Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates/March 2015

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

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.

March 31

March 31, 2015 (2015-03-31) (Tuesday)
Disasters and accidents

Health

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Sports

[Closed] The World is Bardo

No consensus to post. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:32, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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 World is Bardo (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Successful March against Terrorism has been held in Tunisia. (Post)
News source(s): Byrne, E. , and Stephen, C. (2015). Thousands march in anti-terrorism rally in Tunis, Tunisian and French presidents attend unity rally after Tunis museum attack, The Guardian, 29 March 2015

Credits:
 --Csisc (talk) 11:41, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Oppose - even though some world leaders attended this event, I am not sure whether it has had much global impact. It's a protest against terrorism. Most people don't support terrorism already - but what does this achieve? starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 13:24, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose First, the blurb should be better (the title of the source is misleading, as it says "hundreds of thousands" in the march, making it larger than the title suggests), however, while similar to Je Suis Charlie, this seems to be a much smaller, and local, scale, and a response to the already-posted Bardo museum attack. I would suggest that DYK is a prime spot for this if this fails ITN. --MASEM (t) 13:26, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose as protests against terrorism are not unusual and this specific one doesn't seem like it will have a great impact on laws or policy. The Je suis Charlie protests were much larger in scale and occurred in many countries. 331dot (talk) 13:56, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support large protest (see picture) internationally attended. Just object to the word "successful" as odd wording for the blurb. μηδείς (talk) 16:48, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: Strangely worded blurb and rather stale (it happened Sunday, not today). And it wasn't even that big of a march, with only a few leaders of countries in Tunisia's neighborhood joining what Reuters described as "tens of thousands of Tunisians". -Kudzu1 (talk) 17:05, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Purely symbolic, and not even particularly significant at that. Joshua Garner (talk) 17:09, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose: does not seem to have attracted particular international attention; we have not included marches of a comparable size with only national significance on In the News before. Midnightblueowl (talk) 21:16, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Bad article is undeveloped compared to
    talk) 09:10, 1 April 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] Nigerian general election

Proposed image
Article: 
elected president of Nigeria. (Post)
News source(s): BBC News, Aljazeera

Credits:

Article updated
The nominated event is listed on
WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.

Nominator's comments: Support' as nominator. Ali Fazal (talk) 16:49, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

Thank you 331dot. Ali Fazal (talk) 17:11, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support posting ASAP. One of the world's largest democracies (and an apparently democratic result, to boot!) and a major development in regional politics. -Kudzu1 (talk) 17:02, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support with article updates The election, even considering ITNR, has been the subject of news for days being one of the largest in Africa. But the article seems to be missing the results of the election, which I know probably aren't fully complete at this time, but should have a summary of the presidency victory and that the opponent has conceded defeat. --MASEM (t) 17:14, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Jonathan has conceded, NYT and BBC have declared victory for Buhari, the last state to be counted is Borno, which can safely be predicted to go for Buhari. --Varavour (talk) 18:21, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Election commission has declared Buhari the winner... this really should be posted. --Varavour (talk) 02:45, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose not sufficiently updated. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:29, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    @The Rambling Man: Could you itemize a few insufficiencies? It looks ready for posting to me. The article has referenced statements of the results, the winner, and the concession by Goodluck Jonathan. The rest of the article is solid and extensive as well. Can you tell me what information you know of, which you find lacking in the article? It would help people who care to know what to add. --Jayron32 19:28, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    It was mainly the tenses of the sections preceding the polls and results sections, and the fact that we still have "preliminary results" suggesting a rather tenuous claim of a definitive result. Plus there appears a 36th state to confirm results. Also, the National Assembly and Senate tables are incomplete. But other than that, it's good to go. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:02, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks. I'm not familiar with the sources necessary to do the update, but that is an actionable list of items someone can work on before it is posted. --Jayron32 21:38, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Jonathan has conceded. --Panam2014 (talk) 21:12, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: very important international news story. Midnightblueowl (talk) 21:14, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. A very clear case of WP:ITNR. -LtNOWIS (talk) 21:53, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@
ITNR list do not need support on the merits as they are presumed notable by being on the list; this discussion is to assess article quality and determine a blurb. 331dot (talk) 21:59, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
No, individual instances of an ITNR might be an issue, but the discussion should center on if this specific case is a problem, not the event in general. Not that I don't think this case is close to be one to challenge on the event (Africa's biggest element at 50M+ voters, tight race, etc.), but ITNR is not a guarantee that article topic automatically qualifies, just that we should avoid quibbling on the event's broad nature. --MASEM (t) 22:11, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for clarifying that; I didn't mean to suggest it would automatically get posted. 331dot (talk) 22:20, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support – Current top story. Sca (talk) 01:26, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. - Probably the most important African story of the moment.Nickpheas (talk) 09:41, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. - Looked for it to be there. As others have said, the current African top story. User:Marfinan 10:44, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posting. Picture can be changed as well. --Tone 14:56, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Off-topic. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:21, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pity it was posted for several hours still with incorrect tenses and even now has incomplete information, but hey, the vote count rules. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:31, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    You know, TRM, the problem is both that you're correct and ignorable. The tone of your posts, coupled with a long history of being incivil and unpleasant towards people, means that most people are generally going to ignore you, even when you have something important and valid to say. It's the reason why
    WP:INCIVIL exists as a policy, and why it is such a big deal. It has nothing to do with being a nanny, nor does it have anything to do with being arbitrary. Being an effective communicator means getting people to do what is necessary by telling them to do so. Your communication methods and reputation have made you an ineffective communicator, which is why no one ever listens to you. You were right, are right, and by the looks of things, will still be right tomorrow about this article being incorrectly posted. You were right when you brought it up before, and no one listened because of the means in which you expressed yourself, the tone you took, and your reputation of being abusive towards others. Please let this be an object lesson: getting others to act on your say-so requires a certain technique: people don't just do what you say because you are right; it is in how you express your rightness. We've been trying to tell you this for years. I fully expect you to ignore this advice, but my compulsion as an educator to improve others makes me give it anyways: Learn from these mistakes, change how you treat others, learn to communicate ideas in ways that make others act. If you don't, you'll continue to be right and be ignored. It would be much better to be right and be followed. That's what I want for you. I only hope you want that too. --Jayron32 01:11, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
There is not prose update at all...but yeah well said. Time overdue to de-sysop him.120.62.30.7 (talk) 08:20, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Very brave IP, very brave. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:41, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
and you still fail to get the point!120.62.30.7 (talk) 08:49, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You didn't make one. For the avoidance of doubt, what you said was without point. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:11, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I've never made any calls for such. TRM has never abused his tools, and never used them inappropriately. I'm just advising him to communicate effectively so he can be more useful to the project. --Jayron32 12:04, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It's okay, I think we all recognise who the IP is, couldn't stay away for too long, eh?! The Rambling Man (talk) 12:20, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

March 30

March 30, 2015 (2015-03-30) (Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
  • Yemeni Crisis (2011–present)

Business and economy

Arts and culture

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime
  • The Jerusalem District Court finds former Prime Minister of Israel Ehud Olmert guilty of accepting cash from an American businessman for personal use. (Ynet News)
  • In
    Fort George G. Meade, Maryland, base perimeter guards shoot and kill one person and injure another person as two men attempt to crash the entrance gate with their vehicle. The incident also injures a guard. The base is the headquarters for the National Security Agency. (BBC)

Politics and elections

[Closed] Washiqur Rahman Babu killed

trend is clear μηδείς (talk) 16:44, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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: 
Washiqur Rahman Babu is hacked to death in Dhaka. (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian CTV News BBC

Credits:
Nominator's comments: Lots of news coverage from around the world. We posted the death of
talk 20:12, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
  • The primary purpose of ITN appears to be to promote showcase Wikipedia itself. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 21:07, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm pretty sure we'll be talking about the Germanwings crash for some time, and of course the Singapore leader's death. And I know plenty of Australians who will be reminding me about the World Cup for the next four years. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:45, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support possibly under an ongoing "Islamist Terrorism" heading. There's no doubt this would be published if it had happened in Manchester or Dearborn. μηδείς (talk) 20:39, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm not seeing where this is "Islamist terrorism". People strongly critical of a progressive speaker used violence to silence them. It's tragic but its not terrorism. --MASEM (t) 21:29, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose This article probably should/will be speedily deleted as it does not seem to meet the notability criteria in
    WP:BLP1E. Mamyles (talk) 20:42, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Note that I've nominated this for deletion under the normal process. Mamyles (talk) 21:01, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose and speedy delete per Mamyles.--WaltCip (talk) 20:45, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I would suggest directing support for deletion to the appropriate forum; this is only for discussing the merits of posting to ITN. 331dot (talk) 13:59, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Domestic violence, not a major issue. --MASEM (t) 21:29, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"Domestic violence" usually means murder by a family member, in this case Second blogger hacked to death this year in Bangladesh (Daily News) "A blogger was hacked to death by three Muslim attackers in Bangladesh's capital because of his anti-Islamic writings, police said today." If killing people to silence a viewpoint is not terrorism, then what is? μηδείς (talk) 00:28, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Religious violence. Stephen 00:38, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"Terrorism" since 9/11 has become a emotionally-driven word. There are legal/government definitions for it, and then there's what the press claims if they want to emotionally-charge a story, which we should be avoiding at all costs. Killing someone to silence their voice is a tragic event, but it seems part of a larger systemic problem in that area, but I can't see it being defined as terrorism. --MASEM (t) 01:06, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Terrorism is a contentious label for politically motivated violence. This is violence with a political motive.
    talk) 04:49, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Hence the Charlie Hebdo attack was "political violence", not terrorism? 9/11 was "political violence? Noting during The Troubles in Ireland was terrorism because it was political? μηδείς (talk) 16:44, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose Unfortunately, unlike
    talk) 04:49, 31 March 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] Ehud Olmert found guilty of corruption

Two days without any motion toward support μηδείς (talk) 17:40, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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: Ehud Olmert (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Former Prime Minister of Israel Ehud Olmert is found guilty of accepting bribes. (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian The Australian Toronto Star
Credits:
Nominator's comments: A former head of state being convicted seems significant, and we posted
talk 14:47, 30 March 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] Uzbekistani presidential election

Article: 
Uzbekistani presidential election. (Post)
News source(s): The Globe and Mail

Credits:

Article updated
The nominated event is listed on
WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.

 Brandmeistertalk 14:38, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

  • Support Classic ITN topic. Updates already look sufficient. Mamyles (talk) 14:49, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - pathetic "election" but still an election.--BabbaQ (talk) 16:19, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - notable ad ITN/R. Ali Fazal (talk) 16:25, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weakest of all possible supports Article is barely more than a stub, and contains little information that isn't in the blurb above. It is fully referenced, not that it's hard to fully reference an article that short. It'd be nice to see it expanded a bit, but I don't have any formal complaints about quality beyond that. --Jayron32 16:29, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posting. --Tone 19:13, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I understand that this kind of meets the bare minimum requirements, barely, but it's not really even beyond stub-quality. Is this the sort of thing we post when one of our key pillars of ITN is "To showcase quality Wikipedia content on current events."? The Rambling Man (talk) 20:12, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • At the time of nomination I saw basically only one English-language source, likely because vote counting had just finished. Now when there are more sources, it's possible to add them. Brandmeistertalk 21:41, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • I'm not disputing that, I'm just questioning whether the article, which at the time of posting barely scratched up enough to be a stub, was what we consider to be "quality Wikipedia content". Of course more can be added, but perhaps it should be added before it's posted. We used to require articles to be B-class or better.... The Rambling Man (talk) 08:47, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        • Yeah there's only six sentences and I added one of them. Posting on the front page was a bit premature.
          talk) 08:59, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
          ]

March 29

March 29, 2015 (2015-03-29) (Sunday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
  • 2015 military intervention in Yemen

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Politics and elections

Sports

Fall of Idlib

Nominator's comments: Significant development and blowback to the Assad government. Idlib is now the second provincial capital to have been taken over by rebel forces after

Ar-Raqqa in 2013 by ISIL. This is also a good opportunity to bring back the Syrian Civil War (deadliest conflict in the past four years) to ITN. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 14:52, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]

Is there a typo in your comment, @The Herald:? I can't work it out. Formerip (talk) 17:42, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I mean that is this blurb shows anything apart from the details given in Ongoing? The same thing..-The Herald the joy of the LORDmy strength 02:26, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on the technicality it isn't covered by Ongoing. Perhaps there should be a new Ongoing for this whole ISIS/al-Nusra/Saudi-Yemeni situation that's now going on? Joshua Garner (talk) 17:38, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - per user Thue.--BabbaQ (talk) 17:39, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment this should be covered by ongoing events. And at least one source is not confirming this as definitive. Suggest if we're going to flood ITN with this kind of thing, we consider another more general Ongoing item. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:35, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
There needs to be a line somewhere. When do we stop? When we have a 'Conflicts in North Africa, the Middle East and Subcontinent' ongoing item? Or a 'World politics' item? The situation in the region covers:
  • Uprisings against the Assad government in Syria;
  • Ethnic conflict in Iraq arising from the American-led regime change;
  • ISIS' (or whatever we're calling them these days) hijacking of the previous two to establish a caliphate;
  • Popular uprisings in Tunisia, Libya and Egypt over the past several years;
  • Attempts by Islamists to take over those popular uprisings to establish theocratic states, with varying degrees of success and varying connections to ISIS;
  • The Boko Haram insurgency in Nigeria;
  • Boko Haram's connection to ISIS;
  • Efforts by surrounding states to help Nigeria tackle Boko Haram;
  • A rebellion in Yemen which (AFAICT) doesn't owe direct allegiance to ISIS but has similar goals (I may be out of date on this point);
  • Attempts by Saudi Arabia and Iran to influence the outcome in Yemen, possible conflict between Saudis and Iranians as a result;
  • Attempts by Western governments to influence the outcomes of all of the above without getting too involved;
  • Whatever's left of al Qaeda in the region;
  • Activities of the Taliban in Pakistan and Afghanistan, with connections to al Qaeda;
  • The Israel-Palestine conflict, which is not directly connected to any of the above but will be cited as something to be angry about by one side, the other, or both in all of the above.
Where exactly do you draw a line around all that to create an ongoing item and not flood ITN with articles? GoldenRing (talk) 23:05, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reflection - Hmmm, debates over which ongoing war it belongs to. At what point is this all going to meld into a regional Sunni-Shia war? The nightly news guys keep reminding us that the situation in Yemen is exactly that, and the scary thing is that this is how World War I got its start, with nations taking sides like little dominoes falling in one direction or the other. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 20:52, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This is not at all a clear Sunni-Shia war - Sunni Kurds are fighting against Sunni ISIL in Syria and Iraq, and in Syria Sunni al-Nusra (al-Qaeda) is fighting against Sunni ISIL. LoveToLondon (talk) 22:26, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose There are 3 different major civil wars ongoing in that region (
    Yemeni Crisis (2011–present)) each with several major belligerents. Making a blurb each time a battle happens where 200 people die might result in more than one blurb per week. The blurb text is also very confusing in not telling from which of the many other sides in the war they gained it - you would need something like The Syrian Government loses the city of Idlib to Al-Nusra. LoveToLondon (talk) 23:06, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Alternative suggestion: Ongoing:
2015 military intervention in Yemen blurb). LoveToLondon (talk) 22:38, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]

[Posted] 2015 Cricket World Cup

Articles: 
Final
News source(s): ESPN Cricinfo

Credits:

One or both nominated events are listed on
WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.

 -The Herald the joy of the LORDmy strength 10:05, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

If it's just the final article per TRM below then my above comment won't be a problem. starship .paint ~ ¡Olé! 13:17, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support there's no need for two bold links, the final is the key link here, and that article is in reasonable nick. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:18, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support for altblurb —Vensatry (ping) 13:03, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This is a topic of international importance. Gfcvoice (talk) 13:29, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • On ITNR and the final article looks good to go. Marking [ready]. I suggest using the alt blurb, but only bolding the link to the final itself. Modest Genius talk 15:16, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - obviously. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 15:28, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Not knowing cricket or how a game is written in recap, but should there be more of one in the Final page (I'm comparing this to what the Super Bowl page expectations we had this year before posting) ? If that page is going to be linked, it seems woefully missing details on the game itself. --MASEM (t) 15:37, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • The article is pretty extensive, TBH. Everything except what happened in the final is there. Well, if TRM supports (and by his "support" meaning this is both relevant and updated) this, then this should pass his standards on being updated so... –HTD 16:51, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • On the Final page? The leadup to the match is clearly there, but normally for sports recaps I'm used to see a paragraph or more that talks about the general ebb and flow of the game, in other sports. All there is for the match proper is a summary table, which seems underwhelming. But again, this is not a sport I have a good idea about. --MASEM (t) 17:05, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        • Yes, the article about the final is pretty extensive, until it goes into the actual match. Unless you count the bullet points as "prose". –HTD 17:45, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
          • Going back to your first point, yes of course it's "relevant", it's ITNR, and yes, the final article is updated properly, as I already said. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:24, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
            • Sure it's updated. After people knew who won, this is what happened at the article:
              1. Changed the image at the infobox.
              2. Updated the attendance and man of the match.
              3. Something about changing things to past tense.
              4. Added a couple of bulleted "notes" at the box score.
              5. Added prose at the lead of a single sentence about Australia being the favorites.
              6. Then followed by a clause of the result of the match, followed by a sentence about the attendance record.
            • All in all, about 2.5 sentences of new prose.–HTD 19:19, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support of obvious significance. Mellowed Fillmore (talk) 17:09, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral - the sport is of high importance for a few countries that plays it on a professional level. For the rest of the world it is a non-sport.--BabbaQ (talk) 17:40, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • It is listed as a Recurring Item, which means that it passes notability every time and can only be opposed for reasons such as poor sourcing, glaring omissions, etc. '''tAD''' (talk) 18:05, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • And you already know that in those "few countries", there's a combined population of around two billion. There never seems such a problem when posting baseball articles. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:23, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Cricket is a sport of high importance for the many countries that play it at a professional level. And for many other countries that play the sport, such as the USA, they aren't good enough to qualify for the World Cup. Gfcvoice (talk) 18:34, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • Indeed; I know little of cricket, but I know that it is wildly popular in many places, including India, the most populated nation on Earth. 331dot (talk) 18:36, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        • @331dot: - India's 2nd -> see World population, China's 1st. starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 14:13, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
          • @Starship.paint: Thanks. Clearly I didn't think that through enough. I know India likely will be #1 in the future as their birth rate is much higher than China's. Guess I got ahead of myself. 331dot (talk) 14:16, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        • There are supposedly only five cricket pitches in the US. They're so bad, they don't care. –HTD 19:19, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        • No matter what you people say it is a fact that Cricket is a sport of high importance for only a few countries. May so big ones, but still only a few. Fact.--BabbaQ (talk) 19:42, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
          • No matter what you say BabbaQ, this article is listed at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:In_the_news/Recurring_items#Cricket. So debate over how many countries' residents find cricket to be important is irrelevant. Gfcvoice (talk) 19:51, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
          • The Cricket World Cup is the smallest tournament (in number of participating teams in the final tournament) at 14 amongst the major team sports of football, basketball, rugby union and cricket. They'll even reduce that to ten in 2019. Compare, for example, the Football World Cup that would add from the current 32 teams to 40(? 48?), basketball from 24 to 32, heck even the World Baseball Classic has more teams when it started in 2006 with 16 teams (the now defunct Baseball World Cup even tried out 22 teams in 2009). Amongst these "major" sports, cricket has the fewest countries participating; the International Cricket Council has just over 100 countries (compare with the World Baseball Softball Confederation at 141; granted the West Indies is composed of many countries). I didn't even consider the likes of volleyball and handball. –HTD 19:57, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
            • So take your whining to ITNR and get it removed. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:04, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
              • The whole Pot calling the kettle black argument gets a new dimension with your comment above :) lol.--BabbaQ (talk) 23:45, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
                • But it is cricket which have much more viewership than many other sports. For example, the India- Pak match was viewed by 288 million, a record breaking stuff. -The Herald the joy of the LORDmy strength 02:23, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
                • As usual, BabbaQ, you're not really making any sense. Try to stay on-topic and use logical sequiturs where possible. The Rambling Man (talk) 05:55, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
                  • It's not my problem if you have difficulty understanding when You get criticism. I only found it hilarious that you complained about whining, when in fact you keep whining on and on about basically anyone having a different opinion than yourself at ITN. You can read in to that what you want :).--BabbaQ (talk) 16:19, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
                    • No, still not getting it. What does your comment have to do with this nomination? Nothing, other than an obvious declaration that you don't understand this nomination. Still, job done! Keep on whining!! :) (And please, for consistency, have a dig at 331dot, Gfcvoice, AtHomeIn神戸, Aircorn, HappyWaldo,Starship.paint, Lugnuts, Vensatry etc etc, because they have elected to make the same opinion as mine, while you just want to keep on bitching at me – do us all a favour and pipe down or be consistent). The Rambling Man (talk) 19:31, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support the article regarding the final looks sufficiently updated. Any claims about it being a "non-sport" are preposterous. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 01:54, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Article is updated fine and despite the bickering above their is really no doubt about its signifance as a sporting event. AIRcorn (talk) 02:29, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support How is this not on the main page yet? Mind boggling. Like it or not, cricket is one of the world's major sports in terms of participation and viewership. - HappyWaldo (talk) 05:11, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Most obvious support Just post it already! I can't believe people are actually debating the relevance of this. Very widespread appeal internationally, across continents and literately billions of people. We don't seem to have this debate when it's about baseball, which has a much smaller international appeal..... One would be tempted to mention the words 'double standard' 82.21.7.184 (talk) 06:31, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why the delay? Now that all the Americans are tucked up in their little beds, we can post this now, right? Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 07:07, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • If they drag it out much longer, it will be time to start the next world cup. FYI, this American was awake 24 hours ago watching the ESPN-Cricinfo gamecast. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 07:21, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:47, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

March 28

March 28, 2015 (2015-03-28) (Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents
  • Germanwings Flight 9525
    • According to an interview with Germany's Bild newspaper, the former girlfriend of co-pilot Andreas Lubitz was told by him that "One day I'm going to do something that will change the whole system, and everyone will know my name and remember." (BBC)
    • A mourning religious service is held at Digne-les-Bains in the French Alps near the site of the downed passenger jet. (Guardian)

Law and crime
  • The Congolese bar owner whom
    status as American, as opposed to his being African. (Guardian)

Politics and elections

Sports

RD: Gene Saks

Article: Gene Saks (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): New York Times Variety Chicago Tribune
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
talk 21:20, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]

  • Oppose article is stub-quality at best. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:34, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Oppose I was going to nominate and did update the death on the article's page, but as TRM says, the article is woefully poor in describing why he is important. If the article can be expanded (particularly using these obits), that would help, as the DC for RD posting does seem met. --MASEM (t) 21:36, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality grounds. Seems to meet the death criteria for his field, but as has been said the page needs work. 331dot (talk) 21:39, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support storied film and stage director, a bit missed by WP since his last film, apparently, So I Married an Axe Murderer predates most of the web generation and his last TV appearance was in 1998. μηδείς (talk) 03:23, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. The article is little more than a stub - it does absolutely no justice to someone who had the career his awards/nominations/honours seems to indicate. Challenger l (talk) 16:41, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. The article certainly could be improved, but is referenced adequately and already makes the case that he meets the criteria. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 03:51, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment completely outside my comfort zone but I tinkered with the article a little to improve it to at least remove my opposition. Someone else may wish to expand it further and those in opposition on quality grounds may wish to take another look. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:06, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] 2015 Makka al-Mukarama hotel attack

Article: 
12-hour siege at a hotel in Mogadishu, Somalia, ends and resulted death of over 20 people, including a U.N. diplomat. (Post)
News source(s): Somalia hotel siege ends; U.N. diplomat, 19 others killed

Credits:

Nominator's comments: Attack occurred at a hotel, which is popular and has significant security setup and UN diplomat also killed. (Note: Article will be expanded.) AntonTalk 16:03, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Seems to be a significant story, article is decently sourced. --MASEM (t) 16:24, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Good article, more notable than some other shootings that have made ITN. Joshua Garner (talk) 17:24, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support an article of reasonable quality describing a notable newsworthy event, should be nothing too much to think about for posting. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:43, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: Mass-casualty event, apparent act of terrorism, international incident. Checks a lot of boxes for ITN and should be a no-brainer. -Kudzu1 (talk) 19:53, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose number is not that high, terrorism is an OVERLY-represented topic at ITN, terrorism in Somalia is common. The only remotely noteworthy fact is that a UN representative died, but that is not very shocking when you realize it is Somalia after all.
    Nergaal (talk) 20:06, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Funniest oppose I've read from you in a few days. Good work. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:54, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Learning from the master.
Nergaal (talk) 21:39, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
Not me, clearly. I usually oppose on article quality, something you seldom take into account. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:48, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Split decision A lot of terror attacks are posted to ITN, whether in the Western World or elsewhere. However, shipwrecks in Bangladesh and Burma have been opposed on the justification that it happens all the time there. Terrorism is frequent in Somalia. '''tAD''' (talk) 20:13, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This is the 7th article we have on terrorist attacks in Mogadishu alone since 2010.
Nergaal (talk) 21:40, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
And that's relevant because.....? The Rambling Man (talk) 21:48, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You are even more square-headed than you appear.
Nergaal (talk) 22:13, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
And that makes no sense at all and is of no relevance to the nomination, not for the first time. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:15, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oh guys, come on... bring the discussion out of the sandbox please.--BabbaQ (talk) 22:19, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, I agree completely. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:36, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - significant story, good article. --BabbaQ (talk) 20:29, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Split decision There probably is too much terrorism coverage at ITN, but 20 casualties (especially when one is a diplomat) is a high enough amount to leave me on the fence. Mellowed Fillmore (talk) 23:26, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted --Jayron32 03:10, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

March 27

March 27, 2015 (2015-03-27) (Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

[Closed] Amanda Knox

Closing since trending ever more strongly to oppose, and generating more heat than light. μηδείς (talk) 03:28, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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: 
Raffaele Sollecito are acquitted of the murder of Meredith Kercher by Italy's highest court.
News source(s): Al Jazeera Washington Post Christian Science Monitor

