Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates/October 2011

Greek Referendum Announcement

Nominator's comments: It is a major decision which has shaken the global (and Greece's national) economy overnight, and could have grave consequences. Regardless of the result of the referendum itself, the consequences of the announcement included a fierce response from governments all around the world, and as Al Jazeera wrote on their article: "The Greek government faced possible collapse on Tuesday as ruling party lawmakers demanded Prime Minister George Papandreou resign for throwing the nation's euro membership into jeopardy with a shock call for a referendum." It is all over the news around the world. ¬ laonikoss ^(talk) 06:03, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong Support This is clearly an extremely notable event and the article is well-referenced. This has been a leading news story in media around the world. While some editors may feel that posting this item should await the outcome of the referendum, I point out that the ramifications of the announcement of the referendum have already been immediate and far-reaching. I was considering nominating this myself, but nominations of items related to the Eurozone seem to be swimming upstream around here lately. Deterence ^Talk 06:26, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose for now It's just Papandreou's political promises, until an exact date for the referendum is announced. Also, the blurb is mistaken in that the referendum is not about whether Greece will stay in the euro, but whether it will accept the eurozone bailout package, that was announced last week. Also, the referendum might still turn out unnecessary if eg. Greek government falls in this Friday's
  vote of confidence and/or the eurozone decides to dispel Greece. --hydrox (talk) 08:38, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Strong sypport per Deterence. Mythic Writerlord (talk) 14:51, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose its a campaign promise, like withdrawal from Iraq.
  talk-contribs 15:12, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Oppose for now - This will be extremely significant news if it actually happens, or even if a date is set. For now, however, it's just an announcement of a plan by a crisis-plagued government which may not survive the week. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 16:18, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Wait. Post it when it happens, not when it is announced. --bender235 (talk) 18:55, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment For goodness sake, you guys would have waited until 6 months after the lines at the soup kitchens stretched around the corner before posting an ITN item about the Great Depression. This place is becoming more farcical by the week. Deterence ^Talk 20:49, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Associated Press is now reportng that the referendum has been canceled, only four days after it was proposed. I think the caution is well-warranted here. There's no point in rushing to the main page just to have the item pulled the day after. --hydrox (talk) 16:05, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[Reposted] Palestine admitted to UNESCO

Nominator's comments: After the much covered Palestinian bid at the UN, this is the first time where the Palestinian state gets full membership at a UN agency. Given the significance of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, this is echoing globally --

• Support Quite a significant event, Palestine makes it into a UN agency. Chipmunkdavis (talk) 13:20, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. Technically, Palestine isn't a member until it ratifies, although maybe that's too much pedantry to worry about. --FormerIP (talk) 13:21, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support, important breakthrough in the Palestinian bid for statehood. --Soman (talk) 13:26, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: It would be interesting to have a specific article for the votes e.g. who voted for, against or abstained, I don't know if such article has been created yet.
  talk) 13:33, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Support Notable event in the politics of international relations, though God only knows why the whole world is obsessed with Israel and Palestine. Deterence ^Talk 13:38, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Very significant event given the other United Nations angle to Palestine statehood bid etc. Notable, current and with a world view beyond the Anglosphere, I think that ticks most of the ITN boxes. Additional source here - http://www.voanews.com/english/news/UNESCO-Grants-Palestine-Full-Membership-132913673.html doktorb _words^deeds 13:47, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Article has been updated with information beyond a list here. It is a simple sentence, which could be expanded further. Mamyles (talk) 16:23, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note that it won't be admitted as a member until signs the instruments of accession, so updating the article to say it's a member already will be inaccurate until it's done this. Nightw 17:03, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

comment the article has only 1 line of prose, suggest we add more now (reactions perhaps) or wait till its done.Lihaas (talk) 17:09, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest Palestine 194#UNESCO, which gives much better context. There's currently a content dispute though so it's in a constant state of flux. Nightw 17:48, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've updated the blurb's bold link to the above article, as it contributes much more than a list. As this is multiple paragraphs of new information, I'm also marking this nomination as updated and ready. Mamyles (talk) 19:10, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of the relevant content keeps being removed by another user. Unfortunately, I won't get a chance to restore it until tomorrow. Nightw 19:18, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Strong support - Also note that the USA no longer contributes to the UNESCO, which is notable as they provide 22% of the overall UNESCO budget. Mythic Writerlord (talk) 17:58, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Palestine being admitted or the U.S. spitting the dummy -- what's the bigger story? Nightw 18:00, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Support This is making big waves, with USA also withdrawing its funding to UNESCO. Not sure which one is bigger news.. maybe have them both in the blurb? "
  USA." ? Note that this is not a political reaction from the present US administration to the news, but the decision is based on a bill from 1990s that forbids USA from funding any United Nations organizations that accept Palestine as their member. --hydrox (talk) 19:21, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Unless your looking at some super-up-to-date news that I haven't seen, the US hasn't actually made that decision yet and there is no urgency for it to do so (a question for their lawyers and diplomats to chew over, even if the end result is predictable).--FormerIP (talk) 19:39, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-15527534 "The United States is cancelling funding for the UN cultural body Unesco after it voted to grant full membership to the Palestinians. [...] A US state department spokeswoman said a payment of some $60m (£37m) due next month would not be made. Membership dues paid by the US account for about a fifth of the organisation's annual budget. [...] A US law passed in the 1990s bars giving funding to any UN body that admits the Palestinians as full members before an Israeli-Palestinian peace deal is reached. [...] while continued US funding was impossible, the administration wanted to remain an active member of Unesco. " --hydrox (talk) 19:55, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's not actually a new decision, it's the result of a law passed a while ago which said that any UN agency which recognizes Palestine would not receive funding from the U.S. I don't know how that'll work out in practice though. JimSukwutput 05:24, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Posted -- tariqabjotu 19:22, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Following a copyright concern at
  talk) 09:02, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]
  • I Support reposting with the above article bolded. This is a world event of long-term importance. Mamyles (talk) 12:18, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strongly support reposting the article ASAP. By far the most important news at the moment and article is in good enough condition. Mythic Writerlord (talk) 12:48, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Reposted by
  User:Fox as of 12:20. Mamyles (talk) 14:27, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Nominator's comments: This is a significant milestone, and is making headlines globally. --SMasters (talk) 01:27, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Day of Seven Billion is currently scheduled to appear on DYK during the 12:00 31 October 2011 (UTC) update. --Allen3 ^talk 01:33, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose. I was thinking of nominating this myself but, when you look into it, there are various conflicting official estimates of the world population. We will be celebrating the same milestone next April, apparently. --FormerIP (talk) 01:30, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that there are many different organizations giving estimates. But this is the UN. If you wait till April, I doubt you will get the 200+ news sources around the world headlining this story now. By then, this will be old news. – SMasters (talk) 01:39, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Support We don't have to say the world's population is 7 billion. Just say that the UN claims there are at least 7 billion people.
  Qwertyus 01:36, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Oppose. Milestones are not news. They are expected and have no independent effects. JimSukwutput 02:35, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• comment Support if update is complete with picture of guy number 7,000,000,000.·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 02:52, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Like some other editors, I briefly considered nominating this myself. But, DYK is more appropriate for such a milestone. Deterence ^Talk 03:06, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Just an estimate that cannot be verified beyond reasonable doubt. Mythic Writerlord (talk) 07:39, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• oppose per Mythic Writerlord whos to know the population in such 3rd world slumds that cant be counted? whos to know who the 7 billionth baby is? its conjecture and nothing moreLihaas (talk) 07:47, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose - DYN is a good place for this. ITN is for significant news, rather than a number based on conjecture. Mamyles (talk) 12:40, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose. Trivia like this should go to DYK. Lynch7 17:58, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Qantas dispute "terminated"

