rains ever recorded in Panama according to meteorologists. The Panama Canal was shut for the first time in 21 years (since the United States invaded), the first time due to weather. 1.3 million Colombians affected, states of emergency in places, plenty of deaths across the region. 30 deaths alone so far from the landslide in Colombia and Nicaragua, Brazil and Argentina pledging donations to Venezuela. Is there an article that covers this? --candlewicke 15:52, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

This is El Niño at work, right? Nightw 16:36, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
La Niña. Physchim62 (talk) 16:56, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
support since panama canal has not been closed in a fairly long time. -- Ashish-g55 17:09, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Strong support. For something as significant as the Panama Canal to close for the first time in decades due to weather, it must be pretty notable. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 22:00, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
We need something along the lines of 2010–2011 La Niña episode. Physchim62 (talk) 22:02, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Support once an update is available. Nergaal (talk) 02:15, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose The Panama Canal has already reopened, no article exists for the story article is very poorly developed and the flooding has already subsided. Too slow on this one. Swarm X 07:05, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
It may have reopened and the flooding may have subsided (though I doubt the devastation has disappeared) but it has still happened. 4 December is the earliest date on the template right now. --candlewicke 00:53, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
Yes, but the fact that the flooding has subsided means that the topic is no longer "in the news". The media is now covering the recovery efforts and the aftermath. If we can get a blurb that actually reflects something that's 'ITN', I would obviously support it (assuming we have an article to back the story, of course). Swarm X 04:03, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
Support: Widespread havoc and loss of life, as demonstrated by the nominator. Clearly notable. Is there an article though? Nightw 10:29, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
We do have 2010 Colombia floods, but that article is still a truncated stub due to a previous copyright issue (we also posted that one already). Nearby floods will be mentioned in that article or split to other pages. ~AH1(TCU) 13:06, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Jailing of Parmalat founder Calisto Tanzi

BBC: Convicted of criminal association and fraudulent bankruptcy, sentenced to 18 years. "Parmalat collapsed in 2003 with a 14bn-euro hole in its accounts in what was Europe's biggest bankruptcy". --candlewicke 22:39, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

December 8

Portal:Current events/2010 December 8

Optical lift

A team of physicists for the first time have demonstrated the practical ability of an optical-wing or "lightfoil" - an object that in a homogeneous light beam (in analogy with aerodynamic wing) can experience lifting force. The December 5, 2010 publication of this study demonstrates stable optical lift, which is considered by some physicists to be "most surprising". Some headlines:

Thank you, --BatteryIncluded (talk) 03:25, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Support, a nice science story, the paper has been published and the article is informative. --Tone 09:57, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Informative, tick. Close paraphrasing, also tick. (Note on article's talk page). --Mkativerata (talk) 22:09, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Ah, now I get what you wanted to say ;-) Indeed, this should be fixed first. I'll see if I can do anything tomorrow. --Tone 22:22, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Support cool news story. Nergaal (talk) 02:16, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Support very cool. Swarm X 03:02, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Weak oppose. This really doesn't surprise me - we know light has (relativistic) mass proportional to its energy, and basic conservation of momentum demands that any time light is refracted an equal but opposite force is created. Actually doing it is a technical feat, worthy of publication in Nature Photonics, but we don't feature most of the news in just plain Nature. Wnt (talk) 21:15, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Bomb plot at military recruitment center

This has gotten a lot of media attention. Should it go on the front page? Truthsort (talk) 23:44, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Just a plot, nothing actually done. So, no. SpencerT♦C 01:26, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Agree with Spencer: we cannot post every occasion that police forces are successful in preventing possible crimes (all the rest is allegation, which will be weighed by judges not by ITN). Physchim62 (talk) 02:34, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