Credits:
Nominator's comments: Loads of news coverage, has been a high-profile case for some time now, and now this story has been definitively brought to an end. 
talk 15:53, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
I affirm my opposition based on the fact that this is "pretty American" media-pics get clicks-bias and that none of the parties involved was notable. Were this an acquittal in the trial of someone accused of the
Olaf Palme assassination, it might be different. μηδείς (talk) 19:56, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
What really matters is neither of those things, but whether or not a consensus to post emerges, or else why do we bother voting at all? Formerip (talk) 19:32, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Your "oppose" is based on ignorance, and you should retract it. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 19:47, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Haven't we done this already? Formerip (talk) 19:58, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Not helpful at all. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:45, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Your comment "just a murder case" is an ignorant statement. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 19:38, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
And your dick's hanging out. Formerip (talk) 19:39, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for further revealing your ignorance. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 19:43, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
My pleasure. But please put it away, it's distracting. Formerip (talk) 19:44, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You first. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 19:46, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The media have decided that it is in fact not "just a murder case", by giving the case the amount of coverage they gave. But suppose that one can successfully argue here that the media were wrong to do that. But then, we are not allowed to make that determination, we have to stick to discussing whether or not a subject matter is actually in the news or not, we are not here to determine whether or not by our standards, a subject matter should have been in the news or not. That's why even if one can argue that this is just another murder case, that is still an irrelevant determination. Count Iblis (talk) 19:44, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No, I don't believe that's how it works. We don't post everything that's in the news or, say, the top ten most reported stories of the week. We do discriminate, and there are various valid reasons for opposing nominations, one of which is that you don't think a story is all that significant. "But it's on page two of the Guardian" or whatever is also a vaild counter-argument, but a fairly weak one, I'd say. Formerip (talk) 19:54, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose more politicking and nothing of substance to report. If a Colombian woman and her boyfriend were accused of killing a Peruvian woman, and then it transpired, according to the courts, they didn't, would we be posting it? Think about it. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:41, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • The media decides to report or not report on cases, and we stick to determining if there is sufficient media attention. Count Iblis (talk) 19:47, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That's not how things work around here. This is not a tabloid news feeder that just relinks whatever the media decides to sensationalize. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:48, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Are you calling BBC a tabloid? You have no business commenting here. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 19:50, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The BBC is not immune to sensationalized news coverage. And with respect, I don't think it's your call where I can or cannot comment. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:54, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
How utterly and completely absurd, and contrary to everything Wikipedia stands for, to attempt to claim that we should be reporting whatever gains "media attention". Competence here is at an all-time low. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:00, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If you're talking to me, I take your comment as tacit agreement to end the interaction ban. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:52, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Consensus around here seems to set a very high bar for legal cases getting mention on ITN. I think a strong argument could be made that this has much lower relevance and legal implications than the Bowe Bergdahl case that was also recently shot down. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:44, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note - The statement "just a murder" is highly offensive on its face, regardless of the notability of the case. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 19:49, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: I'm sure if our readers are interested in this case, they can read all about it in The Daily Mail or The New York Post, right next to the coverage of Jeremy Clarkson being fired by the BBC and Zayn Malik leaving One Direction. -Kudzu1 (talk) 19:51, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Zayn left? OMG. Much more important (per Twitter, media outlets etc) than this no-result. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:01, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: Don't get the above comparison to Clarkson and Zayn, which were single recent events, and also simple entertainment stories without crime and law. This is the end of the legal case on a murder which had been making news for seven years or so since it happened. '''tAD''' (talk) 20:11, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - a definite ending to one of the worlds most covered murder trials in the last decade. Ofcourse it should be featured on ITN.--BabbaQ (talk) 20:30, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support purely because it is the end of a legal matter involving three countries(US, UK, and Italy) and has much wider interest than "just a murder case". 331dot (talk) 20:43, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. It is a subjectively dumb story, but for good or ill it is in the news and this is the definitive end. I am also motivated by the fact that Wikipedia has quite extensive coverage of this topic, so it offers a chance to highlight more information than one would get from most news accounts. Dragons flight (talk) 20:46, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Legal case is not notable enough. LoveToLondon (talk) 22:36, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. This case, while perhaps fascinating, really is just a murder trial. The fact that American infotainment networks sought to convert it into an international incident because one of the now-acquitted is a pretty, white, American girl is great for the tabloids, but that is about it. Resolute 23:05, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Oppose obviously media coverage does matter to a certain extent, but I think that this specific case was overblown and does not rise to ITN level. Mellowed Fillmore (talk) 23:11, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. This entire story has received considerable and extended international coverage over a long time frame. This is, hopefully, the final chapter is this sad story. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 23:17, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Disagree that an legal case which had the chance to lead to an international disagreement between the US and Italy and involving the death of a UK citizen is a "tabloid" matter. I think that all the parties involved would disagree that this is a "crap" matter as well. 331dot (talk) 07:51, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose WP:NOTTABLOID - this case frequently received sensationalised tabloid coverage inside the US and Italy, that doesn't justify it as notable or influential. Murder cases are decided all the time, this is only promoted as notable because the person is a "celebrity"
    talk) 08:34, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • @
    Aronzak: Boko Haram is still being discussed below; please offer your opinion on posting it. I disagree that BBC, NBC and other legitimate news outlets are "tabloids". This was a case with international issues. 331dot (talk) 08:46, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Oppose per Abductive and per TRM's story. Someone should close this. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 15:05, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as tabloid fodder. This has been a long running tabloid staple because it involves two attractive young women and sexual elements to the murder. In the grand scheme of things it makes no real difference to the world, and is of poor encyclopaedic value. There's no way we should be covering this on ITN. Modest Genius talk 15:19, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    I generally agree with what you are saying, but I'm not sure that ITN items are required to make a real difference to the world. Mellowed Fillmore (talk) 17:28, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Indeed, if we should follow Modest Genius reasoning the Cricket World Cup should not be posted as it is a sport without any importance for most parts of the world.--BabbaQ (talk) 17:36, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Nope, it's on ITNR and is played around the world in countries with a combined population of over two billion. Try again. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:27, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. We didn't run a blurb for the acquittal in
    Shooting of Trayvon Martin, which was much more significant, so I don't see why we should run one for this. Kaldari (talk) 18:07, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
That's not exactly the same situation. This case involves three nations(Knox is American, Kercher was British, it all happened in Italy) and had potential international repercussions(as the US had said it would not extradite her). 331dot (talk) 18:14, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Could an uninvolved editor please
    close this? I think it's fairly obvious that there is no consensus to post. Thanks... -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:17, 29 March 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] RD: Rod Hundley

Not going to be posted; does not meet the criteria. 331dot (talk) 10:57, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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: 
talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): TL SLT

Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.
 -The Herald the joy of the LORDmy strength 03:10, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
  • Oppose, doesn't appear to meet the criteria for RD inclusion. Nakon 03:14, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - article has only five references and many unsourced paragraphs. Also not convinced he's 'big' enough in basketball player - he's a 2× NBA All-Star but many players have had that over 10×. He might have been 'big' as an announcer though - not sure, but the article's shape must still be taken into account. starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 03:17, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per above. We can't list every sports figure on RD when they die. He doesn't appear to be at the top of his field or anything like that. -Kudzu1 (talk) 03:29, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Another that has his fans, likely a good number of them - but doesn't meet the criteria for RD. Challenger l (talk) 05:01, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose seems like just another moderately successful basketball player, not rising to the level we expect for RD. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:18, 28 March 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] Scott Kelly, Mikhail Korniyenko and Gennady Padalka launch

No consensus to post. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:33, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Articles: 
Mikhail Korniyenko and Gennady Padalka launch to the International Space Station, where they will spend 342 days. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ American astronaut Scott Kelly will spend a year in space, to compare his body to his identical twin brother on earth.
News source(s): CNN USA Today The Guardian

Credits:
Nominator's comments: Described as "history-making" by the Guardian; this is significant because it will, if successful, break the record for the longest mission on the ISS (see CNN). 
talk 20:32, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
  • Oppose as with all such "if it happens it will be..." nominations, I'll happily wait until "it" happens. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:34, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose As much as it breaks my heart to oppose a spaceflight story, this will only be the longest stay on the ISS, there were several year plus stays on Mir. 82.21.7.184 (talk) 20:42, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The launch is a routine ISS launch, the mission will not be, but we should wait until they complete it and safely return. --MASEM (t) 20:48, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support the year long mission has never been done before, and the twin study with Kelly's brother is a first - and it has implications for future long-term space missions. Kelly was on the front cover of Time based on this mission. Padalka will have spent the longest in space of any human at the end of the mission. If this isn't ITN worthy I'd propose it for DYK.
    talk) 22:38, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Nope, as I said about, this will neither be the first, nor the longest long-stay mission, several Mir crew members stayed longer. 82.21.7.184 (talk) 08:37, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It will be the longest at the ISS, and will be unique in that Kelly's twin brother will be monitored on the ground for comparison.[2] ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 11:49, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Key language is "will be". We hardly post of a potential aspect, but instead wait until that aspect is verified. Assuming all goes well, their return from the ISS will get comparable coverage, as well as now assurance they have spent the most time there, and that's the point where ITN makes sense. --MASEM (t) 14:02, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Will support upon completion. Joshua Garner (talk) 22:56, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, for now. I'd support a posting should they complete the mission. Nakon 03:01, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for now. It may merit posting when Padalka breaks the cumulative time in space record during the mission, aside from completion of the mission. 331dot (talk) 11:04, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per above objections. —Jonny Nixon - (Talk) 14:00, 28 March 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 RD] Tomas Tranströmer

Proposed image
Article: Tomas Tranströmer (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Swedish poet and winner of the 2011 Nobel Prize in Literature Tomas Tranströmer (pictured) dies at the age of 83. (Post)
News source(s): (Aftonbladet) (Channel News) (Le Point)
Credits:

 Bruzaholm (talk) 16:04, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support per nominator. Truly notable award winning poet, active until death. Bruzaholm (talk) 16:21, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm not going to refactor your comment, but just to be clear, this isn't a "support per nominator", but "support as nominator". – Muboshgu (talk) 16:28, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb per Nobel Prize. RD is a no-brainer. Gamaliel (talk) 16:13, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Nit though that there's only the date of death in the article, there should be at least a sentence or so for a better update. The rest is reasonably sources and okay for posting. --MASEM (t) 16:16, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • To be clear, I support RD but Oppose blurb. Routine death of age, and this was not a person of the likes of Thatcher or Mandela. --MASEM (t) 16:23, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD but oppose blurb. I don't see this story being "significant" enough for a blurb, but a Nobel winner meets the death criteria clearly. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:18, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb RD – Nobel prize winning poet. Influential in his field and active until recently. (Would be a given here if he was from the English speaking world) P. S. Burton (talk) 17:08, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD only. I don't think that simply being a Nobel laureate warrants a blurb. Brandmeistertalk 17:27, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD but oppose blurb. Being awarded with the Nobel Prize should not be taken as decisive criterion for posting a blurb at any price, as there have been many controversies in the past over the recognition that the prize gives its recipients. Tranströmer was surely a good writer for his time but not one of his contemporaries whose works have influenced different generations. I doubt that most of us here have ever even heard of him before winning the Nobel Prize.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 17:29, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • He is also the recipient of the
      Golden Wreath of Struga Poetry Evenings and the Petrarca-Preis. That is all the major international awards, except the international Man Booker. I do not think his significance can be measured by whether or not you have heard of him. If we do not post Tranströmer then I wonder where the thresehold for poets lies. Does any poet warrant a blurb? The only reason I could see for not posting a blurb would be his old age of death. P. S. Burton (talk) 18:07, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
      ]
      • A rough measure of when we would use a blurb to highlight the recent death of a notable person in which the death was by natural cause/old age would be someone of the ilk like Margaret Thatcher or Nelson Mandela. These two people had significant influence on an international level in politics and the like, and its clear the reaction across the world from their passing was a big deal. A poet is very much unlikely to have this type of influence, much less any other Nobel prize winner, off hand. --MASEM (t) 18:11, 27 March 2015 (UTChave
        • ^^^ Off hand, I think the distinguished Mr Mandela won a Nobel Peace Prize '''tAD''' (talk) 01:48, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        • P. S. Burton, all the prizes that you mention are on the top of the field but they simply don't present an automatic qualifier for a blurb, especially after introducing the RD section. The main goal of introducing the RD section is to replace the massive posting of blurbs documenting deaths with a simple line of showing their names only, while blurbs are not completely excluded and allowed in case the person has made major impact in the world and influenced millions of people and whole generations. Frankly, I do think that we've been very concessive in the last couple of years; the number of deaths posted in the RD section has been heavily inflated and some people have undeservedly received blurbs, thus lowering the death criteria. So, if this had been nominated before applying the change, it would have deserved blurb on the grounds of winning the prizes or even solely the Nobel Prize (Note that the Nobel Prize laureates generally received blurbs before RD came into existence.).--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:06, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
          • Ok, fair enough. I have not been active in this part of Wikipedia since the introduction of the Recent deaths section. Thanks for taking the time to explain. P. S. Burton (talk) 19:10, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD but oppose blurb per all above..-The Herald the joy of the LORDmy strength 17:51, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD Oppose Blurb above reasons. Joshua Garner (talk) 18:33, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Removed "Ready" as the article is far from ready. There is no update that he died apart from the first line and the article has to be fixed in several places to reflect that. --Tone 19:12, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD, oppose blurb His death is not one with the exceptional level of global impact and coverage that would warrant a blurb. This is not to dispute that he was a very important writer, but blurbs are rightly rare these days. Neljack (talk) 21:56, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD A Nobel Prize winner is obviously a leading figure in writing. I thought I was aware that RD blurbs are for ones which make an event (death of a reigning monarch, assassination of popular figure) rather than the passing at the end of a long and successful life. Terry Pratchett, whose work sold millions (but won no Nobel prize), had no blurb '''tAD''' (talk) 01:45, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted RD Nakon 02:43, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD, oppose blurb - had success as Nobel winner but not the global impact of say,
    J.K. Rowling. starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 03:05, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]

March 26

March 26, 2015 (2015-03-26) (Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
  • Aftermath of the 2014–15 Yemeni coup d'état
    • 2015 military intervention in Yemen

Arts and culture

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

[Re-posted] RD: Dinkha IV

Article: Dinkha IV (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Holy Synod Announcement
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Iraqi Catholicos-Patriarch of the Assyrian Church of the East. -The Herald the joy of the LORDmy strength 04:13, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

  • Support: Notable religious figure, solid article. -Kudzu1 (talk) 04:19, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Top-level figure in his field, good article, topical.128.214.53.18 (talk) 08:15, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, notable patriarch of an historically important church.--Kathovo talk 09:26, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, Head of a major religious body. Article is in appropriate condition '''tAD''' (talk) 10:48, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support noted figure, good article. —Jonny Nixon - (Talk) 11:30, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 14:56, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Yet more sterling work. I see that his death isn't even referenced. Does anyone read these articles? Does anyone care about quality and referencing? The Rambling Man (talk) 19:44, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    @Coffee: could you explain this posting please? Did you check the death was referenced in the article? The Rambling Man (talk) 21:01, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pulled per TRM. I would not condone his use of belittling tone directed at specific users, but the article cannot be posted with the quality issues, regardless of significance. Two fixes are needed before posting. The purple prose describing the death needs to be neutralized a bit, and the entire death paragraph is unreferenced. We cannot post someone died without any references to the fact, that would be a major BLP issue. No prejudice to this being returned immediately upon those two fixes. --Jayron32 21:06, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    This is all about one admin who has made two poor errors of judgement in posting at ITN in the past 24 hours. The sooner we rid our process of such failings the better. And for the love of God, on an RD posting, there's like ONE THING you need to check. NOBODY here who supported this or posted this checked it. Sad face. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:08, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    It's not like he castrated a baby. [Description of something that admins' actions on ITN are not that TRM can handle] It's reversible. Calm down. -- tariqabjotu 21:41, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    What the hell are you talking about? Your comparison is disgusting and completely unnecessary. Think again "Tariq", before posting such crap. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:42, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    The issue appears to now be resolved. -Kudzu1 (talk) 21:21, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment, there are multiple references on the death of this subject. Any objection to posting this to RD at this time? Nakon 02:59, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. I admit, I had to do some research to fully understand who this person was and what significance he actually held. There are now a couple of sources properly cited concerning his death, though none of them directly state the cause of death. Inline citations seem present throughout the article. It looks as it should. Challenger l (talk) 04:56, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
To me, TRM's remarks have tainted yet another nomination. It's surprising we even have admins still willing to post stuff around here with TRM berating anyone whose actions he disagrees with, and then perpetually holding those actions against them. -- tariqabjotu 05:33, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
To me, your vile comparison and the general incompetence demonstrated by some is the real problem. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:47, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] Exhumation and reburial of Richard III

Not happening. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 05:38, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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: 
Leicester, England. (Post)
News source(s): BBC The Guardian CNN

Credits:
Nominator's comments: Lots of coverage from around the world, seems historically significant, members of the royal family were in attendance. [3] 
talk 00:42, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]

I suggest you recuse yourself, RiiiR, on the basis of
WP:COI. Otherwise we may have to depose you. μηδείς (talk) 02:03, 27 March 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.

March 25

March 25, 2015 (2015-03-25) (Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Business and economy
  • American companies
    Kraft Heinz Company, which will be led by the present CEO of Heinz, Bernardo Hees. (Reuters)

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Sports

[Posted] Saudi Arabia strikes Yemen

Articles: 
conducts airstrikes against them.
News source(s): The New York Times Al Jazeera BBC News

Credits:

Both articles updated

Nominator's comments: Headline-grabbing developments in the ongoing Yemeni crisis that affect potentially millions of residents of Yemen and its neighbors. I would suggest holding off on mentioning the rumors about the president fleeing ITN until the situation is clearer, but suffice to say there's been a lot that has happened in Yemen over the past 24 hours or so, more significant than the capital declaration we listed a few days ago. Kudzu1 (talk) 03:00, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment part of the ongoing Yemen Crisis ongoing? --MASEM (t) 03:03, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • That was my thinking, but it would have to be shoehorned into the blurb. If you think of a good alt, go ahead and add one. -Kudzu1 (talk) 03:06, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • I added an alt. I'm not super-thrilled with it, but it gets the crisis in and is a little bit shorter. -Kudzu1 (talk) 03:17, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • support the alt. An important action by Saudi Arabia. Mhhossein (talk) 03:52, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support regardless of blurb, SA military action is not an every day occurrence. μηδείς (talk) 03:58, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support second blurb with a Comment I prefer this sentence: As
    Mansur Hadi government.--Seyyed(t-c) 04:00, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
@Sa.vakilian and Kudzu1: This suggestion is even more accurate while being short and informative. Mhhossein (talk) 05:40, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Mhhossein: which suggestion?--Seyyed(t-c) 05:44, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@
Mansur Hadi government. Mhhossein (talk) 05:48, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
@Baseball Bugs: Apparently, but this issue does not relate to this discussion. --Seyyed(t-c) 04:33, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - as it's just another step in the ongoing Yemen crisis. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 04:48, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, major development. Please have only one blurb and no ongoing if possible. Abductive (reasoning) 05:36, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – Too early to tell how significant this is. They have intervened in Yemen before. Either way, I believe that an ongoing mention of the Yemeni Crisis would be much more sufficient than a single blurb. There are many notable events going on in Yemen, and I'm not sure why this should be singled out. Support ongoing. RGloucester — ☎ 05:40, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per RGloucester, Saudi have launched offensives into Yemen several times recently. The Rambling Man (talk) 05:43, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"Intervening" and supporting a regime about to be toppled are very different things. It's like saying doctors are treating a patient for a respiratory ilness, and the patient has been placed in critical care with intravenous antibiotics. μηδείς (talk) 05:51, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Regardless of that, the important question is why we would single out this one development for a blurb, when many such developments are presently occurring. Ongoing is the only sensible solution. RGloucester — ☎ 05:55, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I am fairly certain you mean "irregardless", thou foul, revertory, murthersome hunchback. In any case, an Ongoing blurb wouldn't bother me. μηδείς (talk) 06:05, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think the issue is deserved to be on the main page. We can find a proposal which cover both subjects at the same time.--Seyyed(t-c) 06:11, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Marked Ready as this is at 17 Kb and has no orange tags but also 2 to 1 support for posting. μηδείς (talk) 06:14, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • support, major event with over 10 countries participating in airstrikes and 150,000 Saudis on the verge of crossing the border. If a mini-world war ensues, which is not unlikely, this could be the starting point.--Kathovo talk 06:20, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, but oppose calling the rebel government "temporary". Seems a likely outcome, but Wikipedia is not for ball-gazing. InedibleHulk (talk) 12:48, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Read that wrong. Temporary capital. All good. InedibleHulk (talk) 10:25, 27 March 2015 (UTC) [reply]
  • Comment – People need to think, here. We've already got one Yemen blurb in the ITN box. Now we're going to add another one. This is exactly the type of situation where ongoing is used, to prevent a constant stream of blurbs about the same events. This blurb should not be posted. Yemen should go to ongoing, or else we'll keep doing this every few days. RGloucester — ☎ 15:11, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • I suggest removing the other blurb to make way for this one. This is an evolving situation we're dealing with, but a foreign military intervention beginning is undoubtedly a noteworthy development, IMO. -Kudzu1 (talk) 15:15, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 15:26, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Absurd, let's just rename ITN as "Yemen ticker". When have we ever had two blurbs relating to the same item? The Rambling Man (talk) 21:05, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Point me to the rule that says we can't?--WaltCip (talk) 21:14, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Point me to the common sense approach which says we have ONGOING for such things? "Point me to the rule..."? Really? Grow up. And answer the question. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:23, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think we can be a lot more
WP:CIVIL than this, can't we? -Kudzu1 (talk) 21:39, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
Wow, rude much, Rambling? I would think that warrants an immediate apology. And for the record, two distinctly separate but highly significant in a regionally important conflict, so two blurbs make perfect sense. 82.21.7.184 (talk) 22:55, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, stop it. Consensus was for a blurb. There was nothing technically wrong with this posting. "Grow up"? Seriously???--WaltCip (talk) 12:03, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Civility aside, you're missing the point. There's no question that there was consensus for a blurb. The question is whether this item should replace the existing blurb related to the Yemen conflict. I see at least half a dozen people who think it should, including the nominator. And that's normally what happens with stories like this. -- tariqabjotu 13:30, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think you'll find your answer in the alternate question: when has this ever happened in Yemen before? Both news items are incredibly important internationally, and are very ITN worthy. - If this were to happen in the US there wouldn't even be a debate about it. - Their "relation" of being in the same geographical area, does not invalidate them, nor make them the same thing. (Note: This doesn't mean I disagree with eventually posting this crisis as an "ongoing" item; it's just that these are currently independently hot items.) — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 23:32, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If this were to happen in the US there wouldn't even be a debate about it. Actually, with The Rambling Man, there probably would be.
And, much as I hate to say it, I agree with him. I thought this would replace the other blurb. People were even saying just that in the nomination. I can dig through the history if you want, but I'm sure we do this all the time. The two events are related enough -- we could have almost linked to the same article -- that this is pretty much an update on the events in the conflict. This blurb even references the Aden move by calling it the "provisional capital". And note that removing the blurb regarding Aden would cause another Yemen-related article, 2015 Sana'a mosque bombings, to appear back on the Main Page, so don't act like this is something about Yemen. Those bombings and this campaign are distinct enough that the latter doesn't constitute an update of the former, so that is OK. -- tariqabjotu 02:48, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Speaking as the nominator, I figured it would replace the other blurb, too. -Kudzu1 (talk) 06:13, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that's the normal approach. Particularly in this case since the "provisional"/"temporary" capital is covered in the more recent blurb. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:55, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Coffee: Please revisit this issue. -- tariqabjotu 13:22, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I've swapped out the Aden capital blurb, as Coffee didn't respond to the ping and even the nominator was expecting this to be a bump rather than a new blurb. -- tariqabjotu 21:01, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good, thank you. -Kudzu1 (talk) 03:30, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Abel Prize 2015

Articles: 
WP:ITNCRIT
, not the significance.
  • Nom. --bender235 (talk) 02:24, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Both articles are sufficient quality (although their relative lengths show the PR boost that comes of having a movie made about you...) Unless there are any objections, since this is ITN/R I'll post it in a few hours. Smurrayinchester 08:26, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Edit: Actually, Nirenberg has a few citation issues. I'll fix them up first. Smurrayinchester 08:28, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
All his awards are now cited, and hopefully now a lay reader can get at least an inkling of why his work's so important (he's probably brought us closer than anyone to an understanding of turbulence). Smurrayinchester 09:07, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Abel becomes the first Nobel recipient to also receive the Abel Prize, which he shares with Nirenberg but with better phrasing.
Nergaal (talk) 15:13, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]

[Closed] Bowe Bergdahl Charged With Desertion

Will never be posted. Stephen 02:29, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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: 
POW Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl has been charged with desertion and misconduct before the enemy by the United States Army. (Post)
News source(s): Numerous (22) (23)

Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: This is going to be huge news and highly controversial. Ad Orientem (talk) 20:40, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. The general practice here is to post things like this when the party is convicted, especially when involving a criminal charge. 331dot (talk) 20:52, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose absolutely of no consequence whatsoever, a completely overhyped local issue that really demonstrates nothing other than the inability of the US forces to keep their business clean. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:10, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - This case seems entirely lacking in wider relevance. AlexTiefling (talk) 21:12, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • (edit conflict) Oppose Pretty sure I'll oppose if renominated when he's either convicted or exonerated. The prisoner swap was noteworthy, but his particular situation isn't for our purposes. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:13, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I am curious as to your rational that a highly controversial POW swap was ITN worthy but the subject of that swap being charged with desertion is not. -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:22, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
They were members of the Taliban, not terrorists. Abductive (reasoning) 01:31, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think most reasonable people would say that it is a Distinction without a difference. Ad Orientem (talk) 02:13, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • On the news tonight they're saying that his lawyers are likely to work out a plea deal, and if that proves true, the story will likely end in a whimper. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:35, 25 March 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] Ongoing:
Yemeni Crisis

Already resolved. When the existing Yemen item drops off, this will be restored to Ongoing. Please read the thread. -- tariqabjotu 17:19, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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: 
talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Ongoing (Post
)
Credits:

Today, one or more warplanes raided the palace of recently deposed president,

Houthis who are currently in control of the capital Sanaa, have clashed today with troops loyal to Hadi in Aden, and were eventually expelled from the city. Things are expected to develop further there, so this is why I chose Ongoing rather than a blurb. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 20:59, 19 March 2015 (UTC)`[reply
]

  • And I stand by my decision to nominate this for Ongoing. Yesterday's events were in Aden, while today's events were centered in Sanaa, where bomb attacks killed between 126 and 135 people at a Shiite mosque. The bombings were claimed by ISIL's Yemeni affiliate who warned of an 'upcoming flood' of attacks against Houthi rebels. If you insist that this should be a blurb instead, please feel free to propose one. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 18:32, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • ? Is there a template for ongoing noms? I fudged one above. μηδείς (talk) 20:48, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I couldn't find one, so put in a request at
WT:ITN as well. Mamyles (talk) 19:55, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
  • Comment: Houthis, possibly backed by Saleh loyalists, are closing in on Hadi's temporary residence in Aden as we speak.[4] The latter had already fled the city this afternoon.[5] I propose once again pulling all Yemen-related blurbs in favor of an Ongoing link. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 19:38, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Significant ongoing event, recently the President reportedly fled to another location in Yemen. Brandmeistertalk 19:51, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment This item has been bumped from its initial proposal. This seems out of process to me, presumably if it's allowable, it can be bumped up every day until it becomes boring. Please stop doing this, or at least find a consensus that arbitrarily bumping an item up the nomination page is acceptable for an Ongoing nomination. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:20, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment See Coffee's comment above. This was posted. The only reason it's not currently in Ongoing right now is because it's attached to the Aden item. When that disappears off ITN, this will return to Ongoing. This does not need to be nominated again. -- tariqabjotu 21:41, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Since both Yemeni items have been on the main page already for some time, it's possible to remove and swap them for Ongoing link. Currently the Aden item is just third most recent, so there will be several days before it disappears, while the situation is getting hotter. Recently, the presidential palace, for instance, has been sacked and we may be risking a delay while waiting. Brandmeistertalk 22:10, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • Why? Items generally stay on ITN until they reach them bottom and are removed. You want us to remove two items (and, therefore, replace them with two staler items), and to what effect? The link you want under Ongoing is currently higher in the template and bolded. And the story you're referencing -- the president fleeing the presidential palace -- seems directly related to the move of the capital, so it seems like an unsurprising development in the story already posted. What's the problem with leaving things as is? After the Aden item is removed from ITN, the link will return to Ongoing. -- tariqabjotu 22:31, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I think the proposed article (
    Southern Yemen offensive (2015) is the main article which relates to the recent events.--Seyyed(t-c) 02:52, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Support It's an event of importance to the world. Mhhossein (talk) 03:03, 26 March 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] Jeremy Clarkson

Non-admin close. It's obvious where this is going. μηδείς (talk) 18:07, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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: Jeremy Clarkson (talk · history · tag) and Top Gear (2002 TV series) (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Jeremy Clarkson, presenter on Top Gear for over 20 years, has been fired after a 'fracas' with the producer (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Jeremy Clarkson, presenter of the world's most-watched factual TV series Top Gear, is fired for assaulting a producer.
News source(s): BBC News, couple thousand others
Credits:

Both articles updated
Nominator's comments: Normally a person getting fired wouldn't qualify, but I think given the long history of the show and the one million signature' petition to reinstate him, this is quite a big event. EoRdE6(Come Talk to Me!) 15:18, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Previous discussion at Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates/March 2015#March 10. —
    Cryptic 15:26, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Strong oppose Seriously? A TV show host getting fired? No significance to world events. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:28, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: No way this meets ITN criteria. -Kudzu1 (talk) 15:33, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Not very important. And "fracas" should not be in parentheses - he bullied and hit a junior staff member. Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:39, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: UK citizen here, and a big fan of Clarkson and no way is this suitable --Dweller (talk) 15:50, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support: Top Gear is the most popular factual TV show in the world, with hundreds of millions of viewers, Jeremy Clarkson is its most recognizable figure, and big talent being fired for punching a member of staff is not an every day event. This is about as big as TV news can get. For what it's worth, it's on the front page of the websites of Der Spiegel (even with German news dominated by the Germanwings crash), De Telegraaf, and CNN. As much as it pains me to admit it, Jeremy Clarkson is well-known worldwide. No effect on world events, sure, but it's a story that millions around the world care about. Smurrayinchester 16:09, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
What people "care about" is irrelevant. It isn't encyclopaedic. It is tabloid tripe. Send it to the shambles. RGloucester — ☎ 16:15, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That's why I worded it in an encyclopedic mamner. I could have said Jeremy Clarkson punched his producer because he didn't get steak, and then sent it to the tabloids, but this is a factual blurb about some really big TV news about a 20+ year show and a supporting 1 million signature petition. Just saying. EoRdE6(Come Talk to Me!) 16:30, 25 March 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] Curiosity (rover)

No consensus to post. Nakon 02:52, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Articles: Curiosity (rover) (talk · history · tag) and Life on Mars (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Curiosity finds nitrogen on Martian atmosphere, indicating the possibility of life on Mars (Post)
News source(s): NASAHP Many more
Credits:

Article needs updating
 -The Herald the joy of the LORDmy strength 15:04, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose There has always been a possibility of life on mars (the blurb should be changed if this ends up posted). While this is indeed new information, I don't think it has a significant enough impact on the mission to be posted. Mamyles (talk) 15:11, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Mamyles last statement. Not finding any trace of nitrogen would have been the unexpected result. μηδείς (talk) 18:10, 25 March 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.