Nominator's comments: Breaking news at the moment — Joseph Fox 15:57, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• I'm in no position to update, I'm afraid, just a drive-by nom. Could replace the current (now inaccurate) blurb. — Joseph Fox 15:57, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please update. Present tense blurb usage is again making it look like the strike is still in effect. I dont care who says what about "historic present", ITN is on the web and if we insist on using present tense then we need to try and keep the blurb present too. -- Ashish-g55 22:46, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Support While it's not technically incorrect, the present wording on the main page makes it seem as if nothing of note has happened since Qantas grounded its fleet; this is certainly not true and will most definitely be incorrect in the very near future. Ther's a bit of an update at
  talk) 01:53, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Wait until they are in the air and then just update the existing blurb.
  Richard-of-Earth (talk) 04:29, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]
  • First Qantas aircraft left Sydney bounding for LA at 2pm AEDST. YuMaNuMa (talk) 06:30, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Alaa Abd El-Fatah arrested

Nominator's comments: Breaking News: Alaa is one the main activists behind 2011 Egyptian revolution -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 13:33, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Support : as nom. -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 13:33, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  I don't think this guy is particularly well-known outside the Arab world. Nightw 14:07, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  He is. Andy Carvin knows him and alaa was in the oakland protest when the police cracked down. And even if he is not, ITN is not a regional thing but covers the biggest news world wide. -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 14:36, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  I'm not convinced how big this is based on the very weak sourcing in his article. If this is a well-known international figure - why doesn't the article reflect that? --Cameron Scott (talk) 14:41, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  The article is in horrible shape. True but so is/was most of the articles about MENA figures. We dont pay enough attention to MENA articles for the most part. I will be working tonight on the article to try to get it what to standards. -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 16:07, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  I don't know who Andy Carvin is either, but I do know that being an acquaintance of him and being in a political protest does not make a person notable. You nominate items from Egypt almost every other week, so forgive me if I'm somewhat sceptical as to the significance of this. So how is this big news? Nightw 15:29, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  Last time I nominated any news from Egypt to be in ITN was the Maspero demonstrations which I believe was the biggest story of the day. I dont push POV or Egypt news but I do focus on MENA/Business/Science news because they're a personal passions of mine. and again like I said, It's breaking news (Happened few hours ago) so the story will be picked up by more news outlets. -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 16:07, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment The more things change, the more they stay the same. While this event is not sufficiently notable for ITN, it is symptomatic of the very kind of repression that illustrates how the
  changing of the guard of those doing the repressing. But, ITN needs something a little more significant than the arrest of a blogger - worse than this happens in Democratic Western countries every day. Deterence ^Talk 22:15, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]

  Would you mind not turning

  WP:ITN/C into a blog for your opinions? You've been warned about this before, and yet you are continuing to persist. Other than that, yes, this is an isolated incident that by itself is not worthy for posting on ITN.--WaltCip (talk) 03:50, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply

  ]

  Time for you to chill-out, step away from the keyboard and go for a walk. Deterence ^Talk 03:57, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  Mind you this comes 3 hours after he "ignoreD" the asame warning of his pov-pushing/soapboxing.Lihaas (talk) 17:15, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  Pray tell, what POV am I pushing around here? From memory, the only case where I have actively taken a side on an ITN item was when I called Alfredo Astiz (aka The Blonde Angel of Death) a "monster", and I make absolutely no apologies for that, whatsoever. Deterence ^Talk 22:50, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  Yeah, that's what I thought. Deterence ^Talk 06:30, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose, some activist being arrested in some country is not notable news. Even in Egypt this gentleman isn't.
  talk) 06:06, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]

  Alaa is as big as Wael Ghonim in Egypt BTW. -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 18:13, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• 'Support Per nom. Wikifan^{Be nice} 04:34, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support: Major news world wide. The story in on every major news outlet, it is quite telling of how the process of neutralizing the revolution by SCAF is underway. It basically speaks about one of the most important events of this year being hijacked.--Taliawi (talk) 15:57, 1 November 2011 (UTC) -- 131.175.28.139 (talk) 15:54, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose still not convinced by what I see in the article. --Cameron Scott (talk) 16:01, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose unless there is an interesting answer to the question: And then what happened? He's been arrested ("detained" is the sugarcoated wording used by the sources) for 15 days but I can see no indication of any wide-ranging consequences. He has not been found guilty of or sentenced for anything, as far as I can tell, and the reaction to his arrest does not appear to have been overwhelming, though it has attracted international attention (e.g., from Amnesty International). I don't mean to downplay the personal or even local significance of this, but I do not quite see how this is not just another case of "Democracy-challenged government arrests activist who was totally harshing their mellow". -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 15:57, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• "Democracy-challenged government arrests activist who was totally harshing their mellow". Are you referring to Egypt or to Oakland? ;-) Deterence ^Talk 21:29, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Syria on the brink of civil war

• Nom. Not so sure about the blurb, tho. Since Friday, violence is escalating in Syria, more than 50 people died (in Homs and Hama, among other cities; most in half a year of protests). Opposition begins fighting back by force of arms, calls for Western intervention. Assad threatens to set the "whole region on fire". This is definitely a turning point in this uprising. --bender235 (talk) 10:02, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Object "on the brink" is not "news" doktorb _words^deeds 10:06, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Obvious wait till something actually triggers the commencement civil war. So far it's just speculative media report from tension of both(?) parties but as we know tensions don't result in wars for at least weeks or even months. YuMaNuMa (talk)
• Comment Just how long is Wikipedia going to pretend nothing is happening in Syria? Deterence ^Talk 21:59, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  this is the 2nd time in about as many days as youre trying to push a pov with ITN. ITN doesnt DRAW ATTENTION to what editors deem necessary. WP is not a news service as youre insinuation that it should IGNORE or SANCTION. twice youve clearly shown the intent you seek from WP. Syria "on the brink" of civil war th is conjecture, Yemen is closer and sourced as saying "on the brink of..."Lihaas (talk) 07:50, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  Blah blah blah. Ignored. Deterence ^Talk 12:47, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  This should have been posted during the commencement of the uprising in March but was blanketed by the Japanese earthquake and the Fukushima nuclear disaster. YuMaNuMa (talk) 04:45, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• What about a sticky? --Tone 22:34, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  I'll agree with a sticky mentioning Syria, it's probably the biggest news story so far. Secret ^account 04:52, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose until something actually happens. So far, in an attempt to trigger a "revolution", news agencies have been pushing this "Syria is on the brink of something big happening" with daily ~30 deaths stories while relying solely on democracy activists bloggers reports (One of them turned out to be
  talk) 06:25, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Oppose any blurb along the lines of "Syria on brink of civil war" which would be pure speculation. I should point out that of the three sources cited only one even uses the term "civil war" and that one is dated almost a month ago. Hut 8.5 10:00, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose, speculative. Syria should be frequently posted as long as present conflict persists, but the blurb must have a concrete event. --Soman (talk) 13:31, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose proposed blurb as speculative. Also, while the uprising in Syria is, without a doubt, major news (just not of the kind that's always easy to reflect in an encyclopedia), I don't think a sticky is justified. There are other
  ongoing conflicts that have persisted for much longer and are more deadly, and ITN simply does not have enough room to accomodate them all. -- Black Falcon ^(talk) 16:03, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Comment It is ITN/R, so the only issue regarding posting is whether the updates are sufficient. Given that, what on earth is the point of posting this more than 18 hours before any such update is possible? Kevin McE (talk) 10:14, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  And this is bad because...? As long as it's not 25 hours away it's OK.

