Open main menu

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


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

July 31

ITN candidates for July 31

Xingang Port oil spill

Worst oil spill in Chinese history. Jolly Ω Janner 15:59, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Article looks good. Could do with section headers, though and maybe a little expansion if possible. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:03, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
hmm isnt this a little old now? also estimates are so vague that its pretty hard to tell how big the disaster actually is. 400k to 28mil US gal... like wth. might as well not put a number lol. if its actually confirmed that this was anywhere as big as exxon disaster then i will support even if its too late. otherwise neutral. -- Ashish-g55 17:30, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
Support. It's unfortunate that there are English coverage of this topic is minimal, not comparable to the spill in the Gulf of Mexico. It also doesn't help that the PRC government is attempting to minimize coverage. This is being sparsely reported in Chinese television channels. The New York Times: "The growing concern over the potential for further port disasters in China came on the same week as the International Energy Agency's announcement that China had surpassed the United States as the world's top energy consumer." Authorities claimed the leak was stopped on 26 July. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 17:40, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
(ec) Well it was in the headlines yesterday, so we could use a blurb that reflects it's been ongoing for a while. That would get round the "too late" issue. We'd need an update, though. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:42, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
Well I heard it on the news yesterday and I think the emphasis was that it now appears to have been the largest Chinese oil spill. I guess if it's been leeking for 10 days then estimates will change. It hasn't already been on ITN and it's still an ongoing event, so I don't see the great need for an "update". Many news sources are also "late" with their coverage. Jolly Ω Janner 17:58, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

───────────────────────── I very much doubt it was leaking for 10 days, that seems pretty unlikely given it was in a port and the fire was stopped after 3 days. (source) -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 18:59, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Support. What can we do for an update, should we say it becomes the largest spill in Chinese history? The article may need expansion, and the estimates are screwy, how do you have differing estimates on two orders of magnitude? ~AH1(TCU) 02:15, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
Support. Deserves at least one appearance after all the attention the one in the Gulf of Mexico received. --candlewicke 23:43, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Comment. Asking admins to post an ITN story does not work. Using the talkpage to bring attention to a story does not work. The priority attention box at the top-right of the page also apparently does not work. ~AH1(TCU) 23:10, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
Well in principle, I'm willing to post this, except that the oldest item currently on ITN is currently from 3 August and this has been here since 31 July. It's a shame it's taken this long to have the combination of an update and a consensus for posting, but there's nothing that can be done and this whole discussion will be archived in about half an hour. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:37, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

The Chinese Economy becomes the worlds second largest

Given there are no other nominations today can I nominate this? It seems like a notable event in the rise and rise of the leading developing countries. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 14:28, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Not true, not affirmed by anyone other than China (ie- IMF, etc). Sure its picked up by other media but solely on chinese cliams. I'd wait for affirmation from int'l bodies on that.(Lihaas (talk) 14:32, 31 July 2010 (UTC));
I wouldn't say "not true". It would not at all be surprising given 2009 data and 2010 growth rates that China has become the 2nd largest economy. In fact in 2009, the Mainland GDP + Hong Kong GDP already is larger than Japan's ...and I'm not even including Macau or Taiwan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Economet (talkcontribs) 16:24, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
Oppose the article doesn't say where this fact is coming from. IMF or World Bank source would be trustworthy. Jolly Ω Janner 15:52, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
Comment the FT seems to be reporting this: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/fd4430da-9bfe-11df-a7a4-00144feab49a.html. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 16:05, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

July 30

ITN candidates for July 30

Saudi King/Syrian Presidents visits to Lebanon

Amid the STL imbroglio, and in an attempt to calm tensions, the 2 leaders visit Lebanon. This is big as it is the Syrian Presidents first visit to Lebanon since before Hariri's assassination. I am currently working on update the Special Tribunal for Lebanon page tp reflect the recent controversy.

Much expanded, just need a few more reactions like Michel Aoun. and done for now. Can we also get a bot to clear the bare URL's? (Lihaas (talk) 19:34, 30 July 2010 (UTC));
If this is just a presidential visit, then oppose. Barring things like the first heads of two states meet, there's no historical significance to presidents meeting kings etc. Obama hosted some president almost as soon as he took office which was nominated but didn't go up, Cameron has been to Turkey and India in the last few days and that hasn't even been nominated. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:54, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
You are ill-informed. This summit meeting takes place impromptu to avert a crisis. __meco (talk) 22:19, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
Well all I have to go on is the nomination- all the more reason people should actually provide some information in a nom. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:20, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
I added the added caveat that it is not a special visit with all the circumstances. So does your vote change then?
The page has more than doubled, quite literally, overnight.Lihaas (talk) 23:29, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Using a bot won't really solve it. Manually implementing citation templates will make things easier in the long run. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 21:56, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
I've seen a bot do this before on request, odd then.Lihaas (talk) 23:29, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
Support. These are key players in the Middle East puzzle getting together to do important business. __meco (talk) 22:16, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
Did you get the chance to read my comment to HJ Mitchell vote? This story is a lot more impoertant than just any courtesy visit or routine state visit. __meco (talk) 10:42, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
OK, so would someone like to explain exactly what's going on that makes this ITN-worthy? Then I'll consider striking my oppose. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:28, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
couple of important poitns: Syria's (who has quite a history in lebanon and was forced out 5 years ago) president made his first visit to Lebanon since before that time (which also follows a rare visit from the forces traditionally opposinf Syria who visited Damascus (ie- a major breakthrough in relations) and its also as meco state a virtual impromptu visit for the 2 leaders (Saudi and Syria are opposite forces in geopolitics, particularly in the region) to assuage tensions rising since leaks as to what the STL would pronounce/indict. (not as big as the kosovo verdict last week in terms of precedence, but bigger in terms of them practical/real/on-theground-today repercussions by breaking the ice)(Lihaas (talk) 16:48, 31 July 2010 (UTC));
Support. No ordinary visit it seems. To be fair, the nominator did say "an attempt to calm tensions". And two leaders visiting another country together as well? And "Obama host[ing] some president almost as soon as he took office which was nominated but didn't go up" - why should that have gone up anyway if it was an ordinary visit? This also seems more important than Cameron going to Turkey or India. --candlewicke 23:42, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Can anyone point to an article in a major Anglosphere publication that plays this up as a major event? If not, I don't think it makes an appropriate ITN item. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 22:44, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Russian forest fires

BBC: At least 23 people dead and over 2,000 displaced by forest fires in the Russian heatwave. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:26, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

The heatwave itself might be more ITN-worthy- yesterday was the hottest day ever in Moscow and the city was covered in thick smog that's apparently more lethal than smoking a pack of cigarettes- Wikinews has a decent article on that. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:33, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
Several packs. ITN=precedence for the heat wave exists with the record too of course. weak support if there is an article (though the Pak ones has more reason to be there, perhaps a "Freak weather" ITN can combine the two)Lihaas (talk) 19:22, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
Comment. The main article is at 2010 Northern Hemisphere summer heat wave. Russia also recently set a new record for the highest recorded temperature in the country in its European portion, and the record for the Asian portion was also set this year. ~AH1(TCU) 02:19, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
Support. Russia has declared states of emergency in seven regions. (The New York Times)Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 20:35, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
At least 19 regions had previously issued a state of emergency due to crop faliure from the heat wave and associated drought. A related article is 2010 China drought and dust storms. ~AH1(TCU) 01:25, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Support. They're "still spreading" today and there are hundreds of them and dozens of people are already dead. --candlewicke 23:29, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Well given the sustained coverage, the ongoing event an the appalling state of 2010 Northern Hemisphere summer heat wave, I think we could do with a new article. I'll write one a little bit later if nobody get to it first. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:32, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Oh, and given that these fires seem to be getting worse, not better, I suggest this should go at the top of the template. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:35, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Agreed. Now where's that article? --candlewicke 05:18, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
I got distracted with sorting the MP out after midnight UTC. Let me see if I can knock something up. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:46, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

───────────────────────── There is an article at 2010 Russian wildfires, created on August 1. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 05:22, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

  • Support. It would have been nice to see this item posted several days earlier, but these fires are still raging, so let's post this today. __meco (talk) 07:55, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
Posted. Feel free to alter the blurb to include heatwave. --Tone 08:09, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Pakistan flooding

If there was to be an article then it could possibly be ITN-Worth, precedence already set for this and many have been killed/left homeless and even the army is involved now. Theres the link to the hindrance of cleanup/rescue operations on the plane crash some days ago too.Lihaas (talk) 12:08, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

BBC article for anyone else wondering what this nomination is about. Looks like there have been ~400 deaths in Pakistan and Afghanistan. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:42, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
Support. big disaster. this is the article 2010 Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Floods--Wikireader41 (talk) 20:07, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
can we massively expand that with the response the areas of the disaster and the military called in to help out. No doubt in desi politics that will also have reactions of X lakhs for the displaced and/or dead.Lihaas (talk) 21:07, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
Support when expanded.--Johnsemlak (talk) 03:27, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
Support - Mar4d (talk) 03:56, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
Strongly Support - Worst flooding in 80 years. --Saki talk 08:27, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
Support, although the article could use a quick copyedit; I've fixed a few things, but there might be more. C628 (talk) 15:39, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

$1.7 billion drug seizure

Whether this is ITN material or not, I'm not entirely sure, but I though it was worth a nom. $1.7 billion worth of weed has been discovered on the California/Mexico border. (BBC) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:10, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

oppose there are big drub busts all the time evern worth million or hundreds of..(they could sell it and recover the CA budget gap ;))(Lihaas (talk) 12:00, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Prostate cancer "cell of origin" identified

Need someone who can navigate science topics to verify this: Researchers from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute and UCLA's Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center have identified the "cell of origin" of prostate cancer, published in the July 30 issue of Science. (HHMI) (JCCC) (Los Angeles Times) (MSNBC)Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 00:27, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

It should be something more like "cell type of origin". I'm going to say oppose, because I think the update to the article would be very short. Physchim62 (talk) 01:03, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose, since this seems to be an incremental step. Modest Genius talk 13:52, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
  • Support in the Strongest Possible Terms :Sorry for the late response here... While this story seems unremarkable, it's not, for two reasons:
First: yes, they have merely identified the cell-type of origin, the Prostate Basal Cell, but that is a significant step forward in cancer research. Knowing the cell type associated with carcinogenic mutation can very easily lead to effective treatments in the near future. This is for a number of reasons, namely; 1. Patients can now be effectively screened as the testing can be focused on a specific cell type which makes it much more likely that a malignancy can be discovered before it has metastasized or even affected neighboring tissue; 2. Drug-therapy can now be focused on the suppression of a specific cell type/metabolism which has the potential to drastically decrease the side effects of drug-cocktails or chemically-induced chemotherapy; 3. Now there is actually a recognizable target for the relatively new fields of stem-cell replacement therapy and regio-selective apoptosis; 4. And most importantly, surgical procedures can become prophylactic instead of reactionary as a surgeon can now identify and remove only cells known to be mutated and leave healthy tissue untouched. All of that together means that it's possible that in a very short time frame, due to this discovery, the number of deaths related to prostate cancer could be noticeably reduced, and as prostate cancer is one of the major causes of death in older males (Ca. 32,050 per Year: nearly 1 in 36 (U.S.))[1], this goes beyond "significant" and is not subject to cultural or geographic distribution like so many other stories on WP:ITN.
Second: one of the root obstacles to an effective "cure" for cancer has been the lack of a recognizable pattern of mutation, even among like-cases. This discovery in effect gives a baseline to cancer research, as now that the cell-type has been identified, the specific genetic mutation as well as the metabolic action which allowed it to take place, can be positively identified. If that occurs, then it is a (relatively) simple matter of designing a prophylactic regimen to inhibit the initial mutation itself. In short while this discovery is not "a cure for cancer" it is a concrete baseline with which to find one. One of the first in years. So in terms of news, yeah, it's a yawn all the way, but in scientific terms this is a genuine, full-scale, peer-certified breakthrough and IMHO deserves a place of honor at ITN. So... Thoughts? Cwill151 (talk) 21:37, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
Support per Cwill151, assuming the article has been updated. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 21:52, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
  • Okay, I've given a fairly thorough update at Prostate Cancer under "History" though it could also be placed under "Research". Cheers! Cwill151 (talk) 00:09, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose until somebody shows evidence that this is noteworthy. We are completely unqualified to judge which advances are truly newsworthy, and what's just run of the mill. Presumably we would publish an "in the news" when a medical researcher wins some sort of prize. Jehochman Talk 00:34, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
(Comment Retracted) Cwill151 (talk) 19:57, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
  • Strong Oppose even if there is some merit in this finding it is hardly of any interest to the general public. As a practicing physician I can tell you this is most certainly not groundbreaking research. As far as I can see it has zero implications for diagnosis or treatment of prostate cancer. In my lifetime I have seen too many of these "groundbreaking discoveries" by scientists fall into the garbage bin.--Wikireader41 (talk) 15:10, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
(Comment Retracted) Cwill151 (talk) 19:57, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
That was unnecessary. We have no way of knowing what qualifications anybody has, but they are irrelevant. Knowledge of an area may allow you to better understand sources, but, as far as Wikipedia is concerned, we're all laymen. Back to the argument of the significance of this discovery and its ITN-worthiness, is this having any effect on the diagnosis and treatment of prostate cancer? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:44, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
  • You're right, that was out-of-line, off-topic, and unnecessary. To remain on point, this discovery will unfortunately take years to have a measurable effect on patient mortality, though it will assuredly have one. However, for ITN purposes this is not a quantifiable success and may not, in fact, merit placement on MP under WP:ITN criteria, though I must remain in support because it is an achievement of lasting value to humanity, and I, as an individual, know that. I would also point out that a story of this kind is exactly the same as the discovery of a new star; not significant to daily life, just new scientific data, but that data is important and sources back that up. My apologies to Wikireader41 and to the community for my actions/statements... Cwill151 (talk) 19:57, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
No sweat. look forward to working with you here on ITN. It is heartening to see people getting excited about biology this way & I hope one day you are proven right and we do have a cure for cancer. Cheers. --Wikireader41 (talk) 20:52, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
Heh, give me a definite cure for cancer and I'll stick it on ITN instantly! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:22, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
Without Consensus? :) Cwill151 (talk) 22:16, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
I think that would be a legitimate use of WP:IAR. Of course, that's when it happens... HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:37, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
Just as a comment to the above - I appreciate that this is a major step forwards in the study of prostate cancer, but I don't think this is ITN-worthy. Of course this is significant in oncology, but I don't think it's sufficiently notable outside the field to merit an ITN posting. Also, I see no way this would ever come close to a Nobel as was suggested above. As a comparison, which I think is a good one, C60 (buckminsterfullerene) was detected in space for the first time this week. This is massive news in astrochemistry and astrobiology, but nowhere near significant enough for ITN. Modest Genius talk 23:03, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

July 29

ITN candidates for July 29

Malawi's new flag

Malawi has a new flag, and it is signed into law. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 03:46, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Support - very interesting. Is there a prose update at Malawi (or National flag of Malawi or something)?  f o x  11:38, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
Try Flag of Malawi. There had been updates there. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 12:43, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
Strong support. Updates to flags of unanimously recognized nations should be an automatic ITN/R. ~AH1(TCU) 14:34, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
Support, but the article needs to be expanded beyond its current stub status. Modest Genius talk 14:39, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
Support. In my opinion, the article is long enough. --Tone 16:43, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
It's sufficient, but it's not brilliant. The timer's about to turn red, though, so posting. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:47, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Over 100 dead in boat sinking

A boat sinks in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, killing as many as 140 people.BBC HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:04, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Naturally support - Eugen Simion 14 (talk) 16:17, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
oppose no page for it even, how is it nominated?Lihaas (talk) 17:48, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
I've created the article 2010 Kasai River boat sinking. Naturally it will need a good deal of expansion. Let's give this one some time and hopefully it will be acceptable. Even the mainstream media have scant details so far. --Johnsemlak (talk) 18:09, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Oops. I was creating Kasai River disaster as well. I've redirected yours, due to it's size, and the fact it doesn't have any incoming links yet. MickMacNee (talk) 18:44, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
I thought I had redirected it but must have forgot. Someone else just did anyway. [2] MickMacNee (talk) 19:18, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Uh oh. Mitchell is messing around with his buttons, that's what happened. I'm no admin wonk, but I'm pretty sure you don't need to history merge two articles when one is a completely different creation to the other. MickMacNee (talk) 19:22, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Mitchell. wtf have you done? The log states you've restored the article, but all I see is the old two line stub, even when purging. MickMacNee (talk) 19:29, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

───────────────────────── Looks like a decent length article. Support as a lot of people died too. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 22:10, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Support per nom--Wikireader41 (talk) 23:55, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

France baby crime

8 babies was found killed in North-East of France - [3] - Eugen Simion 14 (talk) 15:49, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Oppose. It's sad, but it's "local news", really. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:58, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
oppose per HJ Mitchell, despite the fact that CNN International seems to think its worth "int'l" coverage.Lihaas (talk) 17:49, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Strong oppose as tabloid fodder, and there's no conviction yet anyway. Modest Genius talk 18:05, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. such cases are not all that uncommon. Physchim62 (talk) 20:40, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose - per others. Mar4d (talk) 04:00, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

July 28

ITN candidates for July 28

Court blocks key portions of Arizona immigration law

Currently the top story at washingtonpost.com, msnbc.com, foxnews.com (surpise!) and usatoday.com and No. 3 at Toronto's Globe and Mail. The Arizona situation is also the top story at Mexico's El Universal. The court blocked the most-controversial parts of the law, which "would have given police the power to investigate anyone reasonably suspected of being an illegal immigrant and made it a crime [for immigrants] not to carry identification papers" (Reuters).

I know it's just a district court decision, but I think this is a good opportunity to mention the Arizona law on ITN, as we didn't feature it when it was passed (in part because there were some misconceptions among ITN editors about the law's uniqueness). I think the national and international impact of the whole Arizona situation should now be apparent -- 20 states are said to be considering similar laws, and it's become a key issue in the mid-term congressional elections. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 23:36, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Support (per below) This ruling is well... crucial to the American Public in terms of it's political implications as well as it's ramifications with regards to constitutional law. This has the potential to open (surprisingly literal) flood-gates regarding the ability of states to regulate their own internal affairs and therefore in the context of the United States it is a story of very real and possibly lasting significance. That being said, it is also not ITN material for exactly the same reason: it's only valid for the United States (and neighboring countries). News that doesn't either cross the Pond or the Peninsula just isn't convincing (unfortunately). Cwill151 (talk) 00:20, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Well, I continue to disagree with this silly (IMO) "rule" -- we have news that is predominantly of interest to astronomy fans, sports fans, geopolitics buffs, classical music aficionados... so I don't see why occasionally we can't have something predominantly of interest to North Americans. But I'm not going to belabor the point again tonight. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 00:25, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Support, headline story in the Beeb's world website, so it did cross the pond. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 00:37, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Hey, if you can find another well-known international source, I'll happily change my vote to support. Cwill151 (talk) 01:00, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Top story on al-Jazeera. -- tariqabjotu 01:02, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks, 's all I needed. Cwill151 (talk) 01:04, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. Sorry to spoil the party, but from what I understand (please correct me if I'm wrong), this isn't "the end of the line" so to speak and will likely continue on one legal challenge after another. I'll likely support when this reaches its final conclusion because it's a significant case with interesting and potentially wide-ranging issues to be considered, but I don;t think we should post it until there's something final to post. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 03:01, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. This is not a final ruling. Bolton blocked the provisions while she finishes hearing the full case. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 03:22, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Weak oppose. The Arizona law has obviously gained notability (if not to say notoriety) because it touches on immigration, which is a big political debate in many countries (especially in the English-speaking world). On the other hand, I have to go with HJM and Arsonal in reminding people that this is just an interim injunction, not even a district court ruling on constitutionality, and that this is something that will go all the way to SCOTUS, that you can be sure of. The international interest is as much in the reasons behind any decision as the decision itself, so I would prefer to wait a bit longer before flagging it on the Main Page. Physchim62 (talk) 07:05, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose per Physchim and HJ Mitchell. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 07:47, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Weak Oppose. It's a bit story but clearly this isn't conclusive, so let's wait a bit. I have to say, though, I'm disappointed this story's international interest was even questioned given that it clearly affects and is of interest in Mexico and the US at least. That should be enough even if it didn't cross the pond, unless Mexicans 'don't count'.--Johnsemlak (talk) 12:07, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Fair enough on the interim nature of the court decision -- unfortunately this will probably take years to reach the Supreme Court. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 22:40, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
That is indeed unfortunate, but it's not until it gets as far as it can that this will be laid to rest and only then will we have something to post on ITN. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:09, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose. US domestic news, not final, etc etc. It's not relevant to Mexico, it's relevant to the personal lives of illegal Mexican immigrants, there is a difference. MickMacNee (talk) 18:58, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Uh, we'll if your saying that it's by being relevant to Mexican citizens is not the same as being relevant to Mexico, I dunno. That's a pretty small distinction. In any case this issue is closely followed in Mexico and it has a significant impact on Mexico – United States relations and the law has been criticized by the Mexican Senate.--Johnsemlak (talk) 20:00, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