Kraft Heinz merger

Articles: 
Heinz agree to a merger, to form the world's fifth largest food and drink company (Post)
News source(s): BBC Guardian

Credits:

First article updated, second needs updating

Nominator's comments: Major merger between two of the world's largest food and drink companies, worth around $40bn. Business deals are under-represented on ITN. The blurb is carefully phrased, because this is still subject to shareholder approval. However that is expected to be a formality, and the story is in the news now. Modest Genius talk 13:12, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support big business news. – Muboshgu (talk) 13:58, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Support You make a good point that business deals are under-represented - we usually dismiss them as routine. But even routine business should be posted occasionally. Mamyles (talk) 14:15, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on article improvements This was valued around $40B if I remember the stories yesterday - I believe this number should be included to provide the necessary scope (As I'm not sure of the international recognition of both brands). --MASEM (t) 14:32, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support and agree with Masem on all points. -Kudzu1 (talk) 15:56, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Oppose I generally think business stories that don't involve some wort of innovation (like getting cable channels on your smart phone) shouldn't be posted. (Weak support if they go with the name Heinzkraft or Kreinz :D ). μηδείς (talk) 18:27, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Mergers and acquisitions happen all the time. Fifth largest, not largest. If the Comcast & TWC merger is allowed to go through, would that merit coverage? If so, why? If not, why not? And keep in mind that the purpose of these deals is typically to make the wealthy stockholders wealthier, to provide degraded service to customers, and to deprive people of their jobs. So where do you draw the line? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 19:10, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose just the fifth largest food company? What are the other four? This is DYK material. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:22, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • PepsiCo, Coca-cola, Nestlé and I think Dole Foods. Modest Genius talk 23:05, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • The 5 largest in the U.S. as of 2010, according to this article were PepsiCo, Dole, General Mills, Nestle and Kraft. World-wide, the top 5 food companies according to this article in 2013 were Nestle, PepsiCo, Coca-Cola, ADM, and InBev. But these rankings often depend on how you define words like "largest" "food" and "company". --Jayron32 19:20, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        • Thanks. Still oppose then, this proposed merger is small fry in big business terms. Not to reiterate the fact that it's a "proposed" merger..... The Rambling Man (talk) 21:06, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • No Consensus to post the article yet. Nakon 03:08, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Smaller than mergers like
    MetroPCS. LoveToLondon (talk) 22:46, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Support this is major business news that also presents a welcome break from the more typical ITN posts. Mellowed Fillmore (talk) 23:32, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

March 24

March 24, 2015 (2015-03-24) (Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
  • War in Afghanistan
    • Gunmen kill at least thirteen people in an attack on three passing vehicles including a bus in
      Wardak province's Sayad Abad district. (Al Jazeera)

Arts and culture

Disasters and accidents

Science and technology

[Closed] RD: Yehuda Avner

No consensus to post. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:07, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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: Yehuda Avner (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NYT More
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Israeli prime ministerial advisor and diplomat -The Herald the joy of the LORDmy strength 13:37, 26 March 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.

Boko Haram kidnappings

Article: Boko Haram (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Boko Haram kidnaps hundreds of women and children from the Nigerian town of Damasak. (Post)
News source(s): Reuters BBC Christian Science Monitor
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Seems significant because of the large number of people who have been kidnapped--even more than the Chibok kidnapping. The precise number of people involved, however, is still uncertain, which is why the blurb just says "hundreds" rather than something more precise. 

talk 18:06, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]

[Closed] RD: Lil' Chris

No consensus to post. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:06, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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: Lil' Chris (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC, Aftonbladet (Sweden), TeleCinco (Spain), Guardian, Independent, more
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Child star who worked with Gene Simmons and died at 24. Regular on British TV from 2006-2010 approx. Sources suggest that he was known in Europe as well. '''tAD''' (talk) 20:20, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
one number three hit, no awards. Unless the death turns out to be homicide, it is just tragic young death which does not really contribute to notability. μηδείς (talk) 20:53, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose almost marginal that he has an article. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:59, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per others. Not RD timber. -Kudzu1 (talk) 21:06, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose and close No notability whatsoever. 82.21.7.184 (talk) 21:50, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Not notable, no evidence at him being much more than a publicity stunt. Challenger l (talk) 22:04, 24 March 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] Germanwings Flight 9525

Article: Germanwings Flight 9525 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Germanwings Flight 9525 crashes in the French Alps with 150 people on board. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The co-pilot of Germanwings Flight 9525 deliberately crashes in the French Alps killing all on board.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Germanwings Flight 9525 was deliberately crashed in the French Alps with 150 people on board.
News source(s): BBC NBC News
Credits:

Article needs updating

 The Rambling Man (talk) 11:08, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support pending info on fatalities and some expansion (and also because Airbus is involved). Brandmeistertalk 11:16, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support since it is one of the most significant crashes in Europe in recent period.--Egeymi (talk) 11:23, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in principle pending more details when and if available; French President Hollande has said they believe there are no survivors. 331dot (talk) 11:31, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support as per above. Zwerg Nase (talk) 11:41, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, looking that there will be no survivors. Obviously worthy of posting. Mjroots (talk) 11:48, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posting. --Tone 12:48, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: Mass-casualty, high-profile air disaster. Obvious ITN material. -Kudzu1 (talk) 16:44, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – At some point we may want to update blurb with statement by French prosecutor that co-pilot Andreas Lubitz appeared to have crashed plane deliberately. Sca (talk) 13:31, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Update and have proposed an Altblurb. The essence of the story is a murder-suicide, not a mechanical failure. μηδείς (talk) 17:13, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Although there doesn't seem much doubt, given circumstances, we need to get some element of "apparently" in Altblurb. Sca (talk) 17:32, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support update as it adds an important element to the story. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 17:43, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose update I don't think that a blurb change is necessary. Readers who want to find out what the suspected cause of the crash is should simply follow the bolded link to the article. It would be inappropriate (and a BLP violation) to definitively say the co-pilot is a murderer, since an official report has not been released. Mamyles (talk) 17:45, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
WP:BLP applies to the recently deceased. --Bongwarrior (talk) 17:51, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
Counter-intuitively, BLP policy does apply for a short period after death. Please see
WP:BDP for details. Mamyles (talk) 17:55, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
Define "recent". In any case, BBC is reporting it as an "apparently" deliberate act, based on the findings from the black boxes so far.[7] So, no BLP violation, dead or alive. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 17:57, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Update. We don't need to say that the co-pilot was a murderer, but the plane was clearly intentionally brought down. 331dot (talk) 17:59, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strongly support Update – "Deliberate" action by (co-) pilot cited by official French sources and is all over int'l. media, including German. Suggest immediate update via Altblurb 1 with following modifications (adding two words, number and comma):
"French officials conclude that the co-pilot of Germanwings Flight 9525 apparently deliberately crashed plane the Airbus 320A in the French Alps, killing all 150 on board.
Two adverbs in succession isn't great syntax, but it's clear. Sca (talk) 18:14, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Two things, blurbs should be in the present tense, and I think "apparently" is an unnecessary qualification, as the investigators are reporting it, and the voice recorder confirms the events,and the descent was controlled. μηδείς (talk) 18:51, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Whichever blurb is chosen, it should match with what the article says. Consensus, or any change, is needed there first. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:56, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Agree apparently has been superseded by continued coverage in which big media outlets have dropped that caveat. Don't see where suggested (present-tense) blurb above, minus "apparently," conflicts with article, which appears quite complete. Why wait? Sca (talk) 20:56, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose update the current blurb is factually 100% correct. Other suggested blurbs, although based on the reports in major news outlets, are still based in speculation. The best an updated blurb could do would be to say that it was concluded from the voice recorder that it was a deliberate act. We're not tabloid, there's nothing wrong at all with sticking with the facts that the plane crashed into the Alps and everybody died. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:10, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • BLP does not apply if we say "Authorities indicate the co-pilot of Germanwings Flight 9525 deliberately flew into a mountainside, killing all 150 on board." Given this is the unanimous declaration of all authorities involved and in every press source reticence is baseless. μηδείς (talk) 21:53, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"Unanimous" is an awkward concept here. There if one investigating body - the French BEA. There is only one black box - the CVR. There has been one analysis of that CVR. Essentially this is what the French prosecutor has decided (although, admittedly, the evidence does look compelling). Martinevans123 (talk) 22:12, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Are we more virtuous than than the most respected journalists? Sca (talk) 23:39, 26 March 2015 (UTC) [reply]
I'd vote yes for that one. Martinevans123 (talk) 00:00, 27 March 2015 (UTC) [reply]
  • Support update. We follow the sources. Our job is not to
    reach our own personal conclusions. The sources are reporting the conclusions of the French authorities, so we report the conclusions of the French authorities. Suggest the blurb say "French authorities conclude that the co-pilot of Germanwings Flight 9525 deliberately crashed in the French Alps, killing all 150 on board." There's no need to speak in Wikipedia's voice, but there is a responsibility to match reliable sources on this. --Jayron32 23:57, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
That's a very reasonable compromise. Would support. Martinevans123 (talk) 00:01, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I will also support that blurb. 331dot (talk) 00:08, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose update. The existing blurb is simple, short and factual. Any reader who wants to know why it crashed can click on the link and read the article. We should be very careful about reporting an ongoing investigation, clear as it might seem what the conclusions will be, particularly in a short blurb which cannot capture all the nuances. As for the most recent blurb suggestion: French authorities have provided an update on their current interpretation of the crash - they won't 'conclude' anything until their investigation and final report are complete. Modest Genius talk 00:12, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Jayron's suggestion (if someone can make it fit). Here, from Reuters, is another version of the same idea: "French prosecutors believe Andreas Lubitz, 27, locked himself alone in the cockpit of the Germanwings Airbus A320 ... and deliberately steered it into a mountain, killing all 150 people on board."
 • Prefer "Airbus A320," which adds information, to "Flight 9525," which could be any type of plane.
 • The time is now! Sca (talk) 13:52, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
PS — How about: "French officials indicate the co-pilot of Germanwings Flight 9525 deliberately crashed the Airbus 320A in the French Alps, killing all 150 on board." – ?? Sca (talk) 14:43, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Indian Supreme Court strikes down section 66A of IT Act

Article: 
Information Technology Act 2000, which was used to curtail freedom of speech on internet. (Post)
News source(s): [8] [9]

Credits:

Article needs updating

 Amartyabag TALK2ME 10:49, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose: Possibly notable in India, but has little to no bearing on the rest of the world and is getting little play in the media. -Kudzu1 (talk) 16:38, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Has this been under challenge all along? Does it mean that any convictions will be vacated? A rationale on the impact would help. I read the article but it was pretty cut-and-dried. μηδείς (talk) 19:43, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like the law was used in 2012 to arrest two people that posted something critical, which was based on a vague interpretation of the law (as I read it). This would be equivalent to the US's Child Online Protection Act (and various other attempts to regulate speech on the internet). --MASEM (t) 19:54, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The sources the Hindu, and The India Times, say "many arrests". But no detail is given on convictions, imprisonment, etc. I would be supportive if there were imprisonments, but if it was just abused, randomly enforced, and challenged from the start it's a bit different. We need clarity and more informative sources. μηδείς (talk) 21:05, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Tentative support See my comment to Medeis above, but this would be the equivalent of the SCOTUS striking down a law used to limit free speech, which while only would affect the US directly, did have worldwide impacts. India is far from tiny and would have a similar impact if the law was upheld. So seems reasonable to post. --MASEM (t) 19:54, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: ITN didn't post the passage of a far more restrictive law in the Philippines in 2012. –HTD 19:59, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Large numbers of multi-national companies operate from India, so this has an impact far beyond that country. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:10, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Support Normally this would not get my support, but India is the world's second most populous country with a massive and globalized IT sector. As such the potential ramifications are a bit more noteworthy. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:15, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd still like a little more information. We didn't post it when the Canadian government Human_rights_complaints_against_Maclean's_magazine#Subsequent_legislative_action repealed its hate speech provisions after the high-profile trial and acquittal of Maclean's, Mark Steyn, and Ezra Levant, after several people's lives had been ruined. Basically, if people are being released from jail sentences on this ruling I will support it, but I don't have the sources. Not having seen "India releases dozens after SC overthrows anti-free speech law" I am not inclined to at this point. μηδείς (talk) 17:48, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • The phrasing seems a bit problematic. The sources state that the Supreme Court struck down the law because it violated freedom of speech as guaranteed by the constitution. Saying "which was used to curtail freedom of speech on internet" is both potentially violating NPOV and leaving out critical information that it was struck down because of the Supreme Court's decision that it violated freedom of speech. Also, the sentence should probably begin with "The". --Yair rand (talk) 11:55, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I checked the article to see if there were sources there not mentioned in the nomination that make this clearer. I found the criticism section is still referring to 66a in the present tense. Regardless of merits, the article itself is not ready. μηδείς (talk) 18:54, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] Largest asteroid impact ever

Closed, no significant contributions, no consensus to post. Nakon 03:04, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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: Impact event (talk · history · tag) and East Warburton Basin (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Scientists discover the largest asteroid impact area ever found in Australia, spanning more than 400 km. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Scientists in Australia discover the largest asteroid impact area ever found, spanning more than 400 km.
News source(s): BBC Still more
Credits:

Article needs updating
 -The Herald the joy of the LORDmy strength 05:53, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Tentative support These reports usually include a peer-reviewed paper to affirm the scientific analysis. I don't see one listed in the BBC article but I assume one can find it, as showing this would clear support then. --MASEM (t) 06:23, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Nix that, I see the journal listed in the article now (it wasn't a name I quickly recognized). Support. --MASEM (t) 06:25, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I have proposed an alternative blurb, because the first could be read as "biggest in Australia" (i.e. not the world). I will comment on whether I support the nomination after the article is updated. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 07:01, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • How is it that the East Warburton Basin article was created on February 20? Does this not mean the item is stale? Abductive (reasoning) 07:39, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as stale. Two years.... The Rambling Man (talk) 10:29, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Two years for them to find and validate that 1) it was a meteor impact 2) the timing of the impact and 3) the size of the impact, all through peer-reviewed processes. This is a standard "delay" for scientific process, and the norm when we do post scientific stories that we wait for the peer-reviewed work to appear, not on original claims. --MASEM (t) 13:27, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • Ok, so the blurb is wrong. They confirm it is a meteor impact, not "discover it".... The Rambling Man (talk) 13:55, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: neither article has been updated to reflect this news, and the one on the crater itself (presumably the one to be bolded) is too short to post.
    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 14:16, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Wait the impact hasn't been dated yet, that would be a good time to post. Right now we have a preliminary confirmation it's due to an impact, but not much more than that. μηδείς (talk) 16:19, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, unless certain issues are addressed. The current news seems to be a re-estimate of the size, correct? But also the article says there were two 10 km impactors, so is this crater really one 400 km crater or two overlapping craters? Why is the age estimate so shoddy, and can it be improved? Finally, I would very much like a map in the article before even considering posting. Abductive (reasoning) 16:25, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: Clearly some issues with the research here. -Kudzu1 (talk) 16:40, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The age estimate isn't shoddy, it's just these are deep old impacts which have been burried over time, and which had associated mantle unpwelling, further complicating the issues. Normally things are dated by a layer (KT Event) or by the layer in which they are found. This is a huge structure that basically obliterated the normal layering processes, and which has subsequently been covered over. A good answer as to age might take years. I still think we should wait until something like "The Australian impact has been determined to date to the Permian extinction" or the like before posting, as that would be the essential fact of the event. μηδείς (talk) 19:40, 24 March 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.

March 23

March 23, 2015 (2015-03-23) (Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy
  • outstanding shares. (AP)

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

[Closed] A Rape on Campus

No consensus to post. 331dot (talk) 10:25, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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: A Rape on Campus (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ An investigation conducted by police in Charlottesville, Virginia finds no evidence that the rape described in the Rolling Stone article A Rape on Campus ever happened. (Post)
News source(s): Usa Today CNN New York Times The Guardian
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: This story has been very controversial since it was first published last year, and now we have a major development pertaining to it that has been covered in many major media outlets. 
talk 02:03, 24 March 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] Protests over the murder of Farkhunda

No consensus to post. A potential DYK item if eligible. SpencerT♦C 06:28, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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: 
killing of Farqhunda, an Afghani woman killed over allegedly burning a copy of the Quran, in Kabul. (Post)
News source(s): Newsweek Telegraph BBC Houston Chronicle

Credits:
Nominator's comments: Lots of coverage from around the world, and the president of Afghanistan has ordered an inquiry. [10] Feel free to suggest an alternative blurb, I know this one is kind of clunky. 
talk 01:34, 24 March 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.

2015 Indian swine flu outbreak

Proposed image
Articles: 2015 Indian swine flu outbreak (talk · history · tag) and Swine influenza (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Swine influenza in India claims about 2000 lives. (Post)
News source(s): Various
Credits:

Nominator's comments: This was nominated on 15 March 2015 to close as SNOW. The death toll is rising currently. -The Herald the joy of the LORDmy strength 04:57, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose for same reasons - swine flu outbreaks in this part of the world are not uncommon. --MASEM (t) 05:14, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Outbreaks of swine flu may not be uncommon in India, but ones that kill 2000 people are considerably rarer. Neljack (talk) 06:21, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose the timeline of events goes up to 2 March, if this is really for "Ongoing", we ought to be seeing more than just a tabular update of deaths more than once in three weeks. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:57, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait US researchers disagree with Indian researchers about whether the strain is mutating (Reuters Al-Jazeera). This is more likely to be ITN worthy if other journals publish that the virus is mutating to a more contagious strain - or if there is a case overseas.
    talk) 10:48, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Oppose per TRM; I think there needs to be more happening with this than just the number of deaths being updated. 331dot (talk) 14:13, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Oppose the high death rate per infection seems compelling, but I fear this may be a statistical artifact due to every death, but not every infection being reported. In any case, were I looking for factual information, I would come to wikipedia for comprehensive, non-alarmist coverage, and we have a very good article on this. Looking at swine fu in general, 20,000 + in the US, with a third the population is record. μηδείς (talk) 19:55, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - high number of deaths. --BabbaQ (talk) 20:21, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment for those in support, can they clarify whether they'd like a blurb or an Ongoing post please, it's not clear. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:26, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Neljack, BabbaQ, Mamyles, and Ad Orientem:..-The Herald the joy of the LORDmy strength 03:22, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support due to the unusually high number of casualties (prefer ongoing, but blurb would be fine). Judging from the examples in
    List of epidemics, an event like this occurs only about once a decade. Mamyles (talk) 20:29, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Support The death toll is enough to ring the ITN bell. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:46, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support a blurb - In regards to The Rambling Man's comment above, I don't know about previous cases of an item becoming "ongoing". But to me, it makes sense that an item like this receive a blurb first if it is ITN worthy, then move to ongoing if it remains ITN worthy after a significant period of time (i.e. there are enough newer items to replace it in the list of blurbs). AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 02:56, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Sorry, I don't understand, the article hasn't had a prose update for three weeks, why would you think that would make it appropriate for a blurb? The Rambling Man (talk) 10:30, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb: Ongoing seems too far, too fast, but thousands of deaths from illness is significant. -Kudzu1 (talk) 16:42, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Sorry, I don't understand, the article hasn't had a prose update for three weeks, why would you think that would make it appropriate for a blurb? The Rambling Man (talk) 21:53, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd prefer a blurb, but ongoing would be fine too. Neljack (talk) 04:51, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

March 22

March 22, 2015 (2015-03-22) (Sunday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Disasters and accidents

Politics and elections

[Posted as Blurb] RD: Lee Kuan Yew

Article: Lee Kuan Yew (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
Fuebaey (talk) 20:35, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]

  • He didn't only contribute to independence. He additionally 'raised' a young country after that. starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 22:52, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD, oppose blurb Obviously had a huge impact on Singapore, but I'm not sure his global impact rises to the level I would want before supporting a blurb. Neljack (talk) 00:05, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Neljack: - since when was global impact a criteria? If so, earlier this month we featured as a blurb the deaths of 3 French athletes killed in a helicopter crash in Argentina. Assuredly, their combined global impact was much lower than Lee's. Perhaps you'll like to read the Washington Post : "But the departure of Lee could also have implications for the United States ... Washington has for decades relied on Lee to interpret events in Asia for it." starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 00:26, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The French athletes were not posted just because they were athletes; they were posted because of what happened to them; i.e. an event. Blurbs for deaths are generally for either those at the tip-top of their field(such as Margaret Thatcher and Nelson Mandela) or whose death was sudden and unexpected(like Robin Williams). Is this person in the same league as Mandela and Thatcher? 331dot (talk) 00:38, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
From reading, while not have as wide a range of impact as Mandala did, as Starship has pointed out, he is considered to have single-handedly influenced the creation and rise of economic prosperity of Singapore. --MASEM (t) 00:41, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • @331dot: - if the field is Singapore, he's the top person. No question. IMO, even bigger than Mandela and Thatcher to their respective countries. The UK and South Africa existed before these two statesmen. Independent Singapore didn't exist when Lee took the helm. The Hindu: "a towering figure in post-colonial Asia oversaw tiny Singapore's transformation transformation from British tropical outpost to an affluent, global city in just over a generation, setting the example for developing economies from China to Dubai". starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 00:45, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
At this point it's a farce he's not at least on RD yet. Singapore is the third, fourth or fifth richest company by GDP per capita depending on which source one uses, IMF, CIA or World Bank. There are no tags, the article is hugely supported, and we've got both Thatcher's and Obama's endorsements. What else do we need? Users who look to the front page can at least click there. μηδείς (talk) 00:53, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD and blurb - According to this report, Henry Kissinger called him one of the “asymmetries of history.” Margaret Thatcher said “he was never wrong.” Barack Obama called him “one of the legendary figures of Asia.” Tony Blair said he was “the smartest leader I ever met.” Samuel Huntington said he was one of the “master builders” of the 20th century. -A1candidate 00:52, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • (edit conflict) Posted as RD It seems like this may be heading for a blurb, but I'll let the conversation marinate a bit longer. -- tariqabjotu 00:56, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks Tariq. I'll say oppose blurb more as a comment than a vote, since he died of old age, but a blurb would certainly not offend me. μηδείς (talk) 00:59, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb. He rises to the Mandela/Thatcher level of importance, due to key role in the transition to independence, and his extremely long and influential time as prime minister. -LtNOWIS (talk) 01:05, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

source: US P Obama: "giant of history". UK PM Cameron: "Lee Kuan Yew personally shaped Singapore in a way that few people have any nation". Aus PM Abbott: "giant of our region". UN head Ban: "legendary figure in Asia". @Neljack: @331dot: starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 01:08, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support blurb - father of a nation, a giant of our era, as Obama said. Definitely worthy of a blurb. -Zanhe (talk) 01:45, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted as blurb -- tariqabjotu 01:59, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The nomination is fine the way it is. -- tariqabjotu 02:22, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] US State Department to deny any Italian extradition request for Amanda Knox

Never going to be posted. Stephen 22:10, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Articles: Amanda Knox (talk · history · tag) and Murder of Meredith Kercher (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Amanda Knox will not be extradited by the US to Italy. (Post)
News source(s): Sunday Express
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Breaking news from the US making the legal proceeding in Italy essentially irrelevant. Count Iblis (talk) 20:00, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose of little significance whatsoever. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:14, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose It's part of the legal case, we only care on the final decision that comes out. --MASEM (t) 20:41, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as Masem says, this isn't the end of the matter yet. Possibly, maybe, when the court rules in Italy. 331dot (talk) 20:56, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. This was inevitable and is only a single maneuver in a long-running legal matter. Gamaliel (talk) 21:04, 22 March 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.
  • After the close, of course, but I see that this current BBC article gives no indication that the US will pre-empt any extradition attempt. It appears to still be an open question. Hence, good close. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 19:03, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Now that the Italian supreme court has closed the book on this case today, maybe a final mention of it would be appropriate. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:32, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • New blurb: "The Italian Supreme court overturns the overturning of a verdict made by a court that was asked by the Supreme Court to review a verdict of an appeals court that had overturned the verdict of a lower court." Count Iblis (talk) 01:53, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] Inauguration of Namibian President

No consensus to post. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:13, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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
Article: 
2014 general elction. (Post)
News source(s): Mail & Guardian

Credits:
Nominator's comments: The third president was sworn in yesterday following the
2014 election. The ceremony was attended by at least 14 Heads of State. (Elections are ITNR). Ali Fazal (talk) 14:42, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
  • support - political history.--BabbaQ (talk) 14:48, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The elections should have been posted, not inauguration per usual practice. Brandmeistertalk 14:55, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The election would have been the point this should have been ITN. It looked like no one nominated it then (its at Current Events for Nov 2014 but no ITN as far as I can see). --MASEM (t) 15:09, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose we do not do inaugurations, it is doubtful the inauguration itself is on ITNR. μηδείς (talk) 18:28, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose; elections are ITNR, not inaugurations(as stated on the ITNR page) thus I have removed the ITNR tag. Inaugurations are commonly attended by other heads of state. 331dot (talk) 18:37, 22 March 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.

March 21

March 21, 2015 (2015-03-21) (Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

[Closed] Perro Aguayo Jr.

