Wikipedia talk:In the news/Archive 2

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

The aircraft has not been built, thus should not be "launched". Add link to wikinews? - Amgine 06:55, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I didn't remove it because I think this might be just me, but do any other people feel that GWB reaffirming his oath is really not that big of a deal? I do agree that when he won the election it was of international significance, but we now know that he won. This just makes the start of his next term official. -Frazzydee|✍ 22:12, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Couldn't the same be said of Viktor Yushchenko's investment? -- Basileus 14:03, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Yes, it could. I agree with trying to limit news items to one per country, but this "international importance" policy is BS. --

talk

) 22:52, Jan 24, 2005 (UTC)

Maybe, maybe not. Since there was so much contraversy in Ukraine's last election, it might be more newsworthy. If there's no news of international signifiance, then I guess a leader being officially sworn into office could be there, but is IMO nothing much more than a filler. -Frazzydee|✍ 23:02, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Well, I don't see a purpose to turning this into a tit-for-tat arguement, as President Bush's inauguration is certainly old news by now. I'm not going to bother to reinsert the entry, but I nonetheless object to your reasoning. Both Bush's and Yushchenko's elections were worthy of significant international reporting, so logically both deserve comparable coverage during their inaurugration/investment even after the results were known. -- Basileus 23:50, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Correct, I don't want this to degrade into an argument. While I stand by my view that GWB's inauguration was not that important, it's old news by now, and I don't think that there was really anything better to report on anyways :). -Frazzydee|✍ 23:56, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I've added a request on the village pump suggesting that policy for this box be revised following the introduction of wikinews. If you could read and give feedback there, It would be very much appreciated. --BesigedB ^(talk) 20:50, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Why are these topics at the bottom of ITN?

 Deaths ? Sci-Tech ? Sports ? Canada ? UK & Ireland ? US

Specifically, why were these particular subjects chosen? I believe that this is what Exigentsky was addressing with his comment. -- 01:28 UTC, 29 Jan 2005 128.187.28.186

The first direct flights between mainland China and Taiwan since 1949 have been greeted by large ceremonies on both sides.

"Greeted"? Such "large ceremonies" are planned and constructed by officials and business interests to present an image, more so on the Chinese side. All Wikipedia needs to say is the flights took place and they were significant given the half-a-century ban. -- 00:27 (UTC), 30 Jan 2005 4.250.51.226

Isn't there more important news to report on than the last bit about the U.S. scandal? I've looked at all the relevant sections on yahoo news, and I've seen only one article about that scandal (and it's from USA Today, not AP). CNN.com's page doesn't even list it on the front of of their U.S. or Politics sections... ugen64 17:12, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Google news shows up 123 articles, including coverage from news, papers all over the world, including South Africa (Mail & Guardian Online), Australia (The Age), Canada (London Free Press), Taiwan (Taipei Times), the UK (The Guardian), and the Philippines (Manila Times). Seems important and of international interest to me. Neutrality^talk 20:06, Jan 30, 2005 (UTC)

Here's CNN stories on the subject: [1][2][3][4]. also, if you look at CNN's top political stories section, you'll see the video clip ("Bush: Pundit payments will stop"). Neutrality^talk 20:09, Jan 30, 2005 (UTC)

As a guideline, when a story relates to the US or the UK, I check the mainpages of CNN.com, BBC.co.uk (news section) and SMH.com.au. If all three carry the story, it is likely to be of international interest. Where none of them carry the story, I seriously doubt that it's of international interest. That all Neutrality (who is anti-Bush, I believe) has only found this on an inner page of CNN on US politics, is indicative of it not being of great international interest. This is a minor, minor item that is only relevant if you want to get at Bush. Wikipedia doesn't, so it should be removed, jguk 20:42, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