HMS Investigator (1848) found

Canadian team found the wreck from 1848 ship BBC. A find after 156 years is pretty interesting. According to Star "This is definitely of the utmost importance. This is the ship that sailed the last leg of the Northwest Passage." -- Ashish-g55 21:55, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Support after the article is expanded. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 23:19, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
Support. Robert McClure and his team "are credited with finding the missing east-west link in the Northwest Passage" in the expedition. (National Post)Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 03:32, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Anyone fancy adding a little information and tidying it up a little bit? Shouldn't be too much work and I'm happy to post if it's done fairly soon. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 03:49, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
I've cleaned up the references a bit and will continue working on expansion for a bit. A blurb might be: Parks Canada archaeologists discover the wreckage of the HMS Investigator after the ship was abandoned in 1853 during the McClure Arctic Expedition.Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 04:31, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
belated support How many times do you find an intact pre-Canadian confederation ship within Canadian waters? As far as I know, not often. --PlasmaTwa2 05:50, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose and remove. I'm astounded at the lacking consistency here at ITN/C. __meco (talk) 12:15, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
hmm care to explain about this inconsistency? in terms of historical/encyclopedic value this item qualifies... article isnt the greatest but i think it has satisfactory update for ITN purposes rest it will get better now that its up. -- Ashish-g55 13:07, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
It is unimportant. There's is nothing spectacular about this ship and there are thousands og big ships sunk and lost. Once in a while one of them is located. This is not a major international news event. __meco (talk) 13:19, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
If you read the comments below by JohnSemlak you'd note its importance is related to the McClure Arctic Expedition. Also, as has been stated to death before, ITN is not a news service. It is a system used to highlight encyclopaedic articles that relate to ongoing and current events, which this is. If you want a news service you really should be over at Wikinews --Daviessimo (talk) 13:36, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Comment Well that's the thing isn't it. Now you're right when you say ITN is not a News Service, anyone can read that at WP:ITN (although you might want to take a page out of Shirley Sherrod's book and finish the quote since it actually says, "Wikipedia is not an online newspaper and does not accept original works of journalism or first-hand reports."). But like so many other aspects of WP generally, there is a big difference between the definition of a project and it's reality. In this case it might be wise to use WP:Duck, to wit: the first sentence on WP:ITN is,
"The In the news (ITN) section on the main page features articles that have been substantially updated to reflect recent or current events of wide interest to the encyclopedia's readers."
Here's the first sentence from Journalism,
"Journalism is the [investigation and] reporting of events, issues, and trends to a broad "Encyclopedic" audience. Although there is much variation within journalism, the ideal is to inform the citizenry. Besides covering organizations and institutions such as government and business, journalism also covers cultural aspects of society such as arts and entertainment."
All you have to do is mentally insert the word "Encyclopedic" and... Quack!. We are a news service in any traditional sense, the only exception being is that we do not make our own. We're a lot like television news, not the news channel, nor the news report... but the television itself. We take information and relay it to millions of people all over the world. But, being an encyclopedia... we also have the remarkable ability to define ourselves :). Cwill151 (talk) 17:18, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
So by your logic we should be posting the next story along the lines of Lindsay Lohan getting jailed or Cheryl Cole getting Malaria. Or maybe Wikipedia accepts that this sort of tabloid fodder will not ultimately become important in history, which is what an encyclopaedia looks to record. Despite widespread coverage it is accepted that these 'news' events are unimportant in the grand scheme of things and shouldn't be listed. Likewise we don't list opinions or speeches of political leaders or financial performances of big companies, items that you'll often see on the front page of news websites. At the end of the day unlike the news media, ITN is there to provide an encyclopaedic overviews to current events and not provide coverage of the news itself. We pick and choose what has encyclopaedic value and provide greater coverage to stories that the news media push to 'middle pages' such as stories on science and technology. Conversely, we downplay sensationalist or populist media stories often overlooking them altogether. Also, in many instances we provide a much broader background to current events, far more so that than the news media provide. Many bold links on ITN take the user to an article where less than 5-10% of the article actually relates to the current event (Kang Kek Iew is a current example), while secondary links provide additional information often unrelated to the current event itself, but linked in some other way. That is something you just don't get with the news... --Daviessimo (talk) 18:33, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
No no, you misunderstand me... I agree with you. Yes, we do have the ability to decide what is worthy of immediate encyclopedic coverage and I am proud of our function in that respect and I am glad to know I'll never see Lindsay Lohan on ITN (unless she gets hit by a truck). I am merely pointing out that in our capacity to decide what information is most pertinent to people reading the encyclopedia, we function in a strikingly similar manner to any News Agency. We make our decisions based on the news coverage a story gets, there are other factors- sure, but at the end of the day the amount of information which we can cite about a story is related to the square of the coverage it receives (like gravity). I'm just saying that in many respects we are like a news agency because the stories we make articles for at ITN are the same stories that you would find in headlines all over the world; same information too. Our goal is different, we aren't out to sell or shock, we do this just to make a record of it that most people will find helpful, but the end result is the same... Let's just be real about it. There is always a distinct difference between what we want to be and what we are. Cwill151 (talk) 19:25, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
I have to say I'm a bit uncomfortable with this one. I want to support it as I generally support historical stories but it seems trivial somehow. The article could use some expansion, and frankly some more explanation on how sigficant this is. I hadn't heard of this ship--had people been searching for it all this time? Has anything of value (for historians) been found on it?--Johnsemlak (talk) 12:25, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
EDIT--OK, I'd suggest we link to (and expand) the article McClure Arctic Expedition, which gives much more context to this story. I think you can pretty much copy and paste the update on the ship's discovery from HMS Investigator to the McClure Expedition with minor changes, though I'd prefer to let someone a bit more familiar with the history here do it.--Johnsemlak (talk) 12:35, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Having read the article, I have to say, 'team finds ship after 15 minutes in first ever seearch for it' doesn't exactly say 'wow' to me. But if we are going to post stuff like the Champagne story then I guess this is valid too. MickMacNee (talk) 19:05, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
  • That does not mean it's an unimportant finding: "The Parks Canada discovery last weekend happened almost too quickly for dramatic effect, perhaps befitting an archeological dig that is experiencing such an incredible streak of good luck on the water, on land and with the weather, the team is pinching itself in disbelief." (National Post) The discovery is part of a massive project that Parks Canada has undertaken to locate all three missing ships: Investigator, Erebus, and Terror. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 20:18, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
It'd be good if more of that kind of stuff were in the article. As I said before, just reading the HMS Investigator article doesn't really convey the story's notability to me.--Johnsemlak (talk) 20:33, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
The article was rushed to ITN last night, and I did not have the chance to fully account for all the news stories. I am now continuing to expand the article. However, my knowledge around Arctic exploration and ships is limited, which is why I asked for help at WikiProject Military history and WikiProject Ships. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 20:40, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Catalonia bans bullfighting

I know this will seems like a fairly local story, but bullfighting is an iconic image of Spain and Catalonia has become the first region in the country to ban the practice [4]. The article to update would be Bullfighting in Spain. Thoughts? --Daviessimo (talk) 11:29, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

It certainly is an interesting event. Obviously the article would need a good update. I'm not sure I'd support but it is a slow news period.--Johnsemlak (talk) 12:47, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
Well, it's getting plenty of coverage... Note that Catalonia is the second Spanish region to ban bullfighting (the first was the Canary Islands in 1991). Physchim62 (talk) 15:06, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Support. It's getting global coverage and is a very significant development in Spanish culture, although as above, be careful with the actual wording, there's been many prior bans in Spain in different localities, Catalonia is just the first mainland top-level division to ban it. Any blurb should mention it was a Free vote and passed 68 to 55, with 9 abstentions. I and others have done a rough update of Bullfighting. MickMacNee (talk) 16:03, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
  • MickMacNee that sentence "many prior bans in Spain in different localities", is not correct. There are Anti-Bullfighting City but the cities haven't ban the bullfighting. For example Barcelona is an Anti-Bullfighting City but have corridas in La Monumental. The media coverage in all the world have been important and some countries (France) see as an example Catalonia for doing the same (in south of France, for example Rosellón - Catalunya Nord - there are corridas too). -- (I hope you decide to include the catalan baning in the news) --Vilar 22:58, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
Support in principle - this has not just received coverage now, but over the last few months has been mentioned several times in the British press. Certainly significant in Spanish-speaking culture, which I think it's fair to say is a topic we under-represent. However, the article needs improving. Modest Genius talk 00:19, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
I'd like to see it up there, but the article is a difficult one to write. My guess is that this isn't going up (but I've been pleasently surprized in the past). Physchim62 (talk) 08:47, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
  • User:Vilarrubla above is actually from Spain, why not enlist his help in writing the article? (properly cited of course). His level of known detail and factual accuracy might be just what it needs to make it on MP. Cwill151 (talk) 17:46, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
I live in Catalonia as well! Maybe that's one of the blocks for me to write a decent piece ;) Physchim62 (talk) 18:17, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
My english is not good enough for helping to doing a better article, but I thing the catalan article is the one with more information and there you can get some references (77 Anti-Bullfighting Cities, signatures for the ILP, famous catalan people and internacional as Elliott Murphy, an antibaning platform with signatures of famous people e.g. Mercedes Milà, and probaning 140.000 signatures from 120 countries of the asociation World Society for the Protection of Animals). -- Congratulations Physchim62 for the work done! --Vilar 18:25, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
Some reactions:
  • Government of Castilla y León want to impulse the corridas with fiscal exceptions and promoting it in schools nortecastilla
  • Castilla-la Mancha president says that the baning in Catalona is an "aberration" and "barbaric" eldecano
  • Government of Andalucia thinks that is imposible to do the same in that CA diariodesevilla
  • In Colombia will be a vote baning it. el mundo
  • Bloque por Asturies will promote a parlamentary iniciative to ban corridas elcomerciodigital
  • A map with the numer of corridas and schools in Spain Público (In Catalonia 20, all in la Monumental)

--Vilar 18:38, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

  • Weak support Bullfighting is closely related to Spain, so a ban is notable even if it is a regional thing. --PlasmaTwa2 20:13, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
  • The Ban on bullfighting in Catalonia article is getting better, but it's still not up to ITN standards. I notice there have been some updates at bullfighting. If somebody could add some more to either article, I'd be happy to post. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:00, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
  • There is an error in that sentence (# The Spanish autonomous community of Catalonia bans bullfighting, the first region on the mainland to do so. (Los Angeles Times)) and in the sentence of Daviessimo. Catalonia is the second CA to ban because the first was Las Canarias in 1991 typicallyspanish.com rtve.es. But in las Canarias there weren't bullfightings, so Catalonia is the first "bullfighting CA" that have ban bullfighting.--Vilar 22:29, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Support culturally very significant political decision. --Elekhh (talk) 08:36, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
  • OK, we're now overdue for a new item and this is the only item with a broad consensus in favour of posting and a reasonable update (at bullfighting), so in the interest of trying to keep ITN from going stale, I'm going to post this, despite the update being relatively short. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:14, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Islamabad plane crash

Large passenger plane accident in Pakistan.[5] I haven't started an article at this point because the details are a little sketchy to the point where I'm unsure of what the article's title should be.--Mkativerata (talk) 06:19, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Article here. Will obviously require confirmed facts and a significant expansion to the article (which unfortunately I can't do over the next 16 hours) before we post anything.--Mkativerata (talk) 06:22, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Support when updated significantly more. more than likely well over a 100 deaths. (maybe incldue the Black Day in aviation history tidbit from above) Lihaas (talk) 06:58, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Support Major aircraft crash, although about a third of those on board are known to have survived. Mjroots (talk) 07:52, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Support As above. Likely more than 100 dead, first major A321 crash, massive media coverage. WackyWace converse | contribs 07:59, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Support, but maybe wait a few hours until casualty figures are more known. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 08:09, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Support - Mar4d (talk) 08:38, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Posted -- tariqabjotu 08:39, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

July 27

ITN candidates for July 27

July 26

ITN candidates for July 26

2010 Israeli Air Force Sikorsky CH-53 Sea Stallion crash

- Israeli helicopter crashes in Romania killing 7. YahooNews BBC Mediafax - Eugen Simion 14 (talk) 18:52, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Oppose as military helicopter crash. Indeed, I've also prodded the article as I don't think we'll have anything notable to say about it. Physchim62 (talk) 20:08, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Cambodian war crimes trial

strong support this is the first of many such trials and it sets precedence (disappointment mostly) ahead. Landmark trial as well. Although I would go with the bold link to the courts page mentioned the trial as that is the most important part because of its precedence setting. The person himself should be the regular link.(Lihaas (talk) 18:40, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
  • This is pretty big news and the article seems to have been updated and the timer will be red by the time I get up in the morning, so I'm going to post this since there have been no objections. We even have a free image by the looks of it. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:29, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Tony Hayward resignation

If and when BP chief executive Tony Hayward resigns in the morning and is replaced by Bob Dudley, this will be a significant fallout of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. (The Guardian) (BBC News) Arsonal (talk) 07:32, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

  • Support getting significant attention here in the US, I imagine it's the same across the pond. ~DC Let's Vent 15:58, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Neutral so far. It's a significant reprecussion of the oil spill, but I wonder if it really compares in significance to events directly related to plugging the oil leak itself.--Johnsemlak (talk) 16:00, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Weak oppose. He will be leaving on October 1st, apparently by "mutual agreement" and with full contractual payoff, and may become a non-executive director of BP's Russian joint venture (BBC News). So he's not exactly being sacked. Physchim62 (talk) 17:48, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. I considered nominating this myself, but it's tabloid fodder more than anything else. He's leaving quietly and they're paying him millions of pounds to do it- the so-called "golden parachute"- but it's not really of any historical significance. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:13, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
I don't see how you can consider the leadership of a $239 billion company to be "tabloid fodder," but that said I don't know if this makes a good ITN entry. I still support a sticky entry until the crisis is over. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 21:33, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Well, Hayward isn't the real story here, he's just Obama's scapegoat. Besides, he's not really leaving, he's just being paid millions of pounds to step down as CEO by "mutual consent" but he's still going to be working for the company and, no doubt, earning a handsome salary. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:15, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose BP is throwing him under the bus as a PR exercise. Let's not help their PR machine by putting this on the front page. Cynicism aside, this isn't overly significant: the significance is the substance of the events, not the identities of the key players.--Mkativerata (talk) 23:22, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose per WP:CRYSTAL. His planned departure is October 1. There's always a chance that something happens where he stays (although it's highly unlikely) or has to leave sooner. --Smashvilletalk 16:06, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Hairy-nosed Otter sighting

First live sighting in Malaysia of the Hairy-nosed Otter, the rarest otter in Asia, in over 100 years and a specimen, alive or dead, in greater Borneo in more than a decade. (The Washington Post) (Herald Sun) Arsonal (talk) 07:47, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Interesting. Update is a little short, though I'm not sure if there will be much more to add.--Johnsemlak (talk) 16:05, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose, simply because there is nothing more we could add than the blurb. Physchim62 (talk) 17:50, 26 July 2010 (UTC)


July 25

ITN candidates for July 25

Warlogs leaked by Wikileaks

This news looks huge. "[O]ne of the biggest leaks in US military history"[6]. __meco (talk) 21:12, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Support. Do this ASAP please. This is huge: *Wikileaks releases to The Guardian, The New York Times and Der Spiegel over 92,000 documents related to the war in Afghanistan, in one of the biggest leaks in US military history. Gregcaletta (talk) 00:23, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Support. The line about "coalition forces have killed hundreds of civilians in unreported incidents" ought to be enough in any circumstance and there are three reliable sources in three countries reporting it as well. --candlewicke 00:52, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Support. largest leak in US military history. international implications--Wikireader41 (talk) 00:53, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Weak support. The substance of the leaks doesn't seem that earth-shattering to me, and the three media outlets involved are not entirely neutral as to how important these documents are (each of them has a "scoop" in its market, which they try to make sound as big as possible). Still, the story is now on the top of BBC News... Physchim62 (talk) 01:19, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Are items on In the News supposed to be "earth-shattering"? Gregcaletta (talk) 01:49, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Just a note, we should make sure that on the Wikileaks page it states that it isn't related to the Wikimedia foundation. We've already been in the news over a death hoax recently. Don't need to be in the news again. Mr. R00t Talk 02:11, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Uh,... gentlemen, after reading approx 1/8th the way through the released documents, and having been in the military, I can tell you that what this amounts to is essentially a first-hand account of the War in Afghanistan, no filter, no bias; just a raw time-line of information. Several sub-sections were rated as currently classified. Never in History has the general public had access to this level of military operations data, in any country... ever. The records don't include the operations archive of the any of the Special Forces sub-Branches nor the data of SOCOM itself, and only includes the records of units active in the Afghanistan area; and therefore it is limited to records kept mostly after the initial invasion and records of incidents in established operational fronts such as contested districts and population centers and operating bases. However, though general information on black or illegal operations is lacking, the documents paint a very different picture of the war in striking and surprising detail, including questionable actions taken by the regular U.S. Armed Forces. This is one of the biggest stories this year. I encourage you all to download and read it in it's entirety, and I feel confident you'll recognize the magnitude of it,... the ramifications of it...... Therefore: Support in the Strongest Possible Terms. but those are just my, Thoughts? Cwill151 (talk) 05:28, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

If you're supporting on the ground of amount of previously secret content, I would say that the public release of the UKUSA Agreement (which fell under the news radar) was actually the biggest this year for military topics. But, I digress. If the documents were only relevant to U.S. armed forces operations, I would probably oppose. However, this does not appear to be the case because they seem to describe NATO operations as well. I will support. Arsonal (talk) 07:23, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Strong Support. This is comparable to the Pentagon Papers.--Johnsemlak (talk) 15:56, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Tour de France

In cycling, Alberto Contador of Spain wins the 2010 Tour de France. - Eugen Simion 14 (talk) 07:59, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Support per ITNR if this is the case. --candlewicke 13:46, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
support usual sports victories.Lihaas (talk) 13:49, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
We don't have much in the way of an update- Contador's article has an unreferenced sentence on the race and the race article has a nice overview, but no detail on the winner. If somebody wants to add a paragraph to one or t'other, I'm happy to post this, especially since we could do with a new image and there are free ones of Contador. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:56, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

July 24

ITN candidates for July 24

Bolivia calls for emergency summit

Bolivia wants South American Presidents to meet after Venezuela severs ties with Colombia. See [8]. ~DC Let's Vent 21:24, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Alex Higgins

Snooker player, Alex Higgins dies after a long battle with throat cancer. (Daily Mail), (BBC) - JuneGloom07 Talk? 20:35, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

"Snooker's first television superstar" - BBC.
A two-time world champion who won at the age of 23 on his first attempt in 1972, becoming the youngest ever winner, sounds important enough. Then winning ten years later as well. - The News Zealand Herald. In those ten years it had become "major television entertainment" - The Guardian.
"The sport's first true rebel" and "one of "a triumvirate of players who in their respective eras broke the mould", with one of the other two saying "He is a legend of snooker, and should forever be remembered as the finest ever snooker player" - The Daily Telegraph.
"He kept playing the sport he loved until his final days" indicates he was still active as well - Hindustan Times.
All this suggests he passes "2. The deceased was a very important figure in their field of expertise, and was recognised as such" (even politicians recognise him) therefore support. --candlewicke 23:57, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Support, BBC News said that he transformed snooker from a gentleman's game to a sport. Mjroots (talk) 08:18, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose, all the death sources just seem from Britain/Oceania, no international notability it seems. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 15:25, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
You mean international like the "World Series"? ;) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:25, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
Britain/Oceania are not near one another. What about Hindustan Times? --candlewicke 01:27, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Strong oppose. I get that he was a famous snooker player but posting this would really lower the bar for famous sportsmen's deaths on ITN. I really think the mere death of a sportsman due to old age should only be posted in very rare circumstances and for athletes of true global notability (eg Pele). This man has died long after his career. Also, the death isn't getting very high-profile coverage even in countries where the sport is popular.--Johnsemlak (talk) 20:56, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
He died age 61 of cancer, that is hardly old age. He retired just 13 years ago, and was World Champion just 28 years ago. Plenty of people will remember this guy in his heyday, as is obvious from the obits. Pele by contrast stopped playing 33 years ago, and is not likely to die for another 10 or 20 years at least. MickMacNee (talk) 20:41, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose I concur with Johnsemlak's specific reasoning and general thoughts on the deaths of athletes.--Mkativerata (talk) 01:33, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose Snooker, are you kidding me? That does not sound at all notable to me. Mr. R00t Talk 18:21, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
    Maybe you need to change your country of residence / cable provider then. Snooker is an international sport, and the current World Champion gets paid £250,000, for a days work. And this guy is singularly credited with getting the sport there, from something that previously was just played in Working Men's Clubs and Gentlemen's Social Clubs. He has been in death compared to other sporting geniuses such as George Best, Paul Gascoigne and John McEnroe. Having said that, no, his death is not quite ITN material, but I only base that on what has been rejected before and therefore the predictable outrage if this were posted, and not on any idiotic ideas that this guy was not the singular Mr. Snooker, and as such, his premature albeit expected death has been keenly felt in the notable sphere of world snooker, and beyond. MickMacNee (talk) 20:35, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Love Parade stampede

At least 10 deaths in Duisburg, Germany after a stampede at Love Parade - Eugen Simion 14 (talk) 17:04, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

We have 15 deaths and 45 injuries now - [9] - Eugen Simion 14 (talk) 17:26, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
Sad update: now 18 deaths :( 94.212.31.237 (talk) 21:59, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Support once a decent article is forthcoming. Mjroots (talk) 17:26, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Support per Mjroots. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 20:20, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Comment its been improved is it good enough now? -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 21:41, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
It's looking pretty good. A bit more on the parade itself would be nice (is it notable enough for its own article) to put things into context. If you can add a little on that, I'll be happy to post it. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:04, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
The general Love Parade does have its own article: Love Parade. Or were you thinking of something specifically about this years event? -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 22:32, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
So it does. I added a link to the article. I'm happy with the condition of the article, but I'd like to hear a few more opinions before posting. If there's been no shift in consensus by midnight UTC, I'll post it. Meanwhile, any suggestions for a blurb? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:42, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
I tried to give a bit more context to the nature of the festival, but its hard for me. Most good sources are in german (and totally snowballed by all the news atm), and i'm guessing most people in germany are already in bed by now. —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 23:34, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
Support. At least 17 people are killed and another 100 are injured during a stampede at the Love Parade electronic music festival in Duisburg, North Rhine-Westphalia.  ? --candlewicke 23:31, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Korean sabre rattling

A large naval exercise between the U.S. and South Korea on the backdrop of the sinking in March of a South Korean navy ship, by many blamed on North Korea, causes North Korea to respond with threats of "physical response" and that they are ready to launch a "sacred war" against South Korea and the United States. __meco (talk) 06:55, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

  • I say wait until the sabre rattling turns into actual action. North Korea always likes threats, but I would prefer to wait until they actually do something. SpencerT♦C 14:49, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
I figured that it might be an appropriate item for when the the joint exercise starts on Sunday (which would be anytime now as the clock has just passed midnight there). I also don't mind waiting to see if the temperature rises still further on the Korean peninsula. __meco (talk) 15:29, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose unless something actually happens. NK threatening the SK and/or the US is a common occurrence. Modest Genius talk 20:07, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
What about just the large naval exercise? That sounds like something. If it leads to such a response it must be important? Can't really mention the ship sinking if North Korea denies it as it would probably be too long. The United States and South Korea manoeuvre their military in the Sea of Japan, causing concern for North Korea. --candlewicke 13:34, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

2010 Mindanao earthquakes

A series of 7.6, 7.3 and 7.4 magnitude earthquakes hits Philippines. Eugen Simion 14 (talk) 06:38, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Oppose, No reports of damage or casualties. __meco (talk) 10:23, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

How does this page even exist. It is beyong woeful.Lihaas (talk) 13:51, 25 July 2010 (UTC)


July 23

ITN candidates for July 23

Trafigura guilty of illegally dumping toxic waste

This seems like what is usually posted and might be at least worth discussing if there is little else. "The first time Trafigura has faced criminal charges since the toxic waste scandal unfolded". --candlewicke 01:34, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Support significant outcome, and the article looks decently written. I'm a bit confused, however, as to the process that resulted in this outcome. The news article was vague on which Dutch court made the ruling. Arsonal (talk) 05:06, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
I think I've found the answer. The Guardian - "Amsterdam district court judge Frans Bauduin also convicted a Trafigura employee and the Ukranian captain of the ship that carried the waste for their roles in the 2006 scandal". --candlewicke 05:23, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
Support seems notable. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 13:53, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
Okay, the article as a whole is in good shape, but where is a section with the guilty ruling? Can someone link me...I'm not sure if I see it. SpencerT♦C 15:26, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
I can't see anything on it in the article either. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 15:39, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
(edit conflict) The article is indeed in good shape. There's plenty of material on the aftermath, and there's a section on the inquiry, but it hasn't been updated yet. Would someone care to ad a paragraph? Preferably before the timer turns red again. Seems to have been a slow news week. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:44, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
Is the final paragraph of this section enough? -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 16:14, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
Looks good to me. Posting. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:17, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
I can't find any evidence that Trafigura is British, as described. Would a better description not be Swiss-based? - Highfields (talk, contribs) 16:56, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Indian Tablet