No consensus to post this article to a blurb or RD after 6 days of discussion. Nakon 04:01, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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: 
Tijuana, Mexico. (Post)
News source(s): Telegraph

Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: This meets the death criteria as he's a famous lucha libre. Should this get a blurb due to the circumstances of his death? – Muboshgu (talk) 04:10, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment A wrestler dying from the end result of a spinal cord injury is not very surprising. But it's also the case that this is not a worldwide known figure who's death has a major impact (compared to Margaret Thatcher, Nelson Mandala, or Robin Williams). Note that I have not evaluated this as an RD, only commenting on the blurb aspect. Also we need a source. --MASEM (t) 04:22, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Here's a source. I mean that in this case, the death is the story, as opposed to death of old age. – Muboshgu (talk) 04:31, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not sure at all that he meets the death criteria, but I know basically nothing about Mexican wrestling. Is he just a famous wrestler, or is he generally considered significant to the sport? The bigger story does in fact seem to be that he died in the ring, so a blurb might actually be the way to go here even if he doesn't meet
    WP:ITN/DC, but I'm not particularly enthusiastic about either option. --Bongwarrior (talk) 04:35, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Deaths even during combat sports are actually quite rare, and this one happened in a scripted version of wrestling.
    Nergaal (talk) 06:35, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • I would say this should be a blurb if posted, due to being sudden, unexpected, and an unusual passing(during his work) but like Bongwarrior I know little of Mexican pro wrestling and am not sure he is considered significant to it. 331dot (talk) 07:23, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • After some thought, support blurb. This shouldn't be approached as a regular death listing - as I said above, I suspect he wouldn't qualify, although I could certainly be wrong about that. The notable aspect of this story is that a sportsperson died during a match, although studio wrestling doesn't exactly match the definition of "sport" as we know it. Deaths in wrestling aren't unheard of, but they aren't exactly commonplace either. This seems interesting enough to me, and it's getting coverage. --Bongwarrior (talk) 08:08, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I will support this for reasons similar to those of Bongwarrior, and I have suggested a blurb(please change if needed). There is one citation needed tag in the death section but otherwise there seems to be enough added to the page about it. 331dot (talk) 08:18, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose Sad, but a wrestler died in a wrestling accident. Similarly, we don't generally post deaths in boxing accidents or any other potentially deadly sport (maybe except Formula 1). Weak oppose because I don't know the scale of his fame. If Muhammad Ali or Tyson would have died after boxing accident in their prime, then we'd certainly have posted them, but not sure whether this merits. Brandmeistertalk 08:25, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • support - article ready basically, notable subject.--BabbaQ (talk) 08:31, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • oppose for blurb and weak oppose for RD on notability. Was this guy one of the top luchadores at the time of his death? μηδείς (talk) 18:31, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose unless someone can adequately demonstrate that he was the Mexican equivalent of Hulk Hogan. The article is well referenced but is full of awfully non-encyclopedic language and hardly rises to the level of a "quality article". The Rambling Man (talk) 20:16, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – Wrestling rings are typically constructed to provide some give, particularly with respect to taking bumps, but also with other aspects of movement. In Mexico, like with other places in the world which thrive on unorthodox wrestling styles, the highly acrobatic style known as lucha libre came to be largely due to the hardness of the rings (boxing rings may be used at times), given the physical toll involved in wrestling a more mainstream style. While shocking, this could qualify as not so unexpected due to those conditions. I wouldn't consider this death as spectacular or possibly even as well-reported as that of Oro over two decades ago, more like a freak accident. While a major star, I likewise wouldn't consider him iconic the way I would Mil Máscaras. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 08:22, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - even as a member of
    Rey Mysterio Jr. who was with WWE. starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 12:29, 23 March 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 New York City house fire

No consensus to post. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:47, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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 New York City house fire (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A fire in New York City kills seven children. (Post)
News source(s): New York Times CNN BBC
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Worst fire in NYC in seven years. [11] Coverage from most major newspapers, including non-American ones. [12] [13] 
talk 02:34, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
Deletion of the article should be discussed in the correct forum; this is merely to discuss posting to ITN. 331dot (talk) 07:46, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If ITN has a red-link, that could make Wikipedia look silly. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 17:12, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Snow Close this is a bleeds it leads headline, yes, but unfortunately a rather mundane event. μηδείς (talk) 16:28, 22 March 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] Capital of Yemen

Article: 
Abd Rabbuh Mansur Hadi declares Aden to be the temporary capital of Yemen. (Post)
News source(s): Deutsche Welle Associated Press

Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Designation of a new, albeit temporary, capital city by Yemen's internationally recognized president. -Kudzu1 (talk) 20:04, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Whether he is President or not seems unclear; he 'rescinded' his resignation but the Houthis apparently are still trying to run the country- though he is still recognized by the international community as President. Hard to say. 331dot (talk) 07:27, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Is the fact the UN Security Council planning to have an emergency meeting on this tomorrow (Sunday) important to blurb too? [14]. --MASEM (t) 02:36, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Even if who is considered to be in charge is unclear, there seems to be enough developments here to have some sort of listing. 331dot (talk) 07:27, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 10:57, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] 2015 Six Nations Championship

Closed, no support to post to ITN. Nakon 03:21, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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 Six Nations Championship (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In rugby union, Ireland win the Six Nations Championship (Post)
Credits:

Article updated
The nominated event is listed on
WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: Recurring sports item '''tAD''' (talk) 19:41, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
  • The article has 945 bites of prose. Surely we can do better before posting. Otherwise I'll oppose on quality. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:45, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: an exhilarating and exciting championship that wasn't decided until the closing seconds of the final game. A total of 660 points across the 15 games, yielding an incredible average 44 points per game. A beautifully clear, well-constructed and meticulously accurate article, with links to every official match report. Not sure that any amount of "prose" could adequately describe the progress or outcome of this competition. And why should it. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:26, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Because as somebody who doesn't know the intricacies of rugby, all I see are these images that convey no context to me and I can't follow any of it. This article needs prose. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:34, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Suggest you start here. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:39, 21 March 2015 (UTC) [reply]
People who would see 2015 Six Nations Championship on the main page shouldn't be expected to look for Rugby union. They should be able to click on the link and understand enough from that one page alone. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:42, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Just like 2014 World Series? Martinevans123 (talk) 20:50, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
2014 World Series has 25kb prose. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:35, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
And that explains "all the intricacies", yes? Martinevans123 (talk) 21:57, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I never said "all the intricacies" should be explained. 2014 WS was sufficiently updated with prose. As everyone else agrees, this article is not. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:09, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Three people agree. Two people think the proposed blurb is fully supported by the update. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:25, 21 March 2015 (UTC) [reply]

Oppose, until expansion. One hundred and fifty words and a wall of tables. No match summaries; no background; no general summary, etc... Seattle (talk) 21:02, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose at the moment. Given the absolutely incredible last day of games, in which (I think I'm right in saying) 27 tries were scored across the three matches, we could use some summary of the final week section at the very least. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:33, 21 March 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] RD: Chuck Bednarik

Closed. Article quality has not improved. Significant sources are still absent. Nakon 03:19, 28 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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: Chuck Bednarik (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Guardian
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Pro football player - Pro and College hall of famer. Eagles #60 retired. Namesake of the Chuck Bednarik Award for college defensive players. Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 16:44, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
  • Support when improved Legendary American football player meets the death criteria. Article needs improvements, especially in sourcing. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:19, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose a seemingly prominent American footballer with a strikingly weak article. The "Pro football career" section requires serious sourcing, and, given the alleged significance, a substantial expansion, particularly as it's comparable in size to the rather odd (and full of unattributed unreferenced quotes) "Opinions on current NFL players" section. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:37, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support if improved a famous name in football, enough so that I who don't follow the support know who he is, but it's obvious the article needs refs. μηδείς (talk) 21:58, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support WWII pilot, number one overall draft pick, the last two-way player at his position, Hall of Famer, relevant in the sport even fifty years after he retired, it's clear Bednarik is noteworthy. The article has been improved in the last 24 hours as well. --Tocino 01:38, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on article quality alone. Large stretches of unreferenced claims with contentious language. Notable subject or not, it's a mess. Challenger l (talk) 10:04, 22 March 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.

March 20

March 20, 2015 (2015-03-20) (Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health
  • beta amyloid formation, a protein that forms toxic brain-destroying plaques, and significantly slowed cognitive decline. (Reuters)

Law and Crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

[Closed] Keith O'Brien resigns

No consensus to post. SpencerT♦C 01:47, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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: 
Catholic cardinal after admissions of sexual misconduct
News source(s): US News & World Report Wall Street Journal The Guardian

Credits:
Nominator's comments: This is the first time a cardinal has been demoted in this way since 1927, according to the Wall Street Journal. He is technically still a cardinal, but he will "lose the prerogatives ordinarily attached to it" (again according to the WSJ). 
talk 22:07, 20 March 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] 2015 Sana'a mosque bombings

Nominator's comments: Major terrorist attack by ISIS. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:23, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support as mass-casualty attack, although I'd prefer ongoing status for the Yemen events. -Kudzu1 (talk) 18:26, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'd say this is a good first step towards that. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:30, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support though would like to see the article expanded more before posting. Should we note that ISIS has claimed responsibility for this? --MASEM (t) 18:27, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. I actually edit conflicted in attempting to nominate the same thing. If the current numbers hold up (130+ dead, 340+ wounded), this attack appears likely to eclipse the
    2012 Sana'a military bombing as the bloodiest terrorist attack in the history of Yemen. ISIS has publicly claimed responsibility. Admittedly, Yemen is a violence prone area, but this is an exceptional event even for that region. Dragons flight (talk) 18:32, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Query. Wasn't it four bombs at two mosques? The suggested blurb says four mosques, which I believe is inaccurate. Dragons flight (talk) 18:36, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support first blurb, oppose alt blurb (at this time). It is not yet known exactly which group carried out the bombing, as mentioned in the article. Mamyles (talk) 19:44, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I recommend changing the first blurb to have the number be less absolute. The number of deaths is rapidly changing at this point. I've changed it to say "kill more than 130 people." Mamyles (talk) 20:07, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support first blub. This is exceptional even given the context of the ongoing fighting in Yemen. -LtNOWIS (talk) 20:02, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Any incident involving 100+ deaths is notable, as a rule of thumb. Joshua Garner (talk) 22:54, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - notable. 100+ deaths.--BabbaQ (talk) 01:03, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - very notable event, was coming here specifically to nominate/support this being included. Joseph2302 (talk) 02:05, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted - Article is brief, but acceptable considering the importance of the event. --Bongwarrior (talk) 02:19, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Rae Bareli Derail

Articles: 
List of Indian rail incidents (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ About thirty die as a train derails in Rae Bareli. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ A train crash in Uttar Pradesh, India kills 58 people.
News source(s): IE Many more

Credits:

 -The Herald the joy of the LORDmy strength 12:40, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Does this nomination refer to the subject of the article
    talk 12:43, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Exactly. But its a stub and I spotted it now. -The Herald the joy of the LORDmy strength 13:21, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Not a stub now! Mjroots (talk) 21:31, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say it's fairly close to being ready. The article was two sentences when I looked at it earlier, so very nice work by everyone there. --Bongwarrior (talk) 01:55, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Significant transport accident, and very much in line with the types of incidents we normally post. --Bongwarrior (talk) 01:57, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - whilst train crashes in India are not that rare, this one has a higher death toll than most. Mjroots (talk) 07:04, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose in current state. The article is still a bit small, and the text is just a series of disjointed sentences along the lines of "Photographs show that the carriage next to the locomotive was severely telescoped." Also, rail accidents are unfortunately not rare in India, and unless there's something more notable, like a criminal act, or odd cause or notable death it seems just to be a traffic accident (no disrespect) that will be unlikely to draw much encyclopedic attention. (I.e., "not the news") μηδείς (talk) 18:10, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Medeis: if you can improve the article, please feel free to do so. Six sources immediately available for you to use. Mjroots (talk) 19:51, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I do, on many occasions, improve articles that are nominated and borderline for quality. But given I feel this lacks sufficient notability I would rather spend my time elsewhere. You'll note I opposed the Metro North derailment (fewer casualties) vehemently, and am normally on the side of not posting transportation accidents unless there is some more notable issue like criminality, an inordinate death toll, or an already notable victim. I know this matter hits home for the victims and locally, and I certainly mean no disrespect, but in the long perspective it doesn't reach the "showcase" level. μηδείς (talk) 20:41, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Death toll now 58, ALT blurb added to reflect this. Mjroots (talk) 08:43, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Solar eclipse

Proposed image
Article: Solar eclipse of March 20, 2015 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A solar eclipse is visible across much of Europe, with totality over the north Atlantic. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ A solar eclipse is visible across much of Europe, with totality over the Faroe Islands and Svalbard
Alternative blurb II: ​ A solar eclipse is being masked by clouds across the United Kingdom.
Alternative blurb III: ​ The northern of part of the United Kingdom will be even duller than normal for a while this morning.
News source(s): BBC, The Guardian The Telegraph
Credits:

Article updated
The nominated event is listed on
WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.

Nominator's comments: There will be plenty of photos shortly, I imagine. Smurrayinchester 08:06, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

  • Support in principle. The last total solar eclipse observable from Europe until 2026 is very notable.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:35, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support ALT blurb added. Mjroots (talk) 09:15, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Everyone loves a Britocentric blurb. –HTD 09:49, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • I didn't know the UK had acquired the Faroes and Svalbard. Has anyone told them? Mjroots (talk) 12:18, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        • That was not only an absolutely ridiculous blurb, it was also grossly factually incorrect. The vast majority of the UK is not the South-East of England, for your information. 131.251.254.154 (talk) 14:56, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
          • Nowt wrong with my blurb, considering it was the one that got posted! Mjroots (talk) 18:16, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The Wiki Gods are angry. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 10:07, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support to blurb 1 or 2. Laughed hard at alt 3. Greetings from a greyer than usual Berlin. Zwerg Nase (talk) 10:11, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support article quality is good, prefer shortness of blurb 1.
    talk) 11:16, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Support - interesting, notable---BabbaQ (talk) 11:33, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I live in the United Kingdom and saw the eclipse fine, even if I did have to look at people through a spot of purple for about half an hour afterwards. Unless we're saying that anything outside London doesn't really count, which is fair enough I suppose. Formerip (talk) 11:53, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • What!? UK editors outside London will be apoplectic! Martinevans123 (talk) 12:02, 20 March 2015 (UTC) [reply]
    • Yep, perfect unspoiled views here in Cardiff. I can only assume the second blurb was a joke as well? Who suggested that in the first place? 131.251.254.154 (talk) 14:51, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posting, I'll go with the places blurb. --Tone 13:08, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: A lot of cloud cover in Yorkshire, although there I was able to get a lucky break about ten minutes before the peak. Sceptre (talk) 17:23, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] RD: Malcolm Fraser

Article: Malcolm Fraser (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

Article needs updating
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Former PM of Australia. MASEM (t) 23:45, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

March 19

March 19, 2015 (2015-03-19) (Thursday)
Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

[Closed] Arctic sea ice hits record low

No consensus to post. SpencerT♦C 01:52, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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: Arctic ice pack (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The National Snow and Ice Data Center announces that Arctic sea ice has reached the lowest extent for the winter season since satellite measurements began in 1979. (Post)
News source(s): BBC CNN The Guardian
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: The lowest extent in over 30 years seems to be a significant development as far as global warming is concerned. 
talk 12:29, 21 March 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.

Treaty signed integrating South Ossetia into the Russian Federation

Article: 
Russian Federation, to the protest of the European Union and United States. (Post)
News source(s): Yahoo news, Al-Jazeera, Irish Times, WSJ

Credits:

Nominator's comments: Seems like a major change in an already volatile region. The blurb can also be reworded to mention that the treaty unifies the military, economy and various government agencies of the two states. --benlisquareT•C•E 03:29, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: I think I've been doing most of the work on updating South Ossetian articles with the new developments today; personally, I would suggest South Ossetia as the linked article instead of the relations page, which has a lot of preexisting issues. -Kudzu1 (talk) 03:48, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. The provided news sources state that the treaty "calls for nearly full integration" while the blurb suggests that the treaty accomplishes that already. A country formally adding part of another (or just another if you take the Russian position that S.O. is a country) to its territory is notable but the blurb might need to be changed here. 331dot (talk) 10:23, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Next stop, the Sudetenland! I am of a mixed opinion on this. The annexation is already a fait accompli. It's not a major news story (i.e., front apge) in the US, while Mrs. Obabama's having tripped while trying to curtsey in high heels is. I am leaning towards support based on the historical significance, Putin seems like Hitler, trying to get back his "homeland" after it had been dismantled. But the Ossetes are hardly Russians. Last I remember the area had a population of 50,000. μηδείς (talk) 16:28, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • support - as it is a result of a very publicized war in 2008. a greater context.--BabbaQ (talk) 17:01, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose Technically, South Ossetia didn't sign an accession treaty incorporating it into Russia as a new federal subject, like Crimea did. As such, less notable, yet expectable move from Putler. Brandmeistertalk 20:51, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Unrelated discussion. Mamyles (talk) 01:41, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
"Putler"? You win an *AWARD* for that! μηδείς (talk) 21:18, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
In Russian it's a fairly well-known variation actually. Aside from Sudetenland, compare his first appointment by Yeltsin to the transfer of power from
Dmitri Kiselev to Goebbels and female Putin's Army to the League of German Girls, while Putin is known to speak German fluently. Déjà vu. Brandmeistertalk 21:34, 19 March 2015 (UTC) [reply
]
I read somewhere recently that his German is just "passable." I wonder how that compares with Merkel's Russian? Sca (talk) 13:26, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I believe even though Merkel won Russian prizes in school, it is just "passable". Putin's German should be excellent though, since he spent years in Dresden recruiting German students. I believe they speak both in conversations with each other. Zwerg Nase (talk) 13:57, 20 March 2015 (UTC) [reply]
I read somewhere else that German was spoken, for some reason, in Putin's family. Mehr weiss ich nicht. Sca (talk) 23:21, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to be bold and hat this. From some points of view this could be considered mightily offensive, although I'm confident that is not your intention. Mamyles (talk) 01:41, 21 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose Let me make that official, since the annexation is not going to be internationally recognized. μηδείς (talk) 17:55, 21 March 2015 (UTC)-[reply]

March 18

March 18, 2015 (2015-03-18) (Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Health

Law and crime

[Closed] 2015 Gothenburg pub shooting

No consensus to post. SpencerT♦C 16:21, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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: 
A shooting in Gothenburg, Sweden kills at least two people and injures at least ten. (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian Express USA Today The Guardian again

Credits:
Nominator's comments: Only two deaths so far, but the death toll is expected to rise (see first Guardian link above). 
talk 12:15, 19 March 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] Tunis museum shootings

Article: 
hostage crisis at the Bardo National Museum in Tunis, Tunisia (Post)
News source(s): BBC, BBC live feed, NYTimes

Credits:

Article needs updating

 MASEM (t) 13:47, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support once fleshed out. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:28, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment It sounds like the situation is over (the two militants have been killed along with an officer, in addition to the 8 above), so we should start getting more information here. Note that 7 of the killed hostages were tourists visiting the museum, and as pointed out by the BBC article, this is literally next door to the main legislative building of Tunisia at the same time they were discussing anti-terrorism laws. --MASEM (t) 14:45, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support when article is un-stubbed. Despite the usual flurry on deadly attacks, editing has been slow today. '''tAD''' (talk) 15:09, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment - Most sources - albeit only three hours since the attack - say 11 dead (8 tourist, 2 perps and one officer) — Preceding unsigned comment added by The Almightey Drill (talk • contribs) 10:10, March 18, 2015‎
  • Support: Major news worldwide.
    ☎ • ✎) 17:47, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Support for same reasons as above. Article looks ready, marking as such. Mamyles (talk) 17:57, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per above, and I agree the article is filled in enough to post. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:00, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted -- tariqabjotu 18:37, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The article has been moved (w/ redirect) to Bardo National Museum attack, could an admin adjust this in the ITN blurb? --MASEM (t) 19:26, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Fixed. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:31, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Seat of the European Central Bank opening

Proposed image
Article: 
Blockupy.
News source(s): Deutsche Welle, Telegraph

Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Apart from being a story in itself (significant step in the development of the European Central Bank/Eurozone, and large riots in a major European city), it ties into the current much larger Euro crisis, and particularly the state of relations between Germany and other European nations. Smurrayinchester 09:07, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Israeli legislative election, 2015

The item has been posted, and is not coming down. Further screaming and insulting of admins should be taken to the talk page. μηδείς (talk) 03:29, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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: 
wins plurality in the Israeli Knesset.
News source(s): BBC, Jerusalem Post, Al Jazeera

Credits:

Article updated
The nominated event is listed on
WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: Recurring item. Likud has won the most votes in the election, but a government has not been formed, thus the Prime Minister may or may not change yet. '''tAD''' (talk) 06:58, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
I though we weren't using 'plurality' any more anyway? It's a very region-specific term. There are perfectly good widely recognised alternatives, such a 'relative majority' or even a simple phrasing such as 'Likud wins the most votes' etc. 82.21.7.184 (talk) 22:21, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Given it's wikilinked, I think it's fine. You'd have the same issue in reverse with "relative majority". (I'm not American and I've only heard of plurality.) wctaiwan (talk) 22:44, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Did you even SEE the article before posting? Wheres the update? The results don't even have the seats listed and there is nothing else for an update.120.62.27.248 (talk) 03:05, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Here's 10kb of updating since 17 March. μηδείς (talk) 03:32, 19 March 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.

March 17

March 17, 2015 (2015-03-17) (Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

[Pulled] Remains of Cervantes identified

Proposed image
Article: Miguel de Cervantes (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Forensic scientists identify the remains of writer Miguel de Cervantes (pictured) at the Convent of the Barefoot Trinitarians in Madrid, Spain (Post)
News source(s): BBC, Guardian, Wall Street Journal
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Cervantes is regarded as the greatest author in the Spanish language, and his works have been translated into many other languages. His remains had been lost since 1673. '''tAD''' (talk) 12:58, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Historian Fernando de Prado spent more than four years battling for funding to make this search. Then it took nine months, even with all that hi-tech equipment. "Didn't even have to use"? - they are still planning to use DNA testing, to confirm the identification? Martinevans123 (talk) 23:05, 17 March 2015 (UTC) [reply]
You do realize saying that they plan to do DNA testing is a strong argument for not posting yet? μηδείς (talk) 01:41, 18 March 2015 (UTC) [reply]
I was supporting because it's in the news now. If the DNA evidence is confirmatory, as seems likely, I suspect there won't be much of an additional story. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:38, 18 March 2015 (UTC) [reply]
  • Neutral It's getting a lot play in the news but as Medeis has pointed out, this looks like over playing something fairly mundane. And yes, the article is not really up to scratch. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:21, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The small article Convent of the Barefoot Trinitarians has also been updated. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:34, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Doesn't seem really important to me compared to world events like wars etc. Also Medeis' makes a good point. Thue (talk) 20:50, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • We aren't just about listing wars. We have listed other discoveries of lost historical artefacts, such as a Japanese warship and Richard III '''tAD''' (talk) 06:13, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support once referenced. This isn't the war and bad news page, this is ITN. This is getting much attention (whether it should or not) and is about a notable writer. 331dot (talk) 20:55, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - once it is all ready for posting, this is definitely for ITN.--BabbaQ (talk) 22:00, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:48, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support as an important story relating to the "Spanish Shakespeare." An a side note, it's fascinating that they used clues from his life to identify him.-RHM22 (talk) 05:06, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Eleven supports. Marked ready. Sca (talk) 13:36, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
As a note the article is still missing significant referencing in some paragraphs. For the sake of ITN posting, we should be looking to have at least one cite per paragraph (presuming the cite covers the entire paragraph fairly). --MASEM (t) 13:39, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Feel free to sprinkle some more Britannica fairy-dust. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:18, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted -- tariqabjotu 18:38, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Bad post, with a maintenance tag for the section about which Cervantes was most notable. Still, no longer surprised by this sort of thing. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:40, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull until sourcing issues are addressed. There are four unsourced paragraphs in the 'Literary Pursuits' section. Mellowed Fillmore (talk) 19:47, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Pulled. Maintenance tags? Nein danke. Perhaps those who supported and posted hadn't looked at the article in detail. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:51, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Which four paragraphs? Martinevans123 (talk) 20:13, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The ones that you have now sourced. Mellowed Fillmore (talk) 20:55, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
All good Martin, now just the works section tag to deal with, including unreferenced floral crap like "it is particularly worthy of attention, as it manifests the poetic direction in which Cervantes moved at an early period of life.".... The Rambling Man (talk) 21:05, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
We can't heavily reference Brittanica though, can we, as is most of that section? Stephen 21:23, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Especially as Britannica now seems to be a lame mirror for Wikipedia.... The Rambling Man (talk) 21:25, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I've made an effort. Go ask another hapless editor. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:30, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't mind one way or another, and Donkey hasn't edited for a while so you'll need another hapless editor here sadly. I just think, when we claim we're posting "quality articles" at ITN, we genuinely live up to it, despite the bizarre consensus and even more bizarre posting of an article with grossly under-referenced sections and pure
WP:OR writing. It troubles me that many admins just blindly count votes and don't actually review article quality before posting. But it's commonplace, so much so that perhaps I should just let it go and we post anything at all, as long as we have a numerical advantage for it. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:37, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
Can't wait. Just off to do some in-depth Spanish literary research. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:22, 18 March 2015 (UTC) [reply]
Yes, I agree. Despite TRM's insistence -- and, honestly, I can't help but think that his quick pulling was just another dig at me -- I did look at the article. We don't need perfect articles for ITN. The relevant section is referenced, and it's in the midst of an article where the orange tags are section warnings for other sections. This standard is understandable in new, shorter articles where the entire article deals with the event. To apply that to longer articles, where there's significant information unrelated to the event, that seems like setting a different standard. But if that's the consensus for article quality, that's fine and that should be codified (right now, the criteria deal only with article tags). In the meantime, the pontificating from TRM based on his unwritten standards for quality is unnecessary. -- tariqabjotu 00:12, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The standard we are looking for is the same standard for all articles that are "featured" off the main page (not Featured Article , but anything bold-linked from this). DYK has a strong requirement on decent article quality particularly on sourcing and avoiding paraphrasing. There is no reason to weaken ITN's easily-met standards. And yes, while the relevant section is sourced, we are making sure the whole article is of respectable quality. --MASEM (t) 00:15, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Then change the criteria. Obviously there is disagreement on this. Right now, we have complaints about how the standards should be, not what they actually are. And while it is reasonable to take this position, the tenor from the pulling admin over non-codified rules is unnecessary. -- tariqabjotu 00:33, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That would require the Main Page criteria to be changed, and that requires a massive discussion (see
WP:ITN is clear we are looking for sufficiently-referenced articles. In this case, this should not be this hard. There's about a dozen-odd paragraphs that simply need one citation each presuming it can be met by existing sources. Shouldn't take much work. We're not even close to asking for GA-quality sourcing. --MASEM (t) 03:40, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
What? You can propose changes to criteria on
WP:ITN
does not say anything about sufficiently-referenced articles; it says sufficiently-referenced updates (Updated content must be thoroughly referenced.). It mentions article tags, but the way I read it that's talking about tags for the whole article, not about individual sections. And virtually all of the text regarding criteria is under a section simply entitled "Updated content".
The points about article quality and quality of updates are perennial issues here. It seems the criteria have been improved to describe what constitutes a sufficient update -- the criteria section at
WP:ITN
goes into great detail about what constitutes a sufficient update -- but little is said about overall article quality. It's obvious the criteria are not clear if there remains so much debate. We can change the criteria to say that red- and orange-level tags should not be anywhere in an ITN article (something objective) if that was what was intended. We can proscribe criteria that describe the overall state of the article.
Now, if there is no desire for that to be done, fine, but then we're going to have to live with these subjective discussions. And those gung-ho about having higher-quality articles in ITN will need to cease acting as if this issue is black and white and making flippant remarks in every thread about how this is "no surprise". Threads in individual nominations rarely lead to changes in practice, so if some see a pervasive problem, the talk page is
that way. -- tariqabjotu 04:28, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
Regardless of the attempts at wikilaywering around the criteria for posting, let's stick with one of the key purposes of ITN, i.e. "To showcase quality Wikipedia content on current events." Now if you consider articles with maintenance tags, masses of unreferenced claims and appallingly unencyclopedic writing to be "quality Wikipedia content" I'm not sure you should be posting items to the main page at all. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:09, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
There really is no point arguing with you. If everything was really as clear as they are in the eyes of The Rambling Man, we wouldn't be having these kinds of discussions over and over. Rather than initiate a discussion that will lead to a clarification or change, you choose to go the route where you insist that everyone who disagrees with you is faulty. It's as if you enjoy lamenting about your recurring concerns in threads rather than starting a centralized discussion. I don't think that's productive, but godspeed. -- tariqabjotu 07:25, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The point of articles being put on the front page is to hopefully draw in new editors that are interested in the topic that can contribute to the article. To make that work, the article needs to be in "good enough" shape to show by example so these new contributors can understand what is expected. Poor citations is not one of those things, and why it is a sticking point here. There's enough uncited paragraphs to put into question how citation on WP works and new editors may add material without understanding the need to reference properly. --MASEM (t) 14:25, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, please refrain from posting such low quality articles in the future. No discussion is required unless it's to discuss certain individual's difficulties in determining what quality means. I am not, nor am I ever, alone in noting these errant posts of yours, just read the threads above. Try harder to maintain the quality of the main page please. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:36, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The article still contains a huge number of citations needed for rather strong claims, and contains 'sentences' such as, "which was made into a film in 1972, directed by
tropicalia-pioneers Os Mutantes." Although I have read him in both English and Spanish, I am no expert, and much work is needed by those more familiar with the subject. Either that or mass deletion of unsupported claims. μηδείς (talk) 04:04, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
This just in to the ITN newsroom: Miguel de Cervantes is still dead. Sca (talk) 15:59, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Repost - interesting article subject. if anything mess delete the unsupported claims. this should be in the ITN section. period--BabbaQ (talk) 17:20, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I feel we may be just "
pissing in the wind" (as they say in La Mancha), over this one, alas. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:42, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]

[Closed] Internet Explorer ended

WP:SNOW close --Jayron32 04:59, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]

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: Internet Explorer (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Microsoft announces plans to eliminate Internet Explorer. (Post)
News source(s): CNN Fox News
Credits:

Article needs updating
Nominator's comments:
Talkback) 22:43, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
  • support definitely notable. and ITN worthy--BabbaQ (talk) 22:52, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Form the CNN piece, it appears that A) Microsoft is going to ship a new not-backwards-compatible browser (codenamed: "Spartan") based on a new platform independent from IE, and B) that the current IE (or something like it) will continue to be shipped with Windows to support legacy applications that need it, but that IE will be relegated to the background while the new browser is given emphasis. If that's an accurate account, this "elimination" of IE doesn't seem very radical. Dragons flight (talk) 23:02, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Perfect case for recent deaths? –HTD 23:05, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. It doesn't really seem like it's being eliminated, just supplanted. From what I can read it will still exist for some time. 331dot (talk) 23:28, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Talk of plans to 'eliminate' IE are just wrong - as Dragons flight notes above, IE will continue to ship, just not as the default browser. And, honestly, who cares? People who care about which browser they use will 95% not be using IE anyway; people who don't care, well, they don't care. GoldenRing (talk) 23:40, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support for RD when they stop supporting IE. Hopefully they will bring back Netscape, the last browser that was not designed as if you belonged to it, rather than it to you. Oppose until there's a stake in its heart. μηδείς (talk) 01:50, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose This is not as significant as it seems. If W10 shipped with zero internet function, that might be a case, but just the end of one browser and the start of another. --MASEM (t) 02:02, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Perhaps when support officially ends (January 10, 2023 at the earliest) I will support it, but until then, IE could hardly be considered "eliminated". Joshua Garner (talk) 02:22, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Masem and Joshua Garner. As an announcement of a plan, this is not worthy of being run on the front page. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 02:37, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per above. I almost spilled over my coffee to hear it but could find it not enough notable for being an ITN promo for Netscape in future. -The Herald the joy of the LORDmy strength 03:12, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I'm not sure why this seems to be in the news right now. Spartan being the default browser for Windosw 10 was announced back in January. As for Internet Explorer, it is not being "eliminated" (whatever that means) and will likely be supported for years to come. Isa (talk) 04:41, 18 March 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.