This item would, of course, be assailed as US-centric trivia and quickly removed if it did not reflect badly on George W. Bush. I'm quite sure that the result of the Australian Open is more interesting to the average Wikipedia reader than a very minor "scandal," but in any case it will probably be gone soon. — Dan | Talk 21:28, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Fair point, I've been bold and added it, jguk 21:45, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, google news gives 3,300 hits for "Australian Open" 2005, 4,520 hits for Super Bowl XXXIX... ugen64 23:05, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I have protected this template. I expect after the *major* vandalism yesterday (the goatse image was on the main page for 20 minutes), and that it's the 2nd time this has happened in 2 months, that this will be permanent - we're locking down the main page for good. See the discussion on

Today's photograph illustrates the 3rd blurb, but appears at the top of the box, which is confusing. Is this fixable? --Baylink 00:30, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Also, it doesn't seem right to have so many head shots of white males on the MainPage at the same time. I have just replaced the pic of Zurab Zhvania with the Flag of Togo. Hopefully someone can find a picture of Gnassingbé Eyadéma (with sunglasses !) and post it up there soon. -- PFHLai 00:46, 2005 Feb 6 (UTC)

Now it says that Thaksin Shinawatra is pictured, when in fact the picture is of Israel. --HunterX 06:06, 2005 Feb 9 (UTC)

Hello. I would like to ask what the policy on old suggestions is. Is it okay to clean up and remove old stuffs ? Or, are we archiving discussion on the 'candidates' ? -- PFHLai 16:42, 2005 Feb 7 (UTC)

I don't think archival is necessary, since the template itself isn't archived. —Korath (Talk) 18:01, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)

I think we should leave them there for the moment - we can decide what to do better when we see how it's used. violet/riga (t) 18:06, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

{ Continues below at

She's to be made a dame, but she isn't one yet... --80.41.215.173 21:03, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Indeed. Can someone change this?

(t) (e) (c)

21:33, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Done. --Slowking Man 22:49, Feb 8, 2005 (UTC)

I don't know how to phrase this, but we clearly can't declare that the

How about "Mahmud Abbas (or the Palestinian Authority) declares an end to the intifada"? Mark¹ 07:33, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Actually for the moment I've changed it to Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian leader, and the Prime Minister of Israel, Ariel Sharon, declare a truce in the Al-Aqsa Intifada, since I haven't found a statement from MA that the intifada is over. I'm not wedded to this wording, but if we're going to have an item on this we do need an updated article to include and bold, so we shouldn't just remove the reference to the intifada. Mark¹ 08:20, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

It wrongly says that the Prime Minister of Denmark is pictured, whereas, it is only Charles. Somebody correct this soon. Apparently admin rights are required for editing this. -- Sundar 10:10, Feb 10, 2005 (UTC)

Done ! -- PFHLai 10:18, 2005 Feb 10 (UTC)

Thanks. -- Sundar

The word ought not to be "admits" they have weapons, but "claims" they have weapons. It's a different valence and it reflects the suspicion that has long been circulated about their claims being bluffs. --Fastfission 17:08, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Seconded. "Admits" is very POV. Doops 20:18, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Agree and changed. -- Cyrius|✎ 23:58, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

States is more balanced since it doesn't reflect anythingGeni 01:21, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Why isn't the recent news about Ituri province and Togo in the In The News section? Is it because a dead american playwright is more important 80,000 people fleeing fighting? - XED.talk 20:41, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Please see

Wikipedia:In the news section on the Main Page/Candidates to suggest ITN items. — Dan | Talk

21:30, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Why? Are you seriously claiming it's as important as the New England Patriots beating the Philadelphia Eagles? - XED.talk 21:38, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

No, he's seriously claiming to be the emperor of all Candyland. You were told where to suggest material for the section. How you interpreted that as a value judgement of a particular item is beyond rational comprehension. -- Cyrius|✎ 22:40, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

It should be noted Xed didn't take your advice, and seems to prefer complaining to actually doing something. --Golbez 23:18, Feb 12, 2005 (UTC)

What would be the point? The news section is controlled by people who think the New England Patriots are more important. - XED.talk 12:53, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