List of critical US national security sensitivities leaked

As I have stated in a couple of the already existing WikiLeaks-related nominations below, the biggest leak so far is the cable related to the Critical Foreign Dependencies Initiative (specifically the "National Critical Foreign Dependencies List" included therein). The BBC characterizes this particular leak thus: "Of all the leaks to have emerged from this set of releases from Wikileaks, this global list of infrastructure sites which the US considers critical for its national security interest must surely count as one of the most sensitive."[31]. __meco (talk) 22:56, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Oppose as for other "Cablegate" stories. Physchim62 (talk) 23:07, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose as if all the WikiLeaks-related stories weren't enough. We cannot and should not feature the contents of individual cables. Grsz 11 02:37, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support. I think that you could make the case that the news coverage regarding this list is overblown, but I haven't seen it done, and it was a top headline. Like it or not, I think it's fair to say that at least 1 in 10 news stories on Yahoo have been Wikileaks-related for the past two weeks, and unless sinister forces finally manage to destroy the organization and stop the gradual releases, this may remain the case for months. Get used to it. Wnt (talk) 21:00, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Anonymous (group) and Operation Payback

Just a note to say that this is closely related with the item below. --Dorsal Axe 22:46, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

WikiLeaks again

PayPal and MasterCard, among other companies, have been subject to Denial-of-service attacks by people supporting WikiLeaks after the companies have ceased doing business with WL. (BBC). HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:26, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

STRONG OPPOSE ON BOTH for the same rationale oft-mentioned in the debate on adding Julian Assange's arrest. Wikipedia is not a tabloid, and ITN is not for the shameless advertisement of illegal acts. --Kitch (Talk : Contrib) 21:05, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
illegal acts? -- Ashish-g55 21:16, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
DDoS attacks are illegal. --Kitch (Talk : Contrib) 00:10, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Strong support. The WikiLeaks tour de force is the biggest news we've had in a long time with a very unique character. As this rolls across the global news headlines from always new angles, I can nothing but afford bad faith to all the spin doctors who by whatever trick in the book try to subdue the juggernaut of free speech unreigned. I'm also open to having a combo with the developments regarding Assange's person, or the biggest leak so far, that of the list of facilities that are sensitive to US national security. __meco (talk) 21:26, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Support - this is another aspect of this multi-faceted story that keeps on growing. Someone said this is the first big cyber-battle in the new era of info-wars, and I think that's accurate. Jusdafax 21:30, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
OK due to the massive amount of wikileaks coverage i do believe wikileaks should be back up on ITN. but i highly oppose posting Assange's arrest since that has nothing to do with wikileaks. -- Ashish-g55 21:33, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Strong oppose. This is like having a sticky on the WikiLeaks story, and such stickies rarely work well on ITN. Companies are subject to DDOS attacks every day of the year. Physchim62 (talk) 21:38, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
That is such an utterly nonsensical, irrelevant, non-sequiturial comment. By this line reasoning we couldn't feature the assassination of Obama "because people are murdered every day of the year". __meco (talk) 21:48, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Not at all. The assassination of Obama would be a new story: the nomination is simply the continuation of an old story. The only time I've seen such a "sticky" work (in terms of increasing page views) is for the 2009 flu pandemic, when we were early in breaking the story, several days before the scare got going. Physchim62 (talk) 21:57, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose per Physchim62. --Mkativerata (talk) 21:54, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Comment. Currently this story is featured as the number 2 headlined story at the website of Norway's largest newspaper, Aftenposten,[32] and it is featured on top at the number 2 newpaper VG,[33] and also at the number 3 largest newspaper, Dagbladet,[34]. __meco (talk) 21:59, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose I didn't want to give "strong oppose", because it's still an important report, but manipulating with the ITN template for the sake of WikiLeaks is too much. Please, hold on until another reports will be released and then put it in the ITN template.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 22:16, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Support since it is ongoing and affects lots of countries (possibly any country). It is on the front of TIME's American, European, Asian and South Pacific editions now too... --candlewicke 22:22, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Oppose ITN is not a news ticker. We also don't usually report on the activities of 4chan, who pull this stunt very often. So unless something more serious occurs as a result of this, I am opposed to its inclusion. --Dorsal Axe 22:42, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Support, there's a lot going on, major companies are being affected, it's all over the news, and is clearly significant. Random89 22:54, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
(ec) Plus, the article Operation Payback has received substantial updates on this subject, which is also an important criterion. Random89 23:07, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose relatively few participants, generally small effect. SpencerT♦C 01:27, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Strongest Support like the previous nomination about the rest of Assange, this is part of a notable event that is so far being hushed by a minority of editors. Crnorizec (talk) 01:50, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
What is it that is allegedly being hid? First its censorship for not posting the arrest (something negative against WL) and then for not supporting this (a positive for them). Would you people make up your minds as to which conspiracy is being propogated? Grsz 11 01:58, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
I merely think it is highly newsworthy that the two largest credit card companies in the world had their main web pages taken down by a coordinated attack. I couldn't care less about the wikileaks connection, hence why in my above suggestion i did not include a reference to wikileaks, only the parties directly involved.--Found5dollar (talk) 02:11, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Nobody here hushes anything about the DDoS attack or is part of any conspiracy related, so I sincerely appreciate posting comments related to the topics with less confrontational tone.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 12:15, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Strong support, but would rather wait. I don't really care if an event is over-featured. If it's in the news, it's in the news. Period. It's not tabloid, as it made international headlines, and its article is very well expanded. However, I'm still certain that another event of a higher calibre related to Wikileaks will occur in the near future, and I think we would rather post it than this. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 02:21, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Oppose Wikileaks overload...if we posted every wikileaks story that came up this last week I think we'd have three wikileaks stories on the main page. I'll support one if it is actually significant in the grand scheme of things rather than significant because the news media says it is. Ks0stm (TCG) 14:16, 9 December 2010 (UTC) Oppose per the overall attitude that WL developments aren't ITN worthy. Swarm X 01:08, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Dragon spacecraft COTS Demo Flight 1