March 16

March 16, 2015 (2015-03-16) (Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

RD: Andy Fraser

Article: Andy Fraser (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC TG Many More
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

 -The Herald the joy of the LORDmy strength 14:00, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

March 15

March 15, 2015 (2015-03-15) (Sunday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

International relations
  • People's Republic of China that one of its aircraft crossed the Chinese border and dropped a bomb killing four people. (AP via ABC News America)

Politics and elections

Sports

Weather

[Posted] RD: Xu Caihou

Article: Xu Caihou (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Fox News Global Times Reuters
Credits:

Article needs updating
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: A very notable figure of Chinese military and has been covered in major news agencies due to his scandal --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 19:21, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

I'm dropping my oppose given the explanation below. 331dot (talk) 20:25, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, and actually I'm quite appalled at the level of ignorance with the comments here (although I know it is probably unintentional), particularly those that describe him as "not important." Unfortunately seems to be the result of systemic bias. This has been the top story on almost all Chinese-language news portals, and is the top story on the main page of Chinese WP as a full ITN item. For what it's worth, we posted (on ITN) a full item regarding his expulsion from the Communist Party in June 2014, which was the top headline in the New York Times and BBC, also on every Chinese-language news portal around the world. This man was essentially the number-2 figure in the Chinese military for nearly ten years, subordinate only to the commander-in-chief (the president), as evidenced by this article from the South China Morning Post. I would put his notability to be around that of the U.S. Secretary of Defence and the head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff combined, his military rank is equivalent to a US "four-star general", if we were to compare apples to apples, and it is somewhat sad that I have to do this comparison because of the scant knowledge about Chinese affairs on WP. Moreover, he is the highest-ranked military officer ever be implicated in corruption in PRC history. With these facts in mind, I would ask the users above to reconsider. Colipon+(Talk) 14:49, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well, of course it's headline news in China, but this is an RD nomination, and second in (a highly politized at that) military is simply not the top of a field, no war decorations, nor does the fact he was accused of bribery make him any more noteworthy. Calling editors ignorant is not the way to make the case here. μηδείς (talk) 22:05, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I do apologize if anyone felt my comments were personally directed, they were not intended to be. Colipon+(Talk) 23:03, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support we posted a story about this guy some 1-2 years ago. I think a fine rule for RD is if we posted it within the last 5 years it should be on RD also. Plus, from the explanation above, it seems to be something along the line of China's Dick Cheney.
    Nergaal (talk) 17:11, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Dick Cheney? You mean he shoots people, and drinks children's blood? μηδείς (talk) 22:05, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment User:Colipon offers a compelling argument. It's practically impossible for me to verify most of the article since the references are in Chinese, but given good faith that they're not a work of fiction, this is a mild support, hoping for more sources in English. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:50, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, per Colipon. The BBC calls him the "second most senior officer in the People's Liberation Army - made up of 2.3 million people - behind President Xi Jinping." [15] and notes in an article before his death that he was the "highest ranking soldier ever prosecuted" [16]. Espresso Addict (talk) 22:23, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: Seems to meet notability criteria. -Kudzu1 (talk) 04:06, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support pending article improvements: I'm going to have to agree with the idea this would be equivalent to , say, the chiarman of the Joint Chief of Staff for the US. And this fellow was still in the position (as I read) when he died. RD is met, even if the number of English sources is low. The article does have some paras w/o any inline cites, this needs to be fixed. --MASEM (t) 04:45, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You seem not to have read the lead paragraph of the article, Masem, where he was expelled from the PLA and stripped of his rank. We didn't post Tom Foley, third in line for the White House when he died, or famous gadfly James Traficant. At least they held elective office. Xu had no military distinction, led no military campaigns, held a sinecure, was a rent seeker, and sold influence. None of that ammounts to an achievement or makes him influential as an artist. μηδείς (talk) 05:05, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, yes, I missed that, but there's still the fact he was stripped of that and was shortly to go on trial about this. That part makes the death "interesting" for RD. --MASEM (t) 05:12, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That would make sense if he were shot after a show trial (and might deserve a blurb like all those friends of Kim in NK), or was poisoned to save the state embarrassment. This is just the case of a pathetic party hack ("political commissar of the 16th Group Army in 1990... was offered an air conditioner as a gift from a classmate... chief editor of the People's Liberation Army Daily newspaper... became the political commissar of the Jinan Military Region,") dying in old age of natural causes. Being fired for corruption is not an accomplishment. μηδείς (talk) 05:21, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support With due respect to Medeis, wishing that a story wasn't a big item in news sources is not the same as recognizing that it is. This seems to be big news, (admittedly in China rather than an English-speaking country) and for that reason, this seems worth at least an RD note. The article has a few clean-up needs, but nothing I would think would keep it off the main page. --Jayron32 05:30, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I am not sure what you mean by my "wishing". Do you actually think I am emotionally invested in this? My point is to offer other points to consider, not jump on a bandwagon. I am not troubled or offended by the posting. μηδείς (talk) 01:55, 18 March 2015 (UTC) [reply]
  • Support per Colipon. The claim that the former highest-ranking soldier (outranked only by the Chinese president) of the world's largest army was not at the top of his field is simply laughable. -Zanhe (talk) 14:06, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted consensus to post and some good updates have taken place over the past few hours, well done to those involved. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:28, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Withdrawn] Swine influenza in India

Withdrawn by nominator. 331dot (talk) 15:01, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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: Swine influenza (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Swine influenza claim over 1500 lives in India. (Post)
News source(s): PTI
Credits:
Nominator's comments: May be for Ongoing -The Herald the joy of the LORDmy strength 13:46, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Considering both the tiny amount of detail that the given source provides and the amount of detail in our article on this, this doesn't sound like an unusual thing in this region. (the source article gives "this season", implying that its an unfortunate reality). --MASEM (t) 13:56, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose unless this is declared of epidemic proportions. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:02, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relentfully Withdraw- Looks like this is going to be SNOW. -The Herald the joy of the LORDmy strength 14:32, 15 March 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.

Lahore church attack

Articles: 
Twin bomb attacks on two churches in the Pakistani city of Lahore kills at least fourteen people with seventy more injured. (Post)
News source(s): [17]

Credits:

 --Numancia (talk) 13:41, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose Given the size of the list of the second article, this doesn't seem to be anything unusual or special, an unfortunate common event in that area. --MASEM (t) 13:53, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Tragically, not an unusual event there. 331dot (talk) 13:55, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: This is not a usual event to ignore. Such attacks are rare in Lahore. This event should not be considered ordinary. —ШαмıQ✍ @ 14:03, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose just reading Terrorist incidents in Pakistan in 2015 (which is a better link than the second suggested linked article) enlightens us that this is commonplace and unremarkable. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:04, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Terrorist attacks like this is common in some parts of Pakistan, like the FATA, KPK, and Balochistan, but an attack on a church in Lahore is rare. Lahore is relatively peaceful. This is significant.
(Update:) The news source above supports my statement. —ШαмıQ✍ @ 14:26, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think this should be looked at with a more national eye than a local one; while it may be unusual in Lahore, it isn't for Pakistan. 331dot (talk) 14:28, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Inter religious terrorist attacks are of concern to people of both the parties in various countries, and not just a specific country. Even in this particular country, attack on minority Christianity (is not very common in Pakistan), which is a world majority religion, is of significant interest religious communities especially to Christian religious community. --Samuelled (talk) 15:38, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per 331, TRM. Besides, reluctant though one is to choose on the basis of body count, three times as many were killed in a bus crash in Brazil. Sca (talk) 15:47, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Not helpful. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:11, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
This type of deaths, which are caused by hatred/ideology is very different from deaths due to accident. And are more significant issue to be looked into than say a traffic accident. And current head count of deaths which has now increased to fifteen, and sadly increasing, is definitely not a small number. --Samuelled (talk) 16:02, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The group behind this has a very crooked ideology. They want to establish an Islamic State, and if the government doesn't agree to that, they'll kill Christians. Both ways, Christians lose. —ШαмıQ✍ @ 16:50, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Terrorists are not known for adhering to rational thought. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 16:59, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No. See psychopath. Not for nothing was Hitler labeled The Psychopathic God. Sca (talk) 17:21, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
A bit like Christians during the Crusades then, but the other way round? The Rambling Man (talk) 20:01, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • A Request Could we please refrain from posting editorial comments, a number of which appear rather incendiary and are likely to be offensive to some editors. This is not an appropriate forum for those kinds of posts. Thank you. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:14, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    What is offensive or incendiary? Everything I see written above is factual. If you don't like the facts, that's another matter. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:50, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think you are confusing fact with opinion. But again, this isn't the forum for that discussion anymore than it is an appropriate venue for attacks on religious groups. -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:03, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NOTFORUM. The Crusades have no relevance to 2015
talk) 21:10, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
I think you are confusing discussion with relevant and factual discourse with making attacks on religious groups. Again, if you personally find it offensive, that's a different matter altogether. It may be worth your while appraising yourself of the article I linked, for some context. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:07, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Little to no mention of international significance in the article. I've added a section on violence to
talk) 20:23, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
Bomb attacks on minorities in a religious center in Pakistan is not very common, also not common around the world. --Kinderlander (talk) 05:47, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

March 14

March 14, 2015 (2015-03-14) (Saturday)
Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

[Posted] RD: Valentin Rasputin

Article: Valentin Rasputin (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): TMT Euro News
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

 -The Herald the joy of the LORDmy strength 02:36, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

[Closed] Indian Gang Rape sparks large protests

No consensus to post. SpencerT♦C 00:14, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Articles: 
Gang rape in india (talk · history · tag) and Rape in India (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Protests begin following the gang rape of a nun in her 70s. (Post)
News source(s): Indipendent The National Post

Credits:
 Monopoly31121993 (talk) 18:18, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose unless protests are notable or come to something, this kind of disgraceful behaviour seems all too commonplace in India. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:59, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I don't think there is enough here to raise this to ITN level attention. That may change, and if it does we can revisit the subject. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:54, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Respectfully oppose Morally disgusting behaviour to be condemned in the strongest words possible, but not reached the level of protest and questions asked as the 2012 Delhi case...yet, at least '''tAD''' (talk) 23:57, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose; while getting much coverage, I agree with the above posters that this doesn't rise to ITN level. 331dot (talk) 10:53, 15 March 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] Mohamed Nasheed

Article: Mohamed Nasheed (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Former Maldives president Mohamed Nasheed jailed for 13 years on a terrorism charge. (Post)
News source(s): Dailymail The Guardian BBC HFP WSJ Still?
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: The blurb may be modified.. Ṫ Ḧ the joy of the LORDmy strength 13:32, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support - Notable. --BabbaQ (talk) 13:54, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note - If reporting a former national leader being jailed is typically done here, this guy would seem to qualify. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 14:45, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support a former national leader being jailed is probably significant enough anyway, but when the guy is being jailed for terrorism (legitimately or otherwise) that definitely qualifies for ITN. Mellowed Fillmore (talk) 15:50, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support A former president being jailed for an allegedly terrorism related offense is ITN worthy. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:52, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Former head of state becoming incarcerated is newsworthy. Do not know enough about any aspect of the Maldives to know if this is legitimate incarceration or otherwise, but both of those options are still newsworthy '''tAD''' (talk) 23:58, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Former heads of state being jailed for their activities (actual or otherwise) along with being named a terrorist is noteworthy. 331dot (talk) 13:26, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. The article needs the two sections referring to this amalgamating, out of date material removing, and the events need to be mentioned in the lead. Espresso Addict (talk) 19:53, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Support A head of state going to jail merits inclusion (even a former one), although it's a country without a lot of influence on the global stage. Busy Moose (talk) 05:26, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Per Espresso Addict, fixes look adequate. There are a few "cn" tags and maybe one or two other sentences that could use a cite, but that usually doesn't keep something from ITN. Article is in decent enough quality now. I tweaked the blurb to be a bit more complete and grammatically correct. @
    David Levy: for the pic, there's a good one in the article infobox.--Jayron32 13:12, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    I found one in which Nasheed isn't smiling. —
    David Levy 17:08, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
per TRM, closing. Metadiscussion unrelated to this posting
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
  • Wait, there are posting admins pinging David now? It's really not that hard to add a picture... -- tariqabjotu 18:00, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    So do it yourself. Yes, there are admins who aren't confident in doing this, and it's a 10000% no-no to get it wrong. Plus David is a Commons admin too. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:53, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Um, ok? I can, and I do, and I would have done the same here had I seen this first. I understand non-admins pinging David when they want a photo changed, but it's a bit strange seeing an admin doing it. We shouldn't be relying on just one or two admins to do this, especially when it -- as I said -- is not that difficult. Now, if Jayron knew how to, but just didn't feel like doing it/didn't have time, that's a different story; that's fine. But that's not the impression his request gave. -- tariqabjotu 23:35, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Jayron used to do it every time he posted a blurb, for many years, and literally every single time he did so he would screw it up, and every single time he screwed it up, David Levy would graciously and politely fix his screw-ups, so Jayron started cutting out the middle step and just pinging David to do it, since he had to clean up after him anyways. --Jayron32 01:56, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    tariqabjotu: What, exactly, is your problem with someone who is willing to do something, being kindly asked to do it every so often, and then them doing it? Seems like regular Wikipedia collaboration to me. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 02:25, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    @
    David Levy: doesn't mind or otherwise enjoys being seen as the guy who knows how to add a picture to ITN. But why, exactly? What if he goes on vacation for a couple weeks? Is the section lost without him? Maybe one or two admins not feeling confident enough to add a photo is no big deal, but we shouldn't make this a thing, where David is the guy who adds images to ITN. And, as I said, the procedure is not very difficult and does not require Commons adminship. If the admin instructions still result in mistakes, the solution is to devise better instructions, not give up and put the task in the hands of a single individual. -- tariqabjotu 03:08, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    No one has tried to stop you from doing it... --Jayron32 03:21, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    (edit conflict) You'd think I was speaking Aramaic here. Anyone else have any points I've already addressed that they want to bring up again?
    There isn't anything revolutionary in the idea that there should be more admins involved in this section aware of how to do a common task, and I'm shocked at the resistance to this concept. -- tariqabjotu 04:09, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    It is a common task, but the process is a bit arcane, and as noted below, the fact that David is a Commons admin (whereas many of us are not) actually makes it easier for him. I did do this many times, for quite a while, and fucked it up so much that I just started asking David, because he was kind enough to clean up my mistakes so often. I know you believe differently, but I'm not a total idiot, and jumping through the hoops to upload and protect the picture can be a bit of a hassle. David is good at it, and people who are good at things who also don't mind doing it can be asked. Your defense of David's free time is admirable, but let him speak for himself. Again, if you want to do it yourself to save him the work, no one is asking you to NOT do it. If David has no problems, you certainly have no reason to object to him doing it. --Jayron32 04:41, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    There are others who can do it, but (a) David is more efficient as he can ensure protection at Commons rather than a local upload, and (b) it's often not a case of lacking skills but rather lacking time or resources (there's no way I'll switch a picture while editing from an iPad, for example). Stephen 04:00, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    (a) David is more efficient as he can ensure protection at Commons rather than a local upload Cropped images need to be uploaded locally anyway. Now whether waiting for David to do this is more efficient... (b) it's often not a case of lacking skills but rather lacking time or resources Right. I give up. There's no point in me even commenting in this thread if nobody is going to read my comments. -- tariqabjotu 04:09, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    I think giving up would be a good idea, you don't seem to want to hear the many editors here. We all have things we're good at around here, and as there's no actual problem, I suggest this portion of the "discussion" which is entirely unrelated to the ITN item be collapsed. The Rambling Man (talk) 05:46, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Good idea. --Jayron32 06:12, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] 2015 Myanmar ferry accident

No consensus to post. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:48, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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: 
sinks off the coast of Myanmar, killing at least 33 people. (Post)
News source(s): ABC News Associated Press Reuters

Credits:
Nominator's comments: Significant number of deaths. 
talk 11:20, 14 March 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.

March 13

March 13, 2015 (2015-03-13) (Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Health
  • In regard to an operation that took place on December 11, 2014, today, a
    Cape Town, South Africa, reports the world's first successful penis transplant, an operation requiring reconnection of tiny blood vessels and nerves. (BBC)

Law and crime

Science and technology

RD: Al Rosen

Article: Al Rosen (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): New York Times, USA Today, ESPN
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
talk 23:26, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]

  • Note - Perhaps better known as an executive, so maybe there should be more emphasis on that part of his career. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 05:53, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - I feel like Baseball Hall of Fame should be the minimum requirement for MOST former players/executives (Pete Rose would really be the only notable exception). Hit under .300, under 200 home runs, a little over 1000 hits and was one of the most error-prone third basemen in his day per [18]. Only championship he ever won was as a bench player. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.95.216.224 (talk) 17:57, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I'd be interested to see how many baseball players have won the "World" Series, he seems like "just another baseball player" to me, e.g. we don't post every footballer who dies who won the FA Cup.... The Rambling Man (talk) 19:31, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose. I don't think he quite rises to the level needed to meet the RD criteria. Baseball has been around a long time with many notable people which makes it harder to be "very important" to it; as TRM points out merely winning the FA Cup would not merit an RD posting. 331dot (talk) 19:35, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note - I would say Rosen ranks as a good but not great player, also a respected executive, but is at best a borderline case for ITN. To the furriners out there, the term "World Series" has been around since the 1880s, at a time when baseball was pretty much exclusive to North America. The game is now widely played in Latin America and the Pacific Rim, but MLB is still the top level of the sport, with a strong international flavor to its rosters, so the term "World Series" still fits. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 21:55, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] World's first successful penis transplant

Closed before this becomes yet another mirror of the "hilarity" that goes on elsewhere. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:49, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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: Penis transplantation (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The first successful human penis transplantation is announced by Stellenbosch University in South Africa. (Post)
News source(s): BBC, CNN, CBC News
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Seems to be a significant medical advance. Note that the procedure itself was performed last December but, for whatever reason, was just announced yesterday. 
talk 02:35, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
Yes, nicely inserted. Formerip (talk) 19:45, 15 March 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] Cyclone Pam

Article: Cyclone Pam (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Cyclone Pam, a Category 5 hurricane, makes landfall in Vanuatu. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ United Nations confirm eight people dead, dozens more may have been killed, in wake of Cyclone Pam
News source(s): CNN, BBC News, Time
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Strongest storm since Haiyan, according to CNN link above. Also, according to the BBC link above, dozens of people are already feared to be dead. 

talk 19:38, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]

  • Support: Deadly and powerful natural disaster. Article is long enough and well-referenced throughout. Only minor point of improvement is a couple of bare URL references. '''tAD''' (talk) 20:40, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait nothing to report as yet. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:52, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: Seems obvious this is a major weather event impacting many thousands of people. -Kudzu1 (talk) 21:14, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait but expecting to be posted once we have an idea of death tolls/damage. --MASEM (t) 21:30, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This story will continue to develop over the next few days, but since the eye of the storm passed directly over the most populous island in the chain at category 5 intensity, it is clear that there will be massive devastation and a substantial death toll. Looie496 (talk) 22:16, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - major weather event.--BabbaQ (talk) 22:27, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Too soon This looks like a possible future ITN candidate. But we need to have more information and a better article. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:52, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Will post - Once we have the impact information, this is definitely ITN worthy. Especially considering the historical strength of this storm... which should be mentioned in the hook somehow. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 23:50, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Article is still in need of further work, suffers from an abundance of irrelevant links per WP:OVERLINK and an over-reliance on primary data sources for referencing. 3142 (talk) 03:11, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - latest is 60 dead in Vanuatu. Mjroots (talk) 04:15, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support this should be posted now, the article is well updated, and it's a category 5 that has made landfall. It's absurd to think any formal issues won't be addressed or that people aren't already looking for this now. μηδείς (talk) 05:00, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. The article currently has no information about the effects in Vanuatu. Espresso Addict (talk) 05:27, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hard to get, currently no electricity in Vanuatu...--Stemoc 05:44, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait until it causes trouble to White people in New Zealand. –HTD 09:48, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Is that a joke? 331dot (talk) 10:41, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
More like "satire". ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 14:27, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Technically, it is irony, saying what you don't mean. μηδείς (talk) 16:02, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - The Cyclone has now moved on from Vanuatu and is tracking towards New Zealand. Multiple fatalities have been confirmed and the Cyclone is nearing the half-way point in its life. Definitely ITN worthy... 23:51, 14 March 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by CrashesToAshes (talk • contribs)
  • Posted — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 12:43, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • The current blurb is ungrammatical. --Bongwarrior (talk) 16:02, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    I've attempted to rectify the matter. —
    David Levy 16:24, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Looks good to me, thank you. --Bongwarrior (talk) 16:41, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] Egypt's investment summit

No consensus to post. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 21:04, 19 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Nominator's comments: A long-awaited event in Egypt, with an estimated 2,000 foreign delegates and many world leaders. The article is yet to be expanded though. Here are live updates for those who wish to work on it. Furthermore, year-long plans for a new Egyptian capital city will also be unveiled during the summit. This is major news in Egypt and the Middle East. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 12:54, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose based only on article quality. Right now it is a tiny stub of an article, so we don't have any content to highlight on the main page. If someone can do the hard work of properly expanding and referencing the article to something to be proud to show off, I'd support this easily on significance. --Jayron32 16:21, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Might support a blurb about the proposed new city if someone gets an article going. Formerip (talk) 17:47, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Proposed new capital of Egypt. Formerip (talk) 18:44, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
Feel free to suggest a different blurb. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 20:59, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: Conferences happen all the time. The fact that it took place doesn't merit an ITN blurb in its own right. -Kudzu1 (talk) 18:06, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sure, they happen all the time, but some are significant enough to be posted here. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 07:10, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Nothing exceptional about this conference. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:48, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Any reason why a summit that was attended by several world leaders and delegates from 112 different countries, three of whom already pledged a total sum of $12bn, with huge projects that were already announced, including the new capital city megaproject, has "nothing exceptional" about it? I'd be thrilled to know. Why are BRICS summits (
    WP:ITN/R item) more "exceptional" than this one? If you had opposed due to article quality it would have been understandable. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 07:10, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Alt blurb: A major
Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt. Ali Fazal (talk) 16:06, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
  • Firstly, the event garnered up to $45 billion as of this afternoon, so it's not "some" cash. Secondly, major projects have been unveiled during this conference, particularly the one regarding Egypt's proposed new capital city between Cairo and Suez. Thirdly, when was the last time an investment summit of this size took place? Fitzcarmalan (talk) 20:56, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I understand you're very keen to get this posted, but it's simply making the grade. By all means continue to answer every single oppose, but don't be surprised if it makes no difference. Most here have a clue what's going to post at ITN. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:59, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why don't you come up with better arguments then, rather than patronizing me with those unnecessary remarks? I'm not keen on bludgeoning every oppose comment that shows up here, but I will address badly informed !voters, unless it bothers you of course. I know you can do better than that. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 21:13, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not obligated to supply you with "better arguments" nor am I "patronizing" you. Meetings like this happen all the time, so called "commitments" for various investments happen all the time. The level of quoted investments here seem to match those at regular shows like Farnborough Airshow. And those deals are usually done and dusted, not just political talk. I have nothing more to add here, this is a locally interesting story which isn't really in the news and may have some interest to a microcosm of our readership, but given most of it is show-and-tell, I doubt it. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:20, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Pledges and proposals fly around quite often. Summits happen often too. If anything tangible comes out of this, sure it should be posted, but until now it is just a summit where proposals and pledges have been made. We post few summits and ALL have had a worldwide audience, not just a country.
Nergaal (talk) 21:17, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
Attendance by delegates from 112 countries seems pretty worldwide to me. We have five summits on the ITNR list including one that has five countries attend (BRICS) and another with eight (the G8). 331dot (talk) 10:48, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support as a notable conference; announcement of a proposed new capital for a country adds to the notability as well as that doesn't happen too often. 331dot (talk) 10:48, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I also feel that the announcement of a new capital, considering the 1100 year history of Cairo as one of or the dominant city of Egypt is the more news-worthy blurb. Therequiembellishere (talk) 19:56, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is it definite then? Or is it simply proposed? It's unclear. If the former, and Cairo will no longer be the capital, I could be more interested. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:57, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm certainly no expert, but it seems so after reading between these three trans-continental articles (referenced on the new page). [19] [20] [21] Therequiembellishere (talk) 20:19, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nah, just looks like "plans" to do so. When it happens, i.e. in five to seven years, I'll be interested. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:47, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: It may be major and it may be significant, but this would have gone largely unnoticed even in Egypt outside the world of policy-wonkdom if it weren't for the "new capital" "plans". (Speaking as the child of Egyptian immigrants, with many relatives and friends in Egypt, I gather it's something that most Egyptians were only vaguely aware of the summit until the "plans" were declared, at which point they began paying attention chiefly to make fun of the "plans". I admit that anecdotal evidence isn't notable, but I felt it worthwhile to tell everyone anyway.) Lockesdonkey (talk) 03:53, 16 March 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] RD: Daevid Allen

No consensus to post. 331dot (talk) 01:12, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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: Daevid Allen (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian, Rolling Stone, The Daily Telegraph, Pitchfork, Billboard, Mojo, Le Figaro, Gazzetta de Sport, Svenska Dagbladet
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Influential musician in progressive rock, psychedelic rock and space rock Mark in wiki (talk) 11:15, 13 March 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.