You haven't tried. See wikipedia:Assume good faith. violet/riga (t) 13:01, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I point out Jimbo's recent comments on the mailing list regarding a related issue, in which he noted that "Or, imagine that a particular battle in Europe during World War II had some unusual but local impact on Japan. We might quite naturally imagine that the Japanese article _without bias_ but _with an eye towards the needs and interests of the local audience_ would have a different degree of detail on that topic than say en or fr or de." I take this to mean that news that is of greater cultural interest to English speakers - Arthur Miller's death, for example, or the Superbowl - would be given preference over things that are not of greater cultural interest. Snowspinner 05:53, Feb 14, 2005 (UTC)

Just wanna point out that the New England Patriots beating the Philadelphia Eagles was a big news that day, and it was promptly moved down the list on ITN when more important events took place and relevant and updated Wikipages became available. This was already discussed at

Saudi Arabia municipal elections, 2005, the first elections held in Saudi Arabia since the 1960s, being off ITN ? -- PFHLai

01:51, 2005 Feb 14 (UTC)

The candidates page is getting a bit long, and I was thinking of removing the old stuff, since I don't think it needs archiving - ITN items are not archived, so these shouldn't be either. I've mentioned it here first to see if anyone disagrees. — Dan | Talk 02:43, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I'm not too sure. The page contains discussion not just news entries and may therefore be worthwhile archiving. violet/riga (t) 10:30, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

why? there is always the page history. plus, we have current events. Not that I mind archiving, if someone volunteers to do it, but it's just another task added to those piling up already.

dab (ᛏ)

07:07, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

• It would be nice to archive, at least for now, so discussions on why something should/shouldn't be included there are easily accessible if needed. Mgm|^(talk) 13:19, Mar 29, 2005 (UTC)

Shows a 20, ALT tag says 10... Kiand 03:13, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The In The News section of the front page read: "An earthquake...hits the city of Zarand...leaving at least 546 dead and more than 1000 dead" (emphasis added). I assume this is a typo, and should read "1000 injured". Since I'm not an admin, could someone else please correct? Eric Herboso 01:37, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Never mind -- it was corrected shortly before I made this comment. I should have refreshed my browser. Eric Herboso 01:39, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The links to country-specific current events (Canada ? EU ? Hong Kong and Macao ? India ? UK & Ireland ? U.S.) are cluttering up the template; therefore, I suggest they should be consolidated into a single link to "Country-specific events" or something like that. Alternatively, they could all be linked at the top of the main

And along those same lines, what are the selection criteria for the countries/regions listed there? What the heck is Hong Kong and Macao doing there? I'm interested in what's happening in Hong Kong, but does this qualify as one of the six most important sources of current events worldwide? - Jpo 00:11, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)

Splitting into different countries seems to be a mistake to me anyway. I regularly look at the main page but not the UK-specific one. Remove them all on the ITN template I say - "More current events..." is good enough to cover it all. violet/riga (t) 00:20, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

What's with the sequence of items in the ITN section? I thought that newer items were supposed to be added to the top, pushing older items off the bottom of the list. But today the BTK arrest story has (re)appeared, displacing the Pope from the top of the list and leaving the Iran earthquake (now six days old) and the Spanish approval of the European Constitution (over a week old) on the list. The pace of updates to this section has slowed to a disturbingly low level anyway over the last couple weeks (maybe we should rename it "Out of the News"), and not following a rational sequencing order just makes the problem worse. - Jpo 05:34, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)

In the news will generally not be today or yesterdays news (at least that old) unless it's a REALLY important breaking event being covered properly on Wikipedia. This is because generally news must first go on Current Events, the relevant articles are updated, and the information must be of an appropriate quality to put on ITN.