Obviously this is in progress and would not be posted until finished, but whether successful or not, this is noteworthy as the first attempt by a commercially-produced spacecraft to return to Earth. I will keep you apprised. Splashdown is scheduled for around 2:00pm EST (1900 UTC). --Kitch (Talk : Contrib) 17:38, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
It has successfully splashed down. --Kitch (Talk : Contrib) 19:07, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support, when it's confirmed that the Dragon was recovered. Nakon 19:13, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
    • According to reports, the recovery craft has already arrived at the splashdown site and is preparing to pull it on-board. --Kitch (Talk : Contrib) 19:31, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support it is unfortunate that we just had another spacecraft story, but this is unrelated and is notable by itself. Nergaal (talk) 00:07, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support It may well be flying real missions within a year, very notable event with a decent article. RxS (talk) 02:55, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
  Done I believe that's how it's done Nakon 08:29, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

2010 Chile jail fire

83 killed. 14 injured. See also n:Huge fire in Chilean jail kills 81; 14 injured --Diego Grez (EMSIUB) (talk) 14:48, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Support. Reuters: deadliest such incident in the country's history. Xinhua: About 2,900 inside at time; "total casualties may rise". AP: "Chileans nationwide could hear the screams of dying inmates in the background as a prisoner used an illegal cell phone to call state television for help". Sounds horrific. --candlewicke 17:51, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Support. Seems like a significant tragedy, with the President of Chile calling his country's prison system "inhumane" (BBC News). We need an article, though... Physchim62 (talk) 22:04, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Support. High death toll caused by a fire in an over-populated jail. Article needs to be significantly expanded, however. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 02:13, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose Not until the article is expanded, which might be tough unless there's more to the story or there are consequences (which may take a while to develop). RxS (talk) 02:58, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Support upon expansion and merging of two articles (incl. 2010 Santiago prison fire). Significant conflagaration. ~AH1(TCU) 02:29, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Côte d'Ivoire expelled from ECOWAS