  Anyway, at the rate the people are updating the page, it's a safe bet this should be posted quickly. –HTD 13:06, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  For one thing, the game won't end until the 29th (it won't even start til then in UTC time).

  talk-contribs 13:56, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply

  ]

• Support When it ends. Truthsort (talk) 22:44, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• The game is over, and I've updated the blurb to reflect that the Cardinals have defeated the Rangers. OCNative (talk) 03:29, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support, ITN/R, plus article in good shape. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 03:32, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. Definitely meets update standards, 2011_World_Series#Game_7 has been updated with referenced prose. Spencer^T♦C 04:39, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. Marking 'ready'.--Johnsemlak (talk) 06:16, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

comment NOT READY -- there is not even ONE line of prose update about the victory -- agame 7 section only mentiosn BEFORE the game, that is not what its nom'd for here.Lihaas (talk) 06:43, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Super ready. Dunno what article Lihaas was reading, tbh –HTD 06:59, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There are now three referenced paragraphs. Definitely ready.--Johnsemlak (talk) 08:35, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Posted. --Bongwarrior (talk) 12:36, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Qantas grounds entire fleet

Nominator's comments: National airline; unprecedented. --124.169.191.4 (talk) 06:53, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - Quite significant, thousands of travelers will be stranded in international locations and according to The Daily Telegraph, 37000 employees will be without pay until this situation is resolve. As far as we know, this is an indefinite ceasing of operation for Australia's largest airline. YuMaNuMa (talk) 07:18, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - Quite unusual event (Has anything like this ever happened?). International notice, BBC Nb. It has been reported that Qantas said they will get everyone to their destinations. Hopefully therefore not thousands stranded (fingers crossed!) Whether this includes those who have not yet taken off is another thing. - 220.101.30 talk^\edits (aka 220.101) 07:49, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - Obvious immediate impact. But the blurb needs to change to something like "Qantas, the national airline of Australia, grounds its entire fleet in response to union action." The current blurb implies that the unions directly caused the grounding. While management may want the public to think that, it's a management decision to ground the fleet. HiLo48 (talk) 07:39, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Changed.

Armies 08:03, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

• Support: Exceptional event, immediate impact, international coverage (bbc, cnn]). Could do with more info on the
  Armies 08:06, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Strong support breaking and headline news over here in Australia. Probably the first time a major airline had to completely ground entire fleet. Industrial actions have been going on for a while. I suggest "Qantas, the national airline of Australia, suspends all domestic and international flights indefinitely in response to continued industrial action." --Sp33dyphil © • © 08:21, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - This is not the first time employee disputes have grounded all flights but on a much smaller scale. 1989 YuMaNuMa (talk) 08:35, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Note I've started an article on the whole dispute at
  2011 Qantas trade union disputes. --Sp33dyphil © • © 12:53, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]

I've improved it a bit, but it might be a good idea to expand it a bit more before we link to it in the blurb.

Armies 13:30, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

• Off-topic comment: Anyone else notice the relation between this story and the TFA for today? Nice coincidence. _EricLeb⁰¹ (Page | Talk) 16:23, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support, global impact, possibly global news too. Getting plenty of coverage in the UK. Mjroots (talk) 16:46, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good now. Quantas-biased Main page today... --Tone 18:13, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Post Oppose This is just a routine
  tit-for-tat industrial action has been taken by both sides to the dispute (albeit on a lesser scale) for a few years now. For some reason, media attention (and the Wikipedia community) is disproportionately drawn to events relating to airplanes. Deterence ^Talk 21:48, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]
  • Wouldn't you say that the event is fairly significant on its own, even if media attention may have been disproportionate relative to similar incidents in the past? JimSukwutput 04:40, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• This lock-out pales in significance next to some of the
  Europe experiences. I would be surprised if any of them make it into ITN. I'm surprised this story even got nominated, let alone speedy-posted. Deterence ^Talk 05:47, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]

I'm not on the ground in Oz but it sure doesn't look that insignificant to me. It's caused a great deal of traffic disruption and continues to be a top headline on the BBC. 10s of thousands of passengers are stranded; cost is 250m per day.--Johnsemlak (talk) 11:59, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Skate Canada International

Nominator's comments: A major figure skating competition --

Oppose One of 6 qualification events for a grand final, which is itself of questionable status compared to the Four Continents championship, and surely of lower status than the world championship. Perhaps "a major competition", but a long way short from "the major championship" of the season. Kevin McE (talk) 13:13, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose If this makes it into ITN while the civil war in Syria remains in ITN purgatory then I'm quitting Wikipedia. Deterence ^Talk 22:01, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per Deterence.
  talk-contribs 22:14, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Support This is not ITN/R. The Syrian uprising has been going on every day for many months so it is quite difficult to decide which events are sufficiently notable for ITN . But, a day of such heavy civilian blood-shed, that signifies the government's total rejection of even a hint of compromise, is worth bringing to the attention of Wikipedia's readers. Further more, the article is excellent and extremely well-referenced. Deterence ^Talk 02:26, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

STRONG oppose per Deterence's comments. 1. been going on every day for seven months, 2. 40 deaths in the ME would barely make it news on ITN for attacks unless the target was notable, 3. ITN i s not to POV-push which is what "worth bringing to the attention of Wikipedia's readers" is all about and wreaks off. doesnt get more of an admission of pov-pushin g that that.Lihaas (talk) 06:46, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Newsflash: "worth bringing to the attention of Wikipedia's readers" is what ITN is all about. Deterence ^Talk 21:28, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

NO, ITN is about what IN THE NEWS thats why we cite what is on top of many media outlets and making news all over.Lihaas (talk) 17:36, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• What rock have you been hiding under? The civil unrest in Syria has been a leading international news story for for weeks. Deterence ^Talk 22:17, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose per above. Mythic Writerlord (talk) 06:52, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Irish presidential election

• Wait - until vote counting is finished.--BabbaQ (talk) 18:36, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

article is great, ITNR, just wait for final result confirmed and also more prose will no doubt follow. this is a sure thing.Lihaas (talk) 06:51, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Support The result is now known and this article is over and beyond the usual expected standards. doktorb _words^deeds 09:01, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support The result has been declared in Dublin Castle and is now official. Number10a (talk) 16:04, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. The result is now official (29 October). Suggested rewrite: "
  elected as the ninth President of Ireland." Here is an appropriate picture. --Kwekubo (talk) 19:36, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Ready Extensive article with updated content. Deterence ^Talk 22:22, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Posted I've put it in as an October 27 item. Happy to be convinced to bump it higher or for another admin to do so. --
  Mkativerata (talk) 22:32, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]
  • Higgins is no longer a member of the Labour Party, having stepped down from it upon his election. --Kwekubo (talk) 23:03, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hmm... he was nominated by the party though, and it is usual practice to mention the winner's party in the blurb. How about "Labour Party candidate Michael D. Higgins..." --
      Mkativerata (talk) 23:07, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
      ]
      • I think that works. --Kwekubo (talk) 23:17, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • Done, thank you. --
          Mkativerata (talk) 23:20, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
          ]
          • Could it go higher as the result was only confirmed and announced a few hours ago on the 29th? There is a picture too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.40.192.191 (talk) 23:48, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agree: why has this been placed below the baseball and the ballet? If posting is going to be delayed until completion of counting and official announcement, rather than concession of opponents and inevitability of result, then that is the timing that determines order on ITN. Kevin McE (talk) 08:55, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've bumped it up to number 2, alongside the Qantas story as October 29. I can't seem to locally upload the picture though as it's CC BY 2.0, not CC BY 3.0. --

Mkativerata (talk) 09:13, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

Thanks. Kevin McE (talk) 09:16, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Pic posted. Not sure what's wrong with "CC BY 2.0", though. --PFHLai (talk) 15:29, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Verdict in Joanna Yeates case

 --BabbaQ (talk) 17:39, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose. Despite the totally disproportionate attention given by the press, this is in no way no more notable than the resolution of any other murder case, of which there are about 500,000 per year. Kevin McE (talk) 17:57, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