Many regular news outlets just use filler material or local stuff from day to day when there is no major international events. We don't. ITN isn't even really a news outlet - it's to show Wikipedia articles being updated with the latest happenings.

zoney ♣ talk 12:37, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Well, I guess I disagree with that general approach. My experience has been that events of major international importance generally are covered properly on Wikipedia, and deserve coverage in the "In the News" section. I understand the reservations of many people who don't agree with putting ITN on the Main Page, but currently we do have this section there, and it should be maintained properly. In the last week, we've had several events of international importance, or at least interest: Bush's

Spanish EU referendum (now eight(!) days old). Can't we at least get new items to show up at the top of the list and push the musty older items off the bottom? - Jpo

14:07, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)

And just now, the

Spanish referendum has somehow managed to muscle its way back to the top of the list! Are they still voting? Is this really the most important thing that has happened in the world in the last eight days? - Jpo

14:17, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)

The BTK item has been on ITN and removed - so it is a matter of dispute (some, like myself, consider it not of international importance or (apart from low-brow news outlets) interest). The Pope item is also disputed, as some consider the hullabaloo quite absurd (I'm not supporting that, I think it should be in ITN, but I am merely pointing out why it isn't right now).

So in summary - there are few items people (admins) can agree on being on ITN at the moment.

To pre-empt your unhappiness at this, yes, I consider the malarky that's resulted in 8 day old news on ITN quite absurd. I'm not defending that (even though I kind of understand why it is).

zoney ♣ talk 18:20, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

A reference to Halle Berry's Golden Raspberry award has been added to the Academy Awards item in the ITN section. Is this really of international interest or importance? - Jpo 14:13, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)

Agreed. An admin should remove it immediately.

Talk-o to Taco

16:46, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)

Since when is this protected? Oh well - at the moment, we have a 'pictured right' text about a suspected killer, while the actual picture on the right is about a book. I suggest fixin'. -- Kizor 15:14, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Although technically accurate, the wording is higly misleading. It gives the impression thatr Spain is the first county to ratify the constitution at all. In fact, Spain is the first country to ratify the constitution in a referendum

Although technically accurate, the wording is higly misleading. It gives the impression thatr Spain is the first county to ratify the constitution at all. In fact, Spain is the first country to ratify the constitution in a referendum

The

The bias against American news items on ITN is very disappointing sometimes. Rhobite 01:52, Mar 1, 2005 (UTC)

But such paranoia is far worse. violet/riga (t) 01:55, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I am happy to explain. The item is not four days old. It is a two-day old story that is ongoing as we speak. It is of international importance, to criminologists and the general public all over the world. See, for example, the 2,930 articles on BTK (and that's just the latest developments). This includs extensive coverage from all around the world: England ([5], [6]), Scotland (The Scotsman), Australia (Daily Telegraph, The Age), Canada ([7], [8]), Taiwan (Taipei Times). Might I also remind everyone that we heard no complaints from American Wikipedians when the British fox-hunting ban or Charles' marriage was on ITN for several days? Neutrality^talk 02:00, Mar 1, 2005 (UTC)

Using Google News to show the importance could be applied to "London conference must bring return to roadmap: Abbas" with 2739. While I accept that it might be of interest to criminologists I think you'd be hard pushed to find that it interests the general public outside of the US. It's a small story and has not even featured on the news in the UK - I'd bet that's the same for most other countries. As for the fox hunting well I agreed that it should not be there, and Camilla/Charles is of interest because of the worldwide fascination with Diana.

Using the defense of anti-US bias is not appropriate - I'm just removing a story I think it irrelevant and unimportant and don't really care whether its US, Irish or Danish. violet/riga (t) 02:10, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I don't know if bias against American news items is your motive, but this is an appropriate time to broach the subject. American stories are quickly removed from this page while minor "international interest" stories stay for many days. It seems that the only events in America which are worthy of ITN are award shows and sporting events. Rhobite 02:20, Mar 1, 2005 (UTC)

From what I see the US stories are up there quite a bit, and may sometimes involve an edit war but there are enough American admins to win out on that - I can't revert the changes again (3RR) even though Neutrality didn't show the courtesy of waiting for my reply. If you want an American story then perhaps I could suggest Michael Jackson. I actually find it a little offensive when there are such accusations of bias - many of us are able to contribute to this place without letting our POV show. violet/riga (t) 02:33, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Could you please explain why you removed the BTK story and didn't replace it with anything? In other words, there were four items, and you arbitrarily removed one of them (even though there was plenty of room for it). I like to assume good faith, but I'm have trouble ascribing a motive to this. Forgive me for saying so, but this does seem to be pointless anti-American bias. Neutrality^talk 02:28, Mar 1, 2005 (UTC)