Goodluck Jonathan has announced it. --candlewicke 02:04, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Oppose until the African Union expels it. Nergaal (talk) 08:28, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Support ECOWAS has forced presidential succession to not be hereditary but by election instead. Warmest Regards, :)—thecurran Speak your mind my past 13:05, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Mice born with DNA solely from two fathers

Reproductive scientists in University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center created mice with DNA solely from two fathers, using iPS technology. (Medical Daily) (Biology of Reproduction) (Slashdot)

The achievement of two-father offspring in a species of mammal could be a step toward preserving endangered species, improving livestock breeds, and advancing human assisted reproductive technology (ART). It also opens the provocative possibility of same-sex couples having their own genetic children, the researchers note. Warmest Regards, :)—thecurranSpeak your mind my past 13:09, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

  • Oppose. Definitely interesting, but not of worldwide interest and little to no coverage in media (AFAIK). EricLeb01(Page | Talk) 5:50 am, Today (UTC+8)
  • Support. This is a fundamental theoretical advance, demonstrating that genetic imprinting can be reset with a round of cloning. The technique should also have great utility in creating inbred strains by allowing an animal to literally mate with itself, which is different from cloning - you reduce 50% of the variation in every gene in one generation - you can start an inbreeding program with only two alleles for every locus. Wnt (talk) 21:07, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

December 7

Portal:Current events/2010 December 7

Birds of America sold for $10.3 million

A copy of John James Audubon's Birds of America (book) was sold at auction for $10.3 million. It is a record for the sell of a book. [35] Grsz 11 20:56, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Support if this is so and "world's most expensive published book" suggests it is. The previous record was set in March 2000. --candlewicke 01:02, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Wow, that's a lot of money. Anyone want to sell one of their books for $10.3 million and donate it to my college fund? ;) Support Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 01:24, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Support. Definitely a notable record. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 01:58, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Support and I think we even have a recent FP with one of the images in it. Nergaal (talk) 02:41, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Support Nice change of pace and the article is...ok. RxS (talk) 05:32, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Support Record sales for works of art and other articles have been covered here before. This one should be no different. You can even use an image from the article for the front page, since it's public domain. --Kitch (Talk : Contrib) 18:07, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
  • This is a tricky one. There's one short sentence on the sale in the article. I would like to see a bit more, but the problem is that the article is only a few paragraphs long. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:19, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Comment Since the book was sold in a British auction house, the price should be given in pounds rather than US dollars. The book was sold for £7.3 million, and you can see the sale in the embedded video here [36], in case there's any doubt about the currency in question. 87.114.101.69 (talk) 19:49, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
  • We really need a better article if this is to go up. Physchim62 (talk) 21:21, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
    • I agree, I expanded the article, mostly early publication and sales info...RxS (talk) 02:19, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
      • Expanded with more about the sale itself. I've done as much as I have time for at this point...RxS (talk) 05:35, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Ready to post, so, shall the currency be pounds? --Tone 12:47, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Makes sense to me to do it in pounds...13:42, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
...so is this posting? EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 21:44, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Yep, posting. --Tone 22:08, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Arrest of Julian Assange

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is arrested by British police for allegations of sex crimes.[37]

