Jump to content

Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 350: Line 350:
*'''Posted''' with revised blurb. [[User:Espresso Addict|Espresso Addict]] <small>([[User talk:Espresso Addict|talk]])</small> 09:41, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
*'''Posted''' with revised blurb. [[User:Espresso Addict|Espresso Addict]] <small>([[User talk:Espresso Addict|talk]])</small> 09:41, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
*'''Pull''' too many terrorism-related entries at ITN lately. [[User:Nergaal|Nergaal]] ([[User talk:Nergaal|talk]]) 23:01, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
*'''Pull''' too many terrorism-related entries at ITN lately. [[User:Nergaal|Nergaal]] ([[User talk:Nergaal|talk]]) 23:01, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
*:Time to start ignoring this user's entries here which seem determined to disrupt the process. [[User:The Rambling Man|The Rambling Man]] ([[User talk:The Rambling Man|talk]]) 23:34, 29 November 2015 (UTC)


==== RD: Douglass North ====
==== RD: Douglass North ====

Revision as of 23:34, 29 November 2015

This page provides a place to discuss new items for inclusion on In the news (ITN), a protected template on the Main Page (see past items in the ITN archives). Do not report errors in ITN items that are already on the Main Page here— discuss those at the relevant section of WP:ERRORS.

This candidates page is integrated with the daily pages of Portal:Current events. A light green header appears under each daily section – it includes transcluded Portal:Current events items for that day. You can discuss ITN candidates under the header.

Donald Trump in 2017
Donald Trump

Glossary

  • Blurbs are one-sentence summaries of the news story.
    • Altblurbs, labelled alt1, alt2, etc., are alternative suggestions to cover the same story.
    • A target article, bolded in text, is the focus of the story. Each blurb must have at least one such article, but you may also link non-target articles.
  • Articles in the Ongoing line describe events getting continuous coverage.
  • The Recent deaths (RD) line includes any living thing whose death was recently announced. Consensus may decide to create a blurb for a recent death.

All articles linked in the ITN template must pass our standards of review. They should be up-to-date, demonstrate relevance via good sourcing and have at least an acceptable quality.

Nomination steps

  • Make sure the item you want to nominate has an article that meets our minimum requirements and contains reliable coverage of a current event you want to create a blurb about. We will not post about events described in an article that fails our quality standards.
  • Find the correct section below for the date of the event (not the date nominated). Do not add sections for new dates manually – a bot does that for us each day at midnight (UTC).
  • Create a level 4 header with the article name (==== Your article here ====). Add (RD) or (Ongoing) if appropriate.
Then paste the {{ITN candidate}} template with its parameters and fill them in. The news source should be reliable, support your nomination and be in the article. Write your blurb in simple present tense. Below the template, briefly explain why we should post that event. After that, save your edit. Your nomination is ready!
  • You may add {{ITN note}} to the target article's talk page to let editors know about your nomination.

The better your article's quality, the better it covers the event and the wider its perceived significance (see WP:ITNSIGNIF for details), the better your chances of getting the blurb posted.

Purge this page to update the cache

Headers

  • When the article is ready, updated and there is consensus to post, you can mark the item as (Ready). Remove that wording if you feel the article fails any of these necessary criteria.
  • Admins should always separately verify whether these criteria are met before posting blurbs marked (Ready). For more guidance, check WP:ITN/A.
    • If satisfied, change the header to (Posted).
    • Where there is no consensus, or the article's quality remains poor, change the header to (Closed) or (Not posted).
    • Sometimes, editors ask to retract an already-posted nomination because of a fundamental error or because consensus changed. If you feel the community supports this, remove the item and mark the item as (Pulled).

Voicing an opinion on an item

Format your comment to contain "support" or "oppose", and include a rationale for your choice. In particular, address the notability of the event, the quality of the article, and whether it has been updated.

Please do...

  1. Pick an older item to review near the bottom of this page, before the eligibility runs out and the item scrolls off the page and gets abandoned in the archive, unused and forgotten.
  2. Review an item even if it has already been reviewed by another user. You may be the first to spot a problem, or the first to confirm that an identified problem was fixed. Piling on the list of "support!" votes will help administrators see what is ready to be posted on the Main Page.
  3. Tell about problems in articles if you see them. Be bold and fix them yourself if you know how, or tell others if it's not possible.

Please do not...

  1. Add simple "support!" or "oppose!" votes without including your reasons. Similarly, curt replies such as "who?", "meh", or "duh!" are not helpful. A vote without reasoning means little for us, please elaborate yourself.
  2. Oppose an item just because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. We post a lot of such content, so these comments are generally unproductive.
  3. Accuse other editors of supporting, opposing or nominating due to a personal bias (such as ethnocentrism). We at ITN do not handle conflicts of interest.
  4. Comment on a story without first reading the relevant article(s).
  5. Oppose a recurring item here because you disagree with the recurring items criteria. Discuss them here.
  6. Use ITN as a forum for your own political or personal beliefs. Such comments are irrelevant to the outcome and are potentially disruptive.

Suggesting updates

There are two places where you can request corrections to posted items:

  • Anything that does not change the intent of the blurb (spelling, grammar, markup issues, updating death tolls etc.) should be discussed at WP:Errors.
  • Discuss major changes in the blurb's intent or very complex updates as part of the current ITNC nomination.