India unveils worlds cheapest $ 35 Tablet PC(Fortune)(BBC). since we are slow on news.--Wikireader41 (talk) 20:03, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Oppose I believe there is an unwritten rule about not posting product releases to avoid it looking like promotion? Arsonal (talk) 05:01, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose not even the iPad got posted and that's way more significant in this market. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 13:58, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
Which market? --candlewicke 23:28, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
I believe he means the English-speaking one. --Smashvilletalk 16:24, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
I mean the tablet PC market. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 16:46, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Colombia–Venezuela relations

Well we're five, nine hours past due with no candidates to speak of and this seemed the most "Internationally Significant" of the few currently listed. I personally don't care if it gets shot down, but lets at least talk about something. Thoughts? Cwill151 (talk) 18:00, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Oh post-less day! Callooh! Callay!... He posted in his joy. (Yawn) Cwill151 (talk) 21:11, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
I'm sure we've posted similar items before, but I can't recall any offhand. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:53, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
The only one I can think of off the top of my head is Foreign relations of Libya#Dispute with Switzerland. Arsonal (talk) 05:12, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
Support since there are international consequences several days later. --candlewicke 23:33, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
Support per Candlewicke. Arsonal (talk) 05:21, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
Support, certainly not usual. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 15:25, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Torch Lighting of the Youth Olympic Games Flame

  • The Olympic torch for the 2010 Youth Olympic Games is lit in Olympia. The flame will travel to a few countries before arriving in Singapore. (Straits Times)

I feel that this is significant to an extent, so I am just suggesting it here to see if it could be added. Ja24896kin (talk) 13:45, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Oppose for now, but will definitely support the opening of the first Youth Games. Arsonal (talk) 16:55, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose now and for opening, unless it is featured in major news outlets. The event has to prove its notability by being in the news. If nobody cares, like nobody seems to right now, ITN shouldn't mention it. /Coffeeshivers (talk) 15:43, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

July 22

ITN candidates for July 22

Desmond Tutu

Bumped from below... again. With no disrespect to Spencer who obviously has long experience in this area. My apologies; didn't see the talk page discussion.
Now I'll admit "retiring from public life" is not in itself a major change like say... death. However, this marks the end of a long and respected career of a man who, besides being a Nobel Laureate, is also one of the most internationally recognized figures in modern history. Given the gravitas that comes by simply mentioning his name, I would argue that this story can be considered internationally significant, and seeing as how no one can deny that Tutu qualifies as respected in his field; I figured it was worth the bump. I mean, it's like if the Dalai Lama held a press conference and announced that he would no longer actively seek autonomy for the Tibetan people from the Chinese Government; it's a story you just gotta run with. Thoughts? Cwill151 (talk) 02:35, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose Simply retiring from public life is not enough. Death yes, but not just retiring. SpencerT♦C 03:21, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Well, first of all, he doesn't seem to be actually retiring yet - has just announced it (I think) and is to reduce his work to one day per week before eventually retiring. And, second of all, he must be a certainty for death so I would wait until then. --candlewicke 03:56, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Bumped (See Above) Cwill151 (talk) 05:29, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Not very significant imho. And stop with the bumping!. Reverted per talk page. MickMacNee (talk) 10:14, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose. --Johnsemlak (talk) 15:18, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

New henge at Stonehenge

Sorry i couldn't come up with a better title. This new wooden henge has been discovered less than 1km away from stonehenge and has been hailed as a major archaeological and cultural discovery in over 50 years. Btw, is the article too short? Simply south (talk) 17:15, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

BBC News link for those who want to read more. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:30, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Shouldnt you be at the wiki article to know more ;)
weak support dont know the kind of coverage its getting yet..article also needs a clean up (image?). Otherwise i would say its something newsworthy (maybe a DYK nom. would get it a wider audience)Lihaas (talk) 17:43, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Are copywrited images included in ITN? Simply south (talk) 18:30, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Comment: If I really believed for one minute that this was the greatest discovery in 50 years as the project archaeologists like to claim, I'd support this being in ITN. However in the last 30 years alone, 2 other henges (Coneybury Henge and Bluestonehenge) and the country's first Neolithic house floors (at Durrington Walls) have all been discovered in the same World Heritage Site. There's also the Amesbury Archer 3 miles away. Unfortunately these claims are just hyperbole for what is essentially another monument in the WHS. Can't blame them, but I don't see any serious publication claiming this sort of notability once the press die down. Cheers, Ranger Steve (talk) 20:10, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Should we remove that part but keep the first part? Simply south (talk) 21:48, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
  • The BBC was just talking about a 'Marden Henge' now. It's henge-mania people! I can't make up my mind whether this is a significant enough discovery for ITN, or just a bit of hype that does a disservice to Time Team. Perhaps if someone 'digs up' lol some more convincing and authorative third party statments.... MickMacNee (talk) 12:57, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
    • There hasn't been any new info for 5 days so if no one objects i will switch this over to DYK in the next few hours. Simply south (talk) 17:51, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Muttiah Muralitharan's 800

The most prolific Test bowler in history was on 792 wickets and he announced it was his last game. Then he took 8 and his 8th was the one that finished off the Indians, so he ends with exactly 800 wickets. It's a bit borderline, yes. YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 08:33, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

  • Support For this. Lugnuts (talk) 08:37, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Support - Most wickets for any bowler in Test history = a mention on ITN! – PeeJay 08:45, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Article is in fairly good shape, but I couldn't see any new content on this at a quick glance. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 08:52, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
While we await an update, does anybody fancy putting a blurb together? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 08:56, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
How about:
Sri Lankan cricketer Muttiah Muralitharan takes eight wickets in his last test match before retirement to become the first bowler to take 800 test wickets.
Oh and take this as a Support for inclusion.--Peter cohen (talk) 10:00, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Support in principle (ie pending update). A historic achievement in an international sport.--Mkativerata (talk) 08:54, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
I thought he was some 13 behind...a record already? At any rate, support for record AND retirement. kill 2 birds with 1 stone.Lihaas (talk) 09:24, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Could you make the blurb a bit clearer for those who don't follow cricket (such as myself and, I expect, a fair proportion of our readership)? Thanks, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 10:21, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
alight rewording of my proposal above which HJM may have missed.--Peter cohen (talk) 10:39, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Seems reasonable. How are we doing for an update? Has anyone added this to his article yet? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 10:41, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Having had a look, it appears we're still lacking an update. There's a retirement section, but it doesn't contain any information about this achievement. If I'm missing it, someone please point it out to me. I'm ready to post as soon as we have an update. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 10:46, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
I updated the retirement section, Have a look now. Is the word "International" necessary here? A DYK hook featured in November 04th, 2009 goes like this. "... that Sri Lankan cricketer Muttiah Muralitharan has the highest number of five wicket hauls in Test cricket?" Best.--Chanaka L (talk) 11:52, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
I did a little copy edit to the section, but I hoep that's enough.--Peter cohen (talk) 11:55, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
I think including "international" is harmless at worst and it helps convey the significance for those unfamiliar with cricket (such as myself). I'll have a look at the update now. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 11:58, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Could we ad something about his retire saying "during his last match" or on his "last day before retirement" (granted, only those who know proper cricket (ie- not 20/20) would get that one ;))Lihaas (talk) 12:27, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
If you have a suggestions for working it into the blurb, I'm willing to tweak, but my brain is failing me today. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:37, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
"During his last match"? should suffice. i doubt my other suggestion would make it.
  • I think the fact it was his last ball in his last ever test match deserves a mention. MickMacNee (talk) 13:05, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
I added "In the final match of his career", is that any better? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:19, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Not particularly. It's not his final match, it's his final test match, and the key 'wow' claim is that it was from his last ball in that match. He did after all take something like 8 wickets just in that match alone. MickMacNee (talk) 18:46, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Kosovo status verdict

Will be out in about 9 hours and is an historic verdict regardless of which way it goes in its landmark ruling. An update should/would follow on one of the pages listed above then it can be listed, along with the reaction from Serbia and Kosovo and Albania (Bosnia?), Palestine, Kashmir, North. Cyprus, Abkhazia, South Ossetia, etc, etc in this regard.(Lihaas (talk) 05:04, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

You beat me to the nomination. As part of the Kosovo status process, the International Court of Justice will be ruling at 3 p.m. in The Hague (UTC+2) whether Kosovo's declaration of independence is valid. Streaming will be available at http://www.icj-cij.org/. (The Washington Post) (The New York Times) (ICJ case files) Arsonal (talk) 05:31, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Support when the ruling is out and if the article is updated accordingly. --BorgQueen (talk) 05:37, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Support also note that the proceedings themselves have their own article here. Therequiembellishere (talk) 05:53, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Support this is a particularly significant event as it confirms/denies Kosovo's "right to exist". -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 07:24, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

need to merge in all the various kosovo related articles. (perhaps move my edits to this other page mentioned above.)
As an aside i think the update should go on the page recommended above instead of what i originally proposed. (some mention can go on those 2 pages) Lihaas (talk) 09:25, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Well I'm not particularly bothered where the update goes as long as there is one. Any sign of a verdict yet? We're approaching the time given if my time zone offset calculations are correct. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:33, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Well it should start in 10-15mins...god damn website is not working. the whole damn world must be on it ;)Lihaas (talk) 12:50, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Support: it will show if Kosovo has the final right to be independent. Kubek15 write/sign 11:13, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Comment. So is anyone going to bother stating what this opinion would actualy change? Are floods of recognitions now going to come in? Is Serbia going to invade? Is Russia going to invade? Are Kosovo now going to get a seat in the UN? Are Kosovo going to become an EU state? I've had a look, and none of this sort of info can be found in the current Wikipedia articles. Nobody has even bothered to include it in this nomination. This opinion looks for all the world as if it really has nothing to do with Kosovo, and is just a bit of ICJ wonkery that is more important for future secessions than in changing anything wrt Kosovo's international realtions. MickMacNee (talk) 13:22, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
    • Personally, I think it will greatly increase the will of Transnistria and Nagorno-Karabakh. I don't think a flood of recognitions will come in to other countries, or even to Kosovo. Russia will not invade. Serbia probably will not invade. Kosovo will not get a seat at the UN so long as two veto-holders (Russia and China) do not recognize their independence. The EU... any accession to the EU would probably be at least a decade off, so they'll be in no hurry to push on that. Basically, I think this has less to do with Kosovo and more to do with all the other frozen conflicts. If Kosovo's declaration is held to be legal, then Nagorno-Karabakh, for example, will be emboldened, and work even harder for its independence, and perhaps some countries (I'm looking at you, Cyprus and Armenia) will sack up and finally recognize it. It's essentially making it internationally legal to unilaterally declare independence, something which so far has not necessarily been held as a right. --Golbez (talk) 13:43, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
    • Kosovans seem awfully happy for something that's just a bit of ICJ wonkery... There's some Kosovan international expert or something on TV now claiming it will lead to more international recognitions. (Note I'm not disagreeing with the need for info in the article, but the above response is written like it isn't just referring to the failings of the article) Nil Einne (talk) 15:06, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Strong Support' A very international event. First of it's kind at the ICJ. IJA (talk) 15:11, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Support The implications of this ruling are so significant that it would be downright criminal not to add this to the front page.--The Devil's Advocate (talk) 17:02, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Here's a suggested blurb anyway:

Court says declaration was not illegal.
Just awaiting more reactions/analysis (albeit the latter would take more than 24 hours). There are some real interesting reactions to await. Most important now is Republika Srpska which vetoed recognition on the grounds that it would secede from Bosnia to make up for kosovo's loss to Serbia.Lihaas (talk) 14:41, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
I would support this with the addition of the precedence link for kosovo (As above)Lihaas (talk) 17:17, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
I love the prose update. It currently consists of "On 22 July 2010 the court ruled that Kosovo's declaration of independence was not in violation of general international law." We'll need significantly more than that before it can be posted.HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:28, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Like I said, is there anything more? This really does just look like a bit of ICJ legal wonkery, which doesn't change anything in practice for Kosovo. All points taken on the impact for future secession movements, but it's going to be hard to find links and updates to explain that in brief in an update, if that is what the significant 'event' is here. I'm remined of the Sudanese president warrant nom here. Where's the beef? as they say. MickMacNee (talk) 18:50, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Well I think the wonkery itself is significant enough for ITN, but if that's all there is to say about it, it's a little underwhelming. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:54, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
  • The blurb should also probably say this was a "10-4" opinion. MickMacNee (talk) 18:52, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Keep in mind that the ICJ decided that the declaration, as a text is not illegal, but decided not to rule on the issue of secession and independence and statehood itself and left that to the UN General Assembly. So the ICJ ruled that the independence declaration from 17 Feb 2008 is not illegal and not that the independence is not illegal which they considered a political question. Disappointing scope of the decision - to say the least - and we can see that all of the countries are just sticking to their position, as Slovakian representative stated - "the ICJ ruling changed nothing". Without discussing the implications they neither gave a final ruling on Kosovo but pushed the ball to the incompetent UNGA nor thus did they give some explanation for all the other situations like Abkhazia.--Avala (talk) 23:19, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Add all that to the page.
Think we're coming along for an ITN now..Lihaas (talk) 03:51, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Support? I don't think anyone has made a bold oppose. --candlewicke 04:00, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Support. Physchim62 (talk) 12:25, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Update's reasonable, we're nearly 40 hours without an update (for the third time this week) and there's no significant opposition to this, so I'm posting. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:44, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

July 21

ITN candidates for July 21

Discovery of most massive star

This seems like a very natural candidate for ITN mention. __meco (talk) 17:49, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Damn you, I was nominating this and you gave me an edit conflict! My nomination was:
  • Researchers at Sheffield University have discovered a bloody massive sun for want of a more accurate term. The newly discovered R136a1 is thought to about 300 time bigger than our own sun (apologies to anybody reading from other solar systems!) and, as I understand it, it's the biggest star in the universe that we've discovered so far. (BBC) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:57, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
I guess R136a1 needs its own article first. --bender235 (talk) 18:18, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
I'm happy to zap the redirect if anyone wants to have a go at it. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:20, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Article is there. Support now. —bender235 (talk) 23:29, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Weak oppose. R136a1 probably doesn't merit its own article separate from R136, given the amount that's known about it, and the update at R136 is insufficient for ITN. Also, there is confusion between "most massive" and "greatest diameter": the largest star known is VY Canis Majoris, and many people are quoting our article in other online fora to counter sloppy journalism about R136a1 (so we should be very careful about getting things clear ourselves!) Physchim62 (talk) 21:12, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
weak support i support science article a lot, though not it seems to be a lot. Granted this is a big discovery (btw- it was a Chilean observatory that made the observation (??) ;) (31 hrs since an ITN update, btw) Lihaas (talk) 05:07, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Support - intriguing story. I count three supports with the nom and HJ, so this should be okay to post assuming there is an good update(?) —Ed (talkmajestic titan) 06:22, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Well R136 is a stub at the minute. I don't consider myself nearly knowledgeable to do much about that, but I suppose I could have a go later on. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 08:54, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Support. Mass is more important than diameter 95.26.46.57 (talk) 11:40, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Strong support. A few years ago, something like this could have made scientists very skeptical as such a star would exceed the hypothetical Eddington limit. Is this confirmed? ~AH1(TCU) 13:46, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Strong support in principle. It is indeed the mass that is new (so use the term 'most massive'), size is irrelevant. This is something I know a lot about, and normally would jump to update the article using the paper as a source [10], but ironically enough I'm at an astronomy conference and don't have time. Modest Genius talk 17:29, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Oh and don't say 'announce the discovery of the most massive star', because that star has been know about for years. What's new is the mass determination. I suggest something like 'astronomers announce that R136a1 is the most massive star known'. Modest Genius talk 17:56, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Is there a way to word this w/o saying most massive?--Johnsemlak (talk) 15:35, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
'has the highest known mass' would work. Modest Genius talk 17:24, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Well, bots and I did what we could ;) (almost all IPs are mine). My English does not allow me to expand the article more. 95.25.156.190 (talk) 19:34, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
  • *Scientists announce the discovery of R136a1, the most massive star ever found. Is this an acceptable blurb (it's copied from the news portal). __meco (talk) 20:05, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

  Posted — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:55, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Exhumation of Nicolae Ceaușescu and Elena Ceaușescu

Ex-Romanian dictator Ceausescu and wife exhumed Yahoo News MSNBC BBC - Eugen Simion 14 (talk) 07:54, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

  • Oppose; we didn't note the exhumation of Bolivar, which I find far more interesting. --Golbez (talk) 22:03, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

July 20

ITN candidates for July 20

Suriname election

per yesterday's nomination for Surinamese presidential election, 2010 should the page be update. Precedence set for this (even indirect elections)(Lihaas (talk) 12:13, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Oppose. The electorate isn't even half a million people! At least this one is actually a sovereign state, though. We really need to seriously think about some criteria for posting elections. Suriname, according to our article, has a population the size of a small city. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:16, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Support if the article will be expanded - I don't think population is a realistic criteria. - Eugen Simion 14 (talk) 20:18, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
But this place is tiny. A regular election that determines the governance of about 400,000 people can't possibly be of any international significance. We really need to look realistically at which countries' elections we post. This election doesn't get a mention on Google's world news page or on the BBC's. In fact, it's the fourth story on the BBC's Latin America page. I can't remember the last time we posted something that far down on BBC News at the time of posting. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:09, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Support if there is a proper update. We shouldn't take our cues entirely from the international news. Covering elections in small, albeit sovereign states, shows wikipedia's depth and breadth of coverage.--Mkativerata (talk) 21:43, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
I think it just shows that we post elections of sovereign states because that was what was written down years ago and everyone silently and obediently accepts it. If I took over a rock or an area of land, declared it a sovereign state and gained recognition (aside from the novelty, which could be ITN-worthy in itself), should we post my elections just because I'm a sovereign state? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 04:16, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
No. You are only you. ;) --candlewicke 04:26, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Weak Support The story does qualify under the standards as currently written in WP:ITN/R. However, in a realistic sense this story isn't exactly wildly popular. So, weak support if only for the technicality. Cwill151 (talk) 21:51, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose I'd say a country should have to have a population of at least around 4 million to quality for ITN, which means that about 125 countries qualify. Which is about right. If you go higher than that you miss fairly clearly notable elections like Ireland, Singapore and New Zealand. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 21:53, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
How did you arrive at such an arbitrary number? Why not 5 million, or 4.23197 million? ALL national elections are internationally significant by their very definitions. Trying to arbitrarily draw a line will never work, you'd end up with more arguments over where the line should go. There's not that many national elections around the World, you're trying to fnd a solution where there's no problem. (This is an example of formalising bias.) --203.122.192.201 (talk) 04:46, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Support per Mkativerata. --candlewicke 04:03, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Oppose per HJ. It's about time someone stood up to the nonsense. ~DC Let's Vent 05:13, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Strongest possible support once expanded. Independent country = automatic inclusion. No questions. More important than that thing that was stickied for a month, and that didn't have prose updates... or hurling. If we're having baselines I suggest a political unit with more than 5 million people. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 05:51, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose - it's subjective, but Suriname isn't internationally significant in any sense of the phrase. @Howard, just a quick question, when are you going to drop the stick about the World Cup? —Ed (talkmajestic titan) 06:10, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
I wonder how many European countries excluding the really tiny ones "aren't not internationally significant"? Is Djibouti "internationally significant? How about Montenegro (less than 1 million people)? @Ed -- until I get an indef ban? –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 07:05, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Was I talking about the Euro countries? Did I mention Djibouti? Did I even think about Montenegro? No. I was making a judgment call on Suriname only. —Ed (talkmajestic titan) 07:47, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
This proposed criterion will remove African, Asian and Oceanian countries' elections, while leaving most of Europe unscathed so... –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 08:27, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
I'm choosing to oppose Suriname because it has almost no role in international relations, even in South America. You're putting words into my mouth, Howard. Did I support a new generalized criterion? No. —Ed (talkmajestic titan) 08:37, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
@Montenegro, no probably it isn't internationally significant. @203.122.192.201 the reason for picking 4 million is that you include another 3 majority English speaking countries (Ireland, New Zealand and Singapore) over those that you would include with 5 million. Given this is the English Wikipedia we should take some account of that. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 07:42, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
How about Sierra Leone and Liberia? According to this those have a higher proportion of English speakers than Singapore. And of course, about 87% of the people in Suriname speak English but they're too insignificant even to be listed at ITN. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.)
For this particular piece, precedence shows Hungary's presidential was listed.
But for the future set, i agree with HJ Mitchell perhaps better to have a discussion on criteria for elections, as in disasters (natural or man-made)Lihaas (talk) 11:19, 21 July 2010 (UTC))
This is a silly conversation. Firstly, there is no problem. There's around 200 sovereign states in the World. They have elections every 2 to 4 years. That's about the same number of events as we have annual sporting events on the recurring items list. Secondly, trying to draw an arbitrary line in the sand will lead to endless discussions over where it should lie. As evidenced from other sections on the main page as well as here. Thirdly, this is not the Wikipedia for topics covering the English speaking world, it is Wikipedia in the English language. It's a subtle difference, but an important one. ITN is not a news service, we don't judge newsworthyness considering what we think our hypothetical readership is interested in. That's a metric used by commercial news services trying to chase ratings/money. International significance is the measure in this case, and any change in who's running the county is significant to inter--national relations. Also Suriname in a member of the UN. --Monotonehell 13:49, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
(edit conflict)Support - ITN already suffers from the fact that it relies on an inherently arbitrary decision making process and judging the noteworthiness of political elections on a case by case basis is going to further the biases that are associated with this. I mean what defines international importance or significance? Can a sample of, what, 20 users honestly say what is important to people in the world. Does Ban Ki Moon turn around and go, "Oh you're from Surinam... oh I have no interest in your insignificant country". Also the suggestion of using population as a marker or importance is an inherently flawed rationale. I mean are we really suggesting that an election in India is more internationally important than one in the US or that one in DR Congo is more internationally noteworthy than one in the UK or France. The current system of including all the elections of heads of states in all sovereign territories is a simple criteria and fundamentally is free from the biases that plague ITN and Wikipedia. No country big or small is excluded just because a hand full of Wikipedia users think the country is nothing more than a point on a map --Daviessimo (talk) 13:56, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Strong Support as per HTD and Daviessimo. If the update is good enough, post it. That said, the article needs expansion. All this bickering about whether 4 million, 5 million, or .5 million people is enough doesn't concern what should be the main criterion--the quality of the WP article.--Johnsemlak (talk) 17:12, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
It should be both the quality of the article, and the interest in the subject. ~DC Let's Vent 17:30, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
Strongest possible oppose. I'm appalled at Mkativerata's argument. Should we post news stories that interest nobody and that has significance to an infinitesimal minority of the world's population as a token gesture to the problem of systemic bias? That's a huge insult to that part of the world which the Western media usually don't care to cover? I also see somebody arguing "Independent country = automatic inclusion". What an insult to our readers? News should be important events, not token gestures to provide us with alibis of political correctness. This line of reasoning is literally poison to a vibrant and dynamic community. __meco (talk) 17:42, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
I don't think posting elections of all countries is tokenism; as Daviessimo said, it's a simple objective criterion. It's not like we say, "We never have news about Suriname, so we'll post the election to make up for that". ITNR policy and ITN tradition dictate that we try to post all national elections and this one happens to be Suriname. All this said the argument is moot until the article is improved.--Johnsemlak (talk) 03:01, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Meco, on what criteria do you determine what is of interest to "our readers"? If there's an article about something then someone must be interested enough in the subject to create it. These "readers" who you refer to are not a homogeneous bunch, they have many and varied interests. Almost every independent subject appeals to just a minority. How do you determine importance? How do you think that this is "poison to a vibrant and dynamic community"? Please explain your conclusions. --Monotonehell 06:02, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
I'd expect the death of the Yankees owner (which wasn't posted) is significant to more people than this. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 06:52, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but can someone please explain to me a fair and objective way of defining what is a notable election. There seems to be a continual single mindedness here were users use the rationale that "its not important to me, therefore its not important at all". The death of the Yankees owner (they're a baseball team apparently) may be notable to parts of north America and a fair few baseball fans across the globe, but would be completely non-notable to the vast majority of the global population. So what is the difference? This election will be notable to the population of Suriname and anyone interested in South American politics (and probably a fair few dutch people as well), but will again not be notable to that vast majority of the global population. But that is not what ITN is for. It is not competing with the media and as such does not need to make sure it news items 'sell' it to users. Its role is highlight updated articles and maybe, just maybe teach someone something new. God forbid an encyclopaedia do that --Daviessimo (talk) 07:11, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
It has the population of a medium-sized city. This election will have no particular impact on South American or global politics and I don't mean that slightingly of Suriname, but it's true. We need to over come this election cruft of "sovereign state = ITN". HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 07:37, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Well are you an expert of South American politics? Can you say for certain this will have no impact on this country's international relations? What about its foreign policy and international trade relations. If you judge these things on a case by case basis you have a handful of users who draw judgements on items they realistically have little knowledge on. Effectively a handful of users say "I don't believe an election in Suriname is important enough" and the result is it gets ignored. No wonder no one has any respect for Wikipedia... --Daviessimo (talk) 15:40, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. Surprised this sort of debate died down when we posted Nauru, which has a fraction of the significance of Suriname. Nauru's population can fit in half of a regulation sized NBA arena, yet we deemed it to be noteworthy enough for inclusion on ITN. What nonsense. Most municipal Australian elections have greater impact. I don't think we should necessarily set a bar on the population, but on significance of an event. ITN is completely election-obsessed and some of the stories are just not relevant. In fact, the only cycle of irrelevant stories that keep appearing on here are election stories. Everything else we are at least able to use some degree of subjective judgment. And please, do not post this one after so many opposes. I have never seen so much opposition on a single story and still have it posted, with the exception of some U.S. politics stories, which always seem to garner a lot of controversy. Colipon+(Talk) 13:52, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
@Colipon--all national elections are WP:ITNR events and are eligible for posting w/o consensus here (requirements regarding the update still apply). I'm not saying that we shouldn't change this policy, but that is currently the policy. Ultimately the state of the article is inadequate anyway.--Johnsemlak (talk) 15:32, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Comment. The arguing here is at an unprecedented level and we should post this story just for that reason. ;) Joking aside, the article is in horrendous shape. ~AH1(TCU) 13:55, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Afghan conference