March 12

March 12, 2015 (2015-03-12) (Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy
  • The
    Royal Dutch Shell negotiate a contract, pending union ratification, to end of a six-week strike that began February 1 that has affected twelve U.S. refineries. Previously, the strike had been cited as a reason for recent oil price increases. (AP)
  • In
    Thomas Griesa expands the force of his existing remedial rulings in the ongoing litigation over the Argentine debt restructuring, blocking planned bond payments by Citigroup. The Citigroup processing of payments would violate a requirement that Argentina treat bondholders equally. (Reuters)

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

Science and technology

Sports

RD: Ada Jafri

Proposed image
Article: Ada Jafri (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  The first major Urdu poetess, Ada Jafri, dies at the age of 90. (Post)
News source(s): DAWN.com
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: The most significant female figure in Urdu poetry —ШαмıQ✍ @ 16:13, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

I am not familiar with the terminology here at ITN. What's TLC? And how can I make this meet the blurb level? —ШαмıQ✍ @ 20:42, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • Go back in time and change history so that she was a head of state or acclaimed Nobel laureate? She meets RD criteria, but a blurb, no way. -Kudzu1 (talk) 21:17, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why so harsh? I thought that the article didn't meet the blurb level due to some problem with the article which I could rectify. —ШαмıQ✍ @ 03:48, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • TLC = Tender loving care - basically someone to massage and clean up the prose to be a bit more elegant. It's current state (at least, when I checked) would not prevent ITN posting but it can be better. --MASEM (t) 21:31, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD per Masem. Also, is "poetess" really the best descriptor? -Kudzu1 (talk) 18:04, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I chose to write 'poetess', rather than 'female poet', since it is shorter and both convey the same meaning. It would otherwise be 'The first major female Urdu poet' which has a lot of crowded adjectives. 'The first major Urdu poetess' is more concise and sounds better. —ШαмıQ✍ @ 20:42, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb This would inevitably involve more of a significance judgement than is consistent with OR: we are not here to lavish praise on people. What constitutes a "major" poet? I'm not madly keen on even an RD listing either but I'm not opposing it at his stage. 3142 (talk) 04:03, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The significant thing here is that she was a woman, and the first woman to not just compose poetry, but to also get it published like a mainstream male Urdu poet, despite the social issues. She received a lot of acclaim for her Urdu poetry. That's what makes her "major". Sidenote: I had got this article for DYK, too. There, the hook was: "The first Urdu poetess..." (as sources say). Some people objected to that and weren't ready to accept the claim. So I added a qualifier this time to make the claim more credible. —ШαмıQ✍ @ 04:46, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
So the fact that she is a woman makes her more significant as a poet? Sorry, but I don't accept that. If that is the basis of the claim to notability then my evaluation has just gone down a couple of notches which is why I have amended my position to outright oppose. That, and I don't see the interest to our users. Remember that ITN is a convenience for our users rather than a judgement of significance - what is there here to signify a broad level of interest in an Urdu poet with an English speaking readership? 3142 (talk) 05:24, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I am not evaluating significance by myself in any way. Sources recognize her being a great poet, but also assert her importance as a woman poet (since her poetry deals with feminism, too). That's why the blurb would be just ordinary if it said: "Famous Urdu poet, Ada Jafri, dies at the age of 90." That fact that she was a woman (and a feminist) is significant and I mentioned that in the blurb. However, it's up to you. If you think that her being a woman, and her struggles as a woman which male poets didn't have to go through, are insignificant, go ahead and just mention that she was a famous poet. But don't completely discard her importance as a poet. —ШαмıQ✍ @ 06:21, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose If the significant thing here is that she is a woman that is an insult to humans of all genders. Let's honor merit, not identity politics. μηδείς (talk) 04:55, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This isn't identity politics. Women have to struggle a lot to get a name in this part of the world. She did just that. She took a field which is heavily dominated by men (Urdu poetry), excelled in it and made her name in the field. Her poetry won her plenty of awards to justify her merit. She was the first woman to do so. How does this undermine her merit in any way? —ШαмıQ✍ @ 05:10, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
In any given country, typically there is going to be a dominant ethnic group. For anyone either not male or not in that ethnic group, the social barriers to success are typically higher, and historically much higher. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 14:32, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The issue is whether she is at the top of her field as a poet. There are plenty of noted women poets. I am a big fan of Plath. But being born a woman is not an accomplishment, and at the time of her birth the nominee was a subject of the British empire, which had just been ruled for 60+ years by a female monarch. If the nominator wants my support he can provide evidence she was at the top of her field, not a woman in a field. A good comparison would be Umm Kulthum, widely considered to be the best Arabic singer of all time, regardless of her gender. Her funeral had more attendees than that of Nasser. μηδείς (talk) 21:43, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Query. Is her death being reported internationally? I realise it's not necessary but I found it hard to get a sense of her notability based on the article, and eg the BBC are not covering it as yet. Espresso Addict (talk) 05:31, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Did not find anything in international newspapers. But all local newspapers have an article on her death. —ШαмıQ✍ @ 06:40, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
(Update:) Here's some coverage by VOA Urdu: 1, 2, 3. —ШαмıQ✍ @ 07:17, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Clarifications: Let me clarify a few things here:
  1. She is notable and significant as a poet: She was an internationally acclaimed Urdu poet (regardless of her gender).
  2. She was a woman: This is remarkable because women face various hindrances when pursuing careers like this. The fact that she did that is worth mentioning.
  3. Why I want this on the English Wikipedia: Because most Urdu speakers (in Pakistan as well as abroad) browse the web in English. They are most likely to see this article in English rather than Urdu. For example, see the sorry state of the Urdu Wikipedia and the entry on Ada Jafri there.

See Death of the first lady. It mentions her merits as a poet and next mentions her struggles as a woman. It ought to be significant enough for inclusion. —ШαмıQ✍ @ 06:40, 14 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@The Rambling Man: I am not a fan or anything. That was what I could find about her personality in one of the sources. (BTW, when someone is writing an article on a recently deceased person, you often find words like these. So it isn't odd to find that in the news article there.) If you can word it in a better way, you are most welcome to do so. —ШαмıQ✍ @ 09:24, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You might also like to see this: ET —ШαмıQ✍ @ 09:32, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD- Meets DC, no tag-worthy issues with article. Bzweebl (talk • contribs) 00:57, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD I believe she does meet dc. I also think this is ready to be posted, there is sufficient consensus for it and her article seems fine. SeraV (talk) 12:22, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    I guess it's fine if you think phrases like "She spent her early life within impassable social bounds" belong in an encyclopaedic biography. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:43, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Small sacrifices are acceptable. Marked ready. SeraV (talk) 16:23, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, you consider non-encyclopaedic writing as a "small sacrifice"? Think again. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:50, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You are most welcome to come and improve the writing. That part about "impassible social bounds" is true. Her family had strong traditions and as mentioned in one lengthy article on her, women of her family could not even go out of the family Haveli. She didn't go to a school/madrassa. She was homeschooled. She didn't even leave that Haveli after marriage and in fact stayed with her parents following the family tradition. Those were some of the bounds. She only left her Haveli during the partition of India when she migrated to Pakistan. —ШαмıQ✍ @ 20:40, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Look @ TRM you really are starting to annoy me, you can't decide yourself what is ready and what is not. Also we need more rd and more blurbs from parts of world that aren't english speaking, and the fact is that articles that are from those parts just aren't going to ever stand up to your standards of perfect english, because they aren't most likely written by natural english speakers. But if they othervise seem fine they should be good enough for us. As Wamiq said you are more than welcome edit the article yourself if you are not happy with it, even though most everyone else is. But your dissent is not enough for it to not get posted. SeraV (talk) 22:54, 15 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm "starting to annoy" you? Please, spend more time improving the article in question, bringing it up to the encyclopedic standards we required for main page inclusion. You do realise that I am a lone voice here, that if you have consensus for it to be posted, then it will be. I'm not asking for "perfect english" nor am I interested in this particular individual's article (nor do I have time to spend energy trying to get it to a minimal standard). I have no supervote, you know that, so the pair of you can stop berating me for trying to uphold English language Wikipedia's standards. By all means continue to support such poor writing, this is just my opinion. You don't like it? Get over it. Find an interested editor who writes in non-hagiographical English, and we could move on. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:42, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Michael Graves

Article: Michael Graves (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NYTimes
Credits:

Article needs updating
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Appears to a major architect, one of the The New York Five along with several design awards MASEM (t) 21:53, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

[Closed] Two police officers shot in Ferguson

Consensus against.
BencherliteTalk 20:23, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]

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.

Nominator's comments: Lead story on the BBC, New York Times, CNN, ABC News, and the Guardian. Seems to be a significant development in the unrest in Ferguson. 
talk 18:22, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
  • Support - definitely notable.--BabbaQ (talk) 18:23, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. The initial posting of this(the protests) was sufficient; the two officers will recover. This incident does not directly have to do with race issues there as it seems the officers were targeted or "ambushed".[23] 331dot (talk) 18:26, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Racial motivation is hardly precluded by evidence of premediation or ambush. That said, this news does not rise to ITN level at the current time. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:34, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose There is still a lot of mess going on as a result of the DOJ's review of the earlier shooting, this is just one facet. There will likely be a lawsuit based on the DOJ's findings, and the result of that would be he point for posting. --MASEM (t) 18:29, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for now Officers are shot in this country with disturbing frequency. Such shootings are almost never covered by ITN. In this case the officers weren't killed (thank God). Is it a notable event? Yes. Is it ITN worthy? Not at this point. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:30, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose since both officers will recover there is not much here. SeraV (talk) 18:33, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose per Masem. I think that there will be significantly more notable events in the near future relating to this topic. Mamyles (talk) 18:34, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose really nothing to see here. People get shot in America every day, dozens of them. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:46, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Actually hundreds would be more accurate. On a typical day in America there are ~30 gun-involved murders, ~50 suicides-by-firearm, and ~150 other incidents where someone is wounded by a gun. Dragons flight (talk) 18:52, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The original officer was not indicted and the Obama Admin has decided not to bring Civil Rights charges, but the press and agitators have ginned this up, we don't need to provided notoriety to an incompetent terrorist. μηδείς (talk) 20:19, 12 March 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] RD: Terry Pratchett

Article: Terry Pratchett (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

Article needs updating
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: OBE, famed author of the Discworld series MASEM (t) 15:17, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

March 11

March 11, 2015 (2015-03-11) (Wednesday)
Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

[Closed] 2015 Eglin Air Force Base helicopter crash

No consensus to post. Stephen 03:17, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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 Eglin Air Force Base helicopter crash (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A helicopter with eleven military personnel on board crashes off the coast of Florida. (Post)
News source(s): CNN Washington Post New York Times ABC News
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Lead story on CNN, Obama has also given his condolences (see NY Times link above). This crash has also been covered by BBC [24] and the Guardian [25] 
talk 17:42, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
  • I'm looking at
    List of accidents and incidents involving military aircraft (2010–present) and I'm seeing a lot of crashes, but this one seems to have a large amount of casualties for a military helicopter in a non-war zone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.95.216.224 (talk) 18:06, 11 March 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] Hunga Tonga

No consensus to post. SpencerT♦C 03:00, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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: 
talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Locals walk on a new volcanic solidified island in the Pacific island nation of Tonga, and life takes hold as seabirds nest. (Post)
News source(s): Telegraph Daily Mail, video

Credits:

Article needs updating
 TGCP (talk) 08:48, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I have now - comments were that the event was too recent and still ongoing. The event is now finished, and the news is that it is safe and goes from naked rock to supporting life, like primordial Earth. TGCP (talk) 09:12, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Conditional oppose: The article is seriously out-of-date and is very short for ITN purposes. Once it is filled out and brought up to present, I would likely support posting. -Kudzu1 (talk) 15:21, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would beg to differ: It is not "seriously" out of date. The eruption ceased on 25 January 2015. The first visit to the island (accompanied by photos) occurred 10 March 2015. That's all the news there is. The article is also not "too short". As the primary contributor to the article, I can honestly say that almost every single published, neutral news source available has been used on both eruptive events. (An isoalted, developing nation simply doesn't get the coverage an Alaskan or Japanese eruption would.) - Tim1965 (talk) 16:06, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Consider updating the intro, then, and possibly the infobox as well. Right now, the actual news (that a brand-new island has formed) is buried at the very bottom of the article. -Kudzu1 (talk) 16:11, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support but it needs an update, the only material added this month is one sentence and one ref saying that birds are nesting there now. μηδείς (talk) 16:33, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose stale. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:32, 12 March 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.

March 10

March 10, 2015 (2015-03-10) (Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

[Closed] Jeremy Clarkson suspended

Snow close, will never be posted. Stephen 01:50, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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: Jeremy Clarkson (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Jeremy Clarkson, the host of BBC television show Top Gear, is suspended after his involvement in what the BBC calls a "fracas" with a producer. (Post)
News source(s): CNN, BBC, Reuters, USA Today
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Top Gear is, according to the Wikipedia page on the show, the most watched factual television show in the world. Thus it seems significant that the host of this show has been suspended, and of interest to many of our readers. 
talk 00:47, 11 March 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] RD: Frei Otto

Included as a detail in the award blurb, Stephen 22:34, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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: Frei Otto (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Deutsche Welle
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: We have already agreed in the nomination on winning the Pritzker Prize bellow that the fact he was awarded with this prize means he was on the top of his field. --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 23:20, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
Had he simply died, he might have been listed at RD. Had he simply won the prize, he might have been listed with a blurb. Note that blurb and RD are both part of the single ITN template--these are not two separate areas. Had he been awarded the prize, and a blurb been posted, we would neither pull the blurb if he died and move him to RD nor also add him to RD: we'd simply update the blurb. That's all this is, except the two things both happened before posting. We simply need an "updated" blurb that includes both facts. μηδείς (talk) 03:39, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose RD is a part of ITN and was meant to speed up the process of nominees who really didn't need blurbs. It would be unprecedented and hugely overblowing this to give him two listings, as well as the fact that it would be pushing someone else off ITN or RD. μηδείς (talk) 00:45, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose if the writeup about the prize also mentions his death. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:05, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose This is a time where even if the rules of ITN would require a separate entry for the prize and the death, IAR says to treat them both together. --MASEM (t) 01:08, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Excuse me all. Why am I the nominator of this? Ṫ Ḧ the joy of the LORDmy strength 03:39, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I agree with Formerip. Consensus below is that the award deserves an ITN blurb, so "pushing someone else off ITN" is not a factor to consider. Currently, there is only one person listed at RD, so "pushing someone else" off there is also not an issue. I can't see any harm in one person appearing on the same page twice for different reasons. Conversely, mentioning his death in the blurb for the award could lead to conflation of the two events in the mind of the reader, which would be unfortunate since it is entirely avoidable. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 04:42, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support He qualifies as being at the top of his field - the award does merit a blurb, so I would suggest 'Frei Otto is awarded the Pritzker Architecture Prize posthumously.' Does this work for anyone else? Challenger l (talk) 09:23, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently he was told about the prize before he died so it wasn't given posthumously, though it was announced posthumously. I've suggested an alt blurb below which you can change if you want; I might suggest to everyone that we confine this discussion to the already-existing one below where this can all be worked out. 331dot (talk) 09:24, 11 March 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] GOP's letter to Iran

SNOW close. SpencerT♦C 00:10, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Articles: 
negotiations on Iran's nuclear program.
News source(s): The New York Times

Credits:

Article updated
 
p 23:01, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
Usually run-of-the-mill gamesmanship doesn't include letters to a foreign country.
p 23:12, 10 March 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] Frei Otto wins the Pritzker Architecture Prize

Articles: Frei Otto (talk · history · tag) and Pritzker Architecture Prize (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ German designer Frei Otto wins the Pritzker Architecture Prize. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ German designer Frei Otto wins the Pritzker Architecture Prize.
Alternative blurb II: ​ The awarding of the Pritzker Architecture Prize to Frei Otto, shortly before his death, is announced earlier than planned.
Alternative blurb III: ​ German designer Frei Otto wins the Pritzker Architecture Prize shortly before his death.
News source(s): The New York Times
Credits:

Article updated
One or both nominated events are listed on
WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.

 The Rambling Man (talk) 22:25, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

  • Question. Should the blurb mention his death or just focus on the award? 331dot (talk) 22:27, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    It could mention his death, we could arguably run him at RD at this point, clearly top of his field.... The Rambling Man (talk) 22:31, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    I would mention that he was posthumously given the award in the blurb, as that gives us "two" items for the space of one. --MASEM (t) 22:36, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think a blurb at ITN trumps RD for this particular person. Winning an award the day after dying is ITN material. So I Support for ITN.--BabbaQ (talk) 22:33, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on article improvement Otto's article has one inline reference. While no longer "blp", this needs to be much better sourced to be a front page item. But once that's done, this is clearly good to ITN. --MASEM (t) 22:36, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support for blurb mentioning his death. It appears to be the first time the prize has been awarded posthumously. The list needs updating in the text part. If Otto is also to be bolded, work will be needed on referencing. Espresso Addict (talk) 22:40, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • This is incorrect. The decision that he would be awarded with the prize was made shortly before his death. You can check on the official pages that the jury members do not mention his death in his biography and that is awarded posthumously.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 22:51, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • It is even reported in the official news that the architect was informed about the decision made by the jury and the news includes his reaction to it.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 22:57, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per
    ITN/R but I strongly oppose mentioning his death in the blurb or making any combination. It was known that he would be awarded with the prize before his death and it practically didn't have any impact on the decision. If you think that his death merits inclusion, then you're encouraged to run another nomination.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 22:47, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    So a blurb about the prize and an RD nomination too, because he was clearly top of his field. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:58, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    I second you. Just go for it.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 23:15, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    I've already done it.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 23:21, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • RD is a part of ITN, he should not be double-listed, it would be entirely unprecedented and he's not that important to become the first to set such a precedent. That being said, given he does deserve listing at at least RD, and the coincidence of the death and the prize, I certainly:
(This is not a vote) Support blurb mentioning prize and death and oppose RD. μηδείς (talk) 00:43, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support there is no point in double-listing him, just mention prize and death in the blurb. Something like German designer Frei Otto wins the Pritzker Architecture Prize shortly after his death. SeraV (talk) 03:04, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    The problem with your wording is that our readers may easily get confused that he was awarded posthumously as it's already the case with one of the fellow users commenting above. In fact, the jury made their decision shortly before his death and the architect was even notified about it and had time to react to it.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 07:40, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment for those supporting a combined blurb, please suggest one. It appears to be quite awkward to succinctly capture this in one short blurb, and get it factually correct, i.e. the foundation moved the announcement of the award forward, they let him know, he reacted, he died. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:34, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Suggested blurb; I invite others to alter or change it. 331dot (talk) 08:39, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • It somewhat misses the focus, i.e. that Otto won the Pritzker Prize, by placing more emphasis on his death and the rescheduling of the announcement (which, in the big scheme of things, is relatively trivial). I still can't see a succinct way of combining all of the elements into a neat blurb. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:08, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I can't say I disagree with that assessment- but maybe others will know better than I. 331dot (talk) 09:09, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't see what the big fuss is about him having the Pritzker blurb and an RD listing. It's just a sad coincidence, that's all. The ITNR is really all about the prize and probably ought not be derailed by bloat about Otto's death. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:21, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I totally agree. The quality of Wikipedia depends on the conciseness of presenting facts but not on stylistic changes that may harm originality. The fact that many users participating in this discussion and that above wrongly perceived that the prize was given posthumously is sufficient indicator that we should pay special attention on the conciseness in the blurb and avoid any bloating.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:57, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I've attempted to make a start on improving the references on the Otto page, it's a little outside my comfort zone so any other help in sourcing/excising OR would be great. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:21, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support ALT II, but with both bolded once ITN requirements re article quality have been met. This neatly addresses the issues raised above. Mjroots (talk) 11:16, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Which articles require further addressing? The Rambling Man (talk) 11:21, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support ALT II blurb but not RD duplication is not necessary. Mellowed Fillmore (talk) 14:35, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment do we really want "The awarding of..."? Sounds dreadful to my ear. I prefer, for expediency, we stick to the facts, and go with the first blurb and worry about the death issue subsequently. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:50, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support my ALT III (but not RD) which bolds both articles and makes it clear that the award was pre-death. Marking ready as both articles appear to be in decent shape (the prize article is a featured list).
    BencherliteTalk 17:55, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Support Alt III as short and sweet, covering both important facts. μηδείς (talk) 21:40, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted, Alt III, seemed the most concise, and negates the requirement for an RD. Stephen 22:32, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Removed] Remove "War in Ukraine" from ongoing

Removed by Spencer. RGloucester — ☎ 23:00, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.

  • Events have settled down since the end of the Battle of Debaltseve. There is no need for this item to remain in ongoing. If events start to pick-up again, it can be put in again. RGloucester — ☎ 22:21, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I agree; this has died down and can be removed. 331dot (talk) 22:23, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support removal A quick check of the article history shows no major substantive additions to the content in over a week. All of the edits have been basically style fixes and cleanup. If no new information is being added, it isn't appropriate for ongoing. --Jayron32 22:25, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per Jayron's summary. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:26, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait Today's headline: "More Russian tanks, equipment cross Ukraine border: U.S. official" There are also 3,000 US troops deploying to Eastern Europe and Britain saying it will start broadcasting Putin-critical information into Russia. What's needed is attention from someone with te time and familiarity, the issue itself is nowhere near out of the news. μηδείς (talk) 00:38, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    It's of no consequence if the article is not being updated. As of now, there still isn't any major additions to the article in the past week. --Jayron32 03:12, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Almost 12 hours after the headline Medis mentions, there have been no updates to the article so readers wont be informed about the latest developments, it thus fails the "updated" criterion for being featured in the ITN section of the main page. Thryduulf (talk) 12:03, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That's not the right article for Russian involvement. You must be looking for
2014–15 Russian military intervention in Ukraine. There is a clear division of content with Ukrainian crisis articles. Regardless, this is hardly a new development. Ms Nuland has been making such proclamations on a regular and repeated basis. If one takes a look at the military intervention article, one will see that. RGloucester — ☎ 15:56, 11 March 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] Villa Castelli helicopter crash

Complaints about various images selected can be taken to
WP:ERRORS, this candidate is closed. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:19, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]

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: 
mid-air collision between two helicopters in Argentina, including Florence Arthaud and Olympic medalists Camille Muffat and Alexis Vastine who were participating in a French reality TV show.
News source(s): BBC

Credits:
 The Rambling Man (talk) 08:16, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
There's one of Vastine available too, but I think it would look odd to prioritise one. Espresso Addict (talk) 19:27, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with above. Why have we chosen just one image of a deceased in a crash which killed 10, including two others with images? '''tAD''' (talk) 19:46, 11 March 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]Wikimedia Foundation sues National Security Agency

WP:SNOW close --Jayron32 20:56, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]

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.

I won't write it but someone should mention something. -- dsprc [talk] 16:30, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • IAR support I think ITN is a good way to inform our readers about this. wctaiwan (talk) 16:36, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
To elaborate a bit more: I think we should let our readers know about this and judge for themselves a) what they feel about it and b) whether it would affect Wikipedia. A site notice seems excessive, but this is somewhat more directly relevant to our readers than usual goings-on at the foundation. wctaiwan (talk) 16:45, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
We're not here to
right great wrongs. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:00, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
That's not why I'm supporting. The reader can decide for themselves the morality of the foundation's actions, but I think we should inform them. wctaiwan (talk) 17:08, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It's not our duty to "inform".
WP:ITN "serves to direct readers to articles that have been substantially updated to reflect recent or current events of wide interest." There isn't even an article suggested to link to. And is it of wide interest? To those of us commenting here, maybe, but that's where the navel-gazing concern comes in. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:33, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
  • Oppose Ignoring the navel-gazing aspect, this is just filing of the court documents. If this actually actually has a trial and the decision is significant, then we should post that. But just that a court filing has been opened is not sufficient for ITN --MASEM (t) 16:38, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Navel gazing aside [26], Wikimedia Foundation oversees one of the top visited Web sites on the planet. They are joined by a broad coalition of civil liberties groups seeking an end to unconstitutional mass surveillance of hundreds of millions of their users and the broader Internet community and have directly taken legal action against the Government of the United States and its security apparatus to stop it. If it was Joe Blow it would be one thing, but these are huge organizations. "Pakalitha Mosisili forms a coalition government following a snap election in Lesotho." is really more notable than this? -- dsprc [talk] 16:52, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • If the Foundation felt it was important enough to let its users know that they have filed this suit, they can easily add it to global page header notice box, like they do when they have funding drives, etc. In terms of ITN we need to ignore the fact this has to do with WP and recognize that without that, this is just filing court papers. (The SOPA thing is different as it was an action joined by many many many sites, not just WP, and made actual news). --MASEM (t) 17:02, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Masem: Wikimedia aren't the only ones, they've just the biggest megaphone. ACLU, The Nation, Rutherford, Amnesty International, Pen American, Human Rights Watch. This isn't just about the Foundation either but the coalition. "Made actual news"? Since when is The Paper of Record not news? There is plenty of news [27][28]; everyone from the Russians to Slate, Politico, CBS, The Verge, WSJ, McClatchy, Der Spiegel. Yeah it is not making any news at all. Just navel-gazing. -- dsprc [talk] 17:22, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, it's "in the news", but not in the manner SOPA was (as because of the blackout it affected the way the web work, so had huge coverage, while here I'm seeing a story of interest but not "news shattering". But other points still remain: this is only the filing of the case, and would never by ITN by itself if WP wasn't involved, and there's no article proposed at all (or even one I can see until a court case is actually made). --MASEM (t) 17:56, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That's bit sad if you are actually serious. You should think bit more positively, if there would be consuquences at least you would know that you don't live in democracy with an actual free speech. SeraV (talk) 19:46, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It wasn't a serious vote. My handler made me do it. Formerip (talk) 20:27, 10 March 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.

March 9

March 9, 2015 (2015-03-09) (Monday)
Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Science and technology

US708

Proposed image
Article: US 708 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Astronomers discover fastest unbound star (pictured) in Milky Way at a speed of 1200 kilometers per second. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Astronomers discover US 708 (pictured) as the fastest unbound star in the galaxy.
News source(s): SpaceRef Daily mail Many more
Credits:

 Ṫ Ḧ the joy of the LORDmy strength 10:25, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose, the star was discovered in 1982, all that's new is the theoretical model of what gave it such a kick. Stephen 23:26, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
So says the alt blurb...Ṫ Ḧ the joy of the LORDmy strength 02:58, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

RD: James Molyneaux, Baron Molyneaux of Killead

Article: James Molyneaux, Baron Molyneaux of Killead (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Times
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

 Ṫ Ḧ the joy of the LORDmy strength 12:36, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

  • Support when the "Political career" section is more thoroughly referenced. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:27, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Conditional Support when referencing is improved. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:36, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support A very important figure in the history of N. Ireland and its politics. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:37, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support once article/referencing improved. Though never as much of a household name as Paisley, obituaries make clear he was one of the top NI politicians for decades covering much of the long and slow peace process in the country. Espresso Addict (talk) 19:00, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Look like its improved now with new 2kB of cites. Ṫ Ḧ the joy of the LORDmy strength 12:04, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
On a few quick spot checks, not all the biography is covered by the references cited, unfortunately. There's an expand tag under the section on his death, but I've not seen a cause of death, and I'm not sure what else needs to be added here. Espresso Addict (talk) 00:18, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Will it not appear on the main page? Ṫ Ḧ the joy of the LORDmy strength 09:14, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
BencherliteTalk 09:49, 12 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]

Bring back Boko Haram to Ongoing

Countries in the region have sent troops into Niger to fight Boko Haram, following but not totally related to their new allegiance to ISIL.

BBC - Nigeria, Cameroon, Chad send in troops. African Union plan 8,000-man regional force

BBC - NATO train African forces to fight Boko Haram

More reliable sources: Al Jazeera, Reuters, CNN, The Independent, Bloomberg. 2,702 articles in Google News.