Suggestions

November 29

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Sport

RD: Eldar Ryazanov

Article: Eldar Ryazanov (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): TASS via News.pn, RIA Novosti
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Quite well-known former Soviet and Russian film director whose name is commemorated in asteroid 4258 RyazanovBrandmeistertalk 22:52, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

2015 Davis Cup

Article: 2015 Davis Cup (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Great Britain win the 2015 Davis Cup, their first victory in the event since 1936. (Post)
News source(s): BBC Sport, Sky Sports
Credits:
Nominator's comments: This is not one of the ITN/R items for tennis, as it is not a grand slam, but it is a bit unusual. Basically Andy Murray breaking another (laughably) long GB tennis drought. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 19:45, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I have expanded the article significantly since the comments by @Lugnuts: and @Fgf10:. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 23:28, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

25 (Adele album)

Articles: 25 (Adele album) (talk · history · tag) and List of fastest-selling albums (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Adele's 25 becomes the album with the largest opening week of all time. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Adele's 25 becomes the album with the strongest selling opening week of all time in the United States.
News source(s): MSNBC, BBC, CNN, Forbes
Nominator's comments: Music items at ITNC are very are, and this album actually seems to have surprised even those in the field by how well it sold. I think this is one of these rare commercial news about breaking records that actually works for ITN. Nergaal (talk) 16:40, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The album did break the UK sales also, and I am pretty sure it set other records too, just by looking at the List of fastest-selling albums. Nergaal (talk) 16:59, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well, but we cannot be sure it does so everywhere or world-wide, so the blurb cannot simply say "fastest selling ever". Listing the countries is also not practical if there are too many. Zwerg Nase (talk) 17:06, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose I rather not give weight to fastest album sales as I prefer it to go to all time sales but Wikipedia gave ITN to GTA V for the fastest first day sale in videogame sales 2 years ago but that was for all medias. Donnie Park (talk) 17:52, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, advertish vanity fair. If it becomes the first or second best selling of all time worldwide, I'd reconsider. Brandmeistertalk 18:19, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - well referenced and a news definitely for ITN. --BabbaQ (talk) 19:08, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • The announcement is today, but the ending week was 27th. Shall we move it to earlier date? --George Ho (talk) 19:17, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support. I'd prefer a more global aspect of this, but it seems notable by itself. 331dot (talk) 19:18, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Love Adele, but this seems to be an artifact of the ease of online-downloading and a change in Billboards sales metrics in December 2014 which added in online sales for the first time. This will necessarily have the effect of front-loading sales for newly released works by established artists. No going to the mall to see the album is out-of-stock, just download from your cellphone as you drive on the interstate. μηδείς (talk) 19:51, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I'm not convinced of the notability of first week sales, especially since the world ain't getting any smaller, and content delivery is getting dramatically faster and easier - but if what Medeis says is true and there has been a change in how sales metrics are obtained, then that more or less nullifies it for me. Not sure how I'll feel if this turns into an all-time sales record, but I see no reason it couldn't be renominated if it does. - OldManNeptune 20:08, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - As said, even when record-breaking, I don't see how this something "special" meets ITN standards. Anyone can download the whole album from Google Play or Amazon or any other website, making it most downloaded album of all-time, but that's nothing compared to owning a physical copy. We can wait for either CDs to be dominant again as it was before downloading came along or a newer physical format, i.e. something innovative, to compete downloading and streaming. Or perhaps we'll find a non-Western fastest-selling album of all-time to counter this "special" news. George Ho (talk) 20:11, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support In general we have too few cultural-related stories on the front page compared to sports events; there is practically always one sports event included, while much more seldom anything related to music. This is a very good example of a relevant music-related events; it's nice to sometimes have something a bit different from just the awards events. And the interest and coverage of Adele's album has been extraordinay and the sources for the record sale appear valid as far as I can see. (Billboard), (New York Times) Iselilja (talk) 20:40, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose This is actually of little surprised based on the performance of "Hello", and also what I consider vanity as other !voters have suggested. --MASEM (t) 20:44, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose trivia, would make a great DYK. P.S. Why single out the US as the country where it had the most sales ever in the first week? The same happened in the UK.... The Rambling Man (talk) 20:49, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - So what? As per editors above. Furthermore, no reason to mention the US records, but not the records in other countries. Also, IMNSHO Adele is the most overrated singer in recent history, but I digress.....Fgf10 (talk) 22:11, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Burkina Faso General Election

Articles: Burkinabé general election, 2015 (talk · history · tag) and 2014 Burkinabé uprising (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The people of Burkina Faso hold their first general election since the 2014 Burkinabé uprising that removed Blaise Compaoré from power after he had served 27 years in office. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Despite a delay caused by an attempted coup in September, Burkina Faso holds its first general election since the 2014 Burkinabé uprising that removed Blaise Compaoré from power.
Alternative blurb II: Burkina Faso holds its first general election since the 2014 Burkinabé uprising that removed Blaise Compaoré from power.
News source(s): (BBC)
Credits:

One or both nominated events are listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: This is a significant event for a country that rarely gets mentioned by any news providers and it's notable for Africa more generally as it's not often that people have successfully overthrown their government and gone on to hold democratic elections Monopoly31121993 (talk) 12:10, 29 November 2015 (UTC) (UTC)[reply]