Some repercussion have been set about troop withdarawal in 2014 and more aid. This could be placed on top should it eitehr have a page or a section perhaps in the War in Afghanistan page.Lihaas (talk) 12:09, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Oppose. This dropped out of the headlines almost immediately and nothing unexpected came from it. It was worth a nomination and I'm quite surprised by the lack of sustained coverage, but it was a bit of a fuss over nothing- Cameron and Obama had already publicly announced a 2014 withdrawal, so Karzai was hardly going to turn around and refuse to sign the document. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 07:22, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Greek investigative journalist shot

(VOA Tieng Viet: Vietnamese National)
(Deutsche Welle: German)
(Le Monde: French)
(Prensa Latina)
And the list just keeps going...

...+562 hits on Google News. Regardless of the notability of Sokratis Giolias the man, (requiescant in pace), the story itself is world famous by now. The headlines of nearly every international news agency in the world has at least some mention of this guy, and the circumstances of the assassination itself?... It's like reading a John le Carré Novel. We currently don't have a page for this, but if anyone gives a nod to this story I'll put one up (See Below). Thoughts? Cwill151 (talk) 01:22, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Out of curiosity, are you intending to write a full biography or just an article on his death? If his death is the only notable thing about him, then I would suggest the latter. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:34, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Support pending article creation. ~AH1(TCU) 02:27, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Gentlemen. Unfortunately I have been forced on short Wikibreak due to WP:Real/S. I can and will begin and/or currently update as of 15:30 if there is still significant support. Regards and Apologies, Cwill151 (talk) 04:05, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Support. This is getting quite a lot of attention. Note: He is the first reporter to be murdered there in more than 20 years. --candlewicke 04:31, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Support. Nearly all newspapers wrote about it, also there was no journalist killed in 20 years past in Greece. Kubek15 write/sign 10:20, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
support on expansion both because of news coverage, and state of Greece generally, and possible repercussions/first in a while.Lihaas (talk) 12:06, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Support; Expansion Completed Abstain I have updated the existing article to reflect a large portion of the information currently available. The article can be found here. No doubt it could use more sourcing/copyedit...maybe an image if one could be found, but I believe the article is now sufficient for posting if not perfect. However that decision I will leave to others better informed on the subject. I will re-edit the page for clarity and completion as new information comes in. Regards. Cwill151 (talk) 16:50, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Support article looks good, and seems notable. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 17:40, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose. The article is actualy quite poor in terms of information people might want to know. If there was as much international interest in this shooting as people are asserting, it would be ten times better by now, almost 36 hours after the event. As such, I am unconvinced this is an internationally significant event. There's no article on the radio station he worked for, no article on the group that shot him, and no information that isn't simply from the news reports of the shooting. The background information is particulalry poor for anyone not au fait with Greek domestic politics. If ITN really is 'not news', then this doesn't warrant posting. MickMacNee (talk) 17:55, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Comment there is now an article on the group that shot him: Sect of Revolutionaries. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 18:04, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
  • There seems to broad consensus for posting this, but the article is very much bare bones at the minute. I'm reluctant to post until there's some meat on the bones. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:21, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
I agree in that the article could use a lot of work. But I think it's worthwhile to point out that despite the vast amount of news coverage this story is receiving in the world press, there is very little total information at present which could be considered "credible". I will continue to update the article as new information becomes available/found which I can confidently source. For now I'll leave the choice of posting up to the community and I will change my vote above to an abstention (See Above). Cwill151 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 18:46, 20 July 2010 (UTC).
I'd be fine posting it on the above support, but I'd really like to see a bit more detail in the article before posting. After all, a big part of the purpose of the Main Page is to show off some of our best work. If you or somebody else manages to find enough information to expand the article a little, I'd be fine with posting it, assuming the consensus doesn't change. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:55, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
It seems no worse than Veuve_Clicquot or Sainthia train collision at this point. I'd say it's postable. ~DC Let's Vent 19:08, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Well the train crash article has been substantially improved. The champagne article wasn't written for a single event, but it contains a good paragraph about the event. It's much easier to update an existing article since ITN criteria require that a new article not be a stub. Basically it needs more detail imo, though if several people say it's postable, I'll stick it up an any other admin should feel free to if they think it's postable. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:17, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Comment there is now an infobox, and it is significantly better than 2010 Jiangxi train derailment was at the time of posting for example - even if its mostly about the assassination. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 19:21, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
All right, then. Anyone got a good blurb? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:25, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Don't do it. This supposed 'biography' is seriously sub-standard. It maybe had a chance of being posted as Assassination of Sokratis Giolias once the basic factual errors were fixed and if people had added more info and links, but it's been reverted back to a title that pretends it's a biography and as such now has multiple issues of style and content. An infobox doesn't make up for the fact we don't even know this guy's birthdate. (infact, it only makes it more obvious) MickMacNee (talk) 19:34, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Actually, I agree with you. I'm not posting an obituary when the biography is in that state and the move back has caused serious style issues. If a biography can be written, I'm willing to post, but as far as I can see his death is the only notable thing about him. It needs to be either moved to a title that reflects the article is about his death or the style issues need to be addressed and a biography written and, even then, if he's only notable because of his death, most of that will be largely irrelevant. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:41, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

What about: Greek investigative journalist Sokratis Giolias is assassinated in Athens the first such assassination in Greece for 25 years. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 19:29, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

  • Seeing as how MacNee decided not to continue contributing to the page, the consensus will most probably rest with me and Eraserhead. If the article needs to be moved to the assassination then that's fine, let's do it. Cwill151 (talk) 19:48, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
I've moved the article. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 19:51, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
OK I've cleaned it up now, is it ready to post? -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 20:08, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Looks reasonable to me now the identity crisis has been solved. Posting. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:12, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Something about the wording in the last part of the blurb doesn't click. Connormahtalk 21:23, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
I tend to consider all my blurbs a work in progress! ;) Suggestions are welcome, though you'll probably get a quicker response from me or another admin at WP:ERRORS. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:26, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
The recent reword seems to work the best. Thanks, David. Connormahtalk 22:04, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

July 19

ITN candidates for July 19

2010 Sainthia train collision

- Two trains collide in West Bengal, killing dozens - Eugen Simion 14 (talk) 07:14, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

  • Support, I'm working on expanding article now. --Saki talk 09:42, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Just found this article and redirected it to article at Sainthia rail collision; no need for 2010 in title to disambiguate and the second article had rather more information and references. Nothing to merge. Edgepedia (talk) 13:44, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Per the debate below i dont this qualifies, but at any rate until consensus is built below on the old criteria it might with some 60-odd casualties. Still, though, the article doesnt yet qualify as ITN-Worth.Lihaas (talk) 14:35, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Support. This is a significant incident, but the article needs to be expanded. ~AH1(TCU) 15:03, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Support as soon as we get that article a little bigger. I'm going to start working on it. Mr. R00t Talk 17:23, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Comment. Looking at the article, it looks as if the cause is still under investigation and that it could be suspicious. ~AH1(TCU) 02:33, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
Support, significant disaster. Kubek15 write/sign 10:30, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
  • I'm happy that the article has been made a bit more substantial since my last comment and we seem to be going quite a while between updates at the minute, so I'm going to post this. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:30, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Baghdad suicide bomb kills at least 43

  • Bumped. ...seemed like it was worthwhile. Minemi (talk) 01:39, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Large death toll in an attack on a Sunni militia group formerly allied to Al-Queda. Couldn't find an article but I'll keep looking - Dumelow (talk) 08:03, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Support. --candlewicke 08:50, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Without a page of its own? i can say for sure it wont go up as just a piece of news.(Lihaas (talk) 10:09, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. We're simply having too many of these. They have minimal influence on political/military decision-making, except in aggregate. Coming at the rate of at least two or three a week, we should take time out to discuss how to deal with this deluge of carnage. __meco (talk) 10:14, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Good point, meco. I agree. --BorgQueen (talk) 10:52, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
I agree with meco; however, current ITN precedent and practice seem to indicate that these types of stories get posted. If we ignore it, someone may complain "You posted the winner of x-sporting competition, but you ignored an incident where y-number of people were killed". (The media does that all the time, anyway). I think it would be useful to have a discussion on creating some criteria for how we judge catastrophes that involve large death tolls. I would say the same problem exists with boat sinkings which are very commonplace in poorer heavily populated countries and often involve high death tolls. I don't have an objection to not posting this but will we stick to a consistent policy in the future?--Johnsemlak (talk) 13:36, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
The problem with a policy is that you have to name-names about who is unstable :(, and that list can be argued about too. Overall I also oppose due to there being lots of similar bombs in Iraq at the moment :(. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 13:48, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
For Iraq and Afghanistan, I think we should only be posting the events that have an exceptionally high death toll or have some other effect- significant political repercussions, notable people killed, something like that- but sadly theses incidents are all too common in those countries at the minute. :( HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:44, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
If only to get some fresh ideas flowing about this sort of item, I suggest that we create a repository of these stories in which we can catalog them for say... a week. Then at the end of the news week we can select the largest (comparatively) and most influential (again comparatively) and place them on ITN. Boat sinkings and the like can be devastating and tragic, but not ITN worthy due to the fact that a Ship sinking in Malaysia will not normally generate media attention from the English speaking world, unless it was truly an international tragedy. Whereas, for the past decade now, the international focus of the western world has been locked on the Middle East, and as such even medium sized suicide bombings can become ITN worthy given the sheer amount of coverage they are likely to receive. For Commonly Occurring items like this, I.E. items which are ITN worthy but are too numerous to post regularly, we could begin WP:ITN/CO for example. Then once all of the relevant data has been gathered about the stories at the end of the week, and the necessary updates have been made/pages created, we can select the most ITN worthy of these stories and post them. Devastating bombings are still posted, and ITN is no longer inundated by the shear numerical weight of them all. (although true international crises can be posted immediately as per consensus). It is also worthwhile to note that creating this archive will have long-term benefits for ITN as it will serve it's purpose indefinitely. There are going to be terrorist attacks for many, many years and ships will continue sinking and planes will continue crashing forever,... statistically speaking. Thoughts? Cwill151 (talk) 01:07, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Also, in terms of policy. After looking through the archives, it seems long-standing ITN precedent never to have two of these stories run concurrently except in the most extreme cases. Therefore in deciding between two(or more) stories of similar type and value, I would (unfortunately) have to decide based on degree of news coverage. If there was for example, a bombing in Iraq and a bombing in Somalia: at roughly the same time, with appreciably similar number of casualties, and based on the same principle(Islamo-ethnic conflict), but the bombing in Iraq received more news coverage; I would have to vote for the one in Iraq. ITN partially serves as a guide for navigating the wiki, if more English readers are likely to come here looking for info on Iraq, it's our job to have Iraq on the front page to make it easier for them to find it. But, that's just my opinion and I'm sure there are others. Cwill151 (talk) 01:33, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
A ship sinking in Malaysia would however get international coverage if a single white tourist was killed, which isn't really a standard I'm comfortable with. IMO the best thing to do is to not post stuff if lots of similar events in the same country have occurred - for example Malaysia is an upper-middle income country so a boat sinking is probably unlikely to happen there, but really its difficult to know that kind of thing and where that "logic" applies. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 07:29, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
I think that is an important point that we do not have to be locked into the editorial policies of mainstream Western media with their cultural (and political) biases. They dominate the media world, but the do not fairly represent the world. We write for the world. So some countermeasures would seem appropriate to distance ourselves somewhat from blindly adopting the priorities of Western-dominated corporate media. __meco (talk) 10:03, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
I think it would be much simpler and less controversial to simply have a pre-determined consensus-built criteria for putting these things up. A scale perhaps based on casualties and geography. For example morre than 30/40/X in iraq/Afghanistan/Pakistan would qualify, and something like 20 in the americas or sub-saharan africa or east asia (of course the details will be built by consensus)Lihaas (talk) 14:30, 19 July 2010 (UTC))
Comment. This was already nominated yesterday. ~AH1(TCU) 15:08, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
I don't think it's possible to come up with a fixed formula as in one British death = 10 Greek deaths = 1,000 Congolese deaths. But we have to remember that, as I said before, tragedy is not the same as news value. Quite simply, when events occur with regularity in a region, they lose some of their news value. Remember Man bites dog. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 22:10, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Apparently it was bumped...
That could also work. Having a specific set of criteria with which to judge the ITN merits of stories like these which comes from a globally influenced perspective would achieve roughly the same long-term goal. But in order to do that, we have to have a proper forum for this discussion and enough commentary to numerically be considered a "consensus". Statistically speaking, my opinion matters very little if at all in comparison to most of the Regulars here so it might be wise for someone other than me to start such a discussion and publicize it, although I will if necessary and validated. So... should we form a consensus on this issue or leave it for discussion one-at-a-time? Cwill151 (talk) 22:19, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

July 18

ITN candidates for July 18

World's oldest champagne

Divers have discovered what's though to be the world's oldest champagne- produced in the 1780s. (BBC)

Not sure what chance this has, but it's interesting and I thought it was worth a no at least. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:51, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
It was off the coast of the Åland Islands, between Finland and Sweden! Weak support, but what would be the article to update? Physchim62 (talk) 04:40, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Ohh, yummy. Wonder if it tastes like Veuve Clicquot did ten years ago? Because that's where I think the update should go- Veuve Clicquot. Support if the work is done. Courcelles (talk) 09:06, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Support this is a bit different. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 09:15, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
OK, I've added a decent-sized paragraph with various sources to Veuve Clicquot#Oldest bottle. We're 21 hours without a new item FWIW. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:45, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Has the date not been officially confirmed? SpencerT♦C 18:02, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Non-vintage Champagne is pretty hard to date exactly- and doing so is almost meaningless, anyway, with the system of reserve wines used in production. Courcelles (talk) 18:04, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
It's a 98% certainty according to AFP, but the shape of the bottle proves beyond reasonable doubt that it's pre-French Revolution, which would make it the oldest or 2nd oldest drinkable champagne. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:07, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
As for a blurb, I suggest {{*mp|July 17}} Divers in the [[Baltic Sea]] off the coast of the [[Åland Islands]] uncover a store of [[Champagne (wine)|champagne]], believed to be the '''[[Veuve_Clicquot#Oldest_bottle|world's oldest]]'''. It's not brilliant, though. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:10, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose. This is just end of bulletin news cruft like the dead Dolphin suggestion. It's gravitas is rather reduced when you see the 'record' has been broken a few times, and is likely to be broken again. It's not like anybody was even looking for it either. MickMacNee (talk) 18:05, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
250 year old wine is hardly an everyday occurrence. Nor is 250 year old anything really, especially when it's stumbled across at the bottom of the Baltic Sea in perfect condition. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:10, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
I didn't say it wasn't everyday. And quit bumping things, this is not correct procedure, it is likely to lead to confusion and incorrect listings, as well as disconnecting nominations from the relevant CE box. MickMacNee (talk) 18:44, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Yes, Mick, I know you like the items you oppose to drop into obscurity, even when you're the lone opposer, but disconnecting it from the P:CE box is not a big deal, especially not with a comment that it was moved from yesterday and "it's not the correct procedure" is just daft. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:00, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Comment I think the bumping is a damn good idea as it means you don't get lost with old nominations. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 21:53, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Weak oppose due to lack of significance. This is just trivia, although I'll concede that it is at least interesting trivia. Modest Genius talk 23:33, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

2010 Open Championship

It's all but over, with Louis Oosthuizen holding an 8 shot lead as they play the 13th. Courcelles (talk) 16:16, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

NB: This event is listed at ITN/R - Dumelow (talk) 17:04, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Which, much as I despise golf, means I'll post it (if Dumelow doesn't beat me to it) once it's final and we have an update. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:18, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
At 2010_Open_Championship#Summary_of_rounds_of_play, the 3rd and final rounds need text summaries, and the summary of rounds of play text could generally use more references. SpencerT♦C 17:48, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

This should be on the front page now. Dr. Blofeld White cat 21:44, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Support clearly notable. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 21:54, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
No disrespect, but this is an ITN/R event, so we don;t need support. What we need (and this has to happen before it goes up for the record, Dr. Blofeld) is a prose update for which, last time I checked, we were still waiting. As soon as we have that, I'll post it, but declarations of support aren't necessary. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:16, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Fair enough. Thanks for the explanation :). -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 22:25, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Still no prose updates for the 3rd and 4th round (and the article is pretty light all round tbh). Modest Genius talk 23:36, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Timer's red. Seriously, if this is as interested as people get in the golf, maybe we shouldn't put it up at all! I'm looking forward to the peanut gallery on T:MP slating us because this isn't on ITN! Whisky drinker | HJ's sock 23:55, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
wait until its all over then post. if we need ITN b/c of timer the Iranian nuclear researcher can go up, been a few days and still in the news (albeit fading fast)(Lihaas (talk) 00:18, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

2010 New Britain earthquake

A 7.3 earthquake in PNG - Eugen Simion 14 (talk) 16:03, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Wait for casualty reports. __meco (talk) 16:33, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Comment. No reports of deaths or injuries, moderate damage reported. ~AH1(TCU) 15:06, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Baghdad suicide bomb kills at least 43

Large death toll in an attack on a Sunni militia group formerly allied to Al-Queda. Couldn't find an article but I'll keep looking - Dumelow (talk) 08:03, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Support. --candlewicke 08:50, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Without a page of its own? i can say for sure it wont go up as just a piece of news.(Lihaas (talk) 10:09, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. We're simply having too many of these. They have minimal influence on political/military decision-making, except in aggregate. Coming at the rate of at least two or three a week, we should take time out to discuss how to deal with this deluge of carnage. __meco (talk) 10:14, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Good point, meco. I agree. --BorgQueen (talk) 10:52, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
I agree with meco; however, current ITN precedent and practice seem to indicate that these types of stories get posted. If we ignore it, someone may complain "You posted the winner of x-sporting competition, but you ignored an incident where y-number of people were killed". (The media does that all the time, anyway). I think it would be useful to have a discussion on creating some criteria for how we judge catastrophes that involve large death tolls. I would say the same problem exists with boat sinkings which are very commonplace in poorer heavily populated countries and often involve high death tolls. I don't have an objection to not posting this but will we stick to a consistent policy in the future?--Johnsemlak (talk) 13:36, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
The problem with a policy is that you have to name-names about who is unstable :(, and that list can be argued about too. Overall I also oppose due to there being lots of similar bombs in Iraq at the moment :(. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 13:48, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
For Iraq and Afghanistan, I think we should only be posting the events that have an exceptionally high death toll or have some other effect- significant political repercussions, notable people killed, something like that- but sadly theses incidents are all too common in those countries at the minute. :( HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:44, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
If only to get some fresh ideas flowing about this sort of item, I suggest that we create a repository of these stories in which we can catalog them for say... a week. Then at the end of the news week we can select the largest (comparatively) and most influential (again comparatively) and place them on ITN. Boat sinkings and the like can be devastating and tragic, but not ITN worthy due to the fact that a Ship sinking in Malaysia will not normally generate media attention from the English speaking world, unless it was truly an international tragedy. Whereas, for the past decade now, the international focus of the western world has been locked on the Middle East, and as such even medium sized suicide bombings can become ITN worthy given the shear amount of coverage they are likely to receive. For Commonly Occurring items like this, I.E. items which are ITN worthy but are too numerous to post regularly, we could begin WP:ITN/CO for example. Then once all of the relevant data has been gathered about the stories at the end of the week, and the necessary updates have been made/pages created, we can select the most ITN worthy of these stories and post them. Devastating bombings are still posted, and ITN is no longer inundated by the shear numerical weight of them all. (although true international crises can be posted immediately as per consensus). It is also worthwhile to note that creating this archive will have long-term benefits for ITN as it will serve it's purpose indefinitely. There are going to be terrorist attacks for many, many years and ships will continue sinking and planes will continue crashing forever,... statistically speaking. Thoughts? Cwill151 (talk) 01:07, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
Also, in terms of policy. After looking through the archives, it seems long-standing ITN precedent never to have two of these stories run concurrently except in the most extreme cases. Therefore in deciding between two(or more) stories of similar type and value, I would (unfortunately) have to decide based on degree of news coverage. If there was for example, a bombing in Iraq and a bombing in Somalia: at roughly the same time, with appreciably similar number of casualties, and based on the same principle(Islamo-ethnic conflict), but the bombing in Iraq received more news coverage; I would have to vote for the one in Iraq. ITN partially serves as a guide for navigating the wiki, if more English readers are likely to come here looking for info on Iraq, it's our job to have Iraq on the front page to make it easier for them to find it. But, that's just my opinion and I'm sure there are others. Cwill151 (talk) 01:33, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Exhumation of Simón Bolívar

A key figure in South American history exhumed at the request of a tearful President Hugo Chávez. His skeleton has even been displayed on television. WAtoday Latin American Herald Tribune Reuters CNN --candlewicke 04:29, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

A simple exhumation isn't notable enough, I think, even though it seems interesting. SpencerT♦C 17:50, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Sounds like just another 'look at me' publicity stunt by Chavez. If this is even a remotely internationaly significant event, please provide some direct quotes from news organisations. MickMacNee (talk) 18:00, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Death of Moko

Gained worldwide fame in 2008. Hundreds of people mourned at the funeral. Flowers, a coffin. International coverage. The Sydney Morning Herald Daily Mail Candian Press euronews The News Zealand Herald Malaysia Star --candlewicke 00:23, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

I think your nomination is missing a key fact, Candlewicke! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:25, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Which is? --candlewicke 01:56, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Perhaps that Moko is a dolphin? ;) I don't necessarily oppose on that basis, but the species is probably worth mentioning! ;) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:12, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, I know but that should become quite obvious relatively quickly. I'm only making the nomination. :-) It's a rather unusual one though. --candlewicke 04:21, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
Hmm, "found dead on 8 July"... convenient, I don't have to find any other reason to oppose ;) Physchim62 (talk) 04:37, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
If you compare the numbers mourning at other funerals, "hundreds" isn't enough. I'm going to have to oppose, because even while Moko was living, the dolphin wasn't as notable as many of the deceased that haven't gone on ITN. SpencerT♦C 17:53, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose. This is just typical end of bulletin news fluff. It's not remotely ITN worthy. MickMacNee (talk) 17:56, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

July 17

ITN candidates for July 17

Typhoon Conson (2010)

Casualties: at least 60 deaths - Eugen Simion 14 (talk) 08:12, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the bump. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 10:05, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Support per nom--Wikireader41 (talk) 10:51, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Suggested blurb, Typhoon Conson makes landfall near Hai Phong, Vietnam, after devastating the Philippines, leaving at least 65 dead. Jason Rees (talk) 14:27, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Posting. (also noting support from below). SpencerT♦C 16:39, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Death of Mădălina Manole

- (again) - Romanian pop singer Mădălina Manole committed suicide by poisoning on her 43rd birthday. Now international coverage: The Brilliant Stories YahooNews CBS Washingtonpost Taiwan Post Boston. - Eugen Simion 14 (talk) 07:59, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Even if she is notable enough for ITN, the article is in a horrible shape at the moment. --BorgQueen (talk) 13:00, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. I've never heard of her, and the stub article gives no information that she was internationally known. __meco (talk) 13:27, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
This was nominated already on 14 July - please keep all discussion in one place. As was noted earlier, there's no way she's significant enough to meet the death criteria, so I oppose. Modest Genius talk 14:04, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Working - After 15 July dozens international sites announced her death. - Eugen Simion 14 (talk) 14:11, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
I am romanian, but I support sir Meco, only romanians know she. It's enough the romanian main page. Memo18 (talk) 14:52, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
She isn't even on the Romanian main page! Oppose per meco. Physchim62 (talk) 15:08, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
She will be sure in romanian main page, was proposed.. but here no need.. Memo18 (talk) 15:25, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Posting deaths on the English-language Main Page is always controversial. For doamnă Manole to appear, she would have to have been at the (international) top of her field, and she obviously wasn't a top international pop star or musician. Physchim62 (talk) 16:02, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Europride

Warsaw: The first time it is happening in Central and Eastern Europe. Tens of thousands of people from across Europe. There has been controversy, several counter-demonstrations, more than 50,000 signatures against it and complaints from the Roman Catholic Church. --candlewicke 03:50, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Oppose there was up to a million people at the Pride parade in Toronto earlier this month, so I don't see why this one should go up. -PlasmaTwa2 04:15, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
As the article says, it is difficult to have this many people together like that in Warsaw. Perhaps in Toronto it is easier? --candlewicke 05:03, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. Not significant. Physchim62 (talk) 05:21, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. Sorry, I don't see how an annual gay pride event, which differs in no major aspects from any one of dozens of others, and where nothing out of the ordinary has occurred, should receive special attention. Modest Genius talk 14:06, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

July 16

ITN candidates for July 16

Iraqi hotel fire

Dozens dead. __meco (talk) 10:20, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Support - Sulaimaniya hotel fire - Eugen Simion 14 (talk) 10:28, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
That's... a great blurb. Support when there's a) an actual article and b)references. Courcelles (talk) 10:49, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
The article will need to be, well, written. Half a sentence doesn't count. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:35, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose. No article (this is not even a stub). It really is time that these no hope nominations are just removed from ITN/C unless or until there is anything remotely resembling a valid and postable update. This sort of speculative nom is just a total waste of time. And before anyone starts, no, ITN/C is not a noticeboard for requesting article creation/expansion. MickMacNee (talk) 17:19, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose I've just had a preliminary crack at improving the article, and the news reports just aren't comprehensive enough yet to give us a decent enough article to put on ITN. The fire was over 24 hours ago and this is the best the New York Times can do.[11] The AP's article discusses the fire briefly before wanking on about regional politics.[12] So this isn't getting the international attention warranted for ITN, and it isn't going to allow us to produce a good enough article. --Mkativerata (talk) 19:06, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
    • The Beeb have a slightly better article. They also say that 30 people were killed, including 14 foreign nationals. I've yet to form a definitive opinion on this, but I might see if i can do anything for the article. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:13, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
      • I'm looking at the BBC article now. There's still the problem that without plagiarising it and throwing in unnecessary detail (like quotes from witnesses), there ain't much left.--Mkativerata (talk) 19:15, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
        • Indeed. "One witness saw nothing much, but we interviewed him anyway to fill up some space"! Still, I'm not sure we should dismiss this out of hand. I'll have a dig around. I wonder if Al Jazerra have anything. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:28, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Yes, they do. Also, Arab News, CBC News, euronews, Reuters, Los Angeles Times, Sky News if any of those are useful. --candlewicke 02:22, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Support when expanded. The Guardian says the dead may be from Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Canada, Ecuador, Venezuela and China and there seems to be some concern for Australians and Poles as well. The BBC has some pictures. --candlewicke 02:26, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Support if/when expanded.--Wikireader41 (talk) 03:52, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Archimede solar power plant

Sorry, the nomination was not completed. From the mainstream media the inauguration was covered by AFP and Reuters (the latter mentioning inauguration and molten salt, but not saying it is the first). More coverage was from the specialized (engineering; renewable energy) sources. References are added to the article. Beagel (talk) 13:51, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Withdraw this nomination. After some research it seems that both claims are not true: there have been solar power plant using molted salt and the first plant to combine solar power with combined cycle was Yazd integrated solar combined cycle power station in Iran. So the best what could be claimed is the first that kind of plant in Italy, or the first plant combining molted salt technology with combined cycle, but this is probably not sufficient for the main page. Beagel (talk) 07:50, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Kudos to you for doing the research and withdrawing the nomination. For the record, my immediate reaction when seeing the nom was 'hasn't salt been used for ages?' - glad to see others had the same response. Modest Genius talk 14:10, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Support Scientific first. However, we need a source and a blurb. Cwill151 (talk) 07:22, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
support scientific rarity.Lihaas (talk) 09:36, 16 July 2010 (UTC))
Support. A first step in renewable energy. ~AH1(TCU) 15:01, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Weak oppose. If I read the blurb, I want to know what the advantages of using molten salts are over the more common version using synthetic oils. I once knew the answer to the question (there's a molten salt station being built in Spain as well, I think, or at least it came out in the Spanish press), but I've forgotten ;) Also, as it stands, it is only a stepwise improvement in a technology which is already tested and in industrial production, so I don't see it as that ground-breaking. Physchim62 (talk) 15:05, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Yes, Andasol Solar Power Station in Spain uses molted salt to store the heat. Not sure about the heat transfer. But for integrating thermal solar with combined-cycle gas station is certainly the first time. Beagel (talk) 16:38, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose. The links provided don't really assert that this is an ITN worthy development. The idea that this plant represents long term usefullness / major innovation seems sketchy at best, Reuters are clear that the whole cycle benefits aren't even really proven given the higher costs. It's not exactly the discovery of cold fusion, and we would not normally post say, the development of a slightly better electric car battery, etc. MickMacNee (talk) 17:25, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Comment: The description section could use more references. SpencerT♦C 19:52, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

July 15

ITN candidates for July 15

Iran Bombing

There's not page for this, but should it come up i would support it. Not because of the death toll (which doesnt really make it ITN on its own), but because of its importance. Abdolmalek Rigi was killed, Jundullah vowed revenge. People though it was finished but its not. A new "bin laden"-type leader may emerge. the repercussions could be bigger than the attack.Lihaas (talk) 04:25, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Support I have started a stub 2010 Zahedan mosque bombings --Wikireader41 (talk) 04:55, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
oh crap, July 2010 Zahedan bombings also exists
  • Support. Seems to be a rare event for Iran, and have some international dimensions over and above an ordinary insurgency. Currently tops Google News World category. MickMacNee (talk) 17:35, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
  • The article's in reasonable shape. Is there any more support? A blurb suggestion would be good, too. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:48, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Support. Newsworthy and article is of decent quality. SpencerT♦C 19:57, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
On second thoughts, the article's not bad, but it's a little skint on the details- the background section could do with expansion and the reaction statement is just a copy of Hillary Clinton's statement. The references also need properly formatting. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:02, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
References formatted; can someone else try to add more meat to the article? SpencerT♦C 20:21, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Support. Obama even annoyed. --candlewicke 03:54, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Possible Wording: Bombings at a mosque in Zahedan, Iran, kill 27 people and injure at least 270 others.
But should Abdolmalek Rigi be mentioned? SpencerT♦C 16:35, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Posted. The article is sufficient and I don't want this to just linger here until it's too late to get it up. Feel free to tweak the blurb (or suggest improvements at WP:ERRORS) as necessary. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:44, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Last common ancestor of apes and Old World Monkeys found

weak support as rare as science events are for the ITN i could support this, but lets see what others say too and how strong the article is.Lihaas (talk) 04:25, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Since this is my first shot at ITN, what exactly are you looking for in "how strong the article is"? It's a GAC nom, not a stub. Also, I must admit that I worded the headline lightly, trying to avoid the typical oversimplification seen in the news. This is a major find... possibly one of the greatest finds of the decade or century. – VisionHolder « talk » 11:36, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
I don't like the wording "could be", since we don't normally deal in speculation. Could we just state definite facts - describe it as "a fossil of an early primate that possesses features both of apes and monkeys" or something like that? --BorgQueen (talk) 11:58, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
I'm fine with that... as long as we don't say "missing link", like so many in the media like to say. Yes, it draws attention, but the phrase is horribly misperceived. However, for accuracy, we need to specifically say "Old World Monkeys". Feel free to re-word as needed. – VisionHolder « talk » 12:07, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
(ec) I don't think the paper actually says it could be the common ancestor Old World monkeys and apes. I would prefer something like:
The abstract of the paper says something quite similar. Ucucha 12:08, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Technically, the sources (for the news article) say that it may have been a common ancestor, but honestly, I strongly prefer your wording better. – VisionHolder « talk » 12:22, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Support. This is a major scientific discovery. ~AH1(TCU) 15:02, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
  • The article is in good shape. I'm willing to post, but I'd like to hear a few more comments first, mainly because I have no idea what I'm talking about! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:42, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Support. Defo ITN worthy. MickMacNee (talk) 17:40, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Posted, but I slightly reworded the blurb. --BorgQueen (talk) 17:51, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Thanks! Now if I could just get the article approved on WikiNews... – VisionHolder « talk » 18:31, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
I can help you there. I have reviewer rights on WN. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:34, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Thank you very, very much! I'll try to return to ITN as primate-related news stories emerge. Thanks for the good experience. – VisionHolder « talk » 18:49, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Wall Street double whammy

  • The U.S. Congress approves an overhaul to the country's financial regulatory system, while Goldman Sachs agrees to a $550 million settlement with the U.S. government on charges of securities fraud.
The New York Times says "The landmark legislation ... marks the end of an era of deregulation" and will impact trillions of dollars of worldwide financial transactions. When the SEC sued Goldman, some people said we should wait for the outcome before putting it on ITN. Well, here's the outcome, just as expected -- a hefty find and no admission of wrongdoing. Rather than running two Wall Street items or choosing which is more important, perhaps we should run them together? -- Mwalcoff (talk) 22:41, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
wait if it is to go up then lets wait for Obama to sign it. ITN-worth laws go up after it is accomplished, anyway shouldnt be that long away anyways. Lihaas (talk) 23:33, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Obama's signature is a fait accompli, as the whole thing was his idea. The news event is the Senate's passage. Plus, this gives us the opportunity to combine two Wall Street events in one item. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 01:23, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Strong Support per Mwalcoff--Wikireader41 (talk) 04:00, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Strong Support, a significative legislation, which will undoubtedly affect economic policies around the globe. --IANVS (talk | cont) 04:22, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
not so sure, about that. last summit of global economies failed to get consensus on tackling the issue. That is WP:Crystal Ball to say "undoubtedly"Lihaas (talk) 04:21, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
I didn't say how global policies could be affected, but it is obvious that this will affect them. Methinks. Salut, --IANVS (talk | cont) 04:29, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Support significant legislation. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 07:15, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Where's the update? For the new bill, the only update I see is in a list: "On July 15, 2010 - The Senate gives final approval to the bill with a vote of 60-39 and it goes to Barack Obama for his signature into law.[14]" Needs some prose. Where should the Goldman Sachs link be pointing (preferably to a section about the fine)? —Ed (talkmajestic titan) 16:28, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose. More domestic news from America. Not everything Obama/The Senate does is internationally significant, and I'm sorry people, but the fact that the entire civilised world is undergoing significant financial reform and trying to get some payback from the banks, is not news anymore. There's not even a decent update by the sounds of it. And as usual, half the 'major reform' that the Yanks are horrified about is stuff other normal nations have had for decades. Maybe we just need a regular ITN ticker spot - 'things America caught up with today'? MickMacNee (talk) 17:49, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. I have to agree with Mick- the Americans doing what the rest of the developed world does already is not that important. It's not attracting any attention at all this side of the Atlantic and not even that much in the US according to Google News, whose top 5 US stories are, in order: Deepwater Horizon, illegal immigrants in Utah, Byrd's might-be replacement, an earthquake in Maryland and Obama's plans for the weekend. This is #19 of 20. Obama's plans for the weekend get 2 slots, both well above this. I think that says it all! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:01, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
You're looking at real-time headlines, on a website that changes frequently, well after those events took place. I think print editions of newspapers, as well as evening network newscasts, are more telling. Goldman and the overhaul were two of the three above-the-fold stories (along with BP) in the print edition of today's New York Times and Wall Street Journal. In the Washington Post, they appeared together right under the BP story. In the Financial Times, the overhaul was the lead story -- the Goldman settlement had not been announced at presstime. I don't know how the new U.S. financial rules compare with those of other countries (have you studied the subject, Mick?), but we had the passage of the healthcare bill on ITN, and we all know the U.S. was last to the table on that one. Perhaps we should consider the Goldman settlement separately?
Oppose - the healthcare reform bill got onto ITN because not every country in the western world was doing the same thing at the same time. However, in this case, pretty much every country in the west is reforming their financial services sector. Why is this anymore important than any other? --Daviessimo (talk) 15:56, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Wait, Mick said this wasn't news because every other country has these laws already. Now you're saying it's not news because every other country is enacting these laws at the same time. Which is it? -- Mwalcoff (talk) 01:13, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Deepwater Horizon oil spill

  • According to the TV, BP has just announced that they've stopped the leak. There is no more oil leaking into the gulf of Mexico. I'll see if I can find an online ref. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:03, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
BBC, CNN, The Guardian APK whisper in my ear 21:05, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Support. Clearly the biggest story of the day. And we do not need to wait to see if it holds. __meco (talk) 21:08, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Weak support That BBC article says that this is only a temporary stop. --PlasmaTwa2 21:15, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
It is, but they're expecting to bolster it in the next few weeks so, as I understand it, that means (barring a failure of whatever they're stopping it with) we're not going to see any more significant leaks of oil. This is the lead story on TV news in the UK. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:24, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Support^n (n=# of posts in this subsection). If BP actually gives a press release in which they claim that this is a viable option and that as of today there is no more oil leaking into the gulf, then this almost needs no discussion. It does not matter if it is temporary or not, what matters is that an effective method of stopping the oil has been established and steps are finally in place to implement it. A release like that would signal the end of the crisis which would be unquestionably ITN worthy. Cwill151 (talk) 21:43, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Well the Beeb's headline is "BP says oil has stopped leaking from Gulf well". HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:48, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Support. I wouldn't call it the end of the crisis, but it's a significant step in stopping the spill nonetheless. ~AH1(TCU) 21:53, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose as it is not the end of the crisis and is only a temporary stop (these developments are quite frequent). --candlewicke 22:41, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
How many of these frequent developments bring a total stop the oil leak? This is the first time in 3 months that the leak has been stopped, even if it's not a permanent fix. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:51, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Weak support as we haven't had a BP item since the beginning of this crisis, and I think this event is significant. I don't think this is the kind of thing that will have a definite end that we can point to and say that's what we should wait for. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 22:43, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Support. Conclusion (or as close to a clear-cut one as we're going to get) to an ongoing story, much more significant than the various events along the way that we considered. Modest Genius talk 23:32, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Weak oppose. I think the conclusion to this story will be when they finish the relief wells, which is due in a couple of weeks time: I'd prefer to wait until then before posting. Physchim62 (talk) 01:09, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
In theory, there's no reason why we couldn't post it now and later. If this solution holds, though, I've a feeling that the absolute conclusion when everybody can go home may not be as big an event as this. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:43, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Temporary oppose. They closed the values, now oil seeping underground will continue building pressure underneath the cap for up to 48 hours. Only once the pressure stabilizes will they really know if they have a solution that will hold. On the other hand, if the bore has been damaged, the whole thing could blow up (literally) and we could be worse off than we were two days ago. So, I think it is too early to post this story. Dragons flight (talk) 02:34, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
In general, I Support. We can only speculate what will happen in the future, but it's big news now. Perhaps, though, we should wait 48 hours?--Johnsemlak (talk) 02:41, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Support when officially confirmed by the U.S. administration. Beagel (talk) 07:01, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Support this seems like a big deal as its been going on for months. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 07:17, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
  • I think this is ready to be posted, but where's the update? —Ed (talkmajestic titan) 16:25, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
    • Efforts to stem the Deepwater Horizon oil spill#Temporary closure has been updated, though not by me- I just added in the section header for ease of navigation. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:56, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
      • Started to update, then realized that "The victory — long awaited by weary residents along the coast — is the most significant milestone yet in BP's effort to control one of the worst environmental disasters in U.S. history." was copied directly from the source. The whole section probably needs to be looked over and checked... —Ed (talkmajestic titan) 17:14, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
        • Ugh! The whole thing was a total copyvio. I removed it and deleted the revisions under RD1. I've now re-written the whole section from scratch using BBC, New York Times and CBS articles. Should be postable now. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:21, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose. This item surely is heading for a record number of postings for effectively the same event. As usual, there are all sorts of caveats and warnings about this latest development, so I'm sure any blurb claiming final resolution would be innaccurate or misleading. It's hard to see what benefit there is of putting this news on the Main Page, anyone interested surely knows where to go by now. MickMacNee (talk) 17:55, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Well, Mick, you opposed several items earlier in the week due to lack of Google News hits- this has 51,000. That's more than any other story by a long way. This is the story in all the headlines across the world. For the first time in 85 days, there is no oil flowing into the Gulf of Mexico. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:21, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Blurb suggestion:

{{*mp|July 15}} [[BP]] announces that it has '''[[Efforts to stem the Deepwater Horizon oil spill#Temporary closure|temporarily halted]]''' the [[Deepwater Horizon oil spill|''Deepwater Horizon'' oil spill]].