  • I'm generally against covering every development involving WikiLeaks, but this arrest seems notable considering recent events. Swarm X 11:03, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support I'm normally against posting arrests on ITN, because in most cases it's the conviction (if it occurs) that's more notable. However, in this case, I believe the arrest's notability stems not from the accused crimes, but from the fact that Assange's public aura stemmed alot from his ability to evade authorities, from the now highly public place of him on an international 'wanted' list, and because of his heavy connection to the very important Wikileaks releasings. Probably the first time I've ever considered supporting an arrest. Franklinville (talk) 11:16, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose: This isn't notable. It is a man being arrested for sex allegations. Who cares? If this guy was arrested for something to do with why he's notable (e.g., publishing classified material, treason, etc), then it'd be reasonable to consider posting. But it's not; it's just about his sex life. In any case, he hasn't been convicted, and per WP:NOTNEWS and WP:CRYSTAL, this isn't something that warrants attention. I'm sure there are bigger stories to post with regards to WikiLeaks. Nightw 11:37, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose, at least for now. As far as I can see, he has been arrested, but no confirmation that he has yet been charged. When, assuming if, he is charged, it will not be for sexual allegations, it could be following sexual allegations, or for alleged sexual offences, or with sex-related offences. Given the number of stages still to be gone through before any possibility of conviction (initial appearance, extradition hearings, appeal against extradition, final decision on extradition, then the machinations of the Swedish court system) it seems far too early to run it. Kevin McE (talk) 12:34, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Neutral Oppose Not really notable. If he was arrested in connection to the leaks, then perhaps it would be. Otherwise, only a conviction for rape, or whatever, is notable here. Given that he has been denied bail, and the whole thing is set to blow up, I'm going to shift my position. We'll see. --Dorsal Axe 12:38, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Comment I'm neutral here but I don't know how we can say this isn't notable. This isn't some random guy getting arrested for rape, it's a highly notable individual whose arrest could have real consequences for the the WikiLeaks organization. The story is very topical and is getting lots of international coverage. In cases of arrest, past policy has nearly always been to wait for a conviction or some sort of conclusion so that's probably what's best here, but given that it's notable not really because of the crime but because of the individual arrested maybe it should be considered.--Johnsemlak (talk) 17:01, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Comment Can anybody show some other arrests (rather than convictions) that we featured? I don't think this is to the level of Roman Polanski, who was in the news for years. Grsz 11 17:13, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
I've seen worse things happen. Remember Barry Bonds' indictment? He was neither convicted let alone arrested. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 17:24, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
I think posting of a list of vital infrastructures by wikileaks is more interesting than this. if anything about wikileaks/its founder were to be posted again then it should be about that list. it has turned a lot of pro-wikileaks the other way. this is just an arrest about nothing. we all know they want him to be locked up not for his sex crimes but something else -- Ashish-g55 19:07, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support - It is 'In the News', highly notable, and there is widespread worldwide attention being paid to it. With all due respect to opposers, in my view not to put this item up on ITN with a blurb leading to an updated Assange article makes ITN a laughingstock, and illustrates serious disfunction here. Our current top headline on the main page is a tennis victory. Jusdafax 19:15, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
do you mean to say put it up so that the article can be updated? -- Ashish-g55 19:21, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
No the Assange article is already updated. Jusdafax 19:38, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. Alleged rapist is arrested after a warrant is issued for him. Where's the news? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:28, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
When the alleged rapist is Assange, it's news. Main headline in The New York Times as of this posting [38]. Jusdafax 19:38, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose per KevinMcE. We do not need to breathlessly follow every development in this story, particularly when it concerns the personalities rather than developments of actual substance. --Mkativerata (talk) 19:46, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Wait. Without a doubt there will be more allegations and results following this event. I think we should wait for those to occur before jumping on this one. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 20:41, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Support Given the extent of the coverage that the latest Wikileaks received, and the international impact of the cablegate releases, I feel it is important news that a leader/founder of wikileaks (the main person associated with Wikileaks, in any case) has been arrested in the UK. It was first-page news in a few newspapers around London today (e.g. Evening Standard) and it is on the front page of The Guardian and The Independent websites. ¬ jujimufu (talk) 22:41, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Support - I'm sure the guy is being set up into a quasi-legal roller-coaster for his work with WikiLeaks, and that is what is notable. We've seen a lot of this kind of legal farces in Eastern Europe. It's a shame to see it in Sweden too... Crnorizec (talk) 23:47, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Support I would vote neutral, but it is all over the news. Nergaal (talk) 02:45, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Comment - Indeed it is. It's everywhere except on the main page of Wikipedia. Assange turned himself in, has been denied bail, has had his national leader declare the Wikileaks "irresponisble", has nonetheless had his country assure him of consular support. Noted figures like Noam Chomsky and Peter Singer have declared support for Assange, while media figures like Jeffrey T. Kuhner say we should "Kill him" and Jonah Goldberg ask why he isn't dead. Sarah Palin calls him a "terrorist". Daniel Ellsberg who released the infamous Pentagon Papers supports Assange, and blasts Amazon for booting Assange from its hosting service. Pay Pal has also booted Assange (as noted in the WP article.) To continue to insist that the news uproar isn't notable, even mega notable, approaches WP:ICANTHEARYOU... in my opinion. My view: I say again, not having the ongoing Assange story on the main page is a graphic illustration of what is wrong with ITN and Wikipedia as a whole. Jusdafax 04:33, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Comment I agree with Jusdafax. When I originally proposed this, it was just developing as news, now it seems like it's all over the place except Wikipedia. Swarm X 05:04, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose (and a response to the above comments). This is an ongoing story for sure, but Wikileaks was just on ITN. There are lot's of ongoing storys that are getting widespread coverage...the Irish financial crisis, the war in Afghanistan, Israel and the Palestinian Authority etc, and they don't have regular updates. Not that they should, but I'm trying to draw the distinction between ITN and news services. Not having ongoing coverage of this story on the main page is to be expected, ITN isn't a news service. It's a way to draw readers into our articles. RxS (talk) 05:23, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
That's the point, this is a separate story. Not 'just another development'. Swarm X 05:56, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Comment Disagreements like this could be avoided if the turnover rate was higher and the standards (notability and not article quality) were lowered. Maybe that's worth another discussion...RxS (talk) 05:30, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Comment - (ec) Perhaps I'm not making myself clear. The latest release by Wikileaks is one story, and the subsequent incarceration of Assange and calls for his death, etc. is another. Posting a blurb regarding it will, as you say, "draw readers into our articles", the well-developed and updated Julian Assange one in particular, and I would submit there would be more interest in it than all the rest of the current crop of ITN blurbs combined. To be quite blunt, if I may... I see this situation as defacto censorship by a small handful of Wikipedia editors. I find it highly disturbing. Jusdafax 05:36, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
And that is why it's hard to take your input seriously? Censorship? Of what? I think ITN feeding into the media-created frenzy (that's exactly what it is) sets a bad mark. We don't include tabloid-like junk, and that's what this is, no matter by who or how much it is covered. Grsz 11 05:43, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
That's your opinion, and your lack of ability to say that, and instead speak from an "all-knowing" POV, makes it very hard in turn for me to take your comment seriously. The title of the section is In The News, at the risk of stating the obvious, and people all over the world are talking about it. "Tabloid-like junk" - you are entitled to your opinion, of course. Jusdafax 05:51, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Well, I'd argue that they are the same story to the extent that if the arrest had happened 3 weeks ago we wouldn't be talking about it. It's the latest round of releases that make the arrest of interest. There's lots and lots of storys in the news, but we need to avoid the temptation to follow the high-profile mainstream media around too closely. In my opinion, ITN works best when there's a constant flow of widely spread subjects featured. Everyone knows about the arrest...it's not news to anyone. We've put WIkileaks in front of the readers recently...other topics await. I'm not sure what to make of the defacto censorship...do you mean we're trying to keep news of the rape charge from people? Or the leaks themselves? Or the implied suppression? RxS (talk) 06:00, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Grsz: We don't include tabloid-like junk,... - How about the Prince engagement and the ring he carried around for days? This event is really making history, with all the attention, and various kinds of support that WikiLeaks is getting. The failure to recognize this is a shame for the ITN project. Crnorizec (talk) 01:42, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
The reason these opposes bother me so much is that we seem to be fine with covering things like record-setting books(!) and elections in Tonga(!) but are hesitant to cover such a notable arrest. Assange is making the front page all over the world, but what do we choose to cover? Tonga! Dying actors! Forest fires! All things that are much less internationally significant than something like this. It really is starting to concern me that ITN has some sort of dysfunction. And so what if he was arrested for sex crimes? If Osama bin Laden was arrested for sex crimes, we wouldn't give a damn, just the fact that he's been arrested is notable! Swarm X 06:10, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support Regardless of one's views about the man or wikileaks this is a huge story and his arrest is a very notable aspect of the story. The fact that there are so many stories that say he is charged with rape when this is in fact not the case provides an opportunity for wikipedia to clarify facts. Morgan Leigh | Talk 06:20, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Pointing out that the story here is that the guy in charge of the leaks is arrested (i.e. deprived of freedom). Nergaal (talk) 08:30, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
has he been convicted of anything??? police is holding him for alleged sex crimes. where is the story here... there is a media frenzy because of wikileaks. if it goes on ITN we can not even mention that since then we will be insinuating the (albeit obvious) connection between his arrest and wikileaks. which is not very encyclopedia like... Strong oppose -- Ashish-g55 14:06, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support. As I stated in the most recently nominated angle to the Wikileaks story I am open to a combo item. See #WikiLeaks again. __meco (talk) 21:31, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Strong oppose. He hasn't even been charged with anything, he is merely wanted for questioning at the moment. It is hard enough to get the arrests of international war criminals past the ITN block on anything less than a conviction, I don't see why Assange should be any exception. Also oppose the implied "sticky" on this WikiLeaks story. Physchim62 (talk) 21:36, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Strong support he hasn't been charged with anything, but yet he is arrested and denied bail. How would you feel in his shoes? Crnorizec (talk) 01:45, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
That's nothing unusual in extradition cases; see this concurrent case from the UK. Physchim62 (talk) 02:11, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
This is an unusual extradition case. Shrien Dewani is not Assange. Swarm X 06:47, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Death of Don Meredith

Don Meredith, one of the original commentators for Monday Night Football, dies at age 72.

  • I know this happened two days ago, but I still wanted to put this to a vote. I was mainly influenced to ask due to the recent inclusion of Leslie Nielsen's death. I feel he meets notability as a primary original principle of the long-running, legendary sports program. I would think that, when he goes, Mike Wallace would have the same level of notability due to 60 Minutes. --Kitch (Talk : Contrib) 03:38, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose For me, the ITN-worthiness of a death should be judged by (a) the extent to which the death was expected, which involves a consideration of age; (b) the extent to which the deceased was still active in his or her field; (c) the extent to which the death has a demonstrable impact on current events; and (d) the notability of the deceased. (a)-(c) lean strongly against posting here and for (d), he was notable but not groundbreakingly so.--Mkativerata (talk) 03:42, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose. I'm pretty sure many or even most ITN regulars won't have even heard of this guy. I grew up watching Monday Night Football in the US and I don't even think I can remember him (I'm too young). Sports and News presenters in the US, unlike actors, are generally only known in the US and don't have a wider appeal in other countries. Leslie Neilson was well known in many countries by comparison.--Johnsemlak (talk) 03:52, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose per Johnsemlak. I'd also add that our article on Don Meredith doesn't really answer the readers' question "Why have we chosen this person's death to feature on the Main Page?" We're allowed to be querky from time to time, but we have to give our readers something for their click! "Original commentator" means that he started that job 35 years ago and retired from it 26 years ago – was the success of the format really due to his commentary, or simply the technological advances that made live football commentary available on a regular basis? Physchim62 (talk) 02:30, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

December 6

Portal:Current events/2010 December 6

Air France Flight 4590

[39] Put it please Air France Flight 4590 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Continental air h8er (talkcontribs) 14:39, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Neutral Support Despite the obvious COI of this nomination, I don't see much wrong with the story, seeing as this crash was the only crash by a Concorde in their 27 years in the air and directly lead to their retirement. Ks0stm (TCG) 14:54, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
  Done updating the article. This should be ready to go if there's enough support, and after reconsideration, this is significant enough (due to it being a decision about the only crash of the legendary Concorde and the reasons given in my statement above) it gains my support. Ks0stm (TCG) 15:11, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
Support Even though this is a COI nomination, this is definitely a notable ruling. wackywace 17:25, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
Suggestion: Continental Airlines are found responsible for the crash of Air France Flight 4590, and are fined $268,000. wackywace 17:25, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
Comment $268,000? That's significant how? Grsz 11 17:26, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
They were also ordered to pay Air France €1 million (source). Support if article has been updated so we can keep this section moving. Its a good article and we need to make more updates to WP:ITN. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 18:24, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
Neutral Leaning on Support - Not discounting the significance of this, I don't really feel comfortable with showing favourability towards an obvious COI nom.--WaltCip (talk) 18:35, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
If it makes you feel better count me as the nominator. I read about it earlier today and it sounds like a good story to post. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 18:42, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
Support. This has nothing to do with the fact that $1.26 million was paid, but with the fact that Continental has officially been blamed for the deaths of 113 people. Article is pretty meaty and is nicely updated; ready to go. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 00:51, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Support, per directly above me. C628 (talk) 01:35, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

The article copyvios footnote 15 (this version). And I was only doing a very random spot check. --Mkativerata (talk) 05:01, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

One small paragraph appears to have been copied from that source. That's not enough to be considered a copyvio, but it's less than ideal. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:34, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Mkativerata seems to have taken care of the copyvio, so is there enough support to post this? Ks0stm (TCG) 19:54, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
I don't have any views either way, my concern is that there may be more (given this article has been around a long time). --Mkativerata (talk) 19:56, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Concerningly, it all seems to have been added as part of a large chunk of content.[40] --Mkativerata (talk) 20:01, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Perhaps there's some sort of User:CorenSearchBot type tool we could run the article through? I don't know how to do that though, other than recreating a duplicate of the article for that bot to check. Ks0stm (TCG) 20:02, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
And unfortunately CorenSearchbot won't pickup offline sources, of which there are quite a few in the article. Having said that, if everyone's of the view that the remaining risk shouldn't stand in the way of posting, that's ok with me. --Mkativerata (talk) 20:09, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
I'm up for leaving it up to any admin who wants to post...I won't complain either if it is posted or it isn't. Ks0stm (TCG) 20:16, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Support everybody has heard of Concorde, and this will presumably be the final chapter in its history. Nergaal (talk) 02:42, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

"Worst flooding in living memory"

BBC: Albania experiences what is described as the country's "worst flooding in living memory". Elsewhere, a fatal landslide occurred in the Bosnian city of Tuzla. Is there an article? --candlewicke 04:29, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Strong support It is not only in Albania, but across the all Balkans. Bad flooding occured in Macedonia, Serbia and Croatia too, and the appropriate article might be "2010 Balkan floods".--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 13:46, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
Winter_of_2010–2011_in_Europe#Floodings_and_high_temperatures_in_Balkans --Kslotte (talk) 13:58, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
Support per Kiril. GreyHood Talk 14:11, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
Blurb suggestion: Exceptional cold wheather conditions in Europe causes flooding in Balkan. (assuming that the flooding will be split into separate article) --Kslotte (talk) 14:42, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
Support, but the section should be expanded significantly. --Tone 18:17, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
Support per above. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 18:20, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
Obvious support. The extent of this flood makes it notable alone. EricLeb01 (Page | Talk) 00:44, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Support; I've expanded the section a bit, and I think the wide-spread nature of the flooding makes it ITN-notable. C628 (talk) 02:17, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Oppose, unusual yes, but no deaths. Nergaal (talk) 02:43, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Why should deaths be necessary? --candlewicke 18:55, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
When the arrest of the most notorious "criminal" in recent history does not get posted, I don't see why disasters (which we tend to have a minimum of one at any time) without any casualties should get posted. Nergaal (talk) 01:07, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
There seems to be a strange idea of what makes a "notorious 'criminal'" around here, or a strange sense of "recent history" [41]. Physchim62 (talk) 01:18, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

December 5