November 28

Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Sport

Ongoing: Syrian Civil War

Article: Syrian Civil War (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: No blurb specified (Post)
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Since people decided to keep "European migrant crisis", perhaps we should reinsert this main event, which led to the Crisis in Europe and then attacks in Paris. Although editing has been low, Syria has been discussed frequently, and I don't know why else except the Civil War and Assad clan, including Bashar. However, I am torn, so I'll leave the decision to you all. George Ho (talk) 23:56, 28 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support once the Russian jet shootdown rolls off. -Kudzu1 (talk) 23:59, 28 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in the last few months, on any given day this war or its consequences dominated the headlines, and will likely do so in the foreseeable future. 87.154.212.110 (talk) 00:24, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • oppose this article is not appropriate for ongoing, as no significant additions or changes or updates have been made in over 2 weeks, other than minor wording and grammar changes. Find an article which is getting constant, continuous updates. The purpose of ITN is to highlight new Wikipedia content. This article doesn't have any updated content.--Jayron32 01:36, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Here's the link to the other section, Jayron: #Remove European migrant crisis from ongoing? --George Ho (talk) 03:50, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
What does that mean? The Rambling Man (talk) 23:17, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] Japan to resume whaling

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Article: Whaling in Japan (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Japan to resume whaling next year in Antarctic despite ruling of ICJ. (Post)
News source(s): (BBC)
Credits:
 Jenda H. (talk) 14:08, 28 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Got a quick search showing it still happens in Faroe Islands. [1]p[2] (dated last year).Lihaas (talk) 05:22, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Azawad attack

Article: November 2015 Azawad attack (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ An UN-MINUSMA base is attacked in Kidal, northern Mali. (Post)
News source(s): Econ Times CNN
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Casualties reported but its also ongoing. All in light of the World War now underway. We can change the blurb as time goes by.
Before ya'll comment "not updated", that's preculuded. It depends on the updates coming in, but im working on it. Lihaas (talk) 08:48, 28 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
comment at least 3 killed. While that's low for ITN, the target is notable.Lihaas (talk) 09:59, 28 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support pending article improvement; attacks on UN facilities/personnel are notable. 331dot (talk) 10:33, 28 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - a minor skirmish in a much larger war with thousands of dead. The UN force has been attacked multiple times, with 44 soldiers having been killed in the last two years. 87.154.210.140 (talk) 14:11, 28 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support An attack on an UN base is notable, no matter how low the casualty count is. ƬheStrikeΣagle 14:45, 28 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Support - While it is an attack on a UN installation, we should consider that that this is part of the larger conflict in that region that has been going on for some time, so it might not be as significant as it seems. But given the staleness of ITN in the last few days, its reasonable. --MASEM (t) 14:55, 28 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I think the main question is "so what"? Is this a story that our readers will be looking for? If it's not anywhere near the main pages of major news outlets, I doubt it. It seems to be minor and the article is just above stub quality. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:56, 28 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • ITN items do not require to be at the top of any news site, just that they are covered by reliable news sources (CNN easily qualifies). Dismissing a story just because it is not front page news everywhere is not a valid reason to oppose. I'd also suggest against avoiding trying to determine if it is the type of story that our readers might be interested in. We should be aiming for diversity in both topic and geography, not primarily on interest. --MASEM (t) 20:32, 28 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment This is a moot point since it's never getting on the main page, but is it "a UN" or "an UN"? The latter spelling seems like it would only make sense if it were pronounced phonetically rather than by spelling it out, which generally is not the case.--WaltCip (talk) 20:01, 28 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    If ever posted, it would be "A United Nations...." so that's not a problem. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:03, 28 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - not a high magnitude attack, not a major story. 1.39.61.143 (talk) 00:33, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

November 27

Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Business and economics

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics

Science and technology

November 26

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economics

Disasters and accidents

International relations

November 25

Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Business and economics

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Sports

RD: O'Neil Bell

Article: O'Neil Bell (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Yahoo! Atlanta Journal-Constitution AFP
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Former undisputed cruiserweight champion in boxing. Died unexpectedly, having been shot to death in a robbery. Kudzu1 (talk) 09:11, 28 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Getting stale...but support as top of his fiel.Lihaas (talk) 09:41, 28 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • If his death was unexpected, it should get a blurb, which I'm not sure is warranted here; I'm not sure he was 'very important' to his field. Article is also very slim at the moment. 331dot (talk) 10:08, 28 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Defo not blurb, but RD.Lihaas (talk) 10:31, 28 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Granted the article is crap, he won a title in his weight divisionLihaas (talk) 09:15, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
As have thousands of boxers. That doesn't mean they're important to the field of boxing. The Rambling Man (talk) 23:04, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed; I would look for, did this person pioneer a notable boxing style, influence other boxers, awards, etc. Winning belts is expected of most boxers. 331dot (talk) 23:15, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Remove European migrant crisis from ongoing?