If it can not be added to ongoing, then surely Nigeria, Chad and Cameroon's entrance into Niger to fight Boko Haram is worth a blurb? '''tAD''' (talk) 22:27, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support just as I opposed the pulling last time, which was immediately followed by an attack. Although I think a merged Islamist Terrorism sticky would be just as good. μηδείς (talk) 00:09, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Suggest we expand the existing Ongoing to cover all significant developments in the subject of Islamic terrorism and the various responses to it. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:28, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: In order for it to be listed under ongoing, the article in question needs to be updated regularly. It was orginally pulled because the relevant article wasn't being updated. Has that changed?
    -- Calidum 03:34, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Bring back Boko Haram? Channel 4 must need a ratings boost. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 09:54, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] RD: Sam Simon

Article: Sam Simon (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Variety, NYTimes
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

 MASEM (t) 18:39, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

I don't know how these are formatted (help would be nice) but I would like to nominate Sam Simon for RD. He co-created The Simpsons one of the biggest shows of all time. Nohomersryan (talk) 18:37, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Added the header for you. --MASEM (t) 18:39, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Support with leaning more towards oppose. Several Emmys and the like show "top of the field" , but at the same time, for his work he wasn't the only agent involved (not to dismiss his creative genius). He wasn't a household name even though the shows he did were. --MASEM (t) 18:42, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Nine Emmys, co-creator of one of the most well-known animated series ever made, worked with big-named shows quite a few times over his career. Article quality looks very good. Challenger l (talk) 18:51, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Per the above and the article is a GA too. Lugnuts Dick Laurent is dead 18:55, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Seems to meet the RD criteria and is a decent article already. 331dot (talk) 18:56, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
As EA says below, sources are needed despite the reasons to support this. 331dot (talk) 19:03, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Before someone jumps into posting this, there is as yet no reliable reference for his death in the article, and I haven't found it picked up yet in major news sources. Espresso Addict (talk) 19:00, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Added a RS on the death to header, though yeah, not yet seeing it by non-entertainment sources. Also to note while "young" at 59, this was a matter of when, not if , as he had been considered terminally ill two years ago. [29] --MASEM (t) 19:04, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • And NYTimes has checked in now, so more expected. --MASEM (t) 19:15, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • And now the article has these sources and I cleaned up a bit here. Looks like there's not much more to add since Simon was already preparing for this event (eg his late charity efforts already documented). --MASEM (t) 19:21, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your efforts; I don't yet see any other barriers to posting once sufficient support is present. 331dot (talk) 19:23, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note, NYT doesn't give the date of death. But hopefully more news agencies will get onto this over the next few hours. Espresso Addict (talk) 19:24, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Don't think that's relevant here, if the NYT have only just got wind of it, why wouldn't we do the same? We're not journalistically superior to the NYT (mostly) and we certainly should be posting news items, IAR if he died way back... The Rambling Man (talk) 19:30, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, even with the current article (Which I noted has a URL date for tomorrow) they mention they don't have details on Simon's living relatives that survived him. Variety is in no way a non-RS source, (NYTimes affirms that this was a significant entertainment personality) and they establish the date, so it's confirmed. --MASEM (t) 19:32, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I have no objection if the fact & date of death are covered in RSs. Espresso Addict (talk) 19:35, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Variety has the date on Sunday as reported by Simon's agents, so I think we're good there. --MASEM (t) 19:46, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. There's little doubt that the works of Simon have defined modern animation, he was top of his field and his untimely death makes this even more easy to sanction. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:22, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Per Challenger l. As well as his long career in television, Simon was also an advocate for animal rights. - JuneGloom07 Talk 19:52, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strongest Possible Support as a Simpsons fan. If developing some of the most influential comedy shows of all time doesn't put him at or near the top of his field, I don't know what does. His article is also a GA thanks to my good friend Gran2, so there shouldn't be any issues over quality. -- Scorpion0422 20:42, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted. So sue me. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:45, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting support - You don't get more well-known in animated comedy (in North America at least) than The Simpsons, and this does seem to be a rather young age for him to die as well.--WaltCip (talk) 22:16, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

&Support - Important cultural figure. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:17, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Post-Posting Support hugely influential writer/producer in far more than just The Simpsons. μηδείς (talk) 00:13, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] University of Oklahoma bans Sigma Alpha Epsilon

Okay, enough already. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:28, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Articles: University of Oklahoma#Sigma Alpha Epsilon Incident (talk · history · tag) and Sigma Alpha Epsilon#Controversy (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The University of Oklahoma bans the fraternity Sigma Alpha Epsilon from campus after a video surfaces of the fraternity's members making racist chants. (Post)
News source(s): BBC, CNN, USA Today, NBC News
Credits:
Nominator's comments: This has received a large amount of media coverage and pertains to one of the largest fraternities in the United States, according to the New York Times. [30] 
talk 18:25, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
(edit conf) I'm not going to edit war this, but there is no arbitrary 24 hour requirement; this was closed with no support because the internal workings of a university are not ITN material; otherwise ITN would be a university news ticker. If you (or anyone) supported it, then OK, but I don't think this needed to be reopened when you are not adding support for it. 331dot (talk) 22:15, 10 March 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] Solar Impulse 2

Consensus is clearly against posting this now. Please renominate when the flight is completed, either successfully or unsuccessfully. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:19, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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
Article: Solar Impulse (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Solar powered aircraft Solar Impulse 2 (pictured) begins its circumnavigation of the earth. (Post)
News source(s): BBC News Online
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: First circumnavigation by solar powered aircraft if successful Mjroots (talk) 06:55, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment wouldn't it be better to wait for it to complete? We'd look a bit silly if it didn't actually make it... The Rambling Man (talk) 07:33, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Let's not jump the gun with this. Better to give a final report on it (pass or fail). ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 08:40, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, come back in five months. Stephen 08:42, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose until it is finished. 331dot (talk) 09:57, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I agree that it is better to wait until the feat is accomplished, although many of its milestones along the way will be historic firsts, such as first solar powered aircraft to cross an ocean. -- Ssilvers (talk) 13:41, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • I would still wait until it either completes the trip, or has to end prematurally - assuming it does even the ocean crossing, the failure can still be highlighted with the "best" record. But we should be looking to only highlight the circumnavigation as the ITN item. --MASEM (t) 15:23, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait until the voyage actually ends, one way or another. Then we can assess its historical worth. Modest Genius talk 16:35, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose until the voyage is completed. -Kudzu1 (talk) 16:49, 9 March 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.

March 8

March 8, 2015 (2015-03-08) (Sunday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Law and crime

Science and technology
  • The
    V-22 Osprey, and comes in three versions: a troop- and equipment-carrying utility style, a medevac, and an attack chopper) have come up with since they were selected by the Pentagon in August 2014. (Popular Science via MSN)

[Closed] City of the Monkey God

No consensus to post. Stephen 01:07, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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 Mosquitia rain forest, Honduras. (Post)
News source(s): NGC

Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Blurb needs a rewrite and I doubt about the article concerned. Whether it must be Honduras or not. Ṫ Ḧ the joy of the LORDmy strength 16:30, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The NGC article says the ruins were discovered in 2012 so this seems more like a follow-up. And the target article has an orange tag. With some work and a better blurb, this could make a good story. But even then, the proper date is 2 March, which is at the bottom of the ITN box... --Tone 17:26, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose with regret I have to agree with Tone's observation that this news is a little dated. Otherwise I'd probably support it. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:21, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - There's been extensive criticism from other archaeologists, indicating that (1) this is not a truly new discovery (2) the 'discoverers' have taken a pretty insensitive approach and (3) the 'city of the monkey god' is a wholly fictitious name dating from the 1940s. So I don't think there's as much of a story here as is claimed. AlexTiefling (talk) 20:32, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per the blurb. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:09, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Appears to be old new. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 00:21, 9 March 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.

March 7

March 7, 2015 (2015-03-07) (Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Law and crime

Politics and elections

[Posted] 2015 Suicide bombing in Maiduguri

Article: 2015 Maiduguri suicide bombing (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A series of suicide bombings by Boko Haram suicide bombers in Maiduguri, Nigeria kills at least 54 people and wounds 143 people. (Post)
News source(s): 247ureports, BBC ABC news Premium times
Credits:

 Jim Carter 17:13, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support if the article can get up to par. It will be nice to not have to post news about Boko Haram any more. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:56, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Tentative Support, once the article has been substantially improved. Nakon 04:57, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: Nakon I updated the article. Pinging an admin for assistance. Big news; Should be updated as soon as possible. Jim Carter 05:43, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm an admin, I can get this added to ITN. However, per the guidelines, the article needs "around three complete, referenced and well-formed paragraphs.". I'm all for getting this added, but the article needs to be a bit longer with some more details before it can be posted to ITN. Nakon 05:47, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Nakon: Done. Jim Carter 06:16, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Reviewing now. Nakon 06:20, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
So we can ignore the fact that the blurb unambiguiously attributes this to Boko Haram on evidence that is at best skethcy? We can ignore the fact that the article plays Chinese whispers with referencing, citing the BBC but giving an alternative source to support that? I think not. I invite the posting admin to withdraw this at the earliest opportunity Then consider your position as administrator. Oppose and pull. 3142 (talk) 09:29, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No need to pull the blurb IMO, 3142, I have correct that part. Yes, Boko Haram is not unambiguiously responsible for the attack and I corrected that in the article as well. Nakon, Can you please remove "Boko Haram" from the Live Hook? Jim Carter 13:27, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Procedural query - Is there any sort of consensus for this? I am neutral, but it looks like this is a very premature posting. AlexTiefling (talk) 20:33, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    No, there's no consensus for this at all, not per our usual rationales. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:09, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Since not many actually bothers to insist for this to be pulled I assume most are happy with this. I can also say that I Support this. SeraV (talk) 23:42, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think "stunned" might be more appropriate than "happy". This posting by Nakon was completely inappropriate. Isa (talk) 00:21, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed! I thought it was completely out of process. Espresso Addict (talk) 00:24, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
We wikipedians are too stuffy with our processes sometimes. Also this was open for twelve hours, some blurbs have been posted much earlier than that. But if you disagree you should ask for it to pulled, shouldn't be too hard. SeraV (talk) 00:50, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Stories are not usually posted early and when they are, they end up with a lot of unpleasantries. Stories that generate little to no discussion like this one are not usually posted. Posting a blurb requires consensus. You can't have consensus with two people.
As for the story itself, ITN is meant to showcase good articles that are in the news. It is not a news ticker. Stories are not posted just because they're "big news" (whatever that means). I will not personally call for a pull (I disagree with the posting, but it's not a catastrophe), but I do hope Nakon will wait for consensus next time. I suggest that someone uninvolved close this discussion. Isa (talk) 01:27, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment next time submitters should wait for the articles linked to get to a quality level appropriate. With some events, later reports contradict earlier reports, so no need for a rush.
talk) 03:15, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]

2015 Bamako shooting

Article: 2015 Bamako shooting (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A shooting in Bamako, Mali kills at least five people and injures at least nine. (Post)
News source(s): Christian Science Monitor, BBC, Reuters
Credits:

Nominator's comments: According to BBC (see above link), this attack is the "the first attack of its kind in the capital [Bamako]." 

talk 15:09, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]

March 6

March 6, 2015 (2015-03-06) (Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
  • At least two knife-wielding attackers injure nine people at a train station in southern China; the police fatally shoot one of the suspects. (AP)
  • The United Kingdom's National Crime Agency arrests a man as a suspected hacker in western England in connection with a June 15, 2014 cyber attack on the messaging service used by employees at the U.S. Department of Defense. (AP)(Bloomberg)
  • The
    Alliance Data Systems Corp. Although the other two are in custody, Nguyen remains at large. The charge against Da Silva is conspiracy to commit money laundering. (Reuters)

Business and Economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Health

Law and crime

Science and technology

[Posted] Dawn@Ceres

Proposed image
Articles: Dawn (spacecraft) (talk · history · tag) and Ceres (dwarf planet) (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ NASA's Dawn spacecraft enters the orbit of the dwarf planet Ceres (pictured). (Post)
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Happened today. It makes sense to post it now, since this is a milestone in the mission. Articles need some updates, though. Tone 15:33, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support. First mission to arrive at a dwarf planet. It might be easier to count Ceres (dwarf planet) as the primary article, since it has been updated over the last several weeks with new photos and information gained during the approach. Dragons flight (talk) 16:07, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: Major achievement in the field of space exploration. Agree with the suggestion of making Ceres (dwarf planet) the primary. -Kudzu1 (talk) 16:09, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support as this is especially interesting, and has been getting significant attention from the news recently. Mamyles (talk) 16:23, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Significant achievement. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 17:22, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, but no reason why both articles can't be bolded (I tweaked the blurb to this effect). Mjroots (talk) 17:31, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Suppprt, the milestone of this craft's mission. Agree with bolding Ceres since the article's been updated as Dawn's approached it. --MASEM (t) 18:23, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Will free use images of the light side be available? Abductive (reasoning) 19:35, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This is both the first close encounter and first orbit of any dwarf planet. --Njardarlogar (talk) 19:39, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted. I'll leave someone more competent to swap the image. Espresso Addict (talk) 19:57, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Calling @
    David Levy:. --Jayron32 01:14, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Image updated. —
    David Levy 02:35, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]

[Closed] DNA barcoding and Universal primer technology

No consensus to post to ITN. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 04:42, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Articles: Sunil Kumar Verma (talk · history · tag) and DNA barcoding (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ DNA barcoding in credit dispute with Universal primer technology. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ India's Universal primer technology disputes the credit for invention of DNA barcoding.
Credits:
Nominator's comments: It is considered a big discovery, but it is now in credit dispute - discussed in Nature group of Journal (see sources as cited within the article under "DNA barcoding and Universal primer technology" section) Educationtemple (talk) 20:20, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Do we have sources for this? --MASEM (t) 20:58, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose This is equivalent to the start of trial - it is probably important that who rightfully is credited with the technique is acknowledged (as this has a potential for Nobel prize in the far future) - but we should wait until the legal decision is made on who rightfully has the claim. --MASEM (t) 21:08, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose like Masem, this is an accusation, nothing more. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:29, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment
    P D N Hebert has given a statement that he was not aware of "UPT" that's why he could not credit it because its patents were not visible to the broader scientific community due to a substantial interval from its filling in 2001 to grant in 2006. Science ethicists find hole in this argument since Patent inventions do not go with "date of Grant" but with "filing of patent" which was earlier (2001) for UPT as described in the article than the publication date of DNA barcoding in 2003. So this is not just an "accusation" from one side since Hebert's comment are available, and assessed as being published. Cheers! Educationtemple (talk) 22:06, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Oppose - No indication of significance, and from my previous interactions I think that the nominator may have undeclared ties with the subject. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:59, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The nominator should make the rationale much clearer than it is, and discovery in a civil trial (which is what the above comments seem to apply) is certainly not worth posting. The OP should clarify this more if I have misinterpreted it from the comments above. μηδείς (talk) 04:34, 7 March 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.

March 5

March 5, 2015 (2015-03-05) (Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Health
  • Ebola virus epidemic in West Africa
    • Liberia's last known ebola patient is discharged from a treatment center in Monrovia. The country now needs 42 days without a subsequent diagnosed infection to be declared disease free. (The New York Times)

Law and crime

[Closed] RD: Edward Egan

No consensus to post. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:46, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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: Edward Egan (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CNN, Washington Post, Reuters
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
talk 01:44, 6 March 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] Nimrud

Article: 
ISIL who claimed it was blasphemous. (Post)
News source(s): CNN NYTimes BBC

Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: This was a major city from antiquity that has been reportedly bulldozed. Ad Orientem (talk) 23:09, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment I've added a couple more news sources. Note that this event is not particularly unique - Mosul Library is suspected of being burnt down just last week. Slightly off topic, but I would recommend that an article similar to this one be created for ISIS-related iconoclasm. Mamyles (talk) 23:25, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, important historic site. --AmaryllisGardener talk 23:42, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Isis wiping out 3000 year old ruins is tragic. SeraV (talk) 00:39, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support a blasphemy along the lines of the destruction of the Buddhas of Bamiyan, the destruction of the Twin Towers, acid thrown in the face of liberty. An historic atrocity. The vandalism of antiquity.
  • Question: Not a statement for or against this, but why should this be posted while ISIL is in Ongoing? That article linked in Ongoing does mention this happening. SpencerT♦C 04:15, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
A perfectly fair question. A great deal of what is listed in the "ongoing" area is what might called routine, if there is such a thing, war news. This however, I believe rises far above the routine. It is, if I may editorialize, a war crime and an atrocity of historic dimensions. -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:32, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. A significant site was destroyed, which is Main Page-worthy. Epic Genius (talk) 04:29, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support It is tragic that a city of such significance was ruined. ISIS closely resemble the USA. They both destroy things of historical significance and kill people.--Droneanddrone (talk) 08:03, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • It is irrelevant here whether ISIS is like the USA. We are discussing whether to post the nomination, not how similar these two are. Epic Genius (talk) 13:47, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Droneanddrone really should be blocked per
      WP:NOTHERE. Mellowed Fillmore (talk) 03:56, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
      ]
  • Posted. Espresso Addict (talk) 08:40, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Shouldn't the word "government" in the blurb be decapitalized or it's sometimes acceptable? Brandmeistertalk 13:40, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • Surprisingly, I can't find any advice in the stylesheet -- "Government of X" is often capitalised, while "X government" is often not. I've lower-cased it for now. Espresso Addict (talk) 14:22, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. SeraV (talk) 19:49, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Updated. If anyone can find a better wording that incudes both Assyria & Parthia without being repetitive or using "respectively", please suggest. Espresso Addict (talk) 20:10, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The demolition of Dur-Sharrukin has reportedly started today. Brandmeistertalk 22:39, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Propose photo: The photo of Ceres has been on the main page for 2 days, and is not easily distinguishable from other planets. This Nimrud / Hatra sentence would do well to have a picture next to it, I suggest
    talk) 02:49, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • i disagree with "The Iraqi government reports". Why are we hedging? Either it happened, or it shouldn't up there at all. Let's go with "The ancient cities of
    ISIL, who claim they were blasphemous." or better yet, convert to active voice: "ISIL destroys ... Nimrud, which they claim are blasphemous." -- Y not? 14:21, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Comment
talk) 09:49, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]

[closed] India's Daughter

No consensus to post. Let's move on. Seattle (talk) 13:49, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Nominator's comments: Popular news and related to forthcoming International Women's Day AntonTalk 07:32, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose numerous films have been banned in the past, what makes this any more significant? Could make a nice DYK though. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:38, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: No apparent reason why this should be ITN. It doesn't meet any of the criteria. -Kudzu1 (talk) 07:45, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose posting the mere banning of a film, but there may be some international issues arising from this that might merit at least consideration; the Indian Home Minister has threatened unspecified action against the BBC[31]. 331dot (talk) 11:15, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment In December 2012, ITN posted "A
    talk) 13:11, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • What's going on? Have I been asleep for a decade and Emma Watson is the new Pope? Formerip (talk) 22:19, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, but the person that said it needs to be either a religious leader, political leader, or a Nobel Peace prize recipient before you can start saying "So and so said this, that makes it important!" --AmaryllisGardener talk 22:52, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Added Nobel Peace Prize to that list, I don't remember Emma receiving a Nobel Prize. TBH, I'm a bit offended that you compare Emma to Malala, Emma was never shot in the head in an assassination attempt. --AmaryllisGardener talk 23:27, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • No. The assassination was in addition to the other things. My point is not that it has to be those things, my point is Emma Watson is not important and that was the only way I thought I could explain it to you, to me Emma Watson is just an ordinary actress trying to act like Malala Yousafzai. But I'm done arguing with you, this is ridiculous. --AmaryllisGardener talk 23:33, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Looks like the BBC broadcast was only in Britain.
    talk) 14:07, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Comment Both "BBC broadcasts banned documentary on Dehli gang rape." or "BBC broadcasts banned documentary on Dehli gang rape to mark International Women's Day." seem good. But, a few editors' opposition set obstacle for further move. Even though, article has good view here and the keywords has good reception on the search engines. --AntonTalk 16:36, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Read about this here as the documentary was being promoted and considered writing it up. Agree with TRM and 331dot; how it's panned out since then hasn't reached the diplomatic repercussions as say
    Fuebaey (talk) 19:17, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Presumably the other five countries are still set to show it on Sunday, despite the protests of Union Home Minister Rajnath Singh Martinevans123 (talk) 20:03, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, a film was banned, big deal. To expand on that (although I am not obligated to do so), I've never seen anything about this on the news, I've never heard of the movie, films are banned all of the time, and apparently Emma Watson making some remark is the biggest reason the supporters have. This is just not significant. --AmaryllisGardener talk 23:33, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - To counter the offensive comment immediately above ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 00:24, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well your oppose is very immature, so you're one to talk. SeraV (talk) 00:35, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This exchange as well as the above one are not helpful to this discussion. --331dot (talk) 00:40, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Every time I contribute here I think about retirement, and I thought I would come back from a one week break and start contributing here again, but I can think of only three or four nice people here, this is my final goodbye to the disgusting page filled with darkness on Wikipedia we call ITN/C, filled with hypocrisy, hyperbole, drama, and nonsense. Better I leave ITN/C than leave Wikipedia, right? (I can hear a hundred voices saying "no, retirement's better" right now) The tone of people discussing things with me here are similar to what you'll hear at AN/I, taking away threats of blocking and the word "boomerang". Goodbye. --AmaryllisGardener talk 00:48, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I can't say I blame AG for feeling that way; I'm not sure what was offensive about his post but even if it was it didn't warrant the response it got. I hope it was worth driving away a contributor. --331dot (talk) 00:56, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, and I thought The Mist was creepy! Martinevans123 (talk) 12:15, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Respectfully Oppose Films are banned and or censored all the time in the world we live in. That's not to say that such an event cannot be ITN worthy, but there would need to be something that sets the given instance of censorship apart from all the others and makes it uniquely worthy of prominent attention. I'm just not seeing that here. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:05, 6 March 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] Lesotho general election

Proposed image
Article: 
snap election in Lesotho . (Post)
News source(s): BBC News, Reuters

Credits:

Article updated
The nominated event is listed on
WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.

 Ali Fazal (talk) 00:02, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

March 4

March 4, 2015 (2015-03-04) (Wednesday)
Disasters and accidents
  • South of Sicily, Italy's Coast Guard saves 941 trafficked migrants aboard five motorized dinghies and two larger vessels near southern Italian ports. Authorities cannot account for ten people. (AP)
  • At least 33 miners die in a suspected gas explosion at the Zasyadko coal mine in rebel-held Donetsk region of Ukraine. (BBC) (Reuters via News24)
  • Turkish Airlines Flight TK726, landing in dense fog in the Nepalese capital Kathmandu, skids off a slippery runway, however, there are no serious injuries. (ABC News)
  • A toxic chemical fire forces the closure of the
    Port of Vancouver (Canada's largest and North America's fourth largest port). Authorities later manage to contain the fire, and identify the chemical as trichloroisocyanuric acid. (CBC)

Science and technology

[Posted] Oldest Homo fossil

Article: Homo (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Scientists report the discovery of the oldest fossil belonging to the genus Homo, dating to the Piacenzian age, about 2.8 million years ago. (Post)
News source(s): Science, BBC, NewScientist
Credits:

Nominator's comments: The previous oldest fossil was reportedly 2.4 million years old. The update, however, is currently tiny and the article has one orange tag. Brandmeistertalk 18:29, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support when updated A major archeological find. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:48, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, mostly because it is an incremental result. The problem is that the jawbone does not represent a new species, it is still Homo habilis. A jawbone that has been sitting in a museum was assembled incorrectly years ago and now is a reassembled as a bit narrower. It pushes back the age of the genus Homo from 2.33 million years ago to 2.8 mya. So, how can that be justified ITN? The blurb should read, "Paleontologists make a small correction; the genus Homo is now 20% older. Sorry about that." Abductive (reasoning) 20:25, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Could you explain what you mean? None of the sources mention any museum. The BBC source says "The 2.8 million-year-old lower jawbone was found in the Ledi-Geraru research area, Afar Regional State, by Ethiopian student Chalachew Seyoum." Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:51, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
My bad, that was the other Homo find article. My argument stands; a fossil find that does not change the tree; it just makes the tree trunk a bit longer. Abductive (reasoning) 20:58, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Not convinced by your non-argument, alas. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:04, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe I'm just being stupid, but it seems to me like a period of half a million years during which we previously thought there were no people but now we think there actually were people does at least rise to the level of interesting. Formerip (talk) 21:41, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
There were many kinds of people at that time, check out List_of_human_evolution_fossils. Abductive (reasoning) 05:29, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - a major archeological find. period.--BabbaQ (talk) 20:32, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Probably why New Scientist says "this period, between 2 and 3 million years ago, has long been an archaeological blind spot". Martinevans123 (talk) 21:23, 5 March 2015 (UTC) [reply]
Archaeologists would tend to disagree with you Abductive. Most of them, consider the study of early hominin fossils and artifacts to be a part of their field. Our article on archaeology gives it a 4 million year domain and discusses the study of early hominin fossils, even though fossils would more typically be an area of study for paleontologists. Dragons flight (talk) 21:58, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The fossils are paleontological finds, the tools are archeological. In this case there are no tools. Abductive (reasoning) 05:29, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
So if something is "sticking up out of the ground" it can't be "archaeology", even if it's 2.8 million-year-old? Martinevans123 (talk) 15:46, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The people might call themselves palaeoarchaeologists. Fossils are paleontological finds and tools are archeological finds. Abductive (reasoning) 19:44, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Is this fossil from the Piacenzian age? Martinevans123 (talk) 22:47, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Abductive. I find his explanation of the situation more compelling than simply stating that it is "a major archaeological find." The only impact I can see is that it proves a narrower time period for evolution of the genus.Mamyles (talk) 20:46, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Abductive. And we know how the
    Black & Decker', oops!" --AmaryllisGardener talk 20:52, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Yes, why not write in to New Scientist to complain? Martinevans123 (talk) 21:12, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Radiocarbon dating had nothing to do with this story. I'm guessing you meant to say radiometric dating, but even so, the scenario you describe is without foundation or relevance to the current story. Dragons flight (talk) 21:35, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"It's all metric now, mate, you can't even get jawbones with proper teeth no more." Martinevans123 (talk) 21:42, 5 March 2015 (UTC) [reply]
Radiocarbon and radiometric always confuse me. --AmaryllisGardener talk 21:54, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support populates a half million year gap in the fossil record. A "mere" 400,000 years is about the amount of time it took Neanderthals, for example, to evolve, live, and disappear from the fossil record. μηδείς (talk) 21:52, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. A nearly 20% increase in the range of Homo isn't something that happens often. As discussed by the BBC, it also makes it more likely that the evolution of our ancestors was a response to changing climate in Africa at about that time. It's no moon landing, but I'd say finding new evidence for an oldest member of our genus is at least as interesting as rediscovering a sunken battleship. Dragons flight (talk) 22:10, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I agree with other supports. SeraV (talk) 00:32, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I also agree that 400 million thousand years is quite impressive on the timeline of human development and warrants inclusion. Considering our documentation lists the latest homo discovery as taking place in 1991, it's not as if this will tie up the ITN ticker in the foreseeable future. - Floydian τ ¢ 01:14, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • That is true; at present the entire update consists of changing .33 to .8 here and there. Abductive (reasoning) 05:35, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose It's definitely significant news, but Jayron is right - there is no article on this. None. Challenger l (talk) 03:51, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Can someone more knowledgeable point to a better target article? This seems clearly suitable, but the current state of Homo is not postable. Espresso Addict (talk) 09:03, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Somebody would have to create the article. Before this was even nominated I considered creating LD 350-1 about the specimen. But there is only one primary source article at present, which is paid-access. Using just the secondary sources, one would have a hard time building a long enough article to post. Abductive (reasoning) 19:48, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • CommentWhat about this? Educationtemple (talk) 22:36, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
WHo expects us to create an article on this? When several other suitable articles are available. Stop making a huge issue out of a small one.--BabbaQ (talk) 22:40, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No one expects anything except content. So far, we have none. It can be a new article. It can be an existing article where we add content. However, we cant post content we don't have. We have, as yet, nothing to post. ITN exists to highlight quality Wikipedia content which covers material that people may be reading about in the news. If we have no content, we have nothing to post. So either create a new article or add the information to an existing article it doesn't matter. But you can't say it's a "small issue". Content is the ONLY issue at Wikipedia. --Jayron32 01:17, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
But just think, the longer we wait, the older this fossil gets! Martinevans123 (talk) 13:11, 7 March 2015 (UTC) But alas, by his own admission, the oldest homo fossil was this guy. [reply]
Nearly all the specimens have articles, just look at this Category:Hominin_fossils. And how dare you attempt to stifle debate. What is wrong with you? Abductive (reasoning) 23:11, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
So nearly all, not all. You could probably write a good one. But it's not a requirement for ITN, is it? Martinevans123 (talk) 23:15, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No, I can't. I need to see the primary source, but also need analysis in secondary sources, preferably scientific articles. Abductive (reasoning) 08:31, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That makes it a requirement? Martinevans123 (talk) 10:57, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
For an article? Yes, Wikipedia's rules require secondary sources. Presently there are only the news sources that repeat without analysis the claims made in the primary source. Abductive (reasoning) 17:53, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
...for posting at ITN. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:08, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
What about Piacenzian, or is that just a geological concept? Obviously the significance of this find is more on our idea of human evolution. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:51, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Piacenzian is a not well-known designation. This find does not represent any evolution, it just changes a date. Abductive (reasoning) 08:31, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps a mention at ITN would help make it better known. These pesky encyclopaedias, eh? What's 400,000 years between friends. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:57, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No amount of promotion on ITN will change what terminology scientists use. Pliocene has about 280,000 results on Google Scholar, Piacenzian has only 1,850. Abductive (reasoning) 17:51, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
And which is the more precise? Martinevans123 (talk) 17:54, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Abductive, are we here to find a good solution, or are we here to tell you that you are right?. Seems like your ambition is to be right, not finding a good solution.--BabbaQ (talk) 18:13, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, I suppose you are correct about the direction this debate has taken. All I really am trying to do is point out that none of us is capable of writing an update to an existing article (or writing a new article) that would be long enough to post to ITN. My argument is that it is impossible; if somebody proves me wrong, then it could be an ITN item or a DYK for sure. Abductive (reasoning) 04:21, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ask one of your 1,850 Google scholars to take a look at Piacenzian. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:46, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Prove "you wrong", this is a collaborative effort not a Abductive-Wikipedia. You do not call the shots.--BabbaQ (talk) 10:44, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. If anyone can suggest an article with a few sentence update and no orange level tags, I'm happy to post this, but it's going stale. Espresso Addict (talk) 00:32, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Have been trying: Piacenzian? Martinevans123 (talk) 10:41, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted. The compromise I've come up with is to link directly to the new section of Piacenzian as the target using the wording "late Pliocene Age". This is far from my comfort zone, so please correct me if I'm in error. Espresso Addict (talk) 18:22, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Espresso Addict. I think that's a really elegant result (however long it lasts). Martinevans123 (talk) 19:23, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Japanese battleship Musashi found