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:59, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Posted. The article has been appropriately updated. There is no dispute that this ongoing matter is of considerable international significance and interest. Opposition stems from the lack of finality, which is inconsistent with our usual ITN inclusion standards. We cannot predict the future, so we can only go by the present (in which this development is the ordeal's biggest breakthrough to date, and one receiving an enormous amount of attention around the world). The uncertainly of developments to follow is irrelevant; this occurrence meets our criteria and doesn't preclude the possibility of future developments (positive or negative) generating additional ITN items. Therefore, it's my determination that there is consensus for this item's inclusion. —David Levy 23:49, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
  • What a waste of a slot. Welcome to the Main Page, Bringing you Yesterday's News, Today!. And not even with any certainty at that. 'temporarily stopped'. pfft. You could at least have been accurate in the blurb, and just said 'BP cap well, nobody knows what will happen next, stay tuned for the next installement....'. As on this evidence it's sure to make ITN. We have timelines for this event, we might as well have just stickied them if this is considered a valid item. I miss the Space Shuttle already. MickMacNee (talk) 15:40, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Argentina legalise same-sex marriage

Suggested blurb:

See yesterday ;). -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 17:19, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Well, it actually happenend, Eraserhead1. So I'm proposing this new blurb. Salut, --IANVS (talk | cont) 17:31, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

This should be in front page. Fixman (talk!) 20:15, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

  • OK. Forty hours without an update + reasonable support and no significant opposition below + it's actually happened now = posting. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:05, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

2010 South China floods

Suggested blurb:

Support. That's more than enough people. --candlewicke 22:52, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Comment. This has gone up on ITN previously, but this is an update. The landslide in Guizhou Province didn't get on ITN quickly enough to be posted, but it likely claimed 99 lives in late June. The flooding continues, and Typhoon Conson is likely to hit China tomorrow, which could worsen the flooding. ~AH1(TCU) 00:20, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Is there a specific event to build a blurb round, or are we just talking about the series of events as a whole? If it's the latter, it may be worth putting a sticky link at the bottom like we did for the football. Just a suggestion. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:40, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Good idea! This is a lot of dead and disappeared people. Who opposes? --candlewicke 01:42, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
It's strange that we use the deaths of so many people as a measure of notability, but it is a lot of people and this is obviously an ongoing event. We could post a blurb now then put a sticky up (if there's consensus) when it drops off or anything else anybody cares to suggest. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:49, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
If by the "sticky links" you mean the links at the bottom of the ITN box, then 2010 Northern Hemisphere summer heat wave could go up as well, once it's cleaned up. It's also a weather event, and it's likely taking just as many lives. ~AH1(TCU) 02:12, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Charles Mackerras

World-renowned orchestral conductor, still active at the time of his death. The bio is in reasonable shape, although needs some reaction to his death. Physchim62 (talk) 14:14, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Support. Classical music is under-represented on ITN and the MP in general and this gentleman seems to be very highly regarded in his field. He was scheduled to conduct at the BBC Proms, for example. I'll see what I can do with the article in an hour or so if nobody beats me to it. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:24, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Support when the article is adequately updated. --BorgQueen (talk) 16:32, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Support. Sad day for the Classical music world. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 17:35, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose If someone would never have made it to ITN for anything done in their life, why do we post their death? Why is someone's death so intrinsically significant - especially an old man dying of cancer aged 75? Posting deaths of this kind risks turning ITN into a memorial, not a reporting of actual significant news. This man's death (great as he no doubt was) has affected no-one except his family and friends. It certainly doesn't affect the world at large. --Mkativerata (talk) 20:35, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Well his death is of considerable significance in the UK and Australia. His death wasn't exactly expected- he was scheduled to conduct at the Edinburgh Festival and the BBC Proms over the summer. His death is making headlines in India, Australia, England, Scotland, the US, Canada- that's a sizeable percentage of the English-speaking world. It's also being reported as far away as the Czech Republic and, obviously, within the music industry. I'd say that was quite significant and of international interest. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:53, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Also, User:JuneGloom07 and I have been working on the article- the update should now be of sufficient quality to meet ITN standards. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:58, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Yes I know it is making the news, but why is it significant? His career is significant, but not his death. IN any case, I agree it's postable - my lone philosophical oppose vote shouldn't stand in the way of consensus here. --Mkativerata (talk) 21:01, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Wooden shouldn't have been pulled. It's unfortunate that people piled in with retrospective opposes and nobody bothered to refute the arguments, but that shouldn't be held against this guy. Steinbrenner, though, was completely (or almost completely) unknown outside of the US and barely made the news outside of North America. Also neither death was unexpected- Mackerras was scheduled for concerts months away. In this case, Mackerras' death is being reported across the English speaking works and in places to which he has no particular connection, like the Czech Republic and India. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:32, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Support for a notable international career, notwithstanding the fact that "he had been ill for some time". Arsonal (talk) 21:28, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Support. A notable long-time international conductor. ~AH1(TCU) 21:56, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Support. "One of the great polymath conductors of the 20th century, with interests that ranged from the operettas of Gilbert and Sullivan to the high opera of Wagner and Strauss... earned acclaim and respect from across the musical world". The two mentioned above don't even come close to that. --candlewicke 22:50, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Blurb suggestions? Courcelles (talk) 23:16, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
  • For the record, I think it's pretty unfortunate to see great musicians like this one being passed over when the no-talents who dominate the pop music industry would make the front page in two seconds. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 23:28, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
    • Also for the record, I'm prepared to post this when someone provides a good blurb. Everything I'm coming up with sounds bad to my ears. Courcelles (talk) 23:35, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
      • Oh, I thought this one was going down in flames. Never mind my whine, then. Carry on. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 23:47, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
How sounds:
{{*mp|July 15}} [[Austrlia]]n [[classical music]] [[Conducting|conductor]] '''[[Charles Mackerras]]''' dies at the age of 84.?
HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:50, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
(edit conflict) To the rescue(!) Try: Australian conductor Charles Mackerras dies in London at the age of 84. --candlewicke 23:53, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
It's probably worth noting what he conducted (ie classical music as opposed to buses!) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:56, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Or lightning... --candlewicke 00:00, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Posted, using a combination of your two blurbs. Courcelles (talk) 00:00, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
I hope you added the missing "a" to [[Austrlia]]n . ;) --candlewicke 00:05, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
I did! I copied and pasted your blurb because of that, and double checked. Putting a typo on the main page like that would have earned me a ship's worth of trout. Courcelles (talk) 00:10, 16 July 2010 (UTC)


Indian rupee

  • Big move this, akin to the dollar, euro, and yen to global money changes viewable across the world. (also need to update the wikipedia edit templates with this)Lihaas (talk) 08:17, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Rephrased: Government of India released the official symbol of Indian rupees. (Image:Indian Rupee symbol.svg) Amartyabag TALK2ME 15:48, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

or

India become the fifth country in the world to release their distinct currency symbol ie. after US dollar, Euro, Pound and Yen.

Would you care to tell us WHAT the story is? You can't expect everyone to run off to the newspapers and attempt to work out what you're talking about. Modest Genius talk 12:07, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Support. Seems big enough. --candlewicke 12:19, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose - if the nomination relates to the fact that they have chosen a new symbol for the currency then I oppose. I mean where is the international significance? --Daviessimo (talk) 12:41, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
They changed the symbol? That's it? Strong oppose as a complete nothing of a story in that case. Modest Genius talk 13:04, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
That's the story, or lack thereof. Oppose.  f o x  13:30, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
'Strong Support This is the fifth country in the world to release their distinct currency symbol ie. after US dollar, Euro, Pound and Yen. In 2009, India's nominal GDP stood at US$1.243 trillion, which makes it the eleventh-largest economy in the world. If PPP is taken into account, India's economy is the fourth largest in the world at US$3.561 illion, corresponding to a per capita income of US$3,100. With an average annual GDP growth rate of 5.8% for the past two decades, India is one of the fastest growing economies in the world. This makes India's importance in the global market quite clear. I find nothing objectionable in not nominating it for news candidate. Amartyabag TALK2ME 15:53, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Obviously, the mainstream media hasn't seen . –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 01:00, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Not that relevant The $ symbol is also the "Peso" symbol, predating the dollar identical symbol. Anyway, there's also the Brazilian Real symbol, the former Argentine austral symbol ( ), and so on. Salut, --IANVS (talk | cont) 01:10, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
Which proves this is not that revolutionary... –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 01:26, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
All of those are good reasons why we might feature an economic story about India. But just changing the symbol does not do anything to the economy itself, it's just notation. Besides, our Currency_sign article seems to disagree that this is only the fifth such symbol. Modest Genius talk 16:04, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Since nominator doesn't provide any information about the story except that it obviously has to do with Rupees, default Oppose. __meco (talk) 15:31, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. A new currency or something similar would be an obvious choice for ITN, but this is just a new symbol for a currency, which is even less significant than it sounds. It would be almost (though not quite) comparable to Walmart changing it's logo. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:05, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Support - Eugen Simion 14 (talk) 20:14, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
This is not a a MNC bank its a national symbol akin to the dollar, yen, pound, and euro.Lihaas (talk) 04:21, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Shahram Amiri

  • Big news across the world, top of all the major new outlets (on tv if not online). Could be setting some precedent/war-mongering.Lihaas (talk) 08:17, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
    • Support, but the article could use some polishing. --BorgQueen (talk) 08:27, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
    • For anyone who doesn't have a flaming clue what this is about (like me until about five minutes ago), this is a researcher from Iran who disappeared during the Hajj in 2009 and has since appeared, and theories are rife.  f o x  12:26, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
    • Lihaas, when you nominate items in the future, can you please more clearly state (a) what the story is (so people don't have to go searching through P:CE or news sites) and/or, more ideally, (b) propose a blurb? -- tariqabjotu 13:10, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose since this individual does not seem to have any notability outside this incident, and because most of the 'significance' being attached to the story seems to be based on speculation. Modest Genius talk 16:07, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Support A significant story in international press. The man's value to ITN is the story of his "kidnapping" and the heightened tensions between the U.S. and Iran (which also includes the vested interest of the U.N. as well as the E.U.)
+ Blurb offer: "Shahram Amiri, an Iranian nuclear physicist allegedly abducted and interrogated by the CIA, returns to Tehran amid international controversy." Too long/Rephrase/Etc... Thoughts? Cwill151 (talk) 17:51, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. This seems to be a non-event. Someone disappeared then re-appeared "amid controversy" having been "allegedly abducted and tortured"? Where's the news? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:15, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
You've just written it. ;) --candlewicke 22:59, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
This is a very strange case, but what would be the blurb? -- Mwalcoff (talk) 22:45, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Well, he may or may not have been kidnapped and he may or may not even be a nuclear scientist... so anything that avoids those. How about "Researcher Shahram Amiri returns to Tehran" for a start? --candlewicke 22:59, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
I repeat, where's the news? Some guy who might be a nuclear scientist and might have been kidnapped by someone who might be the CIA and who is barely notable aside from this might-be-kidnapping goes home. Sure, let's post that he made himself a nice cup of tea while we're at it. The only thing that's known for certain is so trivial that it would make the Main Page a laughing stock. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:18, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
But it is the bizarre nature of this event that has received so much attention over a prolonged period of time. Now he is home so it is the end (unless something unusual happens all over again). --candlewicke 00:02, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Poor nomination, it's hard to see what the news is, but I can be certain World War III is not about to start based on whatever happened here. And I will repeat again, why is stuff like this even suggested off the back of the whole 'ooh, Iran, nulear weapons' issue, if 'Iran declares itself a nuclear state', was not deemed an internationally significant event for ITN? MickMacNee (talk) 18:05, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

July 14

ITN candidates for July 14

Death of Mădălina Manole

Romanian pop singer Mădălina Manole committed suicide by poisoning on her 43rd birthday.[13][14] - Eugen Simion 14 (talk) 15:13, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Pensions for Africans

Nicolas Sarkozy has announced equal war pensions for tens of thousands of surviving Africans who served France in two world wars and Algeria's war of independence. This involves 12 former colonies. Sarkozy hosted a lunch in Paris for the 12 leaders and the President of Mali called it "a historic decision". Just needs an article and some support. --candlewicke 02:04, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Support Wow, that's a hell of a story. When the article is sufficient... Cwill151 (talk) 03:36, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. The French government is just giving (more) money to a few thousand people.--Johnsemlak (talk) 05:19, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
Question: did we run the story when the British did essentially the same thing for the Gurkhas last year? I'm leaning towards oppose, but if we did it would only be fair to run both. Plus, is there an article? Modest Genius talk 13:43, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose because I'd personally prefer to have France's burka ban on ITN when it is officially approved, and I think there'd be resistance to two French laws in a short period on ITN. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 23:19, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
You raise a valid point there, but from what I understand, the burka ban (assuming it passes the legislature) won't be law until September so we're probably safe on the "too much France on ITN" side. I'm leaning towards supporting this, but only just. It does seem significant, but I don't think it was unexpected and seems to bring France into line with what a lot of other countries already do. Then again, 12 countries is international importance so I'm torn really. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:16, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
The burka ban won't be enacted until September or it won't go into effect until September? I'm not really familar with the French legislative process. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 01:38, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
I believe it goes through the upper house of the French legislature (I can't remember the official name) in September, so it would be some time after that that it took effect, assuming it's ratified by the upper chamber. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:48, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Typhoon in the Philippines?

This says a typhoon is due in the Philippines. "Thirty-three of the country's 81 provinces and the capital Manila have been placed under storm alert and residents have been warned to expect landslides and strong winds of up to 120 kilometres per hour". Does anyone know anything about it? --candlewicke 03:45, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

The death toll appears to be in single figures so far. Let's wait.--Johnsemlak (talk) 05:22, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
As with all of these weather systems, wait to see how extensive the damage is. Modest Genius talk 13:44, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
Suggested blurb once updates are sorted out:
12 deaths are relatively tiny but the Luzon-wide blackout was rare, even the baddest storms in recent memory didn't cause one. The last blackout was some years ago when tons of shellfish clogged a power plant.–HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 16:26, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
If we posted every large blackout we'd be running several per week. Even those caused by 'bad weather' would be a significant number. Modest Genius talk 16:38, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
Yes, but this was nastier: Mega Manila had no power until nighttime; this was more to the tune of the Northeast Blackout of 2003, more than just "a large blackout". And with a large number of people missing, the death toll has to go up. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 16:54, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
Twenty-six deaths and a major blackout caused by a storm seems fairly significant, but there's no harm in waiting to see if it does any more damage or if it just sort of "fizzles out" for want of a more technical term. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:18, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Support seems significant, but the section could use more references. SpencerT♦C 02:52, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Comment - Whilst the Philippine impact was significant i would rather wait until Conson has made landfall on Vietnam/Northern China before this goes up. Since there will be more Typhoons to impact the Philippines this year, possibly even Super Typhoon's. Also an article is in the process of being made but wont be put out until we know if its a STS or TY at peak.Jason Rees (talk) 15:58, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Support. 26 killed, 36 missing, and it's strengthened back to a typhoon. Besides the effects on areas near Manila, states of calamity being declared and the rare blackout, its second landfall in China tomorrow is likely to worsen the current flooding situation there. ~AH1(TCU) 22:00, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Same-sex marriage in Argentina

Due today. If it happens Argentina will become "the first Latin American country to pass a law legalizing marriage between same-sex couples". 91 per cent of the population is Catholic. Tens of thousands of people are already demonstrating against "the devil's project" outside Congress in Buenos Aires. --candlewicke 02:19, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

weak oppose iceland wasnt mentioned and Mexico City wasnt (albeit that was only one city). That said first in Latin America is something, although there are already 2 catholic countries.Lihaas (talk) 02:23, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
It would be the 10th country to do so if it passes. Two countries with larger populations have already done so; and two Catholic countries have done so.--Johnsemlak (talk) 05:34, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. No more same-sex marriage stories until it's the Vatican legalizing it. Physchim62 (talk) 06:30, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
Wait This hasn't even been passed yet. If it passes, its notability as the first South/Latin American nation should permit its display, but let's not put the cart before the horse here. --Kitch (Talk : Contrib) 13:09, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
Weak support as the first Latin American country, if it actually happens. I agree we don't have to list every single country/state/city which legalises it any more. Modest Genius talk 13:46, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
How many items like this have we had on ITN before? I agree that we don't need every one if they become more common, but Argentina is a huge country, and if this is the first country to have gay marriage in Latin America, I think it's significant. Let's wait for it to actually happen, though. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 23:22, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
Being the first Latin American nation to do so is certainly a good claim to significance, but we should probably start drawing a line as to how many of these we post from now on. Has it actually happened yet? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:21, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Legalised. The vote was even carried on live television so on a scale of marriage legalisation importance this one seems quite significant. --candlewicke 09:34, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Leaning toward support. I agree we shouldn't post every single same-sex marriage legalization, but I believe that the first nationwide legalization in Latin America does have some significance. --BorgQueen (talk) 11:44, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Support per BorgQueen and because there hasn't been an update for 36 hours. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 17:20, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
New blurb on July 15. It actually happened. Salut, --IANVS (talk | cont) 17:30, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

July 13

ITN candidates for July 13

Fidel Castro

  • Cuban ex-President Fidel Castro makes his first televised appearance in nearly a year, predicting possible nuclear war in the Middle East. (BBC) (The Guardian)
Comparatively speaking, this is the most significant and international story of the day so far. Castro, whose very existence has been permanently branded as an international concern/celebration (depending on which side of communism you're on), gets on international TV for the first time in years and proceeds to give a speech about U.S. foreign policy, Iran, and the coming possibility of Nuclear War???? I admit it's somewhat lighter in terms of an actual story, but the impact and ramifications of it are global in scope and fairly significant in terms of U.S/Middle East relations. Thoughts? Cwill151 (talk) 20:01, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
Significant, but oppose. Unfortunately, there is nothing concrete that we can write about for this story. Arsonal (talk) 20:34, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
Vehemently Oppose Soapbox speeches are not the fodder for ITN, especially if the speech itself isn't even notable enough for its own article. Typically such notability doesn't arise until years after. As an example, speeches like the Gettysburg Address and Blood, toil, tears, and sweat most likely would not be notable enough at the time of delivery to be placed on the ITN widget. --Kitch (Talk : Contrib) 13:07, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
Indeed, if I recall correctly, the Gettysburg Address was not put on ITN because some felt it was too Amero-centric. -- tariqabjotu 15:25, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure ITN did not exist at the time of the Gettysburg Address! Modest Genius talk 15:49, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
Even if ITN existed that time I suspect Gettysburg Address would have been rejected as too Amero centric ;-)--Wikireader41 (talk) 02:42, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Hell, even if it wasn't Amero-centric, there'd still be people opposing along the lines of "This is just the ramblings of a madman, it doesn't mean anything" - depending on whether Wikipedia chose to align itself with the Union or the Confederacy.--WaltCip (talk) 17:33, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Riots in Northern Ireland

More than 80 police injured and riots ongoing for two days. __meco (talk) 18:16, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Weak oppose at present, since it's not a major riot in world terms. Right now it's a NI domestic issue, and isn't even being seen as a major event in the rest of the UK. There's always the possibility of it escalating though, and I'll be willing to change my mind if it starts to have impacts on the political situation. Modest Genius talk 13:48, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
For the record, the riots are continuing, the third night in a row. __meco (talk) 13:56, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Colton Harris-Moore

The "Barefoot Bandit" is arrested in the Bahamas. The New York Times  Cargoking  talk  14:09, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

This was nominated t'other day and the consensus seemed to be against it. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:16, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
Oh. Didn't see that. I am only slowly reaching my normal standards once again! —  Cargoking  talk  15:50, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Czech Cabinet

Vaclav Klaus, President of the Czech Republic, appoints a new cabinet from coalition talks from the May election there. The Irish Times  Cargoking  talk  14:03, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Oppose. The main event was the election itself, which we already posted. We shouldn't be announcing things twice just because it took a while for the coalition talks to conclude. Modest Genius talk 13:49, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Death of George Steinbrenner

Oppose: Look, I added the blurb above to finalize the candidate but I still have to vote "no", even though he was a notable personality, mostly because this story will only be interesting/relevant to the United States and thus does not represent an "international significance". Cwill151 (talk) 15:51, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
Although to be fair, it does seem to be a rather slow news day... Cwill151 (talk) 16:06, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
If only to be fair to the man, he does fit the criteria for WP:ITN/DC, namely article 2: "The deceased was a very important figure in their field of expertise, and was recognised as such." Therefore I Abstain Cwill151 (talk) 23:06, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. While Steinbrenner was probably the most well known sports owner in the history of US sports, his death is hardly surprising (he had been on the decline for a very, very long time). --Smashvilletalk 16:22, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. Even in the US it's not that big of a story outside baseball or NYC.--Johnsemlak (talk) 18:30, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
I wouldn't go that far, but it's definitely very US-centric. --Smashvilletalk 18:44, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
Well, everything's relative of course, but if you look at the Washington Post, the story is on the front page but it isn't the lead item. It'll probably be gone tomorrow, though there might be a follow-up article or two as a small headline. All in all, it's not that big of a deal in the US.--Johnsemlak (talk) 19:23, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. My father is a lifelong (and highly outspoken) New York Yankees fan, so I'm quite familiar with George Steinbrenner. As noted by Johnsemlak, his death is major news primarily within baseball and the New York City area. I can't imagine that it's anything more than a minor story (if that) outside the United States. —David Levy 18:50, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. Pretty much as above. Obviously an iconic figure if you're a Yankees fan, but it doesn't mean much to the rest of us. Physchim62 (talk) 19:09, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
Absolutely not his health has been terrible for years. --PlasmaTwa2 19:59, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. Precedence has held that we generally should never publish U.S.-centric stories for ITN.--WaltCip (talk) 21:00, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
You can replace "U.S." with the name of any country, of course. :) —David Levy 21:43, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. There is nothing wrong with having some U.S.-centric stories on ITN since Americans make up a slim majority of our audience. However, I don't think think the Boss meets the criteria for a death on ITN. Here are baseball people whose deaths, I think, would be ITN material: Hank Aaron, Willie Mays, maybe Bob Feller, Sandy Koufax, Pete Rose. The threshold for younger guys would be lower as the shock of their deaths would add to the news value. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 23:15, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose per above. --BorgQueen (talk) 04:26, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Mafia

300 arrests have been made by Italian police of people suspected of being in the Mafia, included suspected boss. That's a lot of handcuffs. RTÉ Xinhua BBC CNN. —  Cargoking  talk  13:56, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Lol. How about this for a blurb?
I may support this. Relevant updates can go under 'Ndrangheta. You'll get a lot of Google News hits with this phrase or "Calabrian mafia". Arsonal (talk) 20:39, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
Which, the mafia or handcuffs? —  Cargoking  talk  20:56, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
It would be fun if the handcuffs could go up, if such fact could be verified. ;) Arsonal (talk) 22:04, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
Support handcuffs. Largest operation of its kind in 15 years? --candlewicke 22:57, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
I know we don't usually go for amusing trivialities, but if you can verify that handcuffs fact I'll support for entertainment value! Modest Genius talk 13:52, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
I can't find anything. Would be funny though... —  Cargoking  talk  18:07, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
Support. It seems like one of the biggest anti-crime operations in recent years 95.26.64.103 (talk) 22:26, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

July 12

ITN candidates for July 12

Darfur Genocide Indictment

A head of state being indicted by the ICC for Genocide? That's huge international news by itself, besides the ramifications it has for the conflict as a whole which is in itself a focus of global attention. Support in the Strongest Possible Terms Cwill151 (talk) 20:26, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
P.S. My International Law is a little rusty, but IIRC a charge of genocide allows sovereign nations the ability to take direct action in his apprehension. I might be wrong, but if not this represents a massive shift in the international significance of this conflict Cwill151 (talk) 21:23, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Strong support in principle. Looks like many of the major news outlets either haven't picked this up yet or only have short stubby articles (Guardian), so it might be a while before there's a verifiable update. Modest Genius talk 20:29, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Question, since I'm not well versed in law. What is the difference between this and the story on Omar al-Bashir's arrest warrant story that we ran in 2009? Arsonal (talk) 20:33, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
In 2009 he was indicted for 'murder, extermination, forcible transfer, torture and rape' and 'pillaging and intentionally directing attacks against civilians'. Which is certainly significant, but this time he's been indicted for three counts of genocide, a far greater crime. There was various legal wrangling over whether there was sufficient evidence to indict for genocide - obviously that has now happened. Modest Genius talk 20:38, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Support. Genocide is a significant step up from his current charges, and warrants ITN treatment. --Mkativerata (talk) 20:40, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
I updated the bio of al-Bashir to reflect the added charges and the circumstances surrounding them, but Genius is right there's not much to go on yet. Still it might be good enough for ITN posting purposes. Thoughts? Cwill151 (talk) 21:08, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
strong wait lets wait and see the reaction if this means much more than a token statement. What has Sudan said? What have others (west and non-west) said? What changes from the status quo? (i dont suspect anything will change, he will still travel to places outside the west)Lihaas (talk) 23:42, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Strong support looks like arrest warrants are out (VOAnews) First sitting head of state to have warrants issued for his arrest per VOA.--Wikireader41 (talk) 02:06, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Lihaas makes a good point- there's no harm in waiting a few hours to see what actually happens. It could turn out the warrant isn't worth the paper it's printed on. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:09, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
Comment something tells me that nobody is going to walk in and execute the warrant and handcuff him. the story here is the issuance of the warrants for genocide ( a First) --Wikireader41 (talk) 02:19, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Total solar eclipse

In a few hours time, the Solar eclipse of July 11, 2010 will occur. Total eclipses are on WP:ITNR (though I note it's also listed in OTD, so that should be removed to prevent it appearing twice on the same MP). Obviously we'll have to wait for it to happen and an update to the article made. Modest Genius talk 15:19, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Comment What kind of update would be necessary for this to be listed? Arsonal (talk) 17:16, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
A reasonable-sized, well sourced paragraph on where, when how etc would be good. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:28, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
I've (re)written the Observations section with more detail. There is also a photograph of the eclipse there. I'd probably support this given the rarity of its occurrence over the south Pacific. Something like first total eclipse in Tahiti in 350 years and in Easter Island in 1,400 years. Arsonal (talk) 19:58, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Support if its the first one on Easter Island for a millennium and the first in Tahiti for 350 years. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 20:20, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
That looks like a decent update to me (thanks), and since this is ITNR that's all it needs. Seems ready to post. Modest Genius talk 20:31, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Support. We always post total solar eclipses. ~AH1(TCU) 01:04, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
Support per nom--Wikireader41 (talk) 01:58, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Swiss refuse Polanski extradition

Switzerland has decided not to extradite Roman Polanski to the United States to face sentencing on charges of unlawful sex with a minor in 1977. BBC, NYTimes, Guardian, Toronto Globe and Mail.