My previous proposal to remove European migrant crisis as ongoing did not go well, despite two supports and two opposes. This time, even when Paris attacks affects the crisis, there have not been frequent updates lately. In fact, editing has slowed down. Whether the crisis is in the news frequently no longer matters. I checked recent developments and found nothing new... except typical politics. If removed, this leaves Paris attacks aftermath the only ongoing event in the Main Page. That shouldn't affect the Main Page, should it? --George Ho (talk) 22:25, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support - The undertones of the migrant crisis continue, and there are news items that say some variant of "in the aftermath of the Paris attacks we should restrict immigration from Muslim refugees", which is definitely related to the migrant crisis. That said, other items are dominating the news right now. Banedon (talk) 00:51, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose At least in Germany, this is still very much top of the news every day. There have been major developments in the last few days, for instance in Sweden. No updates to the article is not a reason to take this off ITN, but rather to get to it and add the new information. Zwerg Nase (talk) 13:27, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as well. The situation is escalating also because several countries have now declared that they will only accept people fleeing from war zones. So there are new developments all the time. --Tone 14:55, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep I just looked at two national news media websites in my country, and the refugee crisis was still on the front page of both today. Thue (talk) 16:33, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose/keep – Lull in editing ≠ lull in event. Issues are continually unfolding and it continues to become more problematic. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 17:29, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The reason to keep something in ongoing is for an article receiving frequent updates, not because it is just in the news. The editing rate on the article has drastically slowed down so it is no longer appropriate for ongoing. --MASEM (t) 17:57, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Masem: Again, if no updates is your concern, then WP:JUSTDOIT. There's plenty to choose from. I'd do it myself, but I don't have the time at the moment, unfortunately. Keeping the article on the main page will serve the purpose of bringing editors there and do more work on it. Zwerg Nase (talk) 23:00, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It is not that it is not being updated, but from what news I see on it, there is little to update on a frequent basis. It's a big story in the news day to day as it is still happening, but there is little actual day to day change in the "story" that merits frequent encyclopedic updates. And Ongoing is meant for stories that do have frequent encyclopedic updates. --MASEM (t) 23:27, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

November 24

Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Health and medicine

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Blue Origin rocket landing

Article: Blue Origin New Shepard (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Blue Origin performs the first successful soft landing of a reusable suborbital rocket, the New Shepard (Post)
News source(s): BBC, Guardian
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: This is the first time anyone has soft-landed a rocket that has been to space. It steals SpaceX's thunder a bit, as they've been trying to do this for a few years without success, albeit with a bigger orbital rocket. This is instead a suborbital one intended for space tourists, but still a hugely impressive achievement that brings the prospect of significantly-reduced launch costs. Modest Genius talk 12:57, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for a few reasons (1) the BBC article is like a press release from the company; there was no media at the rocket launch/landing so all information comes from the company. Questionable reliability. (2) this development seems like an incremental step in progress - the rocket lands and can be used again - doesn't seem like a significant development yet (3) the article hasn't been fully updated e.g. the "mission" section is written about a future planned mission but hasn't this mission just happened? MurielMary (talk) 13:14, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in principle, a very significant "increment" and we usually post the launch of any new series of rockets, none of which has landed under power. That being said, I agree entirely with Modest Genius's reservations on the reliability and independence of sources. When I clicked on the news item for this this morning I expected to see a launch and landing. Instead there was a news anchor and some talking heads discussing this but without any actual footage. μηδείς (talk) 18:24, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The Guardian source above has the footage, albeit taken from Blue Origin's press release. Skip to 1:45 for the landing. Modest Genius talk 13:33, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose this is not significant, especially after (albeit a ropey) Virgin commercial trial or two. What makes this any different? It's not clear to me why this is substantially different or more interesting, other than the fact that I'm disappointed by the spelling of "Shepard". But I do get it, so don't bother. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:50, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I assume it is named after Alan Shepard and so is spelled correctly.Richard-of-Earth (talk) 22:07, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, hence why I said "But I do get it, so don't bother." The Rambling Man (talk) 22:08, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yea, I was just about to undo it, but you are too fast and I got an edit conflict. Richard-of-Earth (talk) 22:11, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
What's significant is the vertical landing. The rocket goes up to space, then comes back down to Earth and lands itself using the main engine (no parachutes). No-one has ever done that before. I agree that a mere trial run of a suborbital flight would not be sufficient, but the major technological breakthrough of a vertical landing is. Modest Genius talk 11:52, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your response, may I ask another question? What is the scale of this landing? Is it a vessel within which six or so humans would survive, or is it an experimental craft which proves that we can re-land vehicles from space? The Rambling Man (talk) 22:00, 28 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Blue_Origin_New_Shepard#Development Three or more passengers (though 0 this time, new manned spaceflight tech would kill too often if it wasn't tested first). Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 01:50, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Rockets are among the most expensive vehicles ever built, and yet most of them are lost (by design) on launch. A reusable launch vehicle is practically the holy grail of current space flight research, and a vertical landing is incredible. Calling that an "incremental step in progress" is like saying a car that can go up the street and back and then be used again is incrementally better than one that you can drive for a hundred miles but requires you to bail out of its exploding hulk when you wish to disembark. Also per Medeis, it's common ITN practice to post the launch of new rocket series, even when they do not represent such a significant step forward - and this one is not only significant, it's a new entry into the commercial spaceflight field, significant in and of itself. - OldManNeptune 12:13, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose - Essentially what we're looking at here is a big sounding rocket. Both the X-15 and SS1 were reusable, went into space, and soft landed, nothing new there. Thus, in the strictest sense the blurb and noms comments are incorrect. The term VTVL should be added for it to be correct. When SpaceX lands their first stage, that's a game changer. But this? Gets a big 'meh' from me. Fgf10 (talk) 14:54, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] 2015 Tunis bombing