Article: 
the Philippines. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The wreck of the Japanese battleship Musashi is discovered near The Philippines.
News source(s): CNN BBC USA Today

Credits:

Nominator's comments: Coverage from numerous news agencies. The ship itself was, before it sank, considered to be "the largest battleship in naval history." [32] 

talk 19:29, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]

  • Highly tempted yet weak support a really interesting story and an excellent, high quality subject article. It could use more than just two sentences on the discovery, but otherwise this is good stuff. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:47, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, important finding. --AmaryllisGardener talk 19:50, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support significant story that is a break from all the sports events, deaths, disasters and elections. Mellowed Fillmore (talk) 20:02, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - A nice find, being widely covered. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 21:04, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. A notable finding. 331dot (talk) 21:46, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - A notable finding.--BabbaQ (talk) 21:50, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment, I would like the article to be a bit more updated. For instance, why was the wreck hard to find all these years? Abductive (reasoning) 22:13, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • A quick inspection of the geolocation coordinates suggests that this is nowhere near the Philippines, but rather inside it. –HTD 22:25, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Depends whether you're thinking of just the islands or also their territorial waters. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:30, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • Depends if it was found more than 12 miles off the coast. The Philippines is one of the archipelagic states so any waters inside its baselines are territorial waters. –HTD 22:36, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Though it would be nice to expand the article a bit more. --Jayron32 00:18, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support with a comment: This is probably the wrong place to raise this, but wouldn't Musashi (battleship) be a more appropriate name for the article? I can't see anywhere in the article's talk page where it has been discussed before. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 00:46, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: Cool, obviously notable find. -Kudzu1 (talk) 02:09, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose this really doesn't seem to have been a mystery, just a necessary bit of drudgery. Had it been found off the Azores we'd have a different story. μηδείς (talk) 02:40, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Just passing, but curious as to why it is prefaced with Paul Allen and his profession. Would it not be better to just concentrate on the battleship or is the fact that the co-founder of microsoft found it what makes this notable? AIRcorn (talk) 05:38, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Alt blurb proposed. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:40, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Making a big thing out of Paul Allen's team happening to be one that found it, is probably overkill... unless he was actually directly involved in it, as with guys like Robert Ballard (the Titanic) and James Cameron (Challenger Deep). ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 14:01, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    It appears he was. I had that objection at first, but reading some of the articles, it was his ship, he was on board, and he was leading the expedition, from what I can tell by reading the sources above. I first thought this was a case of "rich guy pays people to do stuff for him, then takes credit", but this looks more like "rich guy spends his own money to do something cool himself". Of course, he was not the only person on board, but he was actively involved in the search, from what I can tell. I'm ambivalent about his inclusion, but it is at least accurate to note he was involved. Whether we should not it is a different story, but it isn't strictly wrong. --Jayron32 18:45, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support alt. – Historically significant for what was found, not for who found it (or paid for finding it). Sca (talk) 13:56, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Support alt blurb but the update is super-short at the moment. I'd like to see a couple of sentences more before posting. --Tone 14:46, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Btw, the current wording in the article is "what appears to be the wreck", not something more definitive. I think this should be cleared out before posting. Brandmeistertalk 18:10, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posting the alt blurb with some corrections. Jehochman Talk 20:47, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Withdrawn] 2015 Zasyadko mine disaster

Withdrawn by nominator. 331dot (talk) 14:50, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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 Zasyadko mine disaster (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A suspected gas explosion at the Zasyadko coal mine in Eastern Ukraine causes the death of at least 17 miners. (Post)
News source(s): BBC, Guardian, Reuters, CBC
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Mining disaster in conflict-ridden region of Ukraine, in mine with history of accidents. Event marked by a minute's silence in Parliament. News reports from reliable sources across the world. One confirmed death, but total not confirmed yet. '''tAD''' (talk) 15:58, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • support - important enough.--BabbaQ (talk) 16:14, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose article is stub quality and inadequate for main page inclusion. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:16, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, the event is not important enough, and the article is just a stub that hinges on a single source. --AmaryllisGardener talk 18:29, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. I'm not even sure this merits a page, let alone posting to ITN. Doesn't seem significant; the slight relation to the crisis there can be covered by the ongoing listing. 331dot (talk) 19:31, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - New official death toll of 17. Can't say that doesn't merit an article. I admit however the article is too stubby. '''tAD''' (talk) 20:49, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
To clarify, my merits comment was based on the initial one-death information. 331dot (talk) 21:47, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose based solely on article quality. Too stubby, and based entirely on a single source. If the article is expanded and improved, consider this equivalent to a full support. --Jayron32 00:26, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I wish to withdraw the nomination. The article is not of a decent standard. I have no expertise in Ukraine or disasters, thus I have practically no possibility of improving it. '''tAD''' (talk) 14:48, 5 March 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.

March 3

March 3, 2015 (2015-03-03) (Tuesday)
Business and economy

Disasters and accidents
International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

[Closed] FREAK

No consensus to post. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:03, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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: FREAK (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ FREAK, a new attack on web security, affects threatens millions of Internet users worldwide (Post)
News source(s): Forbes
Credits:
 The Anome (talk) 23:08, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Affects"?--WaltCip (talk) 00:21, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • OK, "threatens" might be better: but with online banking and other high-risk sites vulnerable when accessed from two of the world's most common web access platforms, historical experience suggests we can be sure it's either being exploited right now, or will be very soon. And "millions" puts it very mildly: Android has hundreds of millions of users. -- The Anome (talk) 00:33, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose "Potentially" isn't good enough; has this caused any actual damages that can be quantified monetarily? SpencerT♦C 02:03, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: This might turn into a significant story, but right now, it isn't one according to any criterion. -Kudzu1 (talk) 02:07, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, this vulnerability isn't as widespread as previous ones. Nakon 04:16, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose This seems over-hyped. The weakness is that some browsers allow 512-bit encryption, but that still takes a month to break with even high-end consumer electronics. (Compare this to entirely unencrypted cell-phone SMS & calls). Mamyles (talk) 14:51, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I believe you're mistaken on this in several ways, as follows: (a) no, you no longer need a month of elapsed time to perform the computation -- cloud computing services let you use vast numbers of CPUs concurrently, and the cost of breaking a key is only about $100; (b) no, you only need to factor the key once for each site, and you can do that off-line; thereafter, the exploit is instantaneous, and you don't need to attack millions of sites, attackers will select a few high-profile sites (eg. banks) and attack them selectively (c) cell-phone SMS and calls are at least partially protected by encryption: they're typically encrypted over-the-air, but with a weak (in several ways) cryptosystem, and SMSCs should in general run either on private networks via encrypted links. However, the whole system is exploitable in many ways for state-level actors with the technical/legal resources to do so. -- The Anome (talk) 15:58, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that because of cloud computing, it is relatively easy for amateurs to gain access to supercomputing tier resources that could shorten exploitation. Though, modern websites generate a new key for every session, so such factoring will only break a single individual at a time. I also agree that state-level actors can exploit many, if not all, other methods of communication. Cell-phone's broken encryption is an example to show that this weakness does not particularly stand out. Mamyles (talk) 16:09, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The issue here is not to do with up-to-date protocols: it's old cipher suites still being supported by sites that shouldn't really be using this older stuff, but can be forced to use it by a cipher suite downgrade attack. -- The Anome (talk) 16:19, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as a "potential" threat. 331dot (talk) 19:35, 4 March 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] Thorbjørn Jagland demoted

Snowclose, not even close to a head of state, or third in line for head of state, and no death. Feel free to reverse me, but this seems obvious. μηδείς (talk) 22:08, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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: Thorbjørn Jagland (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Thorbjørn Jagland, the former chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, is demoted by the Committee. (Post)
News source(s): the Globe and Mail, Reuters, The Guardian
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Unprecedented in the 114-year history of the Norwegian Nobel Committee. 
talk 19:21, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
  1. His name is Thorbjørn Jagland, not Thorbjoern Jagland.
  2. He has not been demoted at all. The committee elects its chairman for each term.
  3. The main story is the election of the new chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, Kaci Kullmann Five. Bjerrebæk (talk) 19:31, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Snow close if what Bjerrebæk is saying is correct, it's a non-story. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:40, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • The election of the new chairman of the world's most important prize committee would however be a reasonable story, especially compared to the story concerning an obscure British soldier getting an obscure award (at least compared to the Nobel Peace Prize). This is merely a question of emphasis and wording. I would rather suggest: "Kaci Kullmann Five is elected chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, replacing Thorbjørn Jagland". Bjerrebæk (talk) 19:43, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The first four Kaci Kullmen were't even nominated. I think it may be be a bit late to start now. Formerip (talk) 19:47, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Is she related to
BencherliteTalk 19:49, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
BencherliteTalk 19:48, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
In which case Bjerrebæk isn't telling us the truth here. Simple. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:19, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The committee elects its own chairman and has not commented on its reasons for electing Five rather than Jagland, and the new chairman was involved in all those previous decisions cited as much as Jagland. Everything else is speculation, and speculation from foreign tabloids with little knowledge and understanding of the process is not really relevant. And why would the conservative members oust Jagland over the EU prize, something they are entirely in agreement with Jagland on? In fact the new chairman has praised Jagland's leadership of the committee. Bjerrebæk (talk) 20:21, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Snowclose per above and lack of international import or coverage. μηδείς (talk) 22:08, 3 March 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.

March 2

March 2, 2015 (2015-03-02) (Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

International relations

Law and crime

Sports

[Closed] Wave/partial duality of light demonstrated

No consensus to post. SpencerT♦C 04:17, 6 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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: 
Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne are able to visually capture the wave–particle duality of light. (Post)
News source(s): Nature Comm (peer-reviewed paper), NBC, Newsweek

Credits:

Article needs updating
Nominator's comments: Demonstration of a key theory of quantum mechanics. MASEM (t) 17:56, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose without much stronger rationale. We are able to look at population ecology by the cycles of predators and prey and how air pollution drives the evolution of spotted moths, but no one would make a claim that the secret of ecology or evolution itself had been observed on these bases. I don't oppose the subject per se, but let's have a much clearer explanation of the importance of this press release. μηδείς (talk) 19:13, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well first it is a paper that just has been published by a peer-reviewed journal (the usual metric for scientific stories). The importance is that until now, the duality of light photons (and other subatomic particles) has been a theory that matches with experiment but not observed directly. This shows more directed evidence the theory holds (within the scope of scientific principles). The importance is that much of quantum mechanics - which is the driver behind advanced computing, power, and material applications - is based on duality being a property of sub-atomic particles. It's not ground-breaking, but it is comparable to finding the Higgs boson particle via direct experiment rather than just theory. --MASEM (t) 20:05, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: Appears to this layman to be a significant scientific discovery. -Kudzu1 (talk) 20:44, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
A paper has just released a press release is not a strong rationale. We've been doing difraction grating experiments in high school in the US for the better part of the last century. Let's have an actual rationale for the importance of the new experiment, not just the fact that it has been pressreleasen. μηδείς (talk) 22:12, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Could you point to academic commentary/editorials that assess the significance of this work? Espresso Addict (talk) 23:09, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Sources that are more academic/scientific in nature Phys.org, Wired, Discovery, Popular Mechanics. --MASEM (t) 23:14, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • Much though I like airing science items on ITN, I think I'm going to have to oppose. Most of the news sources appear to be based on the same press release, I've failed to find independent editorials/commentaries/news items in major journals explaining the significance of this experiment, and as Modest Genius points out, Nat Commun is not Nature. Espresso Addict (talk) 01:24, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support once article is fully updated:
Light Can Be Both Wave and Particle—
The proof deserves a mainpage article.
Newyorkbrad (talk) 00:30, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • That's the one I was thinking of, thanks. Modest Genius talk 23:59, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • support - per a unqiue experiment.--BabbaQ (talk) 16:15, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose looks like it's far from a new demonstration. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:07, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, clickbait, not a real result. Abductive (reasoning) 22:11, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - The methodology may be novel, but the result is well-known and there's already a massively famous standard experiment to demonstrate it. So this isn't news of the scale that's being implied by the headline, or really news at all. AlexTiefling (talk) 22:16, 4 March 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] RD: Dave Mackay

Article: Dave Mackay (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC, The Guardian, Yahoo, FIFA
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

 72.69.70.247 (talk) 02:01, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

Notable Scottish footballer Dave Mackay dies. A writer's association Player of the Year in England and a notable playing career.--72.69.70.247 (talk) 01:40, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Question Who are you referring to, 72?
    talk 01:50, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
think I got it right now. I'm editing on a tablet so it's a little difficult.--72.69.70.247 (talk) 02:01, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support variously referred to as a "legend" and "one of Spurs greatest players" (and, in fact, as the greatest Tottenham player by Brian Clough), won The Double with Spurs, won leagues and cups in Scotland and England as a player, and successful as a manager too. The BBC article summarises it nicely: "He won 10 major honours as a player in British and European football. The Edinburgh-born player also won 22 caps for his country and was named 'Footballer of the Year' in both Scotland and England." Article could use a few more references in the career section. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:58, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - I don't follow soccer, but he looks like a major figure in the sport. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 07:05, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Apart from the team honours (full set of Scottish trophies with Hearts, three FA Cups and a double with Spurs), Mackay earned individual honours which cement his legacy. 1969 Footballer of the Year and a member of the Football League 100 Legends, as well as an inaugural inductee of the English Football Hall of Fame. '''tAD''' (talk) 09:47, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Given his honors he seems to meet DC2. 331dot (talk) 10:05, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. He meets the criteria for notability in his field - once the references issue is taken care of, should be good to go. Challenger l (talk) 13:04, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment much better referenced, ready to go. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:47, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Immense figure in English and Scottish football. --Dweller (talk) 16:52, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Posted

BencherliteTalk 17:07, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]

[Closed] Repost Boko Haram to Ongoing

I am still of the opinion a broader "terrorism" category might be better, but that can be revisited at talk. μηδείς (talk) 16:39, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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: Boko Haram (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ (ongoing) (Post)
News source(s): Fox News Toronto Star Daily Mail as well as BBC
Credits:
Nominator's comments: The current top story at Fox is the beheading of a Nigerian man by Boko Haram and their connection with ISIS. I have never seen an item deleted without discussion before, and don't see any reason this should be deleted, unless we are going to put up an umbrella "Islamist Terrorism" link. When people are beheaded on video, shot, or blown up on every continent in the name of a single movement we are doing our readers a disservice by telling them it is only happening in northern Iraq. μηδείς (talk) 21:38, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for now at least. The admin was correct to remove it, since the article hadn't been updated in at least a week. It can't qualify for ongoing unless it's been updated. It still hasn't been either.
    -- Calidum 21:55, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
I would probably not have argued against a removal, except for the current beheading, which was reported after the closure. But there was no discussion, and black's lives do matter. μηδείς (talk) 22:19, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The trouble with strawman arguments is that they can easily look like back-handed insults. I'm almost sure you didn't mean to accuse anyone here of saying or insinuating that such lives don't matter, but clarification would put minds at rest.
BencherliteTalk 22:25, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]
That's exactly what this is, a discussion based on an update, see the sources. Is your oppose, Bencherlite, based on the fact that only one Nigerian was beheaded, or that I posted this before there was news to support reinstating the item? There's nothing formally wrong with my nomination. μηδείς (talk) 22:23, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Bencherlite. The ITN policies were followed to the letter, no issue here. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:01, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Bencherlite. Regular constructive editing is not continuing on the relevant article, and the last updates concern events from early February. This should be closed once the accusations of racism are rescinded. Stephen 22:38, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Bencherlite. I await an apology from Medeis for her unfortunate off-hand comment. --WaltCip (talk) 23:38, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose without prejudice to User:Medeis. I understand and sympathize with her perspective, but right or wrong, Boko Haram has not been generating the amount of press and frequent updating to warrant ongoing status as of right now. I would note that a number of other ongoing events that I, personally, have been following more closely (the civil war in Libya, the political standoff in Yemen, etc.) are also not listed for the same reason. -Kudzu1 (talk) 04:18, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. On a quick skim through the websites of Nigeria's main national newspapers (The Sun, The Punch, Nigerian Tribune, Vanguard, The Guardian), only one of them (The Guardian) even mentions the Boko Haram conflict on their main page at present. If the people on the ground no longer consider this newsworthy, neither should Wikipedia. That isn't to belittle the casualties or those affected by the conflict, but just a recognition that this isn't currently in the news. Conflicts like this can run for decades, and it's not reasonable for Wikipedia to keep them permanently highlighted on the main page unless they're being covered elsewhere—ITN is intended to demonstrate that Wikipedia is covering topics which are currently in the news, not to highlight topics Wikipedia considers newsworthy. – 
    iridescent 13:00, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Closing this myself. μηδείς (talk) 16:39, 3 March 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] Boko Haram removed from ongoing

Snow close. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:43, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Just as an FYI, I have removed

BencherliteTalk 16:38, 2 March 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] RD: Yaşar Kemal

Article: Yaşar Kemal (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Guardian, NYTimes, Independent, BBC, ABC News, Hurriyet, Hurriyet, al-Arabiya, Le Monde, Libération, Le Figaro, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Die Welt, Die Zeit, El País, La Repubblica,
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: World-famous Turkish novelist often mentioned as a possible Nobel laureate. How could this possibly have been missed? Hegvald (talk) 11:03, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

  • A possible explanation for a lack of awards in Turkey is that he appears to have been in conflict with the government throughout much of his career. Espresso Addict (talk) 15:02, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Indeed. I'm surprised that anybody can question his notability. --Hegvald (talk) 16:59, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Excellent - as I said, he is from an unfamiliar field. My remaining objection is the lack of references for his accolades and his works. Challenger l (talk) 13:08, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. The UK press is clear as to his importance: "ground-breaking Marxist Turkish author and activist" (Independent), "one of Turkey’s greatest writers" (Guardian), "one of Turkey's best-known writers" (BBC). The article could be improved and requires some work on citations. Espresso Addict (talk) 15:02, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: Maybe a borderline case to some, but that's likely a product of anglocentrism (this being the English-language Wikipedia). He's clearly quite renowned and well-known in Turkey and among the Turkish-speaking diaspora. -Kudzu1 (talk) 18:05, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Seems to meet DC2 for Turkish writers. 331dot (talk) 18:08, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I tagged one section which has a number of claims of accolades, most of which are unreferenced. Most of his works are unreferenced. Needs fixing. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:08, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, seems to be one of the best in his field (Turkish writing). Mellowed Fillmore, I'll try to become a regular again, if I don't get nauseous. --AmaryllisGardener talk 14:27, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, extremely important figure for Turkish literature. Fixed the issue with his works, will work on the accolades shortly. --GGT (talk) 21:32, 3 March 2015 (UTC) Should be more or less OK now. --GGT (talk) 22:16, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose a Nobel nomination is not a grounds for posting--can we have a better explained rationale? μηδείς (talk) 22:17, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I would say that he satisfies
WP:ITND, #2: as a Turkish speaker, he would have been one of the first 2-3 authors that I would think of if asked about living Turkish-language authors, very well-known and acclaimed. Arguably the country's most important author. Hürriyet, one of the country's most popular newspapers, wrote a lengthy eulogy detailing how he is a symbolic figure in the country and was one of its most prominent authors: [33]. He was also world-known, I reckon, from the worldwide recognition he got and per Espresso Addict's comment. --GGT (talk) 22:31, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]

March 1

March 1, 2015 (2015-03-01) (Sunday)
Political elections

Science and technology
  • ISS spacewalks completing the cabling reroutings needed in preparation for the 2017 arrival of the first commercial spacecraft capable of transporting astronauts. (AP)

[Posted] Estonian parliamentary election

Article: 
Estonian parliamentary election. (Post)
News source(s): Wall Street Journal, BBC, Guardian, Deutsche Welle

Credits:

The nominated event is listed on
WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.

 Johnsemlak (talk) 00:16, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

  • Comment. Can you post some news sources? 331dot (talk) 00:48, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. The article is not ready. The lead is not updated and there is no commentary on the results whatsoever. Espresso Addict (talk) 15:06, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I see that the article has been updated and that full results are included. Will post it now, and am sure further improvements will be made soon. Jehochman Talk 14:15, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. In the past, ITN consensus has required a paragraph of discussion of the electoral results prior to posting. Espresso Addict (talk) 17:22, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] Ongoing: Replace "War in Ukraine" with "Minsk II"

Consensus against.
BencherliteTalk 20:08, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]

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.

Hi, since the current Minsk II protocol and its realisation is the dominating topic as opposed to the conflict in general we had up there for ages, could you replace "War in Ukraine" with "

Minsk II" please? Thanks and cheers, Horst-schlaemma (talk) 13:37, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]

  • Oppose a peace summit presupposes a war. The war is ongoing. μηδείς (talk) 17:21, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: The war has continued despite the ceasefire agreement, which fell short of a permanent settlement as it is. -Kudzu1 (talk) 17:34, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Even if the war stops at some point, it's still most notable as a war. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 19:06, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose; I disagree with the premise of this nomination; the conflict itself is still the major story. The peace is tenuous at best. 331dot (talk) 19:43, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I obviously oppose the idea expressed by the proposer. However, I'd argue that, even though low-level skirmishes continue, this event can be removed from ongoing. Nothing significant is happening, to the point where updates have been very slow (I'm the chief writer of both articles). If high-level conflict starts up again, it can be re-added. RGloucester — ☎ 19:46, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Nothing significant is happening"? Such as Boris Nemtsov's assassination not happening, him being Putin's most outspoken critic and an opponent of Russia's war against Ukraine? Even Nixon didn't have McGovern shot, and Nixon ended the war against Vietnam, as well as the draft. Еще Рас...Пүтин μηδείς (talk) 03:05, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
We don't know why Mr Nemstov was killed, or whether that has anything to do with Ukraine. You are making inferences not supported by reliable sources, i.e.
WP:NPOV. RGloucester — ☎ 03:12, 2 March 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] RD: Minnie Miñoso

Article: Minnie Miñoso (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Chicago Tribune, USA Today
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see
MLB All-Star. Three-time Gold Glove Award winner. Member of the Cuban Baseball Hall of Fame and Mexican Professional Baseball Hall of Fame – Muboshgu (talk) 16:43, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply
]

  • Support for RD based on notability and article quality. Newyorkbrad (talk) 18:17, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Rather notable in baseball. Joshua Garner (talk) 18:33, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support as per the above. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 19:08, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support as highly notable sports figure. -Kudzu1 (talk) 19:14, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose the article has swathes of unreferenced claims, I've tagged the worst offending sections. Perhaps some of the keen supporters who overlooked this issue can help fix the article. Otherwise, no doubting that this is a decent RD shout. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:35, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • I've been adding sources throughout the day, and will let you know when those sections are addressed. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:36, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • 56 total cites now. No major passages uncited. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:33, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in principle on the merits as meeting DC2. 331dot (talk) 19:44, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Done. --Jayron32 20:48, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Fine, but if you've read the article, you'll see an unreferenced BLP issue in this sentence, "The earlier extensions to his career with the Sox were publicity stunts orchestrated respectively by one-time Sox owner Bill Veeck and his son Mike, who at the time owned partial or controlling interest in the team." Please either remove the claim or cite it. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:16, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Plenty of articles refer to it as publicity stunts.[34][35] Veeck was the master of the publicity stunt. I'll make sure it's cited. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:29, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      Thank you. Of course, personal anecdotes are all very well, but this is an encyclopedia so claims like that should be referenced with reliable sources, or removed. I appreciate your work. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:43, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • To those of us following the White Sox at the time, there was absolutely no question it was a publicity stunt. The various milestones are connected with it: Oldest player to get a base hit, only player to bat in five, six, etc. different decades. He was closely associated with Veeck for many years anyway. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 21:36, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        • I agree that adding citations is desirable, but it is obvious that when a long-retired ballplayer is given a single at-bat at age 55, this is not because he is the best available player. Newyorkbrad (talk) 22:21, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
          You might as well be speaking Mongolian, that your assertion is "obvious" is clearly out of step with many English speakers, particularly those who have not the foggiest idea about baseball. Don't forget, this isn't American Wikipedia, and importantly that when you assume ....... The Rambling Man (talk) 22:00, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
          The 1976 and 1980 appearances were late in the season after the Sox were well out of the race.[36] ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:28, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • comment. I know this is way after the fact but I think MM is way below our notablilty standards. He doesn't meet DC2. He was never considered one of the best baseball players. He wasn't recognized as such (he never won an MPV). His career stats don't put him among the very best. He's not even a MLB hall of famer. His latin origins maybe boost his case, but it's way short for me. This is not a 'pull' vote, merely an observation. (but i'd be fine with it being pulled).--Johnsemlak (talk) 16:18, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Just as a counterargument, there are nonquantifiable intangibles that make someone noteworthy enough to be considered for RD. Counting awards or positions held is a fine metric for people when they have no experience with the person in question, but ultimately there are some people who don't have any tangible or quantifiable way to express their importance to some field or endeavor. For a recent example, I remember recently we posted the death of a politician which had fairly widespread support even though they had never been a head of state or similar position (I can't remember which country it was from, forgive me), but because they were the leader of a vocal opposition party, and had been for such a long time, and had become a cultural touchstone within that country. One does not need to actually win an award or hold a position to be considered newsworthy enough for people to notice your death. Cultural relevance is really the thing we should be judging here, and while many people with cultural relevance would also have lots of awards, some times a person is clearly relevant enough for their death to be noteworthy, but no one gave them any awards for doing anything. --Jayron32 19:21, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Just as a countercounterargument, these particular individuals are promoted through clear systemic bias. The "cultural relevance" is usually US-dominated here which is of no surprise since most editors are from the US. Hence why we have had non-entity college basketball coaches posted at RD recently. As a project, it's great that we try to promote a diverse set of RDs, but when we falsely lower the bar, as we seem to have done more and more often for these minor US sports personalities, it undermines the process. The problem with claiming "cultural relevance" is that it is often mistaken around these parts as an opportunity to wax lyrical about how individual editors remember the nominated people, how much of an impact the nominated people made in their individual lives; when pressed on how those nominated people actually meet the RD criteria, we get a hand-wavy "cultural relevance" argument and not much more. Sure, every nomination is subjective, but the more we encourage and allow this overt systemic bias, the less likely this section of the main page will be taken seriously from an encyclopaedic perspective. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:14, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    I really don't understand how posting Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat, which is the person I note in the argument above, represents a pro-US bias. --Jayron32 00:22, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat was far more significant than Minnie Minoso. Just not famous in the West Also I think Minoso's 'cultura relevance is mostly from his publicity stunts which made him known to a generation after his playing career, but didn't really make his career more notable.--Johnsemlak (talk) 04:44, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Plus I wasn't referring to Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat, although Johnsemlak's point is a perfectly good one on that subject. The Rambling Man (talk) 05:41, 5 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates/March_2015&oldid=1139197328"