From were do you get that figure? Its like saying we shouldnt post the American presidential election results next year because there "are so many elections each year all over the world", quite hollow.--BabbaQ (talk) 18:18, 28 October 2011 (UTC)--BabbaQ (talk) 18:18, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That figure is from List of countries by intentional homicide rate. Hut 8.5 20:06, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose. Simply not that important on a global scale - or on a European scale, or even on a UK or any other scale. Ghmyrtle (talk) 18:20, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose. I suggest we develop some mechanism to speedy-reject trivial nominations like this, just as we have ITNR for obviously significant events. JimSukwutput 18:50, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is really no way or reason to blanket ban nomination topics. Some murder cases could very well be significant, such as if there were resulting international relations effects. More nominations is better than less, as we sometimes can't find anything for 30+ hours. Mamyles (talk) 19:30, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose the only reason this murder got so much coverage is that the demographic characteristics of the victim made it good for selling newspapers. I can't think of any reason why an international audience might be interested. Unlike elections the vast majority of murders are not remotely suitable for ITN (roughly 700 people a year are murdered in the UK alone). Hut 8.5 20:06, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Once again, we witness how a murder is deemed more important simply because the victim is a beautiful young white girl. That pisses me off. Deterence ^Talk 20:42, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong oppose per above, but also because this seems to have not gotten coverage outside Britain anyway. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 03:31, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Bolshoi Theatre re-opened

Nominator's comments: This must be one of the most costly theatre reconstructions in history, and that's a good chance to feature something theatre-related on ITN. GreyHood ^Talk 16:32, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Bolshoi Theatre is something that really deserves to be included. The amount and the time span are also plausible.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 16:58, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. I really don't think this requires explanation.--Johnsemlak (talk) 17:24, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Conditional support. Interesting minority topic, but the article nowhere near updated enough. Also, I would change "some" in the blurb to either "about" or "over", depending on which is more appropriate. Jenks24 (talk) 17:36, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • The blurb fixed. Soon I'll proceed with the article.. GreyHood ^Talk 17:55, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I've added a brief section about the renovation.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:57, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks, that a good start. GreyHood ^Talk 19:05, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • The article is minimally updated by now, I believe, so it could be marked [Ready] if there are no objections. I'll continue to work on the improvement meanwhile.. GreyHood ^Talk 19:59, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support and marking ready. --
  _T^C_N 20:54, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Not ready In particular, the Current status section is out of line with the new developments. That could be the source of a more meaty update. -- tariqabjotu 21:16, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've transferred most of the content of the section to the section about renovation. Marking [Ready?]. Now the structure of the article must be alright. GreyHood ^Talk 21:38, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Posted -- tariqabjotu 02:04, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Line of Succession

Nominator's comments: Important as it changes a 300 years old law and determines the future heads of state of the 16 Commonwealth realms. --Philip Stevens (talk) 10:26, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Firstly, can we please not refer to it as the "British throne". I'd normally say wait until it's done, but that could be problematic. How many separate acts are we talking? I know that most countries just defer to British legislation on this, but Canada and Australia have their own lines to legally alter (are there any more?). So since that's at least three legislative changes that are surely not going to happen simultaneously it might be better to just post the announcement. Nightw 10:52, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The wording needs to be correct. The CHOGM meeting cannot and did not announce that the laws have been changed, only that there was unanimous agreement that they will be changed. Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:59, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's what it says. Nightw 11:06, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Alter the rules" is ambiguous. Many would interpret that as altering the laws, which CHOGM can't do. Ghmyrtle (talk) 11:15, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It says "agree to alter the rules", which seems accurate. --FormerIP (talk) 11:18, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"...agree that the rules be altered..." would be more accurate. Sorry to nitpick, but "rules" is ambiguous, and neither the meeting nor the heads of government themselves have the power to alter the laws - that is up to the legislature of each country. Ghmyrtle (talk) 11:26, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Support (now) the announcement itself of the proposed rule changes is a big deal.
  talk-contribs 13:54, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Strong support A change of head of state is ITNR material: I would contend that changes to the way heads of state are appointed is if anything more notable, particularly when as here it is 16 countries and the Commonwealth in question. As for the precise wording I feel we need to avoid the temptation to be overly pedantic - there is limited information we can put in one blurb and given that space constraint "British throne" is as good a term as any. I certainly wouldn't pander to that temptation at the expense of either the main headlines - the removal of both the sex and religious discrimination elements. Crispmuncher (talk) 14:35, 28 October 2011 (UTC).[reply]
• Support changes 1000+ year tradition. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 16:35, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support interesting and important item. GreyHood ^Talk 16:37, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• COMMENT there is a ONE sentence update here and another line that was unsourced, there is not way this is updated sufficiently for posting.Lihaas (talk) 17:13, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: The wrong article is being flagged up here. The main article is Succession to the British throne - it is the principle of succession that is the newsworthy item here, not any incidental changes to the line of succession (which will not be affected immediately in any case). The problem is that the main article - Succession to the British throne - is substantially under-referenced, though the newsworthy parts of it have been and are being updated, to a much greater extent than the article on the current line of succession. Ghmyrtle (talk) 18:12, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• I endorse Ghmyrtle's suggestion, Succession to the British throne is the more relevant article. Deterence ^Talk 01:53, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Highly notable constitutional implications for all the civilised English-speaking countries. Deterence ^Talk 20:54, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• ...and 39 other countries throw their arms up in disgust...124.169.191.4 (talk) 07:40, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Relax, I was merely taking a cheeky shot at the Yanks ;-) Deterence ^Talk 21:27, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Support, but Ghmyrtle is right:
  Line of succession to the British throne does. OCNative (talk) 00:44, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]

the article is crap and porrly sourced, but the relevant section ive now merged. though it would wait till the law is passed as required, this is just a suggestion and we only pass/post such things when they are in practice as with biz mergesr and laws of notability. (DADT, etc)Lihaas (talk) 06:59, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Proposed revision: The
  Roman Catholics. Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:51, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]
  • Comment: Better link, for the reasons already discussed. The other Commonwealth realms (Australia, Canada, etc.) affected should also be mentioned, though I'm not happy about using the word "Commonwealth" twice. We should not wait until the laws are actually passed - that may well happen quietly without any dissent; the newsworthy moment is now. Flagging the article up will lead to further improvements to its text. Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:51, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So, the update is in Succession to the British throne#Reform initiated in 2011. A couple of words more wouldn't harm. And, is there any chance to summarize the blurb, as it is, it is rather lenghty for ITN. --Tone 10:36, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It could be shortened in all sorts of ways, down to "It is agreed that the rules governing the line of succession to the throne of sixteen Commonwealth realms be changed." But it's probably important that we say where the change was agreed, and what it means. I've added some quotes to the article - the serious commentary (if any) will probably emerge over coming months. Ghmyrtle (talk) 11:02, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The edits made to the articles overnight by

User:Miesianiacal have now (some of which I have now reverted to allow for further discussion) made the previous suggestion by User:Philip Stevens, or my amended suggestion, unworkable. His/her changes are not technically incorrect, but they make made the reader's job of accessing the information much harder, because the information is was no longer centralised in one place (because of the insistence that we are not talking about the "British" throne but the thrones of a number of separate countries). There is, as yet, no substantial "debate" over changing the rules - what we have is an agreement that the rules be changed. I give up. Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:57, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

• Oppose My opinion is based on four factors: 1) The blurb refers only to agreement to change the line of succession to the British throne when, in fact, more lines than just the British will have to be altered. Saying "line of succession to the British throne and that of the other Commonwealth realms" is still problematic since it both gives the UK an undeserved prominence and wrongly implies there is one throne for the UK and another for the 15 other Commonwealth realms. 2) The article
  Line of succession to the British throne is the wrong one to link to, not only for many of the aforementioned reasons, but also because the topic is better covered at the more neutral article Act of Settlement 1701#Amendment
  . 3) The amendments must first be passed by a number of parliaments and thus aren't guaranteed to be implemented. And 4) not all the Commonwealth heads of government had a say in this matter; in fact, most didn't. Only the prime ministers of the 16 Commonwealth realms did.

I would support if the blurb read something more like: "The prime ministers of the

MIESIANIACAL 02:35, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

Commenting on the above. (1) While technically correct, it would be helpful to have the information in one place as clearly discussions in the countries are very closely linked. The view that the UK has an "undeserved prominence" ignores the fact that the other countries' systems derive historically directly from the British system. (2) Matter of opinion. The article on the Act of Settlement is not necessarily "more neutral" - they are all (or should be) neutral. (3) True - point I made earlier, though the decision in principle has now been taken. The wording that the heads of government will only "attempt" to change the legislation is disingenuous, as there is no evidence that there will be any substantial opposition. (4) True, though it is also correct to state that the decision was made at the CHOGM. Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:34, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that the Commonwealth realms other than the UK derive their systems of governance from the UK is of no consequence to the fact that the UK's prominence amongst them ended in 1926; the UK-first attitude is more than eighty years out of date, and there's no reason Wikipedia should be promoting it. Along the same lines,

MIESIANIACAL 13:23, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

An alternative way of stating it would be to say that

British PM, announced the changes. Which, like it or not, is a fact. Ghmyrtle (talk) 14:40, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

It's a fact Cameron made an announcement. But he did not announce any changes, since none have been made. He was also not alone in making an announcement about the subject. --

MIESIANIACAL 19:58, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

According to Act of Settlement 1701#Amendment proposals, Cameron proposed the change at CHOGM and it was supported by the other heads of government. He made the initial announcement. Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:40, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it appears to have all been set in motion by his initiative. --

MIESIANIACAL 22:40, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

So what would be wrong with: "David Cameron, the British Prime Minister, proposes that the rules governing the line of succession to the sixteen Commonwealth realms be changed, to end male primogeniture and allow marriage to Roman Catholics." Ghmyrtle (talk) 22:47, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't immediately see anything wrong with that. I would only propose that it be tweaked slightly to read: "British Prime Minister David Cameron proposes that the rules governing the Commonwealth realms' lines of succession be changed to end male primogeniture and allow marriage to Roman Catholics." --

MIESIANIACAL 17:00, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

• Comment It would be good to hear the views of other editors on Miesianical's proposed blurb, before the issue goes completely cold. I don't like the wording, but it's not much worse than many others I see here, and if there is agreement in principle that what was said at CHOGM was important enough to go in ITN, perhaps the wording could be tweaked. Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:40, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose, as we should wait until all 16 Commonwealth realms have passed their respective amendments to the succession. PS: As for the blurb? I'm not getting involved with those -British vs Commonwealth realms are equal arguments, again. GoodDay (talk) 03:58, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The point is that the issue is newsworthy now - by the time legislation is eventually implemented, any interest in it will probably have passed. Ghmyrtle (talk) 19:16, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You've convinced me. GoodDay (talk) 22:27, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Renominating following creation of
  new article
  :

"British Prime Minister

the rules governing the Commonwealth realms' lines of royal succession be changed to end male primogeniture and allow marriage to Catholics

."

Ghmyrtle (talk) 18:27, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Support, as these proposed changes effect 16 countries simultaneously, no doubt a first in world history. GoodDay (talk) 22:27, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Tunisian elections

Nominator's comments: Support posting once the results are officially announced, blurb should be modified accordingly --

• Support But axe the "victorious" line. Meh. Wikifan^{Be nice} 09:47, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Note The results are not there yet. At least not in the article. We cannot post before that. The blurb should be a generic one: The X party, led by Y (pictured) wins plurality (seems it's not majority) in the election. --Tone 10:00, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Constituent assembly results are NOT ITNR...it should be based on its own merits, but as the first Arab Spring election i would support when results are confoirmed. Also agree with toe about PLURALITY beig npov wordingLihaas (talk) 10:28, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Results are going to be announced today. I agree that the blurb should be amended maybe something like al-Nahda wins the most seats in...

talk) 10:40, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

Appears to be ITNR as per Reuters above "It will also appoint a new interim president and government to run the country until fresh elections late next year or early in 2013." --Alcea setosa (talk) 21:38, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This is already nominated below. Suggest blurb to follow standards:

• In Tunisia, the
  revolution
  .

Although the article still needs updating. Nightw 11:49, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Support when the results are announced. Right now only 39 of 217 seats have declared and the reports that Ennahda has won are coming from Ennahda officials. The event is significant as it is the first election in the country after the overthrow of the previous regime in the Arab Spring. Hut 8.5 18:13, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment led by
  Rashid Al-Ghannushi. Therequiembellishere (talk) 18:44, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Obvious support per the above. Swarm ^X 14:47, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support with NW's revised blurb. --FormerIP (talk) 11:00, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have moved this nomination because the official results have just been announced. --FormerIP (talk) 21:19, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Support - first free and fair elections in tunisia..--BabbaQ (talk) 21:22, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support, but I prefer something more like NIGHTW's blurb. Mamyles (talk) 00:58, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

marked ready and reworded blurb to consistently use "plurality" on these sort of things and added Arab Spring context

WP:BoldlyLihaas (talk) 06:58, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

Nominator's comments: The most important meeting in Europe since World War II, according to Angela Merkel. Maybe a neater blurb would be a good thing. --FormerIP (talk) 11:15, 27 October 2011 (UTC)--[reply]

• Support. I think the blurb kind of understates how important this is. Summary from USA Today. JimSukwutput 12:04, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed it, but I'm still not sure it feels right. --FormerIP (talk) 13:42, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose - they announce that a package was agreed on, but there isn't even funding for it. We cannot say that an announcement, without any planned action, will avoid a collapse. Mamyles (talk) 14:39, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If it doesn't avoid a collapse, does that mean it is not news? Will you be more convinced if I explain how it affects the US economy? --FormerIP (talk) 15:47, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

An announcement, without any action, doesn't affect anything. At this point, the agreement could easily fall apart with no aciton taken. When it is funded and/or implemented, that will be meaningful. Mamyles (talk) 17:19, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Support This is clearly notable. Business news media have been discussing the potential for this meeting every day for over a week and the markets were hanging on the edge of their seats awaiting the announcement. This announcement is one of the big milestones in the European debt crisis that economic historians will be writing about for decades. Deterence ^Talk 20:40, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support - Stocks soared yesterday at a rate unprecedented these couple of years across the globe and may continue to do so in the coming week in response to the deal. This is unarguably notable. YuMaNuMa (talk) 21:14, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

oppose there are countless deals and bailots every few months that make "stocks soar" the DAX has had 3%+ days several times in the last 18 mths. and then what about the DOWNS that we dont post?Lihaas (talk) 07:37, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• I think you're kinda missing the point. Deterence ^Talk 08:20, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Well, its pretty obvious that the discussions weren't based around stock growth but an increase in stock shows the optimism of investors and business after an agreement was reached towards the Euro and Eurozone economy in general. YuMaNuMa (talk) 10:33, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Really? The accidental death of a motorcycle racer gets speedy-posted while the culmination of a multinational, trillion-dollar financial agreement with huge repercussions around the world for billions of people (both positive and negative) gets ignored for days? This is an excellent indication of how superficial and sensationalist the ITN community has become. No wonder the rest of Wikipedia is trying to remove ITN from the main page for its utter irrelevance. JimSukwutput 18:55, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• I have to agree with Jim Sukwutput's sentiments on this one. This topic is OBVIOUSLY extremely notable with massive economic implications for Europe and the world. It is appalling that this nomination is languishing in ITN purgatory while ITN is awash with bloody sports. Deterence ^Talk 21:00, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support for reasons Jim Sukwutput outlined above.yorkshiresky (talk) 07:17, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Strong support. DS (talk) 16:59, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can't we post this already support but this is not a minority topic. –HTD 19:29, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Added [Ready]. The update is long, detailed and very well-sourced relative to our usual posts, and we have a strong consensus. In response to HTD, I believe this qualifies as minority under the Business and Economics criterion. JimSukwutput 04:37, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Stale This event occurred on October 26. The oldest event (which, arguably, should be dropped due to the short length of the left side of the Main Page) is from October 27. It's too late for this to go on ITN. -- tariqabjotu 05:38, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Olympus resignation

Nominator's comments: Minority topic. An event involving dramatic sacking of a new whistle-blowing CEO, opaque payments by a major Japanese corporation resulted in losses of $1.2 billion (nine zeros) and that wiped 50% off its market capitalisation, and the resignation of the President to assuage shareholders. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 09:15, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Surely, this isn't ITN/R? Deterence ^Talk 09:32, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • No it isn't. I've just removed that defaulted comment. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 10:43, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• It's interesting story, but Olympus isn't really a major company having not appeared on the Fortune Global 500 since at least 2007.
  talk-contribs 16:40, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Neutral for one is that Olympus is not one of the "Big Two", which would stood a better chance, though is one of "Japan's Big Five". If one of the pair went into bankruptcy/administration/insolvency, then that's more like ITN material and you gotta be a douche to not know who is the Big Two. Donnie Park (talk) 22:17, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Let's not make sweeping assertions here, because I certainly don't know who the 'Big Two' are.
    [majestic titan] 07:42, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    • Apologies for that, my point is if that was one of the "Big Two", then it would stood a better chance. The Big Two is what they call
      Canon and Nikon, the two superbrands of photography. Its so-called that because they dominate the market share in photography, plus they dominate the marketspace for SLRs, they are always in the race to outshine over the other instead of anybody else and they bring fanboys together to argue one over the other everywhere. If you read photography news, then you will understand. A few sources to prove that the name does does exist...'Big two' continue to dominate Japan: Digital Photography Review, Best Digital Camera Manufacturers – a Graph, Big Canon launch rumoured for November. Donnie Park (talk) 10:21, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
      ]
• Support This has been rumbling away for a week or so now. This is a major business story and we don't feature enough of those from outside IT. Crispmuncher (talk) 14:50, 28 October 2011 (UTC).[reply]

[Posted] 787

Nominator's comments: I seem to recall this having been deferred to the inaugural flight at the last nomination, and that happened earlier today. --Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 13:08, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Yes the consensus for my last nomination for the plane's first delivery was to wait till it flies. Well it flew. I still believe it should have been posted earlier but better late than never i suppose. -- Ashish-g55 13:52, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Obvious support I remember how this was rejected last time pending inaugural flight. Today it has flown first commercial flight from Haneda to Hong Kong. --hydrox (talk) 14:55, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per the previous discussion. Swarm ^X 14:56, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy support per above. I've added a mention of the first flight in the article. Marking ready. Mamyles (talk) 17:26, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support given the level of attention the project received. I also marked it a minority topic since it involves business and technology.
  talk-contribs 17:29, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Not Ready Yet. I dont see refs and update is the size of the blurb. Needs a little bit more -- Ashish-g55 17:31, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • The reason for posting is mainly that the project is complete. There is not much immediate new info to post beyond a successful landing. Consensus before was to wait for the first flight before announcing. The article is B-class and quite well sourced. Mamyles (talk) 17:36, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • From the ITN page "updates that convey little or no relevant information beyond what is stated in the ITN blurb are insufficient." There is some info about the flight itself in this article which could be added.
      talk-contribs 17:45, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
      ]
      • Then perhaps we should stop delaying major events, like the maiden flight or first delivery, in anticipation for minor ones. I'm not sure info that detailed (price of the first commercial flight and first commercial passengers) is even relevant enough to the encyclopedic content of the article, being too detailed and temporal. Mamyles (talk) 17:57, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • That is ridiculous
        wiki-lawyering given that this marks the pinnacle of a long development that has previously been agreed to become eligible for ITN on the occurrence of the inaugural flight. In essence, the whole Boeing 787 Dreamliner article is the ITN submission, not just this event. --hydrox (talk) 19:25, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
        ]
        • Quite aware of that but this is still no different than when we have a death and articles get pulled from ITN from being posted too fast due to lack of updates, or the fuss we had on nobel prizes. Steve Jobs was pulled even with a whole para of updates. Not really asking a lot but atleast something more than the blurb itself should be required in the article. -- Ashish-g55 19:34, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • edit conflict There's other information in the article that could added. China Eastern Airlines canceled its order and Air New Zealand is going to seek compensation for missed deadlines [5]. Both could be included in the
          talk-contribs 19:36, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
          ]
        • New info added from suggested BBC article, inaugural flight updates now amount 3 sentences. --hydrox (talk) 19:38, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • FWIW I also added more.
          talk-contribs 19:46, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
          ]

Ok, posting. --Tone 19:44, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Should the blurb mention the 3 years worth of delays, since that's why the flight is notable.

talk-contribs 19:49, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

I think mentioning that would be worthwhile, possibly by adding "...after three years of delays." Mamyles (talk) 20:04, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Suggest image on right over current (better crop). --hydrox (talk) 20:32, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Coronal mass ejection

A recent

• The last time the sky lit-up like that, Britain was over-run by
  triffids ;-) Deterence ^Talk 01:59, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Ready But, the two linked sources go to articles about the protests in Bolivia. Sorted. Deterence ^Talk 22:43, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wait. Quoth

WP:ITNR: "In previous years, the item has been added to ITN when the new members take their seats (1 Jan on even-numbered years) rather than when the results were announced". That way we get an actual story on 1 Jan, which is otherwise one of the slowest news days on the year. Modest Genius ^talk 23:28, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

1 January whatever the year, odd or even. Kevin McE (talk) 00:40, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, you might like to update ITNR to reflect that. Modest Genius ^talk 12:40, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Support When it is official and they actually become members. Rephrase blurb for grammar and readability. Wikifan^{Be nice} 01:38, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Anyone mind if I this is closed per Modest Genius' comment? NW (Talk) 03:40, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Sounds good. Deterence ^Talk 06:00, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We dot have to hfollow OTHERCRAPEXISTS...many times , ad esp. in eng speaking countries, the election ad govt was posted when taking office. BUT if others agree despite this notice then ill withdraw nom tooLihaas (talk) 07:35, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bolivian highway cancelled

Nominator's comments: Development project cancelled following protests ~AH1 ^(discuss!) 14:20, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• This is an update on the 'Bolivian protests' column below. We did post a story for the Belo Monte Dam cancellatation in March (that project has now been ruled illegal). ~AH1 ^(discuss!) 15:25, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Very regional, almost local event. Wikifan^{Be nice} 19:56, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose per Wikifan. The protests might be notable, but the hook should be about them then, not road construction. JORGENEVSKI 21:26, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong support. The protests were massive, people were killed by the government, a cabinet minister walked out—it was nominated twice with substantial support, but the update was never done. This is the climax and resolution of the event. Blurb should be shortened though, and I think the protests were mainly about it being through indigenous lands rather than out of any motivation for conservation. Nightw 00:04, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There are several reasons why the highway cancellation, and not just the protests themselves that involve 2,000 people, are significant and quite possibly ITN-worthy:

• • This is a policy-level executive decision made by a head of state based on protesters' demands, which is very rare even in Western democracies.
  • The proposed highway would be a smaller version of the
    Serengeti Highway
    ; this is a major construction project in a nature preserve.
  • Both the highway and the protest story pass the three-continent rule, being featured in news outlets from South America, North America and Europe.
  • Some of the protests have called for the ouster of President Morales, partly for environmentally-destructive policies made by a government that was once often regarded as very pro-environment.
  • Most of the protesters are from indigenous groups, while Morales is Bolivia's first indigenous President, so this is likely to have political fallout as per news sources.
  • News item is an exemplefication of the struggle between economic expansion and environmental/indigenous rights.
  • Announcement of the cancellation came just as protesters reached the capital.

Please feel free to discuss further. ~AH1 ^(discuss!) 00:33, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Support I'm no tree-hugger, but, I can't quite believe this story has been blocked every time it has been nominated. It has resulted in worldwide coverage, (even here in New Zealand - and our news is total shit), it has resulted in the resignations of numerous government Ministers, it has pitted "new world" developers against indigenous peoples' living off their historic land, it has resulted in massive political unrest, it is one of the key battlegrounds in environmental politics, and the judicial ruling that the development was unlawful was an astonishing development in a country where public servants are generally bought-and-paid-for. Now we have the Bolivian President doing a u-turn. Deterence ^Talk 00:48, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per explanation by nominator of why it is significant. HurricaneFan25 00:58, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose. Let us not let our personal political opinions influence our judgment. JimSukwutput 02:07, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose this affects such a small amount of people it's really not too important.
  talk-contribs 02:19, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]

50,000 indigenous groups, who knows how many individuals... The protests caused several deaths, hundreds of detainments, resignation of three cabinet ministers, and the cancellation of a US$ 480-million project due to popular pressure. No wonder it's making headlines, why should we be any different? How many people does the death of a motorcar racer affect? Nightw 04:05, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm opposed to posting the motorcar accident as well and I must say I'm quite surprised that that nomination has somehow received more support than this. But it doesn't change my opinion about this. I see a lot of votes based on - to put it gently - personal political views. JimSukwutput 16:49, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Speaking for this supporter, my friends would be stunned to see how I voted on this issue (I'm so politically incorrect that I literally have the t-shirt). And I personally don't give a rat's fart about the death of a motor-cylist, (which I also supported). But, I set aside my personal preferences and politics to vote for each issue based on ITN notability. Deterence ^Talk 06:07, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Support I fully agree with supporters.--
  _T^C_N 11:47, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Oppose - I agree that this is a local issue. The violent crackdown on protestors may have been internationally significant, but cancellation of a project is not. Mamyles (talk) 12:30, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Much more significant than Wall Street protests, but still below the threshold. --hydrox (talk) 15:50, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

strong support its more than the cancellation, the protests that LED to it are just as , if not more, significa,t adn previously had LOADS of support but ot posted.Lihaas (talk) 22:29, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Support I find the supporters (particularly AH1) most convincing. Swarm ^X 14:44, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support. Just because its not front page in North America does not mean it's a local issue. This was pitting modern engineering and development against environmental, cultural and historical preservation, and the latter won the battle. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 15:14, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: the planned was scrapped on the 21st not 23rd, so it's almost stale.
  talk-contribs 15:19, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Nominator's comments: Article in development, strong earthquake hits major city. ~AH1 ^(discuss!) 14:20, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Only fifteen earthquakes of magnitude 7.0 or higher have hit Turkey in the past 100 years, and this one hit a major eastern city. Estimates of casualties are not available at this time, but range from 500 (Turkish Observatory) to 1,000 (AFP et al.) to 10,000+ (USGS PAGER). ~AH1 ^(discuss!) 14:20, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This earthquake has potentially more impact than the 2011 Sikkim earthquake (which we posted and had 111 fatalities), so please avoid oppose !votes while the article is in development. ~AH1 ^(discuss!) 14:22, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Support but wait Possibly thousands of deaths, given the shallowness and strength. Also, I'd like to note that the intensity on the MMI was X (the highest) according to PAGER, so I have no doubt that it will cause a few hundred deaths. HurricaneFan25 14:25, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Support EdwardLane (talk) 14:26, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Four hours ago, the casualty toll was 45 in Erciş alone. That is already notable in itself. ~AH1 ^(discuss!) 15:25, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Support. The article gives enough information to show that this is a big earthquake, even in aregion known for some fairly destructive tremors. Physchim62 (talk) 16:13, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support big quake with deaths. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 16:33, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Posting. --Tone 17:15, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Update - 138 deaths reported so far.
  Qwertyus 23:58, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Nominator's comments: Limited information available. ~AH1 ^(discuss!) 14:20, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Recent updates showed that the chance of debris hitting any person on Earth was close to 1-in-2,000, higher than the recent UARS probe. ~AH1 ^(discuss!) 14:20, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wait for some confirmation of where, when, and if any debris reached the ground. Modest Genius ^talk 16:10, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose since it came down over the ocean and even if anything did survive to the surface, we will almost certainly never know. Modest Genius ^talk 12:45, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose, this is the seventeenth satellite to make an uncontrolled reentry this year; there were about 23 last year. The only thing that makes this one any different is that the media have blown it out of proportion. --
  W… 16:34, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Oppose per GW_Simulations. It's just another routine case of crap falling to Earth. Deterence ^Talk 19:34, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes satellites re-enter quite ofter, but it would be very unusual if bits of it impacted the surface. Modest Genius ^talk 19:53, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose You would have thought that the mass media would change their approach after their fiasco just a few weeks ago. One can only cry wolf so many times. JimSukwutput 20:31, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[Posting] 2011 Thailand floods

Nominator's comments: Surprised the pretty well-referenced 2011 Thailand floods has never been at ITN. Ever. –HTD 12:31, 23 October 2011 (UTC) HTD 12:31, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Per "Surprised the pretty well-referenced 2011 Thailand floods has never been at ITN. Ever." -- It was nominated and turned down for ITN two weeks ago -- yet for some reason, the reaction here and now was very, very different to that of the previous nomination. Check the archives. You do not have to go back very far. - Tenebris 18:55, 24 October 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.254.157.251 (talk)

It's not just Thailand that's being affected, of course. I can say first-hand that the situation in Cambodia is pretty grim. Thailand is a lot better equipped to deal with this than its poorer neighbours, so I'm annoyed that we don't have a better 2011 Southeast Asian floods article. Nightw 13:05, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Support if this has not previously appeared in ITN. With over 300 deaths, and a third of Thailand under water, this is obviously a notable event. I had been under the impression that this event had appeared in ITN very recently. Deterence ^Talk 12:56, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support notable flood, entire occurrence had significant coverage across major television networks here in Australia.YuMaNuMa (talk) 13:01, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support it's a shame this wasn't nominated earlier, as it's definitely something we should put on the main page. But, there's no update after 10/13 given in the article, so I'm not sure this isn't stale.
  talk-contribs 14:19, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Comment. We did post this earlier in the year, but only for a few hours before it was retracted. The Thai floods are the most significant event within the larger 2011 Southeast Asian floods, and some water is about to reach the outskirts of Bangkok (I'll support when that happens). Any significant developments? ~AH1 ^(discuss!) 14:24, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I found this in the archives from earlier this month, but there's no indication it was posted (the discussion just seemed to go unnoticed, as many these days do).
    talk-contribs 14:29, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • The article which appeared earlier in the year is now at 2011 Southern Thailand floods. --Paul_012 (talk) 14:50, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I'll have to say the article has gone rather stale. For the past ten days Bangkok has been bracing for floods and doing little else. Several suburbs and even more industrial estates have been submerged, as canals are overflowing east and west. Flyovers and expressways are choked with parked cars, the main highway out of Bangkok is under water, and people have been emptying store shelves in panic buying. Global production of hard disk drives has also been hit hard as a result of damage to factories. Criticism of the government's Flood Relief Operations Centre is growing stronger every day, and the general mood right now is that flooding will soon hit downtown Bangkok, despite the government's assurances otherwise. I haven't had time to do a proper update, and given the amount of daily events it's quite hard to judge which developments are the major ones which should be included in the article. I'll say if and when flooding does hit central Bangkok, this will make international headlines and we can easily base an update for ITN on that. --Paul_012 (talk) 14:47, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Since it's already reached suburban Bangkok, can we not simply base a blurb on that. For me, that would justify why we fail to mention other countries. Nightw 23:57, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Support per above. JimSukwutput 22:47, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support thought I'd suggest a possible start point for a blurb "
  Bankok despite goverment efforts." EdwardLane (talk) 10:27, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Support per above. Mention in the blurb that 2.5 million people have been effected. Mamyles (talk) 12:34, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Changing to Support for the casualties and floodwaters reaching Bangkok, but I'm indifferent on the "number of people affected" – recent floods have often affected ten million or more. ~AH1 ^(discuss!) 14:25, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Posting. --Tone 14:31, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[Argentina posted] Election in Tunisia, Bulgaria, Argentina, and Switzerland

The results will be announced later, the articles already exist (links in P:CE). --Tone 11:37, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well in the spirit of diversity if we find ourselves facing an avalanche of election results all at once we're going to have to pick and choose. Our choices will obviously be decided by the readiness of the articles, but we should also look for significance. I don't think the

Tunisia look the best at the moment. Nightw 13:19, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

You can also consider the speed of the counting process. Not all of the results will be released at the same time. Is it a safe bet the Tunisian results wouldn't come out until later this week? –HTD 13:26, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If our motivation is to provide links to timely articles, then would a combined blurb, rather than fulfilling some perceived need to provide an announcements service on the Main Page, not suffice? Kevin McE (talk) 15:04, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Best to just post them as/when the articles get up to scratch. Combining those disparate locations together would be rather odd. Modest Genius ^talk 16:12, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment If we're going to be selective, Tunisia is an obvious choice for inclusion for some rather obvious reasons. Deterence ^Talk 19:29, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bulgarian one produced no result, it's going to a run-off round, so we can scratch that one. Swiss results starting to come through now, but the article is still way behind posting standards. Nightw 02:12, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All the results are out now except for the Tunisian ones, which are out tomorrow according to the article. Great updating by dab to the Swiss article. Apparently we're still waiting on one seat to be confirmed, then we're probably ready for posting that one. Tunisian results are out tomorrow (local time) according to the article. Argentina article needs an update. Nightw 11:44, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Argentina ready for posting:

• In Argentina, incumbent
  wins a second term as president. Nightw 12:47, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Support all finalized head of state wins. Try to spread these out over a week or so, rather than posting them all at once. Mamyles (talk) 12:59, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note that there were simultaneous legislative elections in Argentina, the results of which have not yet been announced (should probably be a blurb update when they do). Modest Genius ^talk 13:19, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Posted. --Tone 13:46, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Marco Simoncelli

Nominator's comments: Another tragic race accident, a week after Dan Wheldon. --Tone 11:37, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support, although I expect a fair amount of opposition thanks to the accident with Wheldon not too long ago. — Joseph Fox 11:50, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Support As a recent former world champion, (250cc world champion in 2008), who died while participating in the sport he is famous for, this is a notable death. Deterence ^Talk 11:57, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support At least as notable as Wheldon. I expect the Wheldon blurb will be pushed off ITN if this one is added, so there will not be two motorsports deaths in the list at the same time. /Coffeeshivers (talk) 12:01, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support, per Deterence. Though I also notice that this is the third death during a MotoGP race since 2003. Modest Genius ^talk 16:15, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose, this is starting to go overboard. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 19:01, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What's going overboard? HiLo48 (talk) 21:34, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

People seem to be supporting only because he died young. Reading through his article, he was not one of the top people in his game unlike Wheldon, who was a reigning champ at the time of his death. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 23:50, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• What are you talking about? Nobody has mentioned his age. Yours is effectively an oppose with no reason, echoed by two other Opposes echoing you further down this thread. All fairly pointless contributions. HiLo48 (talk) 07:18, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• His track-record is not Earth-shattering, but he was 250cc world champion as recently as 2008. Deterence ^Talk 00:51, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Support as a notable death; Simoncelli was a top competitor in the world's leading motorcycle racing championship. Prolog (talk) 19:28, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support notable death, and an unpleasant trend of top competitors in top world motor sports being killed for one reason or another. Should be noted as it's significant. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:38, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose per Wizardman. --
  Mkativerata (talk) 20:46, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]

That might make sense if Wizardman had actually said anything meaningful. HiLo48 (talk) 21:34, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Copying from the guidance above: "Please do not add simple "support" or "oppose" votes. Explain the reasons why you think the item meets or does not meet the ITN inclusion criteria so a consensus can be reached." — NKRI1945 (talk) 06:52, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Major drama in a major international sport. HiLo48 (talk) 21:34, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose doesn't seem to be a very significant motorcycle racer, didn't had any wins in the highest series of the sport, unlike Wheldon who had a championship and won 2 races of the most significant event in the highest level of his sport in the United States. Secret ^account 22:20, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose per Mkativerata. JimSukwutput 22:47, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Copying from the guidance above: "Please do not add simple "support" or "oppose" votes. Explain the reasons why you think the item meets or does not meet the ITN inclusion criteria so a consensus can be reached." — NKRI1945 (talk) 06:52, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Support he was at one point a World Champ in the 250cc, which seems important enough to me. note that I'm not a racing fan, so if someone can prove that the 250cc isn't a significant championship, I could reconsider.
  talk-contribs 02:24, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Support. The subject is notable because he is a former world champion in the intermediate class and now an official Honda-supported rider despite only in a privateer (non-factory) team. The incident is notable because only the third casualty in the sport since 2003 and only the second in the premier class since 2003. — NKRI1945 (talk) 06:47, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Like the death of
  Xavier Tondó. Kevin McE (talk) 09:56, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Support. More worldwide significance than Wheldon's death. Jenks24 (talk) 10:06, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Support We posted Wheldon, so why not this? Look, he was 1st and 3rd in 2008 and 2009, 6th this year; he was just 21 and 22. How can you say he was not one of the top sportspeople in motorcycly road racing and being so young? However, I oppose until someone with good english skills tries to improve the lead--
  _T^C_N 11:56, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Posted -- tariqabjotu 01:52, 25 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] New Zealand wins the Rugby World Cup final

• Ready as nominator, and now that the article has been updated. Deterence ^Talk 10:29, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Support after cleaning the article up and updating and changing tenses in parts, the article is now ready. Harrias ^talk 10:42, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Not quite ready. The match summary could use a few more references. (the criteria state three minimum, and for a sports final where there's lots of coverage it's not a lot to ask).--Johnsemlak (talk) 10:49, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Harrias has expanded the article to include a substantial amount of excellent content. Your demand for some superfluous references, for the sake of adding references, is ... superfluous. Deterence ^Talk 11:01, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's not superflouos, it's the

criteria. Though it appears to be met now.--Johnsemlak (talk) 11:14, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

• Posted, thanks. — Joseph Fox 11:52, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Saudi Crown Prince Sultan al Saud has died

Nominator's comments: A State Department official confirmed to CNN that Saudi Crown Prince Sultan al Saud has died. The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 04:13, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support As the nom. -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 04:13, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support Any immediate member of a monarchy family that died would be considerably significant. YuMaNuMa (talk) 06:05, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mild Oppose to this posting: A minister in the govt, but not head of state: unelected and not likely to have featured large in future governmental development. Strong oppose to YuMaNuMa's apparent proposal of automatic ITN coverage of the likes of people like this. Kevin McE (talk) 08:07, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations you have found one of the most extreme examples of a monarch family. I suppose I was a bit vague in my post but my intentions were pretty clear. Of course a monarch family from such a small country would be questionable in its inclusion.YuMaNuMa (talk) 12:28, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I found two actually. The word any is clear, now it is clear that you did not mean that word, which is fine. Kevin McE (talk) 09:34, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

He was

talk) 08:41, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

Support I added blurb: "

Richard-of-Earth (talk) 06:35, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

News articles seem to be unclear on it also. Could just not mention his age and say "...in New York" instead. Nightw 06:44, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support I would also go with the suggestion of leaving out the age and going with New York as well. --SMasters (talk) 06:50, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support Major event, he was virtually de facto King when the current one was away due to illness

talk) 07:28, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

Support Per above. Mythic Writerlord (talk) 09:27, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Posted. Thue | talk 10:09, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support but strongly oppose the wording 'in his 80s'. Replace it with 'in New York' or with the cause of death if known.--Johnsemlak (talk) 12:13, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Or at least spell out eighties. The current way just looks amateurish. --PlasmaTwa2 13:33, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

After posting support - The death of an heir apparent in a country with an absolute monarchy is pretty much significant however you look at it. Swarm ^X 20:06, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]