Because there wasn't an appropriate replacement that was a) recent and b) updated. There is no rule as to the required number of ITN items and I could actually start shouting pro-US bias about it being up there. However, I agree that there is some level of interest in the story, albeit virtually exclusively in parts of the US, and can see why you think it should be there. As I can't revert it I'll have to accept its inclusion. violet/riga (t) 02:33, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

We shall have to agree to disagree, then. I respect you as a user, and I hope that there is no bad feelings between us. Neutrality^talk 02:35, Mar 1, 2005 (UTC)

Of course not - I understand that there are people with anti-US agendas and can understand your defensive stance and your side of the argument on this one. violet/riga (t) 02:38, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Violet: It takes far more justification to destroy something than to create something. ITN is an example of editorial value. i.e. it's valuable not because it adds content, but because it filters a large selection of content so that only the most important stories are presented to the viewer. Bearing these premises in mind, it's nigh impossible to justify removing an entry without adding another. The judgment call required for ITN is not an absolute one, it is always, and necessarily a relative one. The

BTK Killer story may well be considered less important than another current story, but there's no way it could be considered less important than no story. nsh

02:43, Mar 1, 2005 (UTC)

At the moment, these stories are presumably all first heard about from mainstream news organisations, which tend to have bias towards the country in which they are based. I would suggest that a better guide as to the suitability of story being mentioned here is whether it is on the front page of a majority of "international" news sites such as reuters, bbc, cnn, google, nyt, et al. At the moment the BTK story does not pass that test, plenty of others do. Having said that, removing a story deemed not relevant without replacing it with one that is, is not likely to be popular. hypnox 02:48, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I have never heard of the

BTK killer till I read the Wikipage yesterday. I suppose if the crimes can be described in more detail there, it may help us (the uninitiated) understand why this is a big news item worthy of a spot on ITN. (e.g. If BTK is in the league of Charles Manson and Jeffrey Dahmer, please indicate so on that page.) So far, it's just another 'cold case' to me. And it makes me wonder if it's been 'slow news days' this past weekend in the US, with nothing serious happening except the Oscars ..... -- PFHLai

08:58, 2005 Mar 1 (UTC)

The large-scale hysteria of such news items is nothing more than pandering to the public's horrified fascination anyways. Not only is it local (US) news, but it wouldn't even be worthy of a US ITN section but for the media there. zoney ♣ talk 10:47, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The reason for the existence of ITN is to provide pointers to Wikipedia articles that have something relevant to say about items of international interest currently in the news. The guidelines at the top of this page say

For example, a news item should first be listed on current events, then the article on the subject of that news item should be updated to reflect a current event. Then that item can be placed on Template:In the news.

The BTK article meets all of these standards. The article was listed on Current Events and extensively updated to reflect ongoing events. And the international interest was clear. Over the weekend, the story was linked on the front page of major online newspapers in England, Taiwan, and Australia, among others. On Sunday, the story had more references on the front page of news.google.com than any other story.

While the BTK item clearly meets the standards for ITN, there are other items currently listed that do not. For example, the (excessively) lengthy item on the Palestinian prisoners currently listed second contains links to

Palestinian prisoners is also bolded, which is formatting that is specifically supposed to be reserved for an article that has been updated to reflect the events described in ITN). No one would question the international importance and interest of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but it's amusing to see the feathers fly over a news item like the BTK story, when no attention is paid to other stories that clearly don't meet our self-determined standards for ITN. - Jpo

15:35, Mar 1, 2005 (UTC)

If you're using news.google.com, remember that by default it shows American news first - if you want to check a story's international interest in the English-language press you need to check the Australian, Canadian English, Indian, New Zealand, and UK versions too, and just to be safe, check the foreign-language versions too -- currently the Argentinian and Spanish versions are leading on Princess

Letizia's alleged anorexia, the Austrian version's leading with a major road accident, etc. ... -- Arwel

02:48, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The unqualified item on "Palestinian prisoners" (not updated since Feb.9th !!!???) is now off ITN. Thank you, Jpo, for identifying another problematic item. -- PFHLai 22:06, 2005 Mar 1 (UTC)

Can someone please explain to me why this story deserves to be on the main page? How is this of international intrest? I read the entire article and i still could muster up no interest what-so-ever. Unless someone edits it in a way that makes the story interesting, it should be removed right away. Gkhan 00:08, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)

I'm taking the photo of Ernst Zündel off the MainPage and replaced it with the Flag of Lebanon for now. The photo belongs to AP, not sure if it's in public domain. Does anyone have a better picture for ITN, please ? -- PFHLai 03:44, 2005 Mar 2 (UTC)

Shouldn't it be honorary Knight Commander, since he's not a British or Commonwealth citizen? Ddye 21:43, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Yes it should, I've changed it. Rje 23:40, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)

The Supreme Court is not "(pictured right)" anymore.

The protection of the main page templates really sucks, but I suppose it's better than goatse as a greeting. --Andrew 22:17, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)

a ceremony at the Buckingham Palace. Buckingham Palace doesn't take a definite article. Lose the "the". --Dtcdthingy 01:49, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for pointing that out. -- PFHLai 02:23, 2005 Mar 3 (UTC)

Sorry, folks, I've just updated ITN but I couldn't find an appropriate PD image. Please help find one and put one up if you can. Thanks. -- PFHLai 12:43, 2005 Mar 4 (UTC)

I posted 'Image:Floresiensis.jpg' (right), then I have to rollback my own edit. Turns out that

February 2005. (Maybe I am blind ? working on a cached version ?) Anyway, the item is now hidden. -- PFHLai

23:20, 2005 Mar 4 (UTC)

The item was in most newspapers today (in the UK at least) - I can find you Guardian and BBC pieces if you so request. This is todays news so I will be returning it. --Oldak Quill 23:58, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Please update

Current events. Thanks. -- PFHLai

00:28, 2005 Mar 5 (UTC)

Current events is still not updated. What the .... Fine. I'll do it myself. I'll also re-post 'Image:Floresiensis.jpg' back on ITN ..... Hope everyone is happy .... -- PFHLai

09:33, 2005 Mar 5 (UTC)

The U.S. occupation forces in Iraq killed Nicola Calipari who managed to rescue kidnapped journalist Giuliana Sgrena. This is important news. http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/international/AP-Iraq.html -- Toytoy 23:59, Mar 4, 2005 (UTC)

Please expand the stubs. Thanks. -- PFHLai 00:28, 2005 Mar 5 (UTC)

I see that while

Wikipedia:In the news section on the Main Page/Candidates. Is there a Wikipage on all those kidnapping in Iraq in the past few years ? Such a page would be better to feature on ITN, I suppose. Please be reminded that ITN is not a news service, but a section on the MainPage to showcase updated articles in Wikipedia. And, it's much better to feature detailed and nicely formatted articles on the MainPage than to feature stubs. -- PFHLai

10:05, 2005 Mar 5 (UTC)

Tung Chee-hwa is only "to be about to resign". You may want to hold this news and run the Giuliana Sgrena news. -- Toytoy 00:10, Mar 5, 2005 (UTC)

No, the uncertainty is part of the big news in the Far East. Here's a better reason to take off this HK item : It's now old news. -- PFHLai 00:36, 2005 Mar 5 (UTC)

The 1,049 mile

Thanks for the suggestion. Please post it at

Iditarod, by the way, User:68.81.231.127. :-) -- PFHLai

23:15, 2005 Mar 5 (UTC)

Thanks. I wasn't sure if it needed more confirmation (BTW, I added it to

current sports events yesterday. 68.81.231.127

23:41, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Oh, not in the template part? Ok, that part of the instructions confused me. 68.81.231.127 00:19, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

On the In the News section:

Kidnapped Italian journalist Giuliana Sgrena is released from captivity in Iraq. Nicola Calipari, who helped secure her release, dies on their way to Baghdad International Airport.