This was discussed when he was first arrested, and the common opinion was that we should wait for a conclusion. I think we've got one now. Roman Polanski's article now has a one-paragraph update if we consider the entire affair starting with the arrest last year.--Johnsemlak (talk) 14:04, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Support per nom. --BorgQueen (talk) 15:05, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Support Would Polanski's article or Roman Polanski sexual abuse case be the primary focus? Arsonal (talk) 17:20, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Strong oppose We rejected Her Majesty the Queen and the "barefoot bandit" as media hype and they were much bigger stories than this. This is suitable for the front page of a tabloid but not an encyclopaedia. This is no more significant than Lindsay Lohan going to prison and we don;t need to fuel the criticism that WP is skewed towards popular culture. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:32, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Weak Support HJ, I agree with you when you say that this story is just another famous face on the cover of a newspaper, but the case itself has some international significance. I mean this is a case where a renowned American citizen was arrested in another country, and then said country refused to extradite him even though they are party to common extradition treaties with the U.S. That's fairly significant and far more global than Lindsay or the "Barefoot Bandit", and what's more, could be said of any citizen of any country.
P.S. The Brits all need to take it easy about Her Majesty the Queen. I know you all love her culturally and as an individual and I respect that... but nobody gets bent out of shape when the President gives a speech at the U.N., or the Emperor of Japan or any other head of state or monarch. I mean, we can't just have a cultural favoritism because ITN happens to be dominated by y'all across the pond.Cwill151 (talk) 20:43, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose per HJ. All this story gets out of me is a giant "so what?" Courcelles (talk) 17:44, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
HJ, I'm guessing you wouldn't support Roman Polanski sexual abuse case for FA :D! Anyway, I don't have a strong opinion on this one but I'll offer a few reasons while this one might be more important than Lindsey Lohan going to jail: This is a conclusion of a very long-standing and very famous legal dispute (which got massive media coverage last year); Roman Polanski is a bit more serious of a figure than an ordinary tabloid star (he's won an Oscar, Palme D'or, and loads of other top film awards; the issue here isn't just a famous film star going/not going to jail--the dispute also raises questions of international law, extraterritoritality, etc. Also, while the decision may seem like 'so what?' now, it was a huge story last year and got substantial support for posting.--Johnsemlak (talk) 18:04, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Support per Johnsemlak. This case is a bit more notable than a Lohan story. --PlasmaTwa2 19:13, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose per HJ. 21:13, 12 July 2010 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mike R (talkcontribs)
This mean nothing. No one really gives much of anything for Polanski (has his industry even responded?)Lihaas (talk) 23:43, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
The industry has responded. Loads of cinema celebrities have openly taken a side on this issue--see Roman_Polanski_sexual_abuse_case#Reactions_to_the_arrest.--Johnsemlak (talk) 13:45, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose per HJ. no matter what else he has done his main claim to fame is that he is a pedophile sodomite.--Wikireader41 (talk) 01:56, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
Support -- I think it's hard to argue that Polanski is not encyclopedic given his career. The high level of interest in this case from top government officials, such as the French culture minister who fawns over this guy, separates this from a celebrity news case along the lines of Lindsey Lohan. And there comes a point when even celebrity news becomes real news -- the OJ Simpson murder case, for example, was one of the biggest U.S. news stories of its time, even for media that turn their nose on Entertainment Tonight-style news. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 03:33, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
Support. I think this case covers ground which goes beyond Polanski's own career. The controversy is between the nature of his admitted actions (which almost everyone would condemn) and the utility (or even justice) of punishing him 33 years after the event. There are strongly held views on both sides, but the fact that the debate exists and is international in its nature seems to me to be a reason for including this on ITN. On a personal note, this story is the only one where I have been called upon to comment in the wider media about the goings on in Wikipedia, specifically by Swiss TV at the time of Polanski's arrest who wanted to know why there was such a fight on WP and what we were doing about it. Physchim62 (talk) 18:25, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
Support due to Polanski's profile and career beyond this topic. He is internationally recognisable and has been even before this case, for several decades. He is not an ordinary "celebrity". This doesn't seem like an average "celebrity" event. --candlewicke 22:54, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
Now the consensus seems to be clear. Posting soon. --BorgQueen (talk) 03:40, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
Belated Oppose. I chuckled when I saw this story next to to Omar Al-Bashir. Has Wikipedia gone mad? I expect more opposes to come. Colipon+(Talk) 04:02, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
This should be taken down. There is no consensus for posting, even before considering the above belated oppose and this looks absolutely absurd. How is the Swiss refuse to extradite some "celebrity" even remotely comparable to an arrest warrant for a sitting head of state? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:09, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
The blurb about the guy's head probably should have been taken down as well, but it wasn't. This article has plenty of support; more than any other item in the two days above it. I don't see the logic in comparing two news items to determine if one of them is notable. --PlasmaTwa2 19:03, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
No one is saying the Sudan item should be removed or that the Polanski item is more important. The only question is whether the Polanski item is appropriate for ITN. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 23:28, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
Support, conclusion of an extremely high visibility case. Prodego talk 18:11, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

July 11

ITN candidates for July 11

Uganda capital blasts 'kill 23'

No article yet. The story is clearly developing still.--Johnsemlak (talk) 22:03, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Neutral at the moment – we will have to see what sort of article we can pull together. But it does seem like a significant development. Physchim62 (talk) 23:01, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Support. It seems we have now collected enough information together to make this a useful ITN piece. Physchim62 (talk) 02:15, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Strong support A massive terrorism incident in a country unfamiliar with terrorism on this level? Obvious ITN spot. __meco (talk) 00:18, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Death toll is now over 50 according to the TV. Whisky drinker | HJ's sock 00:32, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Support looks like a big attack. July 2010 Kampala attacks has been started.--Wikireader41 (talk) 01:52, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Barefoot Bandit caught

  • Bahamian police arrest Colton Harris-Moore, the so-called Barefoot Bandit, after he had eluded police in Canada, several U.S. states and the Bahamas for two years by car, plane and boat.
    • A story that's captivated people in North America and made a folk hero out of Harris-Moore; Fox has already bought the movie rights. Currently one of two above-the-fold stories at CNN.com (along with the World Cup); also on the top of MSNBC.com. WP:BLP is no issue -- there is no question Harris-Moore is the Barefoot Bandit and that he has been eluding the police for two years, and this is being reported by every media outlet reporting the subject in the world. What crimes he actually committed will be determined in court. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 21:36, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Support. This was pointed out to me by another editor earlier today, so I added it to my watchlist. It's something a bit different and the article is in decent shape. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:42, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Support per nom. Was going to nominate this myself. - JuneGloom07 Talk? 21:51, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Strong oppose. Another meta-story: "19-year kid accused of several thefts is arrested." Media hype is not a suitable subject for ITN. (or even a serious encyclopedia, for that matter). Physchim62 (talk) 22:01, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. This is curiosity, not encyclopaedic news of international significance. --Mkativerata (talk) 22:02, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose and I'm somewhat shocked we even have an article on this kid. Courcelles (talk) 22:03, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose per Physchim. Modest Genius talk 22:46, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

2010 FIFA World Cup

Obviously, this is going to be eventually put on ITN at some point after the final ends. If anyone is curious as to what was posted on ITN four years ago when the 2006 FIFA World Cup ended, here's the link. Back then, we did not have separate articles for the final matches. But this year we do have the option to either bold 2010 FIFA World Cup or 2010 FIFA World Cup Final:

  1. [TEAM A] beat [TEAM B] in the 2010 FIFA World Cup final.
  2. [TEAM A] beat [TEAM B] in the 2010 FIFA World Cup Final.

Feel free to offer any other suggestions to the wording of the blurb. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (talk) 04:00, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

I forgot about this: we also had a bit of an WP:ENGVAR edit war back in 2006 as well, now archived on Talk:Main Page/Archive 74#World Cup news request, regarding whether to use "defeat" or "defeats". The compromise was to use "beat". Zzyzx11 (talk) 04:18, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Recommend (since consensus can change): In association football, [Winner] defeat [Loser] [score] in the 2010 FIFA World Cup Final to win their first FIFA World Cup Trophy. Arsonal (talk) 04:38, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
I'd support "defeat" if the Netherlands win since that would be appropriate in all WP:ENGVAR as I understand it. Isn't there a complete rework of the sentence that has managed to sidestep this issue in other recent sporting events? --Siradia (talk) 05:16, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Obvious Support. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 11:42, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Obvious support per ITNR, and agree with using 'defeat', since 'beat' sounds rather informal. IIRC we don't normally include scorelines, but I'm ambivalent on that point. Edit: we should probably avoid the trophy link, since the important bit is winning their first championship, and the winners don't get to keep the trophy anyway. Modest Genius talk 15:29, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
We probably shouldn't use it for consistency's sake (though I tend to think scores should be added). ~DC Let's Vent 17:22, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Obvious support. And take down that stupid buried head item when you post it. It's ridiculous, and nobody has yet come up with any evidence that there is an ITN/C legitimate reason why it's even on the Main Page. MickMacNee (talk) 18:43, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Point of order - there were no opposes before it was posted. Mjroots (talk) 19:46, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
    • Agreed. there's no consensus to post it, so it should be removed anyway. ~DC Let's Vent 19:21, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Spain have just won 1-0 right at the end of extra time. I stand ready to post once we have something resembling an update to the article. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:09, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
    • "Something resembling an update" Are the standards here that low? –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 21:13, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
      • I've updated the lead to make it evident that Spain won the match. Arsonal (talk) 21:16, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
        • (edit conflict) Perhaps, Spain are the winners of the 2010 FIFA World Cup, scoring 1-0 against the Netherlands in overtime. That sound good?Fridae'§Doom | Talk to me 21:18, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
        • (edit conflict) I strongly believe that the article needs a prose summary of the game. It doesn't need to be a lengthy thing, but at least a paragraph is needed before being put on the Main Page. -- tariqabjotu 21:22, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Agree with the need for some prose. Plus do NOT use the word 'overtime', the correct term is 'extra time'. Modest Genius talk 21:23, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
I've updated both articles with at least a bit of prose about the match. Tables and stats aren't good enough. --Mkativerata (talk) 21:26, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
2010_FIFA_World_Cup#Final is probably just about sufficient, but I'd like to see a bit more in the article on the final- ideally, that should b the bolded article. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:29, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Sure - there just aren't enough detailed match reports up yet by news sources to source to. --Mkativerata (talk) 21:30, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Fair point. Both articles are getting a lot of edits atm, so I expect more will be added as the material's available, but as I say, the update is sufficient for ITN standards and Tariq has posted it. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:32, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Er, sorry, but do you really think it needs more updating? I saw the prose added to the final match article, and considered that sufficient. The update has to be substantial, but I don't think it has to be in its final form. -- tariqabjotu 21:35, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
I would have liked to have seen a little more before it went up, but the update was sufficient imo and it's certainly not worht a wheel war! HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:40, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
The tense is fixed, shouldn't the currentsport tag be removed since the Finals are over already. Fridae'§Doom | Talk to me 21:45, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Should be wins not win!69.137.121.17 (talk) 21:42, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
    • WP:ENGVAR- apparently (I say this as an Englishman!) "win" is correct in "British English", but if anyone has a suggestion to sidestep it, I'm all ears. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:44, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
      • Whatever English is used should be the one used throughout the article, as per the Wikipedia Manual of Style. Fridae'§Doom | Talk to me 21:46, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
      • I'm clearly spending too much time in England. I was all excited that I sidestepped the AmEng/BrEng issue in the blurb by moving "defeating" later in the blurb, only to realize later that there was still a verb after Spain. And that I used the British "win". And I'm American. Either way, though, it doesn't matter; I don't think we should be bending over backwards to accommodate a particular variant of English. -- tariqabjotu 21:59, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
      • Agreed. Fridae'§Doom | Talk to me 22:01, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Who do we hand out the ITN Recognition to, since I'm confused as to who nominated it and updated it etc. Fridae'§Doom | Talk to me 21:59, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

  • So the World Cup item is really going to be illustrated by that stupid Yagan image? Amazing. MickMacNee (talk) 22:29, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Can you suggest an image for the world cup story? I agree the head shouldn't be up, but even if it is removed we still wouldn't have a world cup picture. Modest Genius talk 22:51, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
I just switched to a photograph of the match ball. It's not ideal, but it's preferable to the head. —David Levy 22:58, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Any reason we can't use the trophy instead? --Smashvilletalk 18:49, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Because it's copyright and fair use images aren't allowed on the Main Page. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:21, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
No one has a picture of it that isn't copyrighted? --Smashvilletalk 21:07, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
The trophy itself is copyrighted. It is essentially a sculpture, and has the same copyright status. 2D representations of a 3D work of art are copyright to both the original creator of the 3D work and whoever created the 2D representation. All images of the trophy will continue to enjoy copyright protection until 70 years after the death of Silvio Gazzaniga. See {{Non-free 3D art}}. Modest Genius talk 23:55, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Japanese House of Councillors election, 2010

Elections to Japan's upper house - Dumelow (talk) 15:09, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

I won't put this on ITN yet. The results section looks incomplete. --PFHLai (talk) 05:15, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Are the "Prefectural Votes" columns in the results table supposed to be blank? (BTW, I likely won't be back till the weekend, so I hope another admin can keep an eye on this item. Thanks.) --PFHLai (talk) 07:08, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
I would guess not. I will take a look at the article later today to see if I can add the missing numbers and some more text - Dumelow (talk) 07:53, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
I cannot find any English sources for the numbers as yet, so I will hold fire for a while and see if someone who can speak Japanese adds them to the article - Dumelow (talk) 12:24, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

July 10

ITN candidates for July 10

Barcelona protests

Might be a bit "local news" for an ITN story, but a protest march with more than a million people deserves a nomination at least, IMHO. Got to be the number two story on the BBC News front page, although it's dropped back a bit now. Physchim62 (talk) 23:59, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Support. Not entirely "local" in that it concerns the autonomy and nationhood of a jurisdiction. In any event, it is clearly a huge event, it has garnered significant international coverage, is encyclopaedic, and provides an interesting juxtaposition with Spain's World Cup Final appearance.--Mkativerata (talk) 00:10, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Support YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 00:53, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Anyone got a good blurb in mind? - Dumelow (talk) 07:48, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Posted. Nice article, noteworthy and encyclopaedic event - I can't see anyone objecting against this - Dumelow (talk) 09:38, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
Another (belated) support. --candlewicke 22:59, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Lutetia

One of the major events of the year in space exploration. Hektor (talk) 06:29, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
Please put in more new materials than a single sentence update in 21 Lutetia. Also, Rosetta (spacecraft)#2010 needs more than the date and 8 words that don't form a complete sentence. Usually, a decent paragraph (with refs) is needed for ITN purposes. --PFHLai (talk) 13:06, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Support in principle, but it needs a proper update. Now the high-resolution images have been released there's plenty of material. Modest Genius talk 15:30, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Yagan burial

  • After more than a century in British collections, the head of Noongar leader Yagan is ceremonially buried on the 177th anniversary of his last full day of freedom.(ABC News)
The above was nominated by User:Thecurran at future events on 9 July - Dumelow (talk) 08:35, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
Support. This is an important event for Australians, Liverpudlians, and indigenous peoples worldwide. Warmest Regards, :)—thecurran Speak your mind my past 09:54, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Support. The article has been updated with sources covering today's burial. Of Interest to Australia and Britain (historic "keepers of the head"), and to indigenous peoples everywhere. If you look hard, there's even a link to Diana, Princess of Wales :-o TFOWR 13:19, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
The content on the reburial is currently only one sentence. We'd need a bit more than that for it to be sufficient for ITN. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:33, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
Bah, I knew you were going to say that ;-) I'll get right on it. TFOWR 14:09, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Just wtf basically. Two people supporting, with zero evidence of any international significance, and it goes up? And the goddam Queen get's fucked over royally? Get out of here please. 34 Google News articles for "Yagan". Still, I guess it makes it almost double the international significance of the 'African Booker prize'. Jebus H Jebus. Enough already. MickMacNee (talk) 17:47, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose I fail to see the importance of this item. The head has been returned to the aboriginals for years. I don't think a burial (his second) is very important. This is more ceremonial than the Queen's speech, and much less international. Plus, looking at the article, I don't think four sentences is good enough of an update. --PlasmaTwa2 20:48, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
Support for encyclopedic value. I think it's pretty nice to see this on the main page four years later. Arsonal (talk) 21:53, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose per above. ~DC Let's Vent 04:26, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Support per TFOWR--Wikireader41 (talk) 05:38, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Support per TFOWR, this is unusual and worthy of posting. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 08:22, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose since the important event was the repatriation, which happened 13 years ago (as an aside, why don't we have a photo if it's been on display all that time?). Modest Genius talk 15:32, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose per MickMacMae. 72.88.78.37 (talk) 19:53, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Nutritional value of vegetables and fruits getting lower at an increasing rate

I think this is a very important story. I believe very many people aren't aware of this even, so I think we'll be doing the world a service by featuring this on ITN. __meco (talk) 10:09, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

That sounds interesting, what sources do U have? Warmest Regards, :)—thecurran Speak your mind my past 13:10, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
And what's the article? -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 13:12, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
It was in yesterday's Current Events frame, an MSNBC article. As for which article it should go into I'm not sure as I haven't really considered it. We'd have to decide on that obviously. __meco (talk) 18:13, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
To get featured on ITN, articles must be well updated. Please get the new materials in Vegetable#Nutrition and Fruit#Nutritional value (or wherever appropriate). Otherwise, no articles would qualify. It's hard to evaluate ITN-worthiness without first reading the updated article(s). --PFHLai (talk) 14:29, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
What is the recent event, other than an MSNBC article, which seems to mostly rely on a study conducted in 2004. Is there a scientific paper? Modest Genius talk 15:38, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

July 9

ITN candidates for July 9

Slovakian PM

ITN has precedence for announce new leaders after elections. This is also the country' first female one to add to its ITN-worthiness. (although the article on her needs considerable work, ill try and get some done in the next few hours. Someone else could help too) (also, i dont know why the red link is above i copied and pasted the title from the page itself)

better but still needs plenty of work. Lihaas (talk) 20:30, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

"First" full face transplant

French doctors at the Henri Mondor Public Hospital in Créteil, France, completed a full face transplant procedure (including tear ducts, eyelids, and lips) on June 27 revealed today. (ABC News) (Associated Press) They are calling it the first full face transplant, but this was also claimed by Spanish doctors in March/April in an operation that did not include the eyelids, etc. (The Daily Telegraph) The news from Spain was not posted on ITN. Arsonal (talk) 16:08, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

There was also another "first face transplant" from the same hospital a couple of years ago: châpeau-bas ("hats off") to the French team, but I don't think this is transcendential enough for a general encyclopedia. Oppose. Physchim62 (talk) 17:41, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Pakistan attack

56 killed and more than 100 injured in suicide attack in Mohmand Agency in Pakistan.(BBC)--Wikireader41 (talk) 12:50, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

That seems quite a high death toll, even for the unfortunate frequency of such events in Pakistan and Afghanistan. The article needs some work, though. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:00, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Support. I've expanded the article, so it should now be in a postable state and I'll keep working on it. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:22, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Support. attack seems unusually deadly, even by the blighted region's standards, and the article looks like it will soon be in a postable condition (I'll try to do some tidying up while we wait for more comments). Physchim62 (talk) 17:44, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Article is now more than sufficient for ITN standards, would another admin care to post this?HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:18, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose Happen every few days according to our list, more if you count other types of attacks. Narayanese (talk) 23:41, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Support Terrorist attacks in Pakistan are frequent, but not so frequent as to ignore one that kills 56 people. I'd be worried about not posting items from Pakistan merely because it is a hotbed for this sort of thing: doing so artificially desensitises readers of ITN to the extent of terrorism there. --Mkativerata (talk) 23:44, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Posted.David Levy 23:51, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

LeBron James

Oppose. This seems to be "metanews" more than anything else, with the story being more to do with the hype than the actual decision. After all, it is really just "professional sportsman decides where he will play his sport next year." In the past, we have been very reluctant to post stories about transfers and career-ends, and I don't think we should change that criterion now. I think there will be little or no "added value" to our readers from an encyclopedia article (although the same could be said of many of our sports stories). Physchim62 (talk) 08:46, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Strong oppose, internal sport news only of interest to fans of the sport. We didn't break the record-breaking football transfers such as Ronaldo's, despite an equally large media frenzy. This certainly does not meet the 'importance' criterion. Modest Genius talk 10:32, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose, as per the above comments. There appears to be substantially more self-fueling media coverage of the media coverage than of the actual underlying event. I've explicitly and strongly disagreed with the "let's not reward attention-seekers" rationale (and I continue to), but this is manufactured hype far exceeding the story's actual significance. —David Levy 11:50, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose per MG, besides, we have too much sport on ITN for my liking as it is. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:37, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. Hahahaha. Hell no. It's a free agent signing. That's all it is. We didn't include any other free agent signings. In fact, I don't think we've EVER included a free agent signing. For one reason, we'd have to pretty much include ALL free agent signings in every sport if we did. --Smashvilletalk 14:09, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Weak Support Due to the unique nature of this escapade. This was more than just a record-breaking soccer transfer or basketball free agency, it was also a media phenomenon as well given "The Decision" last night on ESPN. I'd only say weak suport though per Levy: this is notable, but much of why it's notable is because of the hype...a record amount of hype is still a record, but it's also still hype as well. Doc Quintana (talk) 14:29, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Weak Support Due to intense media coverage. SpencerT♦Nominate! 20:03, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
So? Lindsay Lohan going to prison is attracting "intense media coverage" but nobody would dream of putting that on ITN. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:57, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
From legitimate, international sources. (By legitimate, I mean newspapers and other news organizations, not E!. And LeBron is front page news, while Lindsay Lohan isn't. It's still only a weak support. SpencerT♦Nominate! 23:12, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose per WT:ITN comments. Courcelles (talk) 20:10, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose, not the Lakers or did not involve the Knicks. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 06:38, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose seems like a domestic issue. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 09:14, 10 July 2010 (UTC)


July 8

ITN candidates for July 8

Defense of Marriage Act ruled unconstitutional by a U.S. federal judge

A federal judge in Boston ruled in two separate court cases that the main parts of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) unconstitutional – a big ruling with regards to same-sex marriage in the United States. (source) –MuZemike 21:09, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Oppose Hardly the final word on the matter and the Boston Globe] is already reporting the decision will be appealed. Madcoverboy (talk) 02:02, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
If it gets to the Supreme Court, I'd be inclined to support, but oppose for now. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:42, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose, will be appealed, so the circus isn't done yet. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 21:13, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Spy Swap

Surprised this wasn't nominated yet, but the 2010 Russia – United States spy swap is about to start (or already has). Article is somewhat short, though we've posted shorter updates (we even put a list up once). It's getting coverage in the UK (BBC, Telegraph, Sky), Canada (CTV, Vancouver Sun), Australia (Sydney Morning Herald), and the mid-east (Al-jazeera). ~DC Let's Vent 18:19, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