Article: 2015 Tunis bombing (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In Tunis, Tunisia, a bus explodes, killing twelve presidential security guards. (Post)
News source(s): CNN news.com.au BBC
Credits:

Article needs updating
Nominator's comments: Terrorist attack killing presidential security guards. ISIS has claimed responsibility for the attack. Andise1 (talk) 21:14, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I note the BBC article makes it clear it is a suicide bomber that triggered the explosion and suggest the blurb reflect that. I note ISIS is claiming responsibility but they is yet proven out. The article could use a hint more expansion but it will likely take some time for details to filter in. --MASEM (t) 23:34, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral/weak oppose at this point - neither CNN nor BBC have this story on their front page, suggesting lack of notability. Also the article is very brief. MurielMary (talk) 07:20, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Just because certain websites do not have this attack on their front page does not mean it is not notable. Andise1 (talk) 21:09, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support with caveats per Anise. Most media is covered by turkey/Russia at the moment. oF course the article needs major work.Lihaas (talk) 11:43, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
proposal merge Mali and Tunisia blurbs? Both in Africa and related to Libya (broadly).Lihaas (talk) 08:02, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Douglass North

Nom Douglass North. Nobel prize winning economist. "Obituary: Douglass C. North, Nobel Prize-winning economist, 95" --bender235 (talk) 23:49, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

New Portuguese PM

Proposed image
Article: Portuguese legislative election, 2015 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Socialist Party leader António Costa (pictured) is appointed Prime Minister of Portugal. (Post)
News source(s): BBC, WSJ, Reuters
Credits:

Article needs updating
Nominator's comments: Change in head of government for Portugal. We didn't nominate their general election result seven weeks ago. Incumbent PM has failed to gain a majority coalition to govern, providing an opportunity for another EU country to form a left-wing government. Fuebaey (talk) 22:23, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Zanhe: Changes to head of state are ITNR, but not changes to head of government. General elections are, which often mention the leader of the party that wins, but any other change in head of government is judged on its own merits. 331dot (talk) 02:25, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
not udaed but weak support the circumstances are very unusual (and its not ITNR, the election was). But the section needs more of an update.Lihaas (talk) 00:47, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Premature? The lead of Costa's article says "On 24 November 2015, he was given a list of items by President Aníbal Cavaco Silva that he would like clarified before being appointed prime minister-designate." That implies it's not a done deal. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:48, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I try not to rely on unsourced statements - this is confirmation. The process should be a formality since the SP made their pacts two weeks ago. I'll add a paragraph to Portuguese legislative election, 2015#Government formation in the next day or so, if someone hasn't already beaten me to it. Fuebaey (talk) 01:47, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"Should be a formality" gives me pause. It could still fall through, yes? As a wise man once said, "it ain't over 'till it's over". BTW I do of course support this if it is indeed confirmed beyond any shadow of doubt. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:07, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] Hunting Ground controversy may see changes to Wikipedia editing rules

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Article: The Hunting Ground (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ An ongoing controversy regarding inappropriate edits to Wikipedia articles related to the documentary film The Hunting Ground may result in a major overall of Wikipedia's rules and associated policies, especially those related to Conflict of interest. (Post)
News source(s): http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/wikipedia-founder-considers-updating-policies-following-the-hunting-ground-controversy/article/2577075
Credits:

Article updated
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: May directly effect Wikipedia even more than it has already. Ceannlann gorm (talk) 22:15, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose not that this is not an important issue for en.wiki to figure out but this is far from an ITN-type story. There's other places like the signpost where this can be highlighted. --MASEM (t) 22:23, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose this is not news in any way, shape or form. Not only does nobody other than a few hundred Wikipedia editors care, Jimmy Wales has no powers to change Wikipedia's rules even should he want to. ‑ iridescent 22:25, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Closed] 2015 Roubaix shootings

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Article: 2015 Roubaix shootings (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A number of people are injured during a hostage crisis in Roubaix, France. (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian
Credits:
 EugεnS¡m¡on(14) ® 19:43, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Posted] Russian jet shootdown

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Article: 2015 Russian Sukhoi Su-24 shootdown (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Turkey says it shot down a Russian Sukhoi Su-24 fighter jet on the Turkish-Syrian border. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ A Russian Su-24 fighter jet is shot down on the Turkish-Syrian border.
Alternative blurb II: ​ A Russian Su-24 fighter jet is shot down by Turkey near the Syrian border.
News source(s): Press TV
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: It seems small with 1-2 casualties but its all over the news and some heated rhetoric. Within the next 24 hours it could be even bigger with repercussions already warned. I awas unsure to nominate this but keep an eye on it and it may grow within 24 hours. MAJOR escalation here... Lihaas (talk) 13:09, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Proposing altblurb that leaves out "Turkey says"; all sides seem to agree a jet was lost (and there is film of it) but disagree on the circumstances. 331dot (talk) 13:22, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support altblurb Clearly a major news story right now. I was busy adding additional information to a different article, but have moved over text to this one, as it was reported here first. Also tweaked both proposed blurbs to include links to direct section with text about shootdown. --Jayron32 13:27, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Just saw your link. Ill add it to the article. You can Too ;)Lihaas (talk) 13:34, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