So who done it? -- Toytoy 07:02, Mar 8, 2005 (UTC)

I posted it on ITN. I didn't do the shooting, okay ?  :-) -- PFHLai 07:10, 2005 Mar 8 (UTC)

If you say "Nicola Calipari ... dies on their way to Baghdad International Airport." It could mean Calipari was killed by Joseph Stalin, tuberculosis, the Powerpuff Girls, a dinosaur-erasing-comet or a 500-ft-tall-killer-tomato on their way to the airport! This is not the proper way to brief a long story. -- Toytoy 08:10, Mar 8, 2005 (UTC)

Very funny, Toytoy .... I asked yesterday at

Wikipedia:In the news section on the Main Page/Candidates if someone could draft the line, and got no response ..... I suppose I could mention the gun-shot wound.... If you have the "proper way", please post your suggestion there. Thanks. (Sorry, my friend, another admin will have to take care of this. I'm getting offline.) -- PFHLai

10:21, 2005 Mar 8 (UTC)

I've changed this to add the all-important fact that US soldiers shot and killed him. The fact is undisputed, although the context and why it happened *is* unclear/disputed. zoney ♣ talk 11:10, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for taking over, Zoney. I am not as certain about who shot Calipari, though. The shooter(s) isn't identified yet. It could still be the "Powerpuff Girls" or "Joseph Stalin" in stolen uniforms..... (just kidding...) :-P -- PFHLai 01:25, 2005 Mar 9 (UTC)

Yes, it was U.S. soldiers - that's why they made an official apology to the Italian PM. This has been in the news nearly from the beginning. What isn't known is why it happened (ranging from "the car was speeding" (U.S.) to "deliberate targetting" (the journalist) to "we don't know why but don't believe the U.S. account" (Italians)).

In any case, the news item should be replaced by the funeral (even that is old news now) or another news item. zoney ♣ talk 10:10, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Please update the entry for Cyclone Ingrid from category 5 to 3. --Zigger 15:51, 2005 Mar 9 (UTC)

Updated. It's category 1 now ... -- PFHLai 17:03, 2005 Mar 10 (UTC)

Bless you, would someone be to kind as to replace the image on the main page with this one.

The wording here is really awkward and unclear. The Anti-Secession Law of the People's Republic of China, a law aimed at resolving the issue of Taiwan, is passed and enters into force. Not only is it passive voice, it's needlessly wordy and falls over itself avoiding controversy. Putting it the way it is now sounds like an embassy press release. The law itself isn't going to resolve this -- it's actually raising the stakes and complicating the political situation for Taiwan. Why not just China ratifies an Anti-Secession Law aimed at preventing Taiwan from declaring independence. --Dhartung | Talk 19:57, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Absolutely agree. I'll try to find a better wording. Kosebamse 20:23, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Now on ITN:

Norwegian musher Robert Sørlie wins the 33rd Iditarod with a time of 9 days, 18 hours, 39 minutes and 31 seconds.

Is this really relevant? ?

The

Iditarod is an annual cultural and sports event, celebrating life in the Arctics. It may not be relevant to those who live in places where it never snows, but .... It was in the newspapers, the pages were very well updated (probably the best updated of all items currently in ITN), and it's better to have this as the bottom item than a 3-day old stale item. -- PFHLai

05:16, 2005 Mar 18 (UTC)

Yes, if you read 'In the news' carefully you will see what has happened, but surely the image should be better aligned with its headline. -- Chris j wood 14:21, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Image:Prince Albert of Monaco.jpg on MP needs to be protected ASAP.

Nothing wrong with an April Fool's Joke, but can we have an image that relates to some real news? Brianjd | Why restrict HTML? | 05:22, 2005 Apr 1 (UTC)

Oh, c'mon! That's funny. One day won't hurt anyone, and it just generates interest in the project. Besides, you should have seen what they were going to use for the main article, till it got scotched by Raul654! - Ta bu shi da yu 07:24, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

ok, it's 11:25 UTC now; I suggest we leave the takeover story up for another 35 minutes, and then change back to normal (see

Um...exactly why is an image showing the earth's internal composition the best illustration we have for a report on ecosystem health? While not entirely pointless, surely there must be something more relevant. Doops 17:39, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Please remove the false news item. --Pjacobi 18:41, 2005 Apr 1 (UTC)

That was never claimed and it would appear that italian news agencies are repoting that he is (I know there have been a lot of rumors though). we won't know one way or the other untill the vatican says anythingGeni 18:56, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Any chance of a line on the

It has been sitting on the Candidates' page for so long ... probably too late now .... -- 199.71.174.100 01:42, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Pope John Paul II#Recent health problems to Pope John Paul II#Serious health problems. – Kpalion (talk) 07:35, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)

It should say 21:37, not 9:37PM, because that common in CET timezone.

Are we allowed to use AP photos, such as Image:Jalal Talabani.jpg, on ITN ? Cool...  :-) Maybe we should show the Iraqi flag for the time being. -- 199.71.174.100 02:01, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• I've replaced it with a crop from a free photo from the U.S. Department of Agriculture.--Pharos 03:17, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Nicely done. Thanks. -- 199.71.174.100 03:55, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC) P.S. Dept. of Agriculture ? Hmmm... interesting ....

• Yes, see the full image at Image:Talabani-usda.jpg.--Pharos 04:14, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

"In the news" should link to the separate article about the

With regard to Camilla, please change the word "mistress" to "lover" or "companion" some other less POV term. "Mistress" has negative connotations; moreover, it is sexist and out-of-date in the 21st century. Thanks. Doops 12:40, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The problem is wider than just "In the news" page and concerns Wikipedia practice as a whole -- when we don't even use the words "Mr" or "Ms" to refer to normal citizens, (or for that matter when we don't use PBUH to talk about Muhammad) I find it annoying and POVed in the extreme to use the various honorifics in front of the names of kings -- and for that matter especially in front of British kings.

I wonder if there were a newspiece about Osama Bin Laden -- would people accept to refer him by whatever honorifics he or Al Qaeda may use to refer to him?

The purpose of any honorifics are to honor the people they are referring to. The purpose of Wikipedia is to neither honour nor to dishonour said people, it's merely to report facts about them. I'd have no problem at all to say that now Camilla Parker Bowles is knows as "HRH The Duchess of Cornwall", because that's an actual factual newspiece, the change in her title, and how she'll now be referred to by the British followers of protocol. But since when has the British royal protocol become Wikipedia's own protocol to be used when simply referring to people?

I don't accept as NPOV the holiness of the Pope, the eminence of Cardinal Ratzinger, the serenity of Prince Albert, or the highness of Charles. I don't think that wikipedia should refer to them with such honorifics. Mention that they're *called* such by some people, yes ofcourse, but not call them such ourselves.

Does anyone know if a discussion concerning Wikipedia's usage of such honorifics has already taken place? This issue is important enough, widespread across enough articles, that I think a specific policy should be instituted about this if one hasn't already. I'd like a poll on the issue if one hasn't already taken place. Aris Katsaris 14:05, Apr 11, 2005 (UTC)

Yes, there have been plenty of discussions. Essentially usage of honorifics is quite natural in certain contexts - to have a policy to avoid them all would certainly be POV. Similarly, honorifics are not always used - to have a policy to always use them would also be POV. So we end up sometimes using them, sometimes not - very much like real life - which is pretty much what we want to mimic, jguk 22:26, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Probably this should be raised at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style. -- Sundar (talk · contribs) 04:43, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC)

I agree. "HRH The Prince Charles" should not be used when

We'd be better off saying "HRH The Prince of Wales". He doesn't really tend to get called "Charles, Prince of Wales" - we only use that formulation in WP to distinguish him from past Princes of Wales, jguk 19:11, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Is it a good idea to place a link to

How about in the Other current events box between the calendar and the main pink box, replacing the now-redundant Wikinews link? —Korath (Talk) 16:50, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)