The article would need a bit of work- it currently only has 3 sentences of prose and 2 sources. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:25, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
There was another article created when the story first broke. Combining the 2 article can make them viable for ITN. (i would support that when something comes out of the talks)
A subsection of Illegals Program about the swap can work quite well. the page size is only 25k anyways.Lihaas (talk) 18:43, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
If we can get some better evidence may be. At the current time, the above proposal by DC illustrates the problem with the story as it stands "is about to start (or already has)" and the article and most sources basically say the same thing (we think this is going to happen, but we don't really know) which doesn't make for a good ITN entry. This isn't surprising for something of this sort and I'm not saying we need official confirmation but at least multiple sources reporting the swap has happened so we can say some more definitive then this may have or is going to happen but we don't really know. Nil Einne (talk) 20:58, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
From what I just saw on TV, they've all just pleaded guilty to spying, in return for which, they get this spy swap and the planes are supposed to leave within the hour. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:17, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

The 10 from the United States have been deported and I've updated the article. Only one from Russia has left the country. Shall we wait for word on the other three before posting?--Chaser (talk) 03:37, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Wow, that was quick. But i guess it should be ready for posting just as soon its all done.Lihaas (talk) 05:12, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Spy Swap apparently completed. 95.24.115.195 (talk) 13:48, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Indeed. Any support? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:54, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Support. If you're looking for a good hook, The New York Times calls the exchange "one of the biggest in over two decades". Arsonal (talk) 15:53, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Support. 2010 Russia – United States spy swap and Illegals Program are already combined. 93.80.102.227 (talk) 18:56, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Support now that this is official, it's a huge international relations story. the article needs a little cleanup, but there's plenty of information there. —Ed Cormany (talk) 19:06, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

52 political prisoners released

Cuba has agreed to free 52 political prisoners in its largest prisoner release for decades. Spain and the Roman Catholic Church are involved. --candlewicke 04:55, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

In principle, support. But we need a cover article, is there anything useful? --Tone 08:47, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
There are several possible target articles, but all are in bad shape. I think we should keep the wider story in mind (only five prisoners have actually been released as yet) but it looks difficult to post it at the moment. Physchim62 (talk) 19:45, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Top justice official executed

Is the execution of a top justice official important enough? I don't know which article covers this. --candlewicke 03:28, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps Corruption in the People's Republic of China. Arsonal (talk) 03:50, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
Neutral, depends on the focus article. --Tone 08:47, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
There's only one new sentence since June 29th in the Chongqing gang trials article, and the wikibio of the executed official, Wen Qiang, is a single-sentence stub, hardly enough new materials to qualify for ITN. --PFHLai (talk) 14:34, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Solar Impulse project

The solar powered plane of the Solar Impulse project is in the middle of its first 24-hour flight. It took off at 7:00 a.m. Central European Summer Time (UTC+2). When completed, it will be the world's first manned 24-hour solar flight. (The New York Times) (Wired) (Live Night Flight) Arsonal (talk) 02:24, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Support if the test ends successfully. --Tone 08:47, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
Test has been completed. Total flight time is just over 26 hours. It departed at 6:51 a.m. CEST (Jul 7) and landed 9:00 a.m. CEST (Jul 8). It is currently top item in the Science and Technology section of Google News. (BusinessWeek) (BBC News) (Associated Press) Arsonal (talk) 09:08, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
Strong Support, not only does this cover an international scientific first, which is usually enough to put it on ITN, but also this project is a vindication of both emission-free travel and perpetual energy regeneration; great stuff! Do we have an article on this yet? Cwill151 (talk) 17:34, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
The update is at Solar Impulse project under "First 24-hour flight". Arsonal (talk) 17:50, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
Update looks good to me and ITN's quite stale at the minute, so it would be nice to get this up. Anyone care to suggest a good blurb? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:58, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
The prototype airplane of the Solar Impulse project completes the world's first 24-hour solar flight. It might be hard to create a square thumbnail of the airplane's photo since it's so wide. Arsonal (talk) 18:27, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
Also makes a night flight. A solar plane on a night flight adds to its importance. Anyway, support a first and another non-political ITN makes it worthwhile.Lihaas (talk) 18:48, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
Can we change that to "solar-powered flight"? It sound like the plane flew to the Sun! Otherwise, late Support. Physchim62 (talk) 19:17, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
Agree on 'solar powered', and belated support. Modest Genius talk 19:21, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
Lol, I think it would take a bit more than 26 hours to fly to the sun. You'd get a good tan though! ;) "powered" added as requested, thanks. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:24, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

July 7

ITN candidates for July 7

Death of Robert Neil Butler

American Robert Neil Butler, "father of modern gerontology", coined "ageism", 1976 Pulitzer Prize for General Non-Fiction. (The Washington Post) (The New York Times) (Time) Arsonal (talk) 21:05, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Support sounds pretty notable, though there hasn't been much of an update. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 21:32, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose seems like an interesting guy, never heard of him though. ~DC Let's Vent 21:51, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose not very notable. never heard of him even though I studied the same subject he is supposed to be an expert at.--Wikireader41 (talk) 22:29, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Iraq bombing

biggest in Iraq in over a month and also important in its strike target as it contributes to sectarian tension at a time when the govt cant be formed.Lihaas (talk) 19:07, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Looks like the article is at July 2010 Baghdad bombing - Dumelow (talk) 19:13, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
Support lloks like a big strike--Wikireader41 (talk) 22:30, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
Support as it was such a serious bombing. --candlewicke 23:47, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
I expanded this above to reflect 3-days of the pilgrimage with bombings and attack one each.Lihaas (talk) 18:32, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
The death toll is up to 70 with 300 others injured for the series of bombings over the past few days. The article is just about acceptable for ITN at the moment. I will tidy it up a bit and, unless anyone has any objections, will post it shortly - Dumelow (talk) 18:41, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
Posted. Didn't bother updating the timer as HJ did it for the solar aircraft item 90 seconds before I was about to reset it! - Dumelow (talk) 19:18, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Noriega is convicted in Paris

  • "A Paris court on Wednesday convicted former Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega of laundering drug money in France in the 1980s and ordered him to spend seven years behind bars" and "also ordered the seizure of euro2.3 million ($2.89 million) that has long been frozen in Noriega's accounts." [17] Of course, he already served two decades in a U.S. prison, and this sentence is relatively lower in importance compared to that, but I think it is still significant enough for ITN especially considering the long legal struggle behind it - the French government requested the extradition of Noriega since 1999. I will try to update the article if consensus supports. --BorgQueen (talk) 13:10, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
Supportsignificant story with widespread international interest.--Wikireader41 (talk) 14:49, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. This is barely registering on Google News - World. It's something like the 20th story, while shock horror, the Queen is still around 10th, yet it was apparently an event of no international significance. I wouldn't put too much stall on Wikireader41's opinions, the arrest of Linsey Lohan currently appears nowhere on the list, yet he is convinced that that is also a significant story with widespread international interest, even more so than the Queen. MickMacNee (talk) 15:18, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
support international significance here, precedent also being set.
as an aside mickmacnee seems to WP:NPA, instead of WP:Civil, because he doesnt like what is being saidLihaas (talk) 16:39, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
No, I don't happen to like it when people make nonsense votes at ITN, and then cry about NPA when they are pulled up on their ignorance and rather obvious gamery and provocation. Still, you carry on parrotting Wikireader41's views all you want, it's pretty clear neither of you have the first idea how to even prove what you say is correct with regard to this nomination, yet you appear to think you have the god-given right to say it without being challenged. MickMacNee (talk) 18:02, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
Strong Support. Look Manuel Noriega gets out of prison in 2007 after nearly two decades and then gets sent right back to prison by another country? This is a man who helped the United States define the twentieth century version of the Monroe Doctrine. This is a man whose support of rebels and drug smuggling as a head of state led to one of the first great examples of causally preemptive warfare by the United States, any information on his further punishment for what happened before and during that war are relevant to the international community, and therefore to ITN. BTW, is that really how we decide what stories are relevant to ITN these days, by what rank the stories are given on websites? That's stupid, inefficient, and really undermines the whole idea of our independence as a news resource. If we do nothing but what is most popular on the internet, then no wonder people think Lindsay Lohan is an ITN-worthy story, more people in the world care about her than a drug-smuggler most people using the internet were too young to have ever heard of, sad but true: sad... but f***ing true. So let's not go discounting other peoples ideas out of a sense of superiority MickMacNee, everyone is welcome here. We have to be professional not patronizing, otherwise we'll end up being a small group of people who sit around with their thumbs up their a**es and have no real claim to represent an international consensus, good lord. Cwill151 (talk)`
I will discount the opinions of people all day and everyday if their opposition doesn't extend beyond total ignorance, as is evident from Wikireader41's statements elsewhere. Simply totting up people's opinions with zero relevant supporting evidence like Google World News rankings is infact a sure fire way of ensuring ITN becomes 'stupid' and 'inefficient'. You don't appear to have noticed this key fact in your post - but Lohan appears nowhere in that list, which is pretty good evidence that no, nobody gives a toss about her latest news, which is why the people who think that event is ITN worthy over and above items that are in there need to simply be ignored, because they clearly have no idea what they are talking about. MickMacNee (talk) 18:02, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
I've looked at the information about Noriega and some of wikireader41's posts - sum total: you're right, the news about Noriega isn't anything special in his case and has actually been accrued over a long and relatively predictable time-line; yes, wikireader41 does make several unsubstantiated claims; and yes, it is important to distinguish the useful users from those whose I.Q. is less than their edit count. However, I still remain in support of this posting for the reasons I've stated above, and I still point out that our collective job here is not to post what's most popular but what's most Important. That is what separates us from other media, while the rest of the media in this world is busy bringing you what's popular because it pays more, we have the ability to actually report what matters, what is actually important to history. Also, I still say that the continuing purpose of Wikipedia will only be served if we all carry ourselves professionally. That's what WP:Civil is for. We have to at least accept the opinions given and if they're inept and stupid, then explain that to community so we all get it. If we go around demanding perfection and then flame on users for posting something, then all we will have accomplished is to make Wikipedia a small group of elitist a**holes who consider themselves to be the final word in information; like Britannica ;). All we will have done is to turn Wikipedia into another gay encyclopedia. We can't let douche-bags turn us into douche-bags, we're better than that, Wikipedia is better than that.Cwill151 (talk) 21:48, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
The article needs some more update, otherwise, tentative support. --Tone 17:07, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
I've expanded the update a bit more. --BorgQueen (talk) 17:45, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
It's a pretty awfull article all round actually. I've just added some basic essential details to the lede that were missing, but the main body is hopeless if, as Cwill151 probably rightly suggests, 90% of readers don't have a clue who he is/was. If this does get posted, it needs clarifying that nothing has actualy happened here that is 'new' except him being re-tried and convicted in France for something France had originally convicted him of in 1999, which is the same offence he was also found guilty of in his original US trial anyway. Frankly, I really am not seeing what the 'event' of international significance is here, this just seems to be a way-point in what has just been a long life of indictment, and he has never actually been free between one sentence to the next. There are no new crimes here, nor is there anything really surprising about the current developments. MickMacNee (talk) 18:23, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
Support - a conviction against a former head of state or government by another country is usually important enough. --candlewicke 23:53, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
Now the consensus seems to be clear. Posting soon. --BorgQueen (talk) 06:13, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
Wow, didnt realize we posted the extradition and then conviction (should have waited)
But the not of the ITN mention for today is not on the page, can someone add that (admin?)Lihaas (talk) 17:02, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Olufemi Terry

BBC - "regarded as Africa's leading literary award".
CBC News - "considered one of Africa's most prestigious prizes for creative writing".
National Post - "often referred to as the “African Booker Prize”".
The Guardian describes a good previous publication record for past winners and says patrons include Chinua Achebe and the African Nobel Laureates Wole Soyinka, Nadine Gordimer and J. M. Coetzee.

He beat writers from Zambia, Kenya, South Africa, etc and has lived, worked, studied, etc. in Sierra Leone, Nigeria, United States, Somalia, Uganda, South Africa. --candlewicke 04:22, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

SUpport slow week, + global -- if we give credence to these silly nobel WAR prizes...Lihaas (talk) 04:31, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
Support significant literary prize and a good opportunity to counter systemic bias. __meco (talk) 07:32, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
Support. It is a slow news day, there does not seem to be a consensus regarding the Queen's speech in the UN, and posting the fact that the Netherlands are the first finalists would not be a good idea. On the other hand, here we have 3 nice articles covering a topic that does not often get on the covers. --Tone 08:38, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
  • IAR in that a little more support would normally be good- but we have three reasonably updated articles, and 36 hours since the last update. Posting. Courcelles (talk) 10:00, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
Meh, fair enough to post this, but don't add it to ITNR. Next year might not be in such a slow news week. Modest Genius talk 12:27, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose. 15 hits on Google News for "Olufemi Terry". 15!!!!!!!!!. Internationally significant my ass. How many for "Queen" "United Nations"? 1748 [18] ITN needs to be shut down if it produces nonsense outcomes like this. MickMacNee (talk) 12:39, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
Support. nice story.But oppose putting in ITNR. and definitely oppose shutting down ITN.--Wikireader41 (talk) 15:05, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose per MickMacMee. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 17:26, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose per MickMacMee. ~DC Let's Vent 18:56, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose small news coverage, award is only £10,000, and also, how many Africans write in english? Only about 1 in 4 African nations has English as an official language. The award itself is small in scope and small in general. SpencerT♦Nominate! 20:14, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
    It would appear that consensus is to remove it. ~DC Let's Vent 20:52, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Never like opposing after the fact but sometimes it has to happen. I agree with the above opposes. Also, the winner would have been eligible for the Man Booker prize as Sierra Leone is in the Commonwealth. So it's hardly the top prize that Terry could have won. I also thought we had generally considered that "slow news week" is not a good reason to post an item - invariably slow news weeks turn big without us having to prompt them. --Mkativerata (talk) 20:59, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
Question, how did this get posted without community consensus?Cwill151 (talk) 21:03, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
At the time this was posted there was a reasonable consensus to put it up. --Mkativerata (talk) 21:18, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
Also, when the timer is as overdue as it was when this was posted, a somewhat lower amount of support is permitted. I'd be opposed to this going down until something goes up in it's place- or the newest item on the template would be ~48 hours old... Courcelles (talk) 21:30, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
So it's ok to disregard consensus to keep ITN "fresh"? ~DC Let's Vent 21:45, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
This illustrates my opposition to the timer (an element that made perfect sense for the Did you know section and was duplicated at In the news without due consideration of the latter section's fundamental differences).
ITN should be updated based on the availability of suitable items, not based on how long it's been since the most recent update. Just as we shouldn't suppress items on busy news days (even if we're outpacing the timer), we shouldn't artificially accept them on slow ones. —David Levy 05:08, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
Consensus is clearly for removal, and based on the above points I'll weigh in with an oppose. Better to go with consensus and have a slightly old item than leave it up just because we don't have any other good candidates. Modest Genius talk 22:44, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

July 6

ITN candidates for July 6

Her Majesty addresses the UN

I'm not sure what kind of chance this has of getting on, but I thought it was worth a nom. Queen Elizabeth II is to make an address at the UN headquarters in New York City- the first time in 53 years BBC. Thoughts? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:11, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

  • Support. This will obviously get international attention. MickMacNee (talk) 13:33, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose. It's certainly unusual and, as Mick points out, it is getting quite a lot of attention, but at the end of the day it is just a speech. (given that it's Lizzy, you can be sure it won't be a contraversial speech either!) Physchim62 (talk) 13:47, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Support It's getting attention from both sides of the pond. And she hasn't done it since Eisenhower was President. ~DC Let's Vent 14:06, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose if this is just a formal address. Support if the content of the address is important as itself. --Tone 14:58, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose as an event in itself. If what she says makes waves we can post it. __meco (talk) 15:16, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
    • To Tone amd Meco, I've really got no idea what you think she is going to say, but she is the Queen, not the US President, she doesn't do 'Axis of Evil' or 'Change You Can Believe In'. The event is her speaking, full stop - that is why it has already got international attention, even before she has said anything. MickMacNee (talk) 15:54, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Well, first she is a queen, not the Queen. She's not queen of the world. I agree with your notion that her speaking there is an event in itself. I just don't think it is that big a deal. If it should be seen as a presage of great changes in the future I agree that it should be posted. Otherwise not. __meco (talk) 21:00, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
support per its historic value. not everyday does the monarch gives speech at the UN... 53 years to be exact here. most likely next one will not come for quite a long time. and i sorta agree with Mick here that just because she does things slowly, it doesnt bring down significance of this event. -- Ashish-g55 16:10, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
According to UN Webcast, she will address the General Assembly at 3:00 p.m (UTC−4). It can be streamed at Channel 3 on that website. Arsonal (talk) 16:45, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
Support the first time the head of state for 16 countries addresses the UN in 53 years is notable. --PlasmaTwa2 18:24, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
Comment. OK, so she's going to speak in about half-an-hour or so. Let's see what see says and how the rest of the media react. Don't forget that we will also need an article update somewhere before this can be posted. Physchim62 (talk) 18:27, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
One thing I would like to bring up before we put this up: Do we call her the Queen of the United Kingdom, the Queen of Canada, the Queen of Australia, etc., or do we just leave that out? I for one don't think we should specifically name her as the Queen of a single country and so I think we should either leave it out or call her the head of the Commonwealth. --PlasmaTwa2 19:40, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
Just call Her Queen Elizabeth II. She doesn't really need further disambiguation and it saves on all the sensitivities. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:45, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
I've made a bit of an update at Elizabeth II#Golden Jubilee and beyond (the penultimate paragraph of the section). It should be just a bout sufficient for ITN standards. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:16, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
Just say "Queen of Belize" and try to confuse everyone. --Golbez (talk) 20:19, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
Nigeria too (i believe) ;) but oppose really isnt much of a big deal, although the opening week of the General Assembly with world leaders needs to be put on (it has been)Lihaas (talk) 20:53, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
(edit conflict)^That would be an excellent idea for April Fools! Try to remember that one and see if she does anything newsworthy around that time. Also, weak oppose since I don't think she said anything significant, and the time gap is mostly cruft. Modest Genius talk 20:55, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
That would indeed be amusing for April Fool's! I don't think this is cruft, though- the (albeit constitutional) monarch of 16 nations and the head of the Commonwealth addressing the General Assembly in New York would be big news in at least those 16 nations + the US (ie most of the English-speaking world). It's also worth noting that that timer will be turning yellow very shortly and this is the only nomination with an updated article. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:05, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose.unlikely that any of her statements would be of any consequence.--Wikireader41 (talk) 21:07, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Support on a slow news day. Full text of address. Arsonal (talk) 22:11, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose, at least for now. Has she said anything important? This doesn't seem to be clear. And I can't see anything unusual in the link above. "The Queen" or "the Monarch" (perhaps she is ruling the world but since she hasn't bothered to confirm this she is just any old queen to many people) or anyone at all speaking at any event surely can't be important enough by itself - surely she has to say something important (or else there would be a flood of nominations about speeches given by people who sound important)? I also don't think it's very surprising that this is getting coverage in the UK (where she is from) and the US (where this took place). If Bhumibol Adulyadej, for example, did something similar, would it be as acceptable to include if it was similarly covered in Thailand but not in Europe or North America? I just don't see anything important in the content of her speech or the event itself. Most of it seems to be addressed entirely to a "Mr President" (guessing that this is probably Barack Obama)? --candlewicke 23:40, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
Comment UN General Assembly speeches are preceded with specific addresses to presiding officers: the President of the United Nations General Assembly and the Secretary-General. A common parallel is the US President mentioning Mr./Mdm. Speaker during the State of the Union address. Quoted from The Washington Post: "Her address to the 192-nation assembly represented something of a valedictory speech for one of the world's longest-serving heads of state, an 84-year-old monarch whose life has paralleled the history of the United Nations. It also provided a rare opportunity for her to weigh in on a contemporary political issue championed by Britain: the rising temperatures brought on by climate change." And as a side note, I would actually support as well if Bhumibol were to make a speech at the General Assembly. Arsonal (talk) 00:48, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Just post it already. I don't have a clue what people think she was supposed to say to make this event any more 'important' than it already was, but it's beyond irrelevant frankly. The event was the speech, full stop, and it's of proven international interest. The template is red now. If you don't post this, what crapola can you even remotely find to post that is even remotely similar? Maybe the King of Thailand has addressed the Imperial Galactic Senate for the first time in 53 years? No? I thought not. MickMacNee (talk) 00:22, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
The Czech govt or the prez of Kyrgx is more worthy. Even the meeting between obama and netanyaho.Lihaas (talk) 00:53, 7 July 2010 (UTC))
Apples and oranges much? You're comparing bilateral relations to the Commonwealth and the UN. Besides, I think heads of state meet just a little bit more often than once in a lifetime (or twice in a lifetime and a half if you want to be picky). Let's imagine this is posted, it will likely be decades or at least years before we have a similar event, so there's no risk of opening the floodgates. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:58, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
That is because most of the world has done away with Kings and Queens and find what they say/do irrelevant. I know that Brits are sentimental about their Queen but that does not make this ITN worthy.--Wikireader41 (talk) 01:20, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
You really sound clueless about the whole subject tbh. The Queen's words have today no more or less influence on the UN than she would have had 53 years ago. Nobody in Britain is 'sentimental' about the time when The Queen could go and announce a war at the UN, this is just nonsense, it was never the case this could ever happen in her lifetime. You might as well be claiming that nobody listens to the Pope anymore either because the world's moved on from Christianity since the middle ages. You might be right, but it's really got sod all, not one tiny little thing, to do with whether him speaking somewhere important for the first time in half a century would be of international interest. MickMacNee (talk) 01:35, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
So Mick you are the one with 'clue'!!!! Looks like Lindsay Lohan is giving the Queen a run for the money in terms of international news coverage. In terms of relevance both are about the same IMO. In terms of interest Lindsay would beat the old broad anyday ( at least with the guys).--Wikireader41 (talk) 02:00, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
old broad... seriously? i question your judgment if you are actually comparing Lindsay Lohan to Queen of 16 countries. -- Ashish-g55 02:43, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
As Ashishg55 said, if you think Linsey Lohan crying is even remotely comparable in ITN worth, then you are without doubt 100% clueless. MickMacNee (talk) 12:27, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
all I was comparing was the news coverage that Lohan and "Her majesty" were getting in the international media. and between the two Lohan is the one who has actually made any contribution to the society/ earned a single dollar based on her talents ( & not by accident of her birth). Though both were equally ITN unworthy. Glad there are more "clueless" people around here ;-)--Wikireader41 (talk) 14:59, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
Rubbish. You are talking nonsense. If you believe Lohan going to jail is ITN material, post it here and see if anyone really is as clueless as you about what ITN is and is not for and will support it. You are just making yourself look like an idiot frankly with your rather pathetic but rather overt anti-monarchy crap in here. MickMacNee (talk) 15:05, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
Was that a reply to me? I didnt say anything about bilateral relations.
as an aside, "old broad"? OUR majesty Empress Elisabeth I of India ;)
At any rate if we're running short of news we have the Pak taliban death above or the funeral of Fadlallah (an update to the current post which can be moved to news item #1)Lihaas (talk) 04:39, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Oppose. Non-event with little significance. Christopher Connor (