:*Note: The new article is not sufficiently developed yet, if it gets there we can change the target link. Let's keep the target at the larger article, which provides more context and has more details. If and when the new article is as developed as the current Russian military intervention target, we can change it. --Jayron32 13:41, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Theres a minimum update for nw. Obviously over the next 3+ hours more would come in. Nato is meeting in an emergency session in about 2 hours.Lihaas (talk) 14:04, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
All good. --Jayron32 14:08, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support altblurb which I've modified to present tense, but most outlets are pretty clear on how this happened, e.g. BBC: "Turkey shoots down Russian warplane on Syria border", NYT: "Turkey Shoots Down Russian Warplane Near Syria Border", SMH: "Russian fighter jet shot down by Turkish jets near Syrian-Turkish border" so perhaps we should modify the blurb to reflect these reliable sources. Putin has just said "We will never tolerate such atrocities". The Rambling Man (talk) 13:33, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - that military planes get shot down by accident or by friendly fire in wars is hardly uncommon, and so is this incident. If larger ramifications emerge (break of diplomatic relations, military escalation), then let's post something. But at the moment it seems all that will happen will be a few harsh words being exchanged. 93.215.90.237 (talk) 13:46, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
By Turkey's admission, it was not an accident, and Russia also is not saying it was an accident. 331dot (talk) 13:55, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, to all intents and purposes, this is an act of war. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:58, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"Friendly fire"? This is not friendly fire, check the definition. LjL (talk) 16:09, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
PS: Target article lede says "by the Turkish Air Force." Alt2 could be changed to "by Turkish Air Force jets," (or "F-16s") if that's not too long. Sca (talk) 15:14, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
READY to post?Lihaas (talk) 14:33, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
NOTE TO POSTING ADMIN we don't know the exact location ofw here it was shot down (hence the controversy). We should use the more neutral original blurb indicating the border of both.Lihaas (talk) 16:35, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The reason I keep running into this organizational issue (with several admins) is that not every suggestion for improving an ITN blurb concerns an error per se. The lack of any indication of the incident's location isn't technically an error, it's an omission, or a simple lack of info. The pre-posting discussion of the blurb occurred here, and it seems logical for additional discussion of the blurb to be allowed here. However, please see this. Sca (talk) 18:31, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
And you'll note it got fixed promptly. So... --Jayron32 18:43, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
For some reason the fix isn't showing up on the Main Page display yet. Now it's there.
Aside from which, it would make sense to change the headings on Main Page Talk to something like Errors/suggestions. Sca (talk) 18:50, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well that's something to take up elsewhere, like WT:MAIN. Suggestions are usually so vague and subjective that they can be dismissed, most importantly because the community has come to a consensus on a blurb before it's posted. Why then suddenly bend the whim of an individual's subjective opinion unless there's a factual error? Everyone has a preference, and not everyone has copyedited print. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:07, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
OK, leave MP Talk as it is, but allow good-faith post-posting discussion here. Sca (talk) 21:37, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Why have further discussion on the nomination thread when the item has already been posted? That makes no sense.--WaltCip (talk) 00:45, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Quatsch. Sca (talk) 00:54, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

November 23

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations
Politics and elections

Science and technology
  • A new United Nations report finds 90 percent of the thousands of disasters over the last two decades are weather-related. The majority have been caused by floods, storms, heatwaves and droughts. Researchers with the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNISDR) suggest the cost has been between $250 and $350 billion per year, i.e., total of $5 trillion/$7 trillion. The report concurs with findings of previous studies that weather disasters are on the rise compared to previous decades. Flooding, in particular, is becoming more frequent and more devastating as sea levels continue to rise. (UPI)
  • Blue Origin launches the unmanned rocket New Shephard to the edge of space (100.5 km) and lands safely upright on its original launch pad in Texas, becoming the first organization to do so. (press release) (WSJ)

[Closed] Northern white rhino dies, population down to three

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Article: Northern white rhinoceros (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Northern white rhinoceros moves closer to extinction with the death of a female at San Diego Zoo's Safari Park; three animals remain in the world (Post)
News source(s): CNN BBC USA Today
Credits:

First article updated, second needs updating
Nominator's comments: Significant event in species reduction/extinctions MurielMary (talk) 09:02, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, it's not a species, it's a subspecies, and it's not the last one. Abductive (reasoning) 09:26, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose — if a species becomes extinct, that's news, but we're not going to run a countdown ticker each time a member of an endangered subspecies dies. This doesn't "move the species closer to extinction", anyway; the effort to resurrect the NWR don't involve any of the surviving examples but instead is based on implanting NWR embryos into other rhino surrogates. ‑ iridescent 09:28, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in principle - It's in the news now. No guarantees the actual extinction will be in the news as well, especially given how many species go extinct every day. Only problem I would say is that the article looks pretty outdated and / or badly structured. There are three rhinos remaining for example, but that is not apparent in that page. Banedon (talk) 09:43, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The fourth sentence of the opening paragraph of the rhino article states there are three remaining; second paragraph mentions death of the female at San Diego. Also seem to be a large number of updates in the last 24 hours. Or do you mean the San Diego article looks outdated? MurielMary (talk) 09:45, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
comment is that the last female? If so then its notable as the end of the speces (almost). Any resurrection will then be of a mixed species.Lihaas (talk) 11:17, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Ongoing: Military intervention against ISIL (swap Paris attack aftermath)

Aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle reportedly made its strikes recently, with France and Russia apparently leading the way. This is to swap the current link Paris attack aftermath to military intervention against ISIL which seems more precise and developing. Brandmeistertalk 16:39, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: The above choice of article is being updated MUCH LESS often than the Paris Attacks article is. The requested ISIL article has only been edited 4 times in the last 24 hours, and in the last week I see only 2-3 updates to the article I would count as substantial. The Paris Attacks article exceeds 50 edits in the past 12 hours, with at least 4-5 major content additions in that time span. Based just on that, the Paris Attacks article is the preferred target. --Jayron32 17:42, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Why not post the Syrian Civil War as ongoing? The terrorist attacks in Paris, the refugee crisis, the French and Russian (and many other nations, including the US) strikes on ISIL, all these news stories are directly related or are direct consequences of this civil war. All the while, the civil war is going on with an intensity that by itself would justify this civil to be posted as ongoing. And frankly, it should never have been removed. 93.215.90.237 (talk) 19:39, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I would agree. Just today it appears that the UK will be sending airstrikes against ISIL in Syria. Time to focus on the bigger picture (e.g. as noted by the IP above) and not just one of the many horrendous individual events, makes perfect sense for Ongoing. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:25, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
In the Syrian Civil War article, there are a few more substantial updates, but not as much activity as the Paris attacks article; its last 50 edits takes us back to October, and while there was a flurry of activity on November 21, the Paris attacks article is getting more updates more recently. Still more action in that article. --Jayron32 02:24, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know if such a page exists but it would seem that if we had an outline page (one that follows WP:OUTLINE, not necessarily a prose-filed article but one that is more a inter-wiki link directory) that gave overviews of various articles that touch on the ISIL/Syria situation (including but not limited to the refugee crisis, the Paris attacks, the Metrojet crash, the various historical ruins destroyed by ISIL, etc.) that this would be an acceptable "ongoing" news target even though that specific page may not always be updated. It's this type of specific scenario where the situation is so amorphous and all-encompassing where I'd consider this a possibility; I would not, for example, recommend it at all for something like the Olympics (in that the current Olympics page should be a good overview prose article and not just an outline-level article). --MASEM (t) 20:32, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I was the admin who put 'Paris attacks aftermath' in Ongoing after the item rolled off, because related news was at the time continuously top of the BBC's news index and the article was being heavily worked on (~50 edits per day). I am entirely happy for it to be replaced with a more general ISIS-related article, as long as a suitable target can be found that is being updated frequently. Espresso Addict (talk) 22:40, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] Move Metrojet Flight 9268 to Ongoing again?

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


"Metrojet Flight 9268" has been cyclically being removed and reappearing, but perhaps patience wasn't in our minds. This time, I hope patience is considered in regards to developments. Russia stated that the flight was bombed, exciting fears of terrorism. Afterwards, there aren't any more developments yet. Currently, it's at the bottommost. Shall we declare it ongoing again? George Ho (talk) 16:01, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"confirms" was changed to "states". --George Ho (talk) 16:16, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Any further determination will likely takes months (it took several to confirm what took down that MA flight over Ukraine). The story for all purposes is now stale and/or part of the larger issue of these various terrorist acts between Paris, etc. (though no linkage has been made at this time that I have seen). --MASEM (t) 16:20, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Getting a little tired of this now. The Kremlin confirmed it. If you doubt the Kremlin, then you should doubt the White House and Downing Street etc. This is seriously becoming a drain on resources responding to each and every nuance of your posts. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:36, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move on.--WaltCip (talk) 18:01, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • The article in question has just one substantial edit in the past week, nearly all the activity has been vandalism reversion and minor wording fixes. And that substantial edit: [7] is not any new information, but a retrospective discussion over claims Russia had made initially in the investigation. There has not been any substantial new information added to the article to justify its inclusion in any part of ITN, and the volume of new information is far too low for Ongoing. --Jayron32 02:27, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Posted] Pfizer deal

Articles: Pfizer (talk · history · tag) and Allergan, Plc (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ American pharmaceutical company Pfizer agrees to merge with Allergan in a deal worth US$160 billion. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ American Pfizer and Irish Allergan agree to merge to produce the world's largest pharmaceutical company.
Alternative blurb II: ​ American Pfizer and Irish Allergan agree to merge, with Pfizer becoming based in Ireland.
News source(s): Guardian, CNBC, Reuters
Credits:

Both articles updated
Nominator's comments: Significant business takeover. Big drug company buys out Botox manufacturer, to potentially create world's largest drug company. Tax inversion may also be involved - relocating from the US to Ireland would more than halve the corporation's tax rates. Fuebaey (talk) 13:57, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Support, It is just a merge rather than a buyout (the total value of the merged companies to be $160B, as opposed that much trading hands), but that said, this is a major deal in the pharma side. Pfizer's article has a few cns, but otherwise both articles seem ready to go. --MASEM (t) 15:14, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on article quality of Allergan. I thought about nominating this earlier today, until I looked at the article and saw that it doesn't actually talk about the company. It has bits about its corporate history and a list of its product and nothing else. -- KTC (talk) 16:00, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Time we had a discussion about this kind of thing. Not that I disagree with you, but how many times have we seen massive (mega-massive) business deals bummed out of ITN because they haven't signed, sealed and delivered the bottom line. I'll start something, hopefully you and the others around these parts can contribute so we get some guidance we can follow in the future. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:42, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
TRM, Ping me when you get the discussion started. I'll add my two cents. Rhodesisland (talk) 00:26, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose we just went through this with Heinzkraft, whose merger nominated here as a "big deal" was followed within a few weeks by buyouts and layoffs. Consolidation during bad economic times is not the same thing as, say, the creation of Verizon as an integrated mobile, internet and full-service phone carrier with the merger of some local service baby bells and GTE. There's no promise of synergy here (i.e., no news) just cost cutting and tax avoision. μηδείς (talk) 22:14, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

November 22

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

Sports

[Posted] 2015 NASCAR Sprint Cup Series championship

Proposed image
Article: 2015 NASCAR Sprint Cup Series (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In motorsport, Kyle Busch (pictured) wins the 2015 NASCAR Sprint Cup Series championship. (Post)
News source(s): NASCAR.com New York Times
Credits:

Article updated
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: Notable subject concerning the championship in the highest level of stock car racing. Dough4872 04:03, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Looks a bit better now. A few unsourced statements, but not enough for me to stand in the way of this being posted. Kudos to Dough4872 for the summary. Fuebaey (talk) 12:27, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Super Bowl, World Series, Stanley Cup, and NBA Finals are featured on the main page every year, so I see no reason why the NASCAR Sprint Cup championship shouldn't as it is one of the biggest spectator sports in the United States, and also has international following. Dough4872 15:54, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • From the instructions: "Please do not complain about an event only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. This applies to a high percentage of the content we post and is unproductive." – Muboshgu (talk) 16:57, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's only not the same because it's an event you personally aren't interested in. Otherwise, it's exactly what the rules tell you is an invalid reason to oppose an article being posted. --Jayron32 03:14, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] Ko wins LPGA Player of the Year Award, youngest ever winner

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Proposed image
Articles: Lydia Ko (talk · history · tag) and LPGA (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In golf, Lydia Ko (pictured) wins the LPGA 2015 Player of the Year Award, becoming the youngest winner in the 49-year history of the award (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In golf, 18-year-old Lydia Ko (pictured) wins the LPGA 2015 Player of the Year Award, becoming the youngest winner in the 49-year history of the award
News source(s): USA Today Stuff NZ Toronto Star Golf.com The Golf Channel Vavel Sports Newspaper L.A. Times
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Although other wins from the end of the season are being reported, they are being reported as secondary to Ko's "youngest P of the Y" achievement. Another "youngest ever" achievement to add to a string of other achievements. MurielMary (talk) 00:01, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Per above. We practically never post individual sporting awards, including much better known awards. This doesn't equate to winning an individual sporting competition/trophy. "Youngest to win" is really only an interesting enough tidbit to mention in passing for something that would get posted anyway (i.e. "Jane Doe wins the Generic Sports Championship, becoming the youngest athlete ever to do so.") However, this could be a great DYK hook. - OldManNeptune 10:25, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per the above and noting that we wouldn't post the men's equivalent award for the same reason. However, there is potential to spin off the list of winners into its own page and take that through the featured list process into "today's featured list" on the main page, or to get Ko's article to GA status and into DYK that way. BencherliteTalk 10:58, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per above reasons. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 20:57, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as with the Kachin jade mine disaster below, on another day I might have supported this, but with the quantity of ITN-worthy items right now I think there is no space for this. Banedon (talk) 01:00, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Close Thanks for the responses on this nom. I suggest that the agreement to exclude individual sporting awards is included in the ITN/C criteria so that it's clear for new editors (currently not mentioned there) MurielMary (talk) 01:19, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Posted] Argentine presidential election

Proposed image
Article: Argentine general election, 2015 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Mauricio Macri (pictured) is elected President of Argentina. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Cambiemos candidate Mauricio Macri (pictured) is elected President of Argentina.
News source(s): BBC, Bloomberg, Channel News Asia
Credits:

Article updated
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: New head of state/government for Argentina. Run-off result based on exit polls - still requires official confirmation. Fuebaey (talk) 22:11, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Kachin jade mine disaster

Article: Kachin jade mine disaster (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ At least 104 people are killed in a landslide at a jade mine in Kachin State, Myanmar. (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:
 The Rambling Man (talk) 11:24, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Withdrawn] Aircraft unit as current ITN photo

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The Russian statement on bomb conclusion has gotten old...er. We have newer blurbs, so either keep the current photo, use the fish photo (File:Salmo salar GLERL 1.jpg) as replacement, or no photo at all. I could not propose the big gem photo because it is unfree. I wanted to take this to WP:ERRORS, but I don't see it as an error... at all. George Ho (talk) 03:39, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]


The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

References

Nominators often include links to external websites and other references in discussions on this page. It is usually best to provide such links using the inline URL syntax [http://example.com] rather than using <ref></ref> tags, because that keeps all the relevant information in the same place as the nomination without having to jump to this section, and facilitates the archiving process.

For the times when <ref></ref> tags are being used, here are their contents: