Wikipedia talk:In the news/Archive 26

Archive 20

←

Archive 24

Archive 25

Archive 26

Archive 27

Archive 28

→

Archive 30

May day protests

We have the headline: "Police clash with protesters across the world as traditional May Day marches turn violent." What it doesn't say, and it really should say is why they're protesting. The lead of the article says they're a "protest at the current global economic crisis." That should be in the headline on the main page as well. -Oreo Priest ^talk 21:09, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Rephrased. --BorgQueen (talk) 21:14, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Error - Car attack on Dutch royal family

Hello,

Seven, not six people, including the driver, were killed in the attack. I don't know if the number 'six' is in the portal because it hasn't been updated or because the driver maybe doens't count, but I just wanted to point this out. Greetings, 77.167.224.101 (talk) 22:08, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Boxing

I don't know about you, but to me, the current blurb on boxing utterly fails the criterion of "international import, or at least interest". How is this important? Punkmorten (talk) 10:41, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Go ask Auntie Beeb. –Howard the Duck 14:02, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

My understanding is this is "the fight of the year" in boxing. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 14:06, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Howard, I'm continually astounded at how you come to rely so much on Google and the BBC for determining the importance of sports... why then do you oppose the snooker since the BBC is giving it such extensive coverage? --candle•wicke 15:24, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

I also use a variety of other sources. I mostly use the Beeb if it's non-American news. –Howard the Duck 15:35, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

That is understandable but I sense a mass contradiction there. You usually use a complex rationale involving television statistics, population, google hits, etc. but, whilst I agree the BBC is useful, it is not the world outside America. What I mean is that America ought not to be represented by multiple sources and the rest of the world by the BBC alone. --candle•wicke 19:21, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

I would've probably lashed out some more stats but Punkmorten didn't pursue. Anyway, it doesn't really matter now since sports selection is now more liberal; I presume the upcoming Juan Manuel Marquez-Floyd Mayweather, Jr. fight will be added. –Howard the Duck 19:43, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Ambassador recall from Guinea

There is a discussion going on at the talk page of Foreign relations of Guinea regarding the accuracy of the point that we have here. Very few news outlets seem to have picked up this story, and I smell a rat. Apart from one AP story that's only been reprinted in a couple of places as far as I can tell, it seems that nobody is talking about this. Given that the story is now two days old, it seems a bit sus that nobody has picked it up. Might it be worth scrubbing it from the template for awhile while we investigate to see if it's true? Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 12:19, 8 May 2009 (UTC).

As far as I can see, the story is true. I think the lack of English-language response is simply that people dont't pay much attention to Guinea, as well as the fact that the move seems so strange that no-one really knows what it means. I found several links from French-language sources [1], [2], [3], [4], including this one from a Senegalese newspaper (quoting AFP). Several of the sources give the names of the thirty ambassadors and their functions and/or other information not included in the press agency reports. I haven't been able to find any denial of the recalls, either by press agencies or other French-language sources, so I think we have to assume that the story is true. Physchim62 (talk) 18:09, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

I don't see much reporting on the 2009 Brazilian floods and mudslides in the news either? Should we take that off when we're on the topic of removing items and replace it with the Californian bushfires since it seems to be getting more coverage? --candle•wicke 18:11, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Blackwater Worldwide?

This is seriously worthy of Wikipedia's front page? The US government swapping private contractors? Who cares? --Spangineer^ws (háblame) 04:23, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Iraqis care, obviously, as well as all non-Iraqis who protest over their 2007 massacre of civilians. The company has been involved in a number of high-profile international controversies, and the founder had to attend a U.S. congressional hearing for its conduct in both Iraq and Afghanistan. The post-war Iraqi government made numerous attempts to get rid of it and it is involved in the counter-narcotics program in Afghanistan. It acquired such a notoriety in Iraq that it had to change the name. I would say it is reasonable to conclude that the long-waited removal of this "private contractor" is indeed worthy of Main Page. --BorgQueen (talk) 04:47, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

And also I would like to point out many people who watched Jericho (TV series), a 2006 post-apocalyptic drama television series, and the Current Season of 24 (TV series) can actually learn more about the facts which they are based on, esp. Private Military Contractors (which I did not know was even existed). --33rogers (talk) 06:09, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

U.S. Supreme Court (continued from candidates page)

The question is whether we should include the nomination of David Souter's replacement on the US Supreme Court when it happens.

In my opinion, the nomination of a new SCOTUS (Supreme Court of the US) justice is just what ITN is for. The nominee will be of huge interest, yet will be little known to most people. Thousands of people will come to Wikipedia looking for background information on the nominee. ITN should be there to point people in the right direction.

Why will so many people be so interested in Souter's replacement? Because the nomination of a SCOTUS justice is a huge event in American politics. The Supreme Court leads one of the three equal branches of the US government and has a huge impact -- much larger than the top court of a country with a civil law system or an unwritten constitution. In my mother's lifetime, SCOTUS has legalized abortion and birth control; banned school segregation and school-led prayer; extended anti-discrimination laws to almost all businesses; established Miranda rights, the exclusionary rule, the doctrine of actual malice in libel cases and that of imminent lawless action in free-speech cases; allowed The New York Times to print the Pentagon papers; and, lest we forget, decided the 2000 presidential election -- among many, many other things.

There are only nine SCOTUS justices, and they serve until they retire or die, so Souter's replacement may be on the court until 2040. A SCOTUS vacancy happens only once every few years.

Now the question arises: Would we include on ITN the nomination of an equivalent official in other countries? It's hard to judge, because in most other countries, the Supreme Court, if it exists, isn't as big of a deal. But I would certainly advocate the inclusion of the nomination of a UK official who is as important in the UK as Souter's replacement will be in the US. Canada or Australia? Maybe, assuming it wouldn't lead to a glut of Canadian or Australian ITN entries. San Marino or Burkina Faso? No -- there just aren't as many Wikipedia users interested in the judiciaries of those countries.

I'm consistently exasperated by all of this hand-wringing over whether big-time news events are ITN material. It's led us to the positively bizarre situation where an election in Andorra (pop. 68,000) goes up but not the landmark appointment of Hillary Clinton as secretary of state of the US (pop. 300,000,000 English speakers). As long as we're going to call this feature "In the News," it ought to reflect what's actually in the news for most of the users of the English Wikipedia, who tend to live in the US (about half of them) or other English-speaking countries. That doesn't mean that we should ignore what happens elsewhere. On the contrary -- we should strive for geographic diversity. But you shouldn't say, "I'm not going to support this US event because we wouldn't have it up if it happened in Djibouti." When it comes to political events, not all countries are equal. Population matters, and so does language. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 02:16, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

I'll wait if this gets to be placed prominently on most news websites if it happens. –Howard the Duck 02:54, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

I disagree. San Marino and Burkina Faso are worthwhile and I would strive to have them featured at ITN if possible. Perceived smallness or lack of interest by readers is no reason to ignore a country. How exactly do you define Clinton as landmark? You seem to misunderstand the In the news section which worries me somewhat. Perhaps it ought to be renamed to avoid these problems. Wikipedia isn't a news service designed to appease the areas with the most readers. If that were the case we would have many African countries with large populations being ignored entirely. You seem to be advocating the omission of previous ITNs such as the West African meningitis outbreak, the Bolivian dengue fever epidemic, the Kenyan oil spill or the floods in Angola and Naimibia because these weren't exactly heavily reported on in the western media and therefore not of interest to the majority of readers. Is the appointment of a US Secretary of State or retirement of a US Supreme Court judge really more significant than these events which collectively result in hundreds of thousands of deaths? Your assessment of what should be "In the news" would seem to indicate that this is the case... perhaps it is time to rename the section? The title could replace a word like "news" with a word like "events". But if language matters it is time for more sports events from neglected speakers of the English language, such as New Zealand or Ireland. --candle•wicke 09:09, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

We mostly follow English-language media. –Howard the Duck 11:57, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

I have in the past recommended changing the name of ITN to something like "From far and wide" to better reflect its contents. That said, however, I think you misunderstand my argument. I am very much in favor of geographic diversity on ITN. A cyclone that kills 25,000 people in Bangladesh should get as much play as a hurricane that kills 25,000 people in the US. But I also believe that an important political event in the US or UK should go up even if the equivalent in San Marino would not go up. That's because the event in the US or UK would affect more people and be of interest to more Wikipedia users -- which should be a consideration, if not the only consideration. Regarding Hillary Clinton, it was a landmark event because secretary of state of the US is such a hugely important position, for the US and for the world, and because Hillary Clinton is such a towering figure in American politics and has been for nearly 20 years. Her appointment also united the two sides of the Democratic Party -- her supporters and Obama's. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 14:01, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

I think Hillary's or any other cabinet appointment shouldn't be here either. –Howard the Duck 14:38, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm confused by your statement. You're saying because domesticly Hillary is a towering figure and Secretary of State is a vitally important significant position (which may or may not be true, but let's not go there) international that means her appointment was a landmark event? Sorry but it seems to me your putting 2 and 2 together and getting not 5 but 1000 Nil Einne (talk) 06:59, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

You had me until the fifth paragraph.

I agree that U.S. topics sometimes are unfairly excluded (typically because of the argument that the United States is "only one country," despite the fact that its population is equal to 61% of the entire European Union), but I see no valid reason to discriminate against smaller nations. If the requisite article expansion/creation occurs (and that's a big "if"), we should be delighted to update ITN accordingly. (It isn't as though we've been cycling through items at too fast a pace.) —David Levy 15:06, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

The best way on countering bias, is not by limiting potential items but by expanding it, just like in articles, instead of deleting items to offset bias, add more items to introduce diversity. –Howard the Duck 16:17, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. I've seen people opine that American event "Z" shouldn't be included because comparable events "X" and "Y" from elsewhere in the world weren't. Invariably, it turns out that "X" and "Y" were never proposed and/or lacked appropriate article updates. In other words, the editors who work hard to expand content pertaining to American topics are to be punished when no one has bothered to do the same for topics related to other countries. The real solution, of course, is for editors from those nations to step up and do the necessary work.

Unfortunately, we'll never have the level of participation from non-English-speaking countries that we have from English-speaking ones. (Obviously, other Wikipedias are similarly biased toward the languages in which they're written.) —David Levy 17:26, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Events like snooker have been opposed in the past as well for reasons concerning perceived popularity (or lack of it) or because they don't have as many television viewers or Google hits as shows like American Idol. Despite this, there have been enough editors to ensure that each individual World Championship in that sport has an article (as seen in this template). Evidence that it is not just a language barrier and that sometimes American editors do oppose items that seem ridiculous to them. The same goes for the World Table Tennis Championships which has competitors from more countries than the finals of the FIFA World Cup and representation from every possible continent. One reaction I noticed to that nomination was a doubt as to whether table tennis was popular outside China. Yet China far outweighs the US on population and size and all the other various arguments that are given which are to the advantage of a country which may very well have more computers and televisions than most. Were that the US and were it to have such a championship (it took place in Japan actually) it would be measured on how many watched it or how many googled it. So no, I disagree with the point that X and Y were never proposed and or lacked the appropriate article updates. American editors are most certainly not being punished for their efforts – that has to be one of the most overexaggerated claims I've ever heard made in relation to ITN's coverage of sports. American sports have survived numerous questionings, revisions and attempts to deem them unsuitable. Rather (in the past at least) some decent editors have had their attempts to improve the balance discredited due to "never heard of it", "not interested" or "not big enough in my country" attitudes, seen when snooker was proposed last year by another user on the talk page but was opposed for a reason as silly as it supposedly being only of interest to Europe and the world's largest and most populous continent (if that's the criteria for failing an ITN we'd have to strip the list of most of its content). --candle•wicke 19:16, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

It remains to be seen if table tennis is really more popular than other sports in China; for example, I dunno if any Chinese athlete approaches the popularity of the Yao Ming. Although it can be said that if we'll base on sheer population alone, ping-pong would've made it a long time ago. –Howard the Duck 19:51, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

I believe I saw some source before which claimed table tennis was the most popular participant sport, badminton I think (or may have been football, both were mentioned in some way) was the most popular specator sport and Yao Ming was the most popular athelete. I'm pretty sure I mentioned it on this talk page a long while back. Definitely I've never seen any evidence basketball is actually more popular in any way as a sport then table tennis or badminton or football in China despite the often misleading claims to the contrary by the NBA/IBF. Yao Ming may be popular and that has undoutedly helped the sports popularity but it doesn't mean the sport is more popular. Nil Einne (talk) 06:55, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Chacaltaya disappears... this is news??

I object to the inclusion of this item on the main page's "in the news" for several reasons:

1. A Google news search shows only about 3 news outlets in English that have covered this story. There are a few mentions of the glacier in other languages as well but I don't know what those stories are. Even if there are ten mentions in reliable sources in the last week, this is not a news story of wide interest by any stretch.
2. This glacier melted at least a week ago, as this is the date on the citation in the article. This isn't news now, if it ever was.
3. The connection to global warming, stated as fact on the main page, is currently marked with [citation needed] in the linked article.

Therefore, I believe this item should be removed. Oren0 (talk) 08:12, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

The item has been replaced. --BorgQueen (talk) 08:50, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Sri Lankan deaths

The words "by the Sri Lanka Army" should be stricken from the summary -- the only reference states that doctors and the Sri Lankan government are having their own version of an edit war as to who is reponsible. In the absence of a credible source who is willing to actually say "The Sri Lankan Army did it", I don't think we should represent them as solely responsible in the edit summary. Let the two viewpoints duke it out in the actual news article. Banaticus (talk) 22:57, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Fixed by User:Geni. --BorgQueen (talk) 23:37, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Improvement to wording of item about Jacob Zuma

Instead of

• Jacob Zuma is sworn in as South Africa's fourth president since the end of apartheid

I'd suggest

• Jacob Zuma is sworn in as South Africa's president, its [or "the country's"] fourth since the end of apartheid

Thanks. 72.244.200.146 (talk) 04:25, 12 May 2009 (UTC).

Rephrased. --BorgQueen (talk) 04:32, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Commenting on events from a position of ignorance

I don't mean this to be a personal attack or an attempt to rehash a discussion on the candidates page. However, something telling happened when I nominated Manny Ramirez's suspension. I incorrectly described it as a 50-day suspension rather than a 50-game one. Another user objected on the grounds that it was not noteworthy enough of an event. However, when informed that it was a 50-game suspension, he dropped his objection and took a neutral position, saying he didn't know enough about baseball to comment.

The irony is that baseball teams play almost every day. There's not much of a difference between 50 games and 50 days. The user apparently thought baseball was like soccer, where you play once or twice a week.

The user also hinted in his response that he was unaware of the issues surrounding baseball and drugs that have been so huge in baseball-playing nations over the past decade. It's almost certain he didn't know who Manny Ramirez is.

The question is whether he -- or she -- should have commented at all when it was clear he didn't know enough about baseball to judge the importance of the event.

This situation often comes up with sporting events (and, with athletes, on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion). People tend to have an urge to comment on a sports nomination even if they aren't familiar with the sport or event. Sometimes, they rely on platitudes that turn out to be incorrect, such as that professional sports are bigger than their amateur equivalents (when they aren't always) or that international events are bigger than domestic ones (same).

So when should people respond to nominations on an unfamiliar topic? I don't want to say never. I mean, I'm not familiar with petanque, but I can say that the Romanian junior petanque championship is inappropriate for ITN. On the other hand, since I don't know anything about cycling, I wouldn't want to comment on whether a given drug suspension or new performance record in cycling is ITN-worthy.

I think the best way to go about addressing sports news is to see how news media are playing it. If it is the kind of thing that is front-page news (not sports-page news) across a wide area, it is probably OK for ITN. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 03:11, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Absolutely agree on your last point, and it doesn't not only involve sports but on all items. Only items featured by other media prominently should make it. –Howard the Duck 09:13, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

I tend to agree, but by "other media", you mean English-language media only, or does it include media outlets in other languages? Because Anglophone news outlets may give just a passing mention to certain events that are featured prominently by, say, Arabic or Spanish-speaking media outlets. --BorgQueen (talk) 09:45, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

As you can see, I tend to (over-)rely on BBC News as a barometer, since they report virtually everything, including CNN and the others miss out. I'd still stick with my proposal about a year ago of at least 2 prominent mentions per continent on 3 continents for every blurb. –Howard the Duck 10:49, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

This is the English Wikipedia -- it's presumed that English language sources will predominate, just like Spanish sources will likely predominate on the Spanish Wikipedia, etc., although because of the great size of the English Wikipedia compared to other Wikipedias, we do try to include a fair mix of other languages. However, something could still hit the Notability requirements on the German Wikipedia but not hit it on the English Wikipedia. Banaticus (talk) 23:11, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

I'd like to make it clear that we are talking about ITN, not the English Wikipedia as a whole. As for the differences in criteria between the English Wikipedia's ITN and the German Wikipedia's In den Nachrichten, can you give an example? --BorgQueen (talk) 23:28, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Does Wikipedia accept an article entirely (or a great majority) referenced by non-English references? –Howard the Duck 09:48, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Oh yes, why not? DYK features such articles on a regular basis. --BorgQueen (talk) 14:18, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

However, that brings up another question: How notable is the event if there are no English sources for it? 70.239.10.84 (talk) 19:29, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Since you are using the term "event", I assume you are talking about ITN—if there are no English sources at all for the event, no, it certainly is not notable for ITN, and I never said we should feature such entries on ITN. I think Howard the Duck was asking about the English Wikipedia as a whole, and the English Wikipedia does not reject articles soley based on the lack of reliable English sources because it may simply mean the topic is obscure in anglosphere. But as long as the subject's notability in a non-anglophone world is verified through reliable non-English sources, it is accepted. This project in particular tries to correct the anglosphere bias by creating articles found in non-English Wikipedias but missing from the English Wikipedia. --BorgQueen (talk) 20:09, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Sri Lankan War

There should be something on this. A war has ended, and there's not even a mention of it in ITN. 122.255.2.61 (talk) 01:32, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

People want to wait until Tuesday... Please see WP:ITN/C. --BorgQueen (talk) 01:33, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Ruth Padel

I really believe that the Ruth Padel story has little interest to any one outside of Britain, and in no way deserves more attention than say... the Sri Lankan conflict. I call for it to be removed. Colipon+(T) 07:58, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

I am a British person and I too see nothing interesting in this story to the vast majority of non-poetry reading people from outside Oxford. The poet laureate entry was iffy but this is ridiculous.92.139.44.5 (talk) 22:42, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. And I'm also British. --Dweller (talk) 05:45, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Removed. --BorgQueen (talk) 05:48, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Creating a new day header

Because of this edit history, I'm adding to "Wikipedia:In the news section on the Main Page/Candidates" the following: "If it’s not already created (see below)." This is needed because the directions as they are, are obviously making it seem like the page has not already been created when it in fact it has.--Chuck Marean 06:51, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Big Ben

The clock often referred to as Big Ben (actually it's the name of it's biggest bell) is 150 today. A nice curiosity for main page? --Dweller (talk) 09:32, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Please nominate the item at WP:ITN/C. --BorgQueen (talk) 09:42, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

A little late, but I don't believe this should have been on ITN anyway. WP:OTD/SA would have been a fine place though Nil Einne (talk) 00:06, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Air France Flight 447

Can we please update the news section? The plane debris have been found off of the coast of Brazil, please read the article and update. It is not missing anymore, it's a real sea crash. Thanks, Shadiac (talk) 23:57, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Federal Anti-Monopoly Service of Russia brings an action against Microsoft corporation

Federal Anti-Monopoly Service of Russia brings an action against Microsoft corporation for discontinuing Windows XP and setting different prises for retail and OEM versions of Windows. Source: http://www.fas.gov.ru/news/n_24516.shtml--MathFacts (talk) 19:18, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

ITN should reflect real-world news story prominance

Because it's called "In the News," the items on ITN should be somewhat similar to those that Wikipedia readers are likely to find "in the news," that is, on the TV stations they watch, the newspapers they read and the Internet sites they visit. Sometimes, some editors may not like the fact that certain stories are "in the news" and would prefer that mass media outlets adopt a different standard of news judgment. But it is not for us to say what should be "in the news." Rather, ITN should reflect what is "in the news," whether we like it or not.

Compared to the news sources that English Wikipedia readers are likely to use, ITN has been heavily weighted toward events in obscure Third World countries and has demonstrated an extreme bias against news from the countries where most readers live. Most English Wikipedia readers live in the U.S. or UK, and thus most of the items "in the news" to them are from those countries. Yet relatively few ITN items come from the US or UK.

Now I'm not saying we should stop running items from obscure Third World countries. I like that quirky aspect of ITN. But I think that the constant rejection of items from the US especially and to a lesser extent from other English-speaking countries reflects a "POV" that major news sources in English-speaking countries are somehow wrong in their news judgment. And that's not a call we should be making. Something that is all over the TV, newspapers and news websites should be on ITN.

Take the example of the Barack Obama speech at Cairo University, 2009. A look at newspaper front pages on Friday finds the speech was front-page news in much of the world. The Toronto Star, in huge letters, called it "A speech that might change the world." A search at Google News finds more than 16,000 English-language news stories on the speech, compared to 199 for the Baciro Dabo assassination. Now when it was suggested for ITN, one of the editors mentioned that heads of state make speeches all the time, and of course that's true. But most political speeches don't generate 16,000 English-language news articles. An event that generates so much press is "in the news," whether we like it or not, and should go up at ITN.

Similarly, the Gordon Brown Cabinet shuffle gets 4,771 hits on Google News, compared to fewer than 400 for the news on Marc Ravalomanana. The Cabinet shuffle is huge news in many English-language publications and has been included even in publications distant from the UK. It should go up on ITN.

It's a credo on Wikipedia that decisions on what content to include should be based on objective criteria and not on personal biases. Thus, when determining whether an event should go up on ITN, we should use things like Google News English-language hits, Wikipedia:Popular pages and the story lists of major English-language news sources such as the AP and BBC. We can make some judgments about the importance of an event and give some extra-credit points to events in Third World countries for the sake of diversity. But we should not be imposing our own beliefs about what should be considered news, such as "It's not ITN-worthy unless it would also be considered ITN-worthy if the same thing happened in Country X." If it's "in the news," it should go on "In the News." -- Mwalcoff (talk) 23:13, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

A bit like talking to the wall, don't you think? You will probably get faster responses at Talk:Main Page. --BorgQueen (talk) 02:00, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

I dunno but Google News hits are not that accepted in these parts. More like... "objective biases" as you put it. –Howard the Duck 05:48, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

The above is somewhat analogous to opining that hedgehogs and quahogs need to be made more pig-like to better reflect their names.

Despite its name, our In the news section has never been intended as a rundown of the world's top news stories (a function more in line with the mission of our sister site Wikinews). Is purpose is to highlight Wikipedia articles that have been created or substantially updated to reflect news of international interest or importance. (Whether the specific topics cited above qualify is debatable, and you make some good points.)

There has been a great deal of discussion regarding the possibility of changing the section's name, but no one has managed to come up with an alternative that proved more popular. —David Levy 16:14, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

I proposed "Current events" and "From far and wide," but no one responded. Anyway, it's clear that while the purpose of ITN might at one point have been to highlight quality articles, that's clearly not the rationale that's being used to push the kind of content that's dominated ITN recently. No one said that the articles on Baciro Dabo and Marc Ravalomanana were that great, while the articles on Obama's speech and the Brown Cabinet shuffle were crummy. Rather, the Africa articles were pushed because of some editors' judgment about what should be considered important news, which is different from the news judgment of just about every news outlet in the Western World. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 03:17, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

hoax info

I would suggest to cancel information about the death of president of Gabon... http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/8088382.stm Leinad (talk) 10:06, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Agree. The French press this morning are retracting [5], the Spanish press are either silent (El País) or refuting reports of death (La Vanguardia), so we are left without reliable sources. Physchim62 (talk) 11:25, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Obama image

Could a crop of this image of Obama be used, instead of the one currently being used; as it would allow the microphone to be removed from the picture. Gage (talk) 03:55, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Ok, working on it. --BorgQueen (talk) 03:57, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Done. I didn't realize a microphone was something so sinful though. :-D --BorgQueen (talk) 04:10, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Not really sinful, just a tad distracting. Thanks so much for agreeing to my suggestion. Gage (talk) 04:30, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Is it just me or does it look like he is catiously trying to feed a wild animal? --candle•wicke 23:56, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Order

Why do new "In the news" items get inserted in the middle of the rest instead of on top ? it makes looking for new items harder. --George (talk) 21:16, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

The events listed on ITN are always sorted according to the date of the event they describe. There have been times, however, that an article describing a particular recent event has not been fully-developed, updated or cleaned up as per the ITN criteria until a couple of days later, and thus will get inserted in the middle of the rest once it qualifies. Zzyzx11 (talk) 23:31, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

In addition, we try to put the pictured item as high as possible, so as to avoid confusion. So if an item is on the same date as another but it does not have a picture, it would go under the existing item. Spencer^{T♦Nominate!} 22:00, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Bus accident

That photo doesn't look like a protest to me. No one is carrying any signs. It's on an unidentified street. It doesn't seem to be in front of a government building. It looks like an accident from maybe a long time ago.--Chuck Marean 17:30, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

It is the worst civil unrest in Iran for over a decade. Do you expect it to be peaceful and organized? It is of course bloody, violent, chaotic. Please read 2009 Iranian election protests. --BorgQueen (talk) 17:44, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

No one is carrying any signs. It's on an unidentified street. Was this a WP:FPC or something? :) --candle•wicke 00:00, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

BRIC

The quote first official summit would be linked to 1st BRIC summit. Regards; Felipe Menegaz 16:27, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

This ought to be at WP:ERRORS. I'm afraid I got there before you though... ;) --candle•wicke 03:45, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Gay Pride Festival?

Why is there a link to some stupid gay pride festival in Shanghai? Are we going the have a link for each time a new carnival/procession/festival takes place? ChrisDHDR 15:41, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Too right, I mean is that really the most important thing in the news? --T.M.M. Dowd (talk) 21:03, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Only two people supported the ITN nomination -- Candlewicke and BorgQueen. A page that is seen by millions of people should have more than two people deciding what's on it. There really needs to be changes to the way ITN works. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 22:15, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Mwalcoff, I find it curious that you didn't oppose at that time, and now you are complaining here. Let me remind you that the Obama speech, which was enthusiastically supported by five people, including yourself, had to be taken down due to massive complaints at Talk:Main Page. --BorgQueen (talk) 04:44, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

There is not a single mention of the European Parliamentary Elections, which is most probably more important on the international scene than a puffda parade. --T.M.M. Dowd (talk) 09:53, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Take a look at WP:ITN/C to see why it is getting delayed. --BorgQueen (talk) 12:10, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps some of those complaining would care to involve themselves more in the process of choosing the ITNs? All this recent bickering over ITNs is nearly enough to create a desire to demand a pay rise... --candle•wicke 14:17, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Clearly more people need to be recruited to participate in ITN and to discuss its future. Once again I've written a long missive about improving ITN (above) only to get hardly any response. And this for something millions of people see every day! -- Mwalcoff (talk) 01:40, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

I planned to not post in this conversation but after yesterday's discussion which ended up getting closed i think i need to address Mwalcoff atleast once since its the same on going issue. i dont really know if you actually supported the adultery case because you thought it was worth putting on main page or because it simply took place inside your beloved country. But in any case if that is ur definition of "improving" ITN by putting those kinds of news items then i will not argue on this topic with you anymore. Clearly if u r correct then i must be living in a parallel world where a man sleeping with someone other than their wife needs to be known by "milions" of people instead of a first gay pride event taking place in a country with billion+ people. there is just no point in wasting time arguing in a parallel world. Ashishg55 (talk) 19:45, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Shut up --T.M.M. Dowd (talk) 13:24, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

The attack by tribesmen

In my opinion, if you're going to include how many people were killed in the attack, that should come at the end of the headline ( to preach against it). As it is now, with it at the beginning, it sounds like you're trying to prove the world is bad. --Chuck Marean 21:07, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Chuck - its fine as it is in my opinon Jason Rees (talk) 21:13, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

I think it's boring, like a broken record. Day after day, some amount of people were killed. It would be more interesting at the end of the sentence or maybe the middle.--Chuck Marean 21:37, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

They've still been killed... shunting them away to the middle or end won't bring them back to life... --candle•wicke 23:58, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Actually personally I feel putting the lost food aide first may not be a bad thing. Not because I agree with Chuck Marean but because 735 tonnes sounds like a lot to me, and as unfortunate/sad as the 40 deaths may be, could easily have a significant effect on a far greater number of people. One of the references used for example [6] 'The United Nations said there were fears for the fate of thousands of displaced people in and around Akobo now left without food aid after the attack. "There are people who are desperately in need of food,"' On the other hand, the 40 deaths is probably likely to have a more significant negative effect on the programme and future food aide deliveries since aide agencies don't like losing people working for them so it's a half dozen this way, 6 that way.... P.S. Am I the only one who finds the 'broken record' comment ironic? Nil Einne (talk) 20:17, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't find "broken record" ironic even if I disgree with it. Let's not discourage regular contributors, more nominations are always needed. Chuck just made a point which led to some disagreement but it was just a proposal on a talk page - better than vandalism any day. --candle•wicke 22:50, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

I didn't really want to have a big discussion about this, it was more of a tongue in cheek comment although I forgot the smiley. But since you've made it into a bigger deal... I was not just referring to this talk page comment in particularly but to Chuck's perpetually harping on about too many deaths on ITN (except when they're executions) which no one else seems to agree with, which to me is starting to sound like a broken record. Useful contributions are always welcome, but when it's clear no one else agrees with you I think some soul searching is in order and the question must be asked whether your contributions are of any use and if they are not, whether you can change that and if you can't, whether it might be better to move to other areas. And there are plenty of areas on wikipedia that need attention, while ITN is one of them it is not the only one. I'm not of course opposed to someone playing 'devil's advocate', I myself freely admit that I primarily comment when I feel an item should not go up. But there's a big difference between disagreeing with the merits of an item for a variety of reasons with hopefully useful points of discussion, and continually disagreeing for the same reason, a reason which no one else seems to feel has any merit. To use an example, while it's clear I frequently disagree with Mwalcoff and sometimes disagree with HtD, as do a number of other people (particularly in Mwalcoff's case) they do often raise useful points of discussion which ITN is the better for. And speaking of vandalism, while it's one of my pet peeves and I agree wastes a significant amount of time, ultimately continually discussing the same point, when that point is only ever raised by one user, no one else agrees with it and usually without any more information or something different, is no more fruitful. P.S. I don't contribute much to ITN nowadays and looking thorough it, it seems Chuck has somewhat moved on from continually harping about deaths and is now mostly proposing items. Even if he still has a lot to learn about phrasing an item and his selection of items has generally garned limited support, I welcome this development, and it fits into my point about changing your contributions and raising useful issues of discussion rather then just raising the same issue over and over again which no one else agrees with. This doesn't mean I'm going to encourage Chuck to continue to complain about too many deaths on ITN Nil Einne (talk) 16:30, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

The trouble is that nobody seems to be commenting at all now under any of my nominations either right now and sending them around isn't working either. So should I assume that there is just nobody around or that my contributions are not of any value? If no response equals lack of interest or possibly sounding like a broken record then I might as well give up... --candle•wicke 03:25, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

PS. Chuck is hardly the first person to complain about death at ITN - there was a lot of that earlier in the year. And he nominated Acropolis Museum which is currently on the Main Page and also found this today only for an IP to remove it. --candle•wicke 03:26, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Mark Sanford update

Apparently, the story's become quite big in Argentina, too, and amazingly, the purported name of Sanford's Argentine lover is getting more Google searches than "Michael Jackson" or "Farah Fawcett": [7] -- Mwalcoff (talk) 00:40, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

If resigns he SC governorship this might have a shot. –Howard the Duck 01:14, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I think we ought to consider what happens if he resigns. We had the resignation of Rod Blagojevich of Illinois. The argument in favor of inclusion is that in a federal system like that of the U.S., Canada or Australia, states or provinces have enormous power that is guaranteed under the constitution, so they are not comparable to, say, cities or French departments. And this being the English-language Wikipedia, there is special interest in English-speaking countries. I don't think it would set a bad precedent; gubernatorial (yes, that's the adjective for "governor") resignations are rare, except in the aftermath of November elections (when different standards may apply). -- Mwalcoff (talk) 02:33, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Blagojevich didn't resign, did he? –Howard the Duck 06:41, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

And after thinking about it, his resignation (if it comes) doesn't seem that notable, compared with say, Blago's conviction on his impeachment trial or the assassination of the president of one of Russia's republics. –Howard the Duck 11:52, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

For comparison, IIRC, we didn't have the resignation of Eliot Spitzer but we did have David Paterson as the first black & blind governor (or something) Nil Einne (talk) 16:23, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

That's right, Blago was thrown out of office. How short my memory is. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 18:42, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Michael Jackson

Hi. I thought making Mr. Jackson's death an exception to be included ITN was too bad. But maybe because I don't own any of his records. I realize that some admins flew in out of nowhere to add it to the template. -SusanLesch (talk) 16:29, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

I don't think it's an exception; "The deceased was a very important figure in their field of expertise, and was recognised as such." "The death has a major international impact that affects current events." Both apply here. His death was unexpected, it's not like he was old or ill. --Golbez (talk) 16:34, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Golbez, thank you. I actually agree because Thriller is the best-selling record of all time. (I don't think it matters that he died unexpectedly.) Some people thought Arthur C. Clarke for example could be included but he failed some test. -SusanLesch (talk) 19:36, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Can we add a link to Death of Michael Jackson in the news listing? –Dream out loud (talk) 22:04, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

I understand the need to keep ITN from becoming a daily obituary, but this was the biggest death since Pope John Paul II. The media coverage has been wall-to-wall in the U.S. and quite substantial worldwide. Even the stogy old BBC World News had a live interview with the gossip columnist from the National Enquirer about Jackson's eccentricities. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 02:41, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Just to set the record straight: Susan, your claim that "some admins flew in out of nowhere to add it to the template" is not true. The entry was discussed at WP:ITN/C and got overwhelming support. The admin was obviously inexperienced and clumsy (he skipped the whole update process, such as resetting the timer) but it is not that he added it against consensus. --BorgQueen (talk) 03:52, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

OK, sorry. Also it does matter in real life that he died unexpectedly. This Is It would have been something. -SusanLesch (talk) 04:38, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

That is one of the key reasons why we allow unexpect deaths but not expected ones. If someone dies in the prime of their life, their loss is generally considered of far greater significance then if they die in their old age, because they may still have had a lot to contribute. While MJ wasn't exactly in the prime of his life, he clearly was still at an age and that his death was unexpected particularly given the cause. This is quite different from Arthur C. Clarke, Pavarotti, or Edmund Hillary since they were considered to have lived relatively long and fullsome lives although they may have still had something to contribute, it isn't generally considered as significant as someone who died young. Many people were still expecting great things from MJ, while not quite as much perhaps as if he were still at the top of his career, it was still of great interest. Expectations from the other three were far less because they were at the tail end of their careers, or in Edmund Hillary's case, it ended long ago. Also, it is of great significance to ITN that unlike in the other three cases, where there was little investigation into or speculation about their deaths, there is a great amount for MJ. This is for several reasons, but it means there is much more to cover on wikipedia then simply 'he/she died of X, people were sad, tributes flowed'. Indeed in Pavarotti's case, he had terminal cancer, so it's highly likely he set his affairs in order etc (most 80-90 year olds would probably do likewise, while a 50 year old would to some extent, generally not to such a great extent). Nil Einne (talk) 16:21, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Flute

The 35,000 year old flute discovery has its own article at Paleolithic flutes. Grundle2600 (talk) 01:44, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

The article is currently too short. --BorgQueen (talk) 03:43, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Iranian protests

This is a large story, and is unlikely to leave for a bit. Is it policy to let last items fall out of the template, or is this an exception? --Xavexgoem (talk) 19:51, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

We usually let the items be replaced by newer stories. However, if there is something new development in the story, a new blurb is written. --Tone 19:55, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

I think this story should remain on the front page a bit longer because there are daily updates and changes in the story.--brewcrewer (yada, yada) 06:29, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

It would be great if ongoing events faded out into a link instead of disappearing altogether. Above the "Wikinews – Recent deaths – More current events..." line there could be "Ongoing events: 2009 Iranian election protests - Air France Flight 447 - 2009 flu pandemic" to offer some examples of what this might look like right now (unless anyone can find a better event than the plane crash, 2009 Peruvian political crisis perhaps). This would benefit both readers and editors greatly I'm sure. However, there is nobody to implement these ideas I'm afraid. :( --candle•wicke 03:15, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

I suggested this for the Olympics and Canadian and U.S. elections last year, but it was only implemented for the Olympics. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 00:56, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

We can add it at the bottom like any other blurb, think of it as sticky posts on a web forum, but the only difference is it is at the bottom. –Howard the Duck 04:50, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Right, so is that consensus? --candle•wicke 23:41, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

The next problem would be what event will get this sticky privilege. –Howard the Duck 13:29, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Well they would have to have been on ITN already and have continuing significant coverage so that narrows it down a bit. Requests could be made at WP:ERRORS when a topic disappears from the Main Page but is still ongoing. --candle•wicke 16:48, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

"Systematic bias"

In the interest of counteracting systematic bias, someone removed the countries from all the cities mentioned in ITN. Then, in the interest of counteracting systematic bias, someone added the countries for all the cities mentioned in ITN. This is quite ridiculous. Is that what counteracting systematic bias means to you all? If we had a post about London or New York or Tokyo, would we need to add the countries for fear people didn't know where these alpha world cities are? Not all cities are equal, and I think the paranoia about appearing Amero-centric is getting ahead of the fact that we shouldn't over-describe things on the Main Page. Washington, D.C., Los Angeles, and even Baghdad are all cities generally well-known enough to allow the countries to be omitted (and the same goes for a multitude of other cities -- Western, Eastern, and in between).

However, I don't want to suggest that no city should have a country qualification. It should be done on a case-by-case basis, instead of an all-or-nothing approach. -- tariqabjotu 05:21, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Don't make any assumptions about why I removed a single country from one entry. It was for consistency with the other items, nothing to do with systematic bias. --Stephen 06:02, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Rather pompous assumption? Okay; fine:

In the interest of consistency, someone removed the countries from all the cities mentioned in ITN. Then, in the interest of consistency, someone added the countries for all the cities mentioned in ITN. This is quite ridiculous. Is that what consistency means to you all? If we had a post about London or New York or Tokyo, would we need to add the countries for fear people didn't know where these alpha world cities are? Not all cities are equal, and I think the paranoia about appearing consistent is getting ahead of the fact that we shouldn't over-describe things on the Main Page. Washington, D.C., Los Angeles, and even Baghdad are all cities generally well-known enough to allow the countries to be omitted (and the same goes for a multitude of other cities -- Western, Eastern, and in between).

However, I don't want to suggest that no city should have a country qualification. It should be done on a case-by-case basis, instead of an all-or-nothing approach.

Point still stands. Geez. -- tariqabjotu 09:59, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

We should have a definitive list for cases such as this. –Howard the Duck 07:59, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

I'd hate to think a list is necessary; it's just that "common sense" should be put on the same level as "counteracting systematic bias" or, as Stephen puts it, "consistency". -- tariqabjotu 09:59, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

This thread reminds me of all the discussions that led to a modification on WP:PLACE#United States that makes a reference to the AP Stylebook. I mean, if you really, really want a list, that same section in the AP Stylebook also lists foreign cities that do not need a country qualification. Zzyzx11 (talk) 06:30, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

I'd refer to an external source, such as the AP and probably one more non-US source for balance. I don't want us Wikipedians creating a list by ourselves. –Howard the Duck 14:20, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

The trouble with 'common sense', is that it rarely leads to a consistent or systemic bias free approach since we are inherently reliant on peoples opinions being the same, which is unlikely. It also leads to often repeated arguments. For example do Auckland, Wellington, Melboure, Sydney, Canberra, Kuala Lumpur, Penang, Manila, Jakarta need the country name? I would say no, but I'm not convinced everyone is going to agree. Yet if we go by the AP list for US, there are some US cities which don't need country distinction which IMHO are more likely to be uncertain or unknown for quite a number of English speaking people. And what about Darwin, Brisbane, Kuching, Kota Kinabalu, Bandung, Medan, Davao, Cebu? These aren't that much less well known then a number of the US cases IMHO. I'm not saying we should work on a list for every single city, but IMHO there's no harm in coming up with a short list and adding to it as cases occur. I should point out we've had some rather odd occurances on ITN or other areas of the main page before like people putting the US state but not US. P.S. I would remind people that this was largely started because Baghdad, Iraq was added to ITN followed by Los Angeles. Clearly the 'common sense' approach is working well when the country was added to one of cities in your unneeded list (and probably not for the first time)... Nil Einne (talk) 11:01, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Comment: This makes it a very difficult topic. I would think that from where I am Penang, Manila, Kuching, Kota Kinabalu, Bandung, Medan, Davao, Cebu to start with would need a country for readers to be absolutely sure. But I am sure there are places where this is not the case. It is also easy for me to be surprised at the omission of several cities which appear prominent from my perspective. Stockholm, Turin, Barcelona, Liverpool, Munich, Vienna, Prague, Edinburgh, Dublin, Cardiff, Belfast... just some I would recognise instantly but would everyone? So it would be better not to be selective when there is just no way an agreement could ever be reached. Baghdad was mentioned above but would as many people recognise that city without events from the last few years? A city may easily enter everyday recognition for a time in one area and yet may never be considered so in many others. --candle•wicke 17:02, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Madoff's sentencing

It should be added that Bernard Madoff was just sentenced to 150 years in jail. --68.89.211.93 (talk) 17:14, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

He was posted back in March. He's had his day. --candle•wicke 03:14, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Spacing issues

Is there any way to remove the high white space in the row where the picture is? It looks asthetically unpleasing in my opinion. Green caterpillar (talk) 02:26, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Never mind, it's fixed. Green caterpillar (talk) 02:57, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Overdue

For anyone that hasn't noticed, ITN is about 11 hours overdue for an update. MacMed^talk_stalk 03:11, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

ITN can't be updated unless we have a properly updated and supported article first. You might want to take a look at WP:ITN/C and update what you can. --BorgQueen (talk) 03:20, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

This is why I've never understood why that counter exists. The section cannot always be updated at the recommended pace, and it should be updated at a faster pace if a greater than average number of appropriate entries happen to become available in a particular time frame. So what's the point of timing this? Why don't we simply add the items as we're able to (like we used to)? —David Levy 04:23, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

The thing is that we do sometimes forget to update ITN even when a candidate entry is properly updated and supported. The timer exists to remind us to pay attention. --BorgQueen (talk) 05:54, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

And what reminds us to pay attention to the timer?

I don't see how someone could view any of the pages on which it's transcluded without being reminded of the update concept simply by viewing the page itself (with or without the timer). If anything, wouldn't the timer discourage people from checking for items (because it isn't "time" yet)? —David Levy 06:27, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

A few weeks ago inclusion of new ITN items was held off since there were so many addable items. –Howard the Duck 06:40, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

I disagree with such a practice (a time-based implementation, at least). If items are quickly pushed off of the main page, it would be better to cycle some back in if/when the influx slows down. Alternatively (or in combination), we can be more selective (just as we're more likely to include borderline entries when the pickings are slim) or increase the section's length. (Did you know... can easily be expanded to compensate.) —David Levy 06:50, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

(ec) And what reminds us to pay attention to the timer?: Its annoying red color, which can be seen at Talk:Main Page, WP:ERRORS, and others. Of course, someone who is a total stranger to the ITN process wouldn't understand much, but that's not the point, is it? I've been updating ITN extensively for the last several months and found the timer convenient because it reminded me to know how many hours passed, without checking the history. I was not around when those people decided to install the timer, but I can see why they did.

If anything, wouldn't the timer discourage people from checking for items (because it isn't "time" yet)?: If anyone gets discouraged like that, the person obviously doesn't understand the difference between ITN and DYK, and ITN is mainly being updated by experienced regulars anyway, so I don't think we need to worry about that. --BorgQueen (talk) 06:53, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

1. My point is that anyone seeing the timer already is viewing a page related to the main page. Yes, the red coloring stands out, but doesn't anyone capable of appreciating its meaning already know that the section requires updates?

2. My other (related) point is that the timer encourages us to care "how many hours passed," which I view as a bad thing. (You're welcome to disagree, of course.) In my assessment, there never should be any reason to concern ourselves with that concept; we should care only about whether a suitable new item is available now (regardless of whether the last one was added five days ago or five minutes ago). A more useful timer, therefore, would be one indicating when a sysop most recently evaluated the candidates. —David Levy 07:07/07:13, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

(ec) I have to disagree with your first point. In my experience as an ITN (and DYK) updater, I and others do forget to update, since ITN is not the only work we are undertaking. I may be in the middle of discussion at Talk:Main Page, or reading error-fixing requests at WP:ERRORS, and the timer did remind me to update, or at least look for potential candidates.

As for your second point, not only me but others might disagree as well. The first reason is that when we are not pressured by the "deadline" kind of concept, I noticed editors tend to slow down their work and potential candidate articles are not nominated/updated as quickly. The second is, as you might know, ITN has been subjected to criticism for its tendency to stagnate. I suppose that is because all the sections of Main Page are updated at least once every 24 hours and when ITN doesn't, people see it as inefficient or incompetent. You may argue their views are groundless but still I don't want to give anyone that kind of impression. --BorgQueen (talk) 07:39, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

1. I realize that the sight of the big, red box causes users "to update, or at least look for potential candidates." My point is that we shouldn't receive such a reminder based on the amount of time since the last update.

2. I haven't noticed a speedup in article updates or candidate proposals since the timer was implemented (though I'd be interested to read any relevant statistics).

3. I'm certainly not advocating that we update the section less frequently. On the contrary, I'm pointing out that the current system conditions us to wait until close to the "deadline" (during which appropriate candidates can accumulate), while in no way guaranteeing that the section will be updated at such point (as evidenced by the current drought). —David Levy 08:20, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Your proposal for a new timer might be worth experimenting though. I would be interested to know what others think. --BorgQueen (talk) 07:42, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, it might be worth a try. I recognize the value of a visual reminder to check for new items, but it seems to me that the amount of time since the last check is of far greater relevance than the amount of time since the last update is. —David Levy 08:20, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

The timer is there just so when it gets an ugly red and hard to look at the ITN folks are forced to stop being lazy and find something interesting to update the main page with. damn i hate it when its dark red. Ashishg55 (talk) 02:24, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Some points which came to mind when reading the above. A "last check" could be added to the bottom of the already existing timer. What is the problem if BorgQueen (who does a lot of the updates at the moment) is only assisted by the timer? DYK is queued (and is already having enough difficulties) so how can it be made flexible to suit ITN? Items being held off - did this actually happen or was it because BorgQueen was the only admin updating and thus there is the pressure of so many items? Stats? There were 51 ITNs in February (28 days), there were 76 ITNs in May (31 days) - this does not lead me to think that the system is on its knees. Also, I'm sorry if I've been a bit slow at providing updates this week but this has nothing to do with the timer. I am always looking... what is everyone else doing? --candle•wicke 18:03, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

1. At the very least, the timer page ought to be reworded to avoid stating that "a new item should be added" by a certain time (implying that this is to be done regardless of the available entries). I realize that no sysops are doing that, but it's misleading to users in general (such as the one who initiated this section).

2. I certainly don't wish to take away a tool that BorgQueen finds useful. I'm merely explaining why I believe that an alternative setup would be more useful. That you're frequently checking means that she must be frequently re-checking without realizing. And there might be other instances in which no one is checking (because your gap happens to coincide with a period during which the timer box isn't red).

3. If an unusually high volume leads us to include some extra ITN items, the main page can easily be balanced by restoring some DYK hooks from an earlier update (which in no way disrupts the section's planning). I've done it on occasion. —David Levy 18:51, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

What do you mean you've restored some DYK hooks from an earlier update? You mean they are given two consecutive periods of time on the Main Page? How often is this carried out? --candle•wicke 10:57, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

I am a bit surprised by David's remark, too. Honestly, I have restored a couple of DYK hooks to maintain MP balance once or twice myself, but I've never seen anyone else doing it... Perhaps they used to do it in the ancient, pre-bot era...? --BorgQueen (talk) 11:04, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't know how widespread the practice was. As I recall, it's something that I did a few times when the day rolled over and the TFA blurb suddenly was unusually short. —David Levy 06:37, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, some items appeared twice. To my knowledge, this has never been a frequent occurrence. —David Levy 06:37, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

The timer was added during a more general revamp of the ITN/c procedures which also resulted in the transclusion of the current events template onto the candidates page, and discouraging people from !voting, all of this was done with the aim of encouraging a quicker circulation of items through. What the timer does is to truncate discussion when we need a new item added, something which prevents endless debate. Random89 05:38, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

So the timer's main purpose is to arbitrarily "truncate discussion"? —David Levy 06:37, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Train crashes and precedents

I don't think we should have a precedent that all fatal train crashes are ITN material just because we had the Washington Metro one. I'm sure trains crash all the time somewhere in the world. And what about car and bus crashes? I mean CNN is reporting four teenagers died in a car crash in New Mexico -- does that trump the Chinese train crash with three dead? (Rhetorical question.) I think the Washington Metro crash was unusual because it likely generated a great amount of interest among Wikipedia users. Not only do a fair number of them live in the Washington area, but I'm sure a good chunk of Wikipedia users have been to Washington and been on the Washington Metro -- likely on the Red Line, the location of the trains that crashed. The same cannot be said of the train system in Hunan, China.

By no means do I believe we should ignore what happens in Third World countries. I think it's good that we have things like the Honduras coup, or whatever it was, even though it will generate only a fraction of the interest of, say, Michael Jackson's death. This is, of course, an encyclopedia, and it's good to draw attention to the breadth of Wikipedia's content.

But it simply shouldn't be true that if we list an event in Country X, we have to list an equivalent event if it happens in Country Y. No news medium works that way. Even those media that make a special effort to cover the whole world, like the BBC World Service and International Herald Tribune, don't work that way.

Every individual event should be considered on its own merits, with the key factors being the degree of interest among Wikipedia users in the event and the quality of the content that has been added to the Wikipedia articlespace about the event. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 02:31, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

I am sure China is as interested in its single figure train crashes as the US is in its single figure train crashes. Neither really bother me to be honest. The only difference being that China has more people to be interested. Perhaps had this been in a few months but the following week? If it is updated appropriately it would be very strange to refuse. --candle•wicke 03:13, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

So let me get this straight Mwalcoff, according to u a train crash in china is same thing as car crash in US? Do u know how many cars crash a day in the world? No wait world clearly doesnt seem to matter. Lets just say US. Comparing the 2 is almost same as some random person dying vs Michael Jackson dying. Now since CNN reported that random person that doesnt mean wikipedia users are more interested in it now and we must post that instead. If u wanna go into philosophy here and say each life is equally important then i will not argue there. If u agree to post every single car crash around the world then im fine with it. Wikipedia is not some democracy where we are trying to please the majority. Its encyclopedia and news events are added on world level. not CNN level. US train crash wasnt added because it was in US it was added cause it was a train that crashed. And to be honest i find it hard to believe that english speaking users (mainly as u describe them "people from US") are ONLY interested in what happens inside US. If u r visiting an encyclopedia i really hope u expect to see events from all over the world. doesnt matter if they happened in another english speaking country or not. Ashishg55 (talk) 05:17, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

No, no, no, that's not what I meant. I was not arguing in favor of including the car crash. I was using a rhetorical device to ask what makes a three-fatality train crash so special when it's obvious we wouldn't include a four-fatality car crash. I find disconcerting your comment that "Wikipedia is not some democracy where we are trying to please the majority." If we're not editing for "the majority," whom are we editing for? Ourselves? -- Mwalcoff (talk) 02:35, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

we (atleast me and i hope others too) are editing for everyone. Majority and Minority. If a person in some small country opens up wiki they should wanna know about item thats on ITN. Doesnt matter if it is of importance to them but atleast it should have a global (general) interest. Ashishg55 (talk) 10:48, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Bulgarian Elections

I'm sorry, but I just don't see how the Bulgarian parliamentary elections deserves to be on the front page when legislative elections of larger nations don't make it, especially considering a legislative election of a larger nation, Mexico, precisely happened on the exact same day. Sourside21 (talk) 20:36, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Nominate it at WP:ITN/C if you think the Mexican item deserves to be on ITN. However, the article needs to be properly updated first. --BorgQueen (talk) 00:02, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Upon further contemplation, I've realized that the Bulgarian parliamentary elections result in a change of executive, whereas the Mexican legislative elections don't, so I think things are fine the way they are. And yes, the Mexican legislative elections article is horrible underdeveloped, despite my best efforts to add a bit to it (anyone wanna help out on that?). Sourside21 (talk) 23:35, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Al Franken and ensuing discussion about systemic bias

Several users have disagreed with posting Al Franken on ITN. Please seriously reconsider. (see below) Colipon+(T) 01:55, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

We could replace it with the MJ memorial. –Howard the Duck 01:59, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

I am fine with that. Have to wait for some more opinions though. Colipon+(T) 02:39, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Depends on the admin really if s/he wants to wait. –Howard the Duck 02:51, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't see what's bugging you so much. Just because you don't care about Al Franken doesn't mean no one else does. I don't care about the MEGAL Pipeline, Frank Kabui, GERB or Jadranka Kosor, but I don't demand that they be removed. I think it's especially absurd to replace Al Franken, who is of interest to a great many Wikipedia readers, with the governor-general of the Solomon Islands, which hardly anybody cares about. I'm not interested in every story in the newspaper -- some are aimed at people with other interests than mine -- but I don't send letters to the editor demanding that those stories be removed. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 04:12, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

To be honest with you I am actually quite the Franken fan, and I especially enjoyed Rush Limbaugh is a big fat idiot etc. etc. But I thought a principle was being breached here - that is, there was serious disagreement about putting Franken there. That was the issue that led me to ask for its removal. I also do not consider the Solomon Islands story relevant, but no users really voiced their disagreement there. Colipon+(T) 05:17, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

We should have a rule that there should be like 2 supports, aside from the nominator. –Howard the Duck 06:26, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Is two enough? Therequiembellishere (talk) 06:36, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Even when there are 2 supports, if oppositions are more than that it becomes completely pointless. --BorgQueen (talk) 06:40, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

This new rule would only take effect if the discussion was limited between the nominator and someone else. –Howard the Duck 11:33, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Mwalcoff you keep using your own personal opinions to govern what you think is important. Items should only be judged on their individual merits relative to the broad topic area they fall under. This Franken story is political and the normal policy for ITN is that because politics is such a broad subject only national elections, changes of leadership, resignation or sackings of top levels officials and coups go up. Franken does not meet the notability because he is one senator and is too far down the political spectrum. I think the obvious issue here is say this story came out of Germany or any country that uses a similar political system, would you still support? Even in countries who have parliamentary systems there will be equivilant political positions (i.e every legislative bill has to pass a House of Commons Vote and often a House of Lords vote in the UK). As people were supporting this on the basis of I speak English and I'm American therefore this is important, the answer for many would likely be no. Given that you are sggesting that the new head of state of the Soloman Island isn't notable because you have no interest in it furthers my case that too many people are making judgements on opinion rather merit --Daviessimo (talk) 07:23, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

He was actually supporting the Franken story... Therequiembellishere (talk) 07:42, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

The only way to take POV out of this (as much as we can) is to base our decisions on external gauges of importance, such as an entry's prominence in major media, Google News hits and ranking on WP:Popular pages. That's the kind of reasoning I like to use when I suggest an item for ITN. We can also use what information we have on the location and interests of English Wikipedia users to try to include items that will be of interest to many of them (even if they are not of interest to all of them). To answer your question, it is very hard to make an apples-to-apples comparison between countries because of their differing political systems. There is no one in the British Parliament or Bundestag who represents 5 million people like a U.S. senator from Minnesota. And individual members of those other bodies, unless they are cabinet ministers, don't have the prerogatives of a U.S. senator. Finally, there's the issue of the supermajority of 60 senators which is unique to the American system. But if an individual House of Commons race for whatever reason generated the kind of national interest in Britain as the Franken race generated in the U.S., than I might recommend it for ITN. In the case of Germany, I would probably demur unless the race for some reason generated pan-European interest, since we have much fewer German readers than U.S. or UK readers. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 08:34, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I honestly just don't buy this "because he represents five million people" argument. Look at Mayawati. You can argue she represents the upwards of a hundred million or so dalits in India; she is also the governor of a state that has roughly the same number of people. But have you seen her election to governor or to parliament on ITN? I would argue that story was followed extremely extensively by nearly a billion people. Even go ask anyone in rural Alabama or Tennessee and you will see that the Franken is of little relevance. Colipon+(T) 14:15, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, but what you are in effect saying is that because there are 300m English speakers in the US and maybe 200-250m native English speakers in the rest of the world Wikipedia should favour American News. I've said it many times before English is the most widely spoken language in the world, it is an official language in 50 different countries and there are probably somewhere in the region of 1 - 1.5 billion people who have some command over it. How many wikipedians have you met who's userpage states that they are from India or Japan or China or Europe(exc. UK and Ireland)? How many regular ITN contributors come from countries outside the Anglosphere? The fact is that yes the US is the largest native speaking nation, but there are probably at least 2 or 3 times more people who speak it as a second language. --Daviessimo (talk) 08:56, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

I wonder if there is a better place for the discussion of more general issues such as how to qualify content and by what criteria. Right now all I have to say is, Wikipedia is often criticized for its American-centric and less so, British-centric content. The fact is that people from all over the world read the English version of Wikipedia, but the majority of users that edit are from countries such as US, UK, Australia, Canada etc., makes Wikipedia home of a systemic bias. This is not something that any individual users can be blamed for. It's true - anglophone users care more about things in the anglosphere, so the content reflects that. However, I believe Wikipedia has policies or guidelines that say we should be focusing on more "worldly" topics, or at least try our best. This is why I think this putting-Franken-in-ITN issue is rather important. Colipon+(T) 14:15, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

My opinion is that ITN has an anti-American bias as evidenced by this discussion. -SusanLesch (talk) 15:42, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

can u point to the evidence please. thanks Ashishg55 (talk) 15:56, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi Ashishg55. Colipon said "ask anyone in rural Alabama or Tennessee and you will see that the Franken is of little relevance" and 93.97.122.93 said "This is a tad Americocentric" (two of the three opposes) yet the Bulgarian election stayed up and Franken came down. -SusanLesch (talk) 16:20, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

What? Can you please explain what you mean? Colipon+(T) 16:22, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Are u suggesting that Bulgarian elections which are of national level should come down because Al Franken was taken down? I think u can figure out on ur own why that will not happen. And Al Franken was taken down to balance the main page not due to this discussion. Ashishg55 (talk) 16:37, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Regarding "And Al Franken was taken down to balance the main page not due to this discussion". The American election was taken off the main page out of order. All I know is what I saw and I have no other comments. -SusanLesch (talk) 16:45, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, Susan is right about that. :) --BorgQueen (talk) 16:49, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

well i only stated the comment that was posted by the admin who removed it. It said it was due to main page balance. the reasoning behind removing Al Franken out of order u will have to take up with the admin themselves. Ashishg55 (talk) 17:54, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

American Bias? Political bias?

To be really honest, I think the bias is not just American. I think another important bias that people have not pointed out is this overt obsession with politics. So much ITN is about this country's legislative election, that country's newly elected Prime Minister. With all due respect to sovereign nations like the Solomon Islands, their leadership changes just don't matter a whole lot to the rest of the world. It takes up room in ITN that can be dedicated to more pertinent stories. With Wikipedia's coverage of current events (especially more controversial topics) now a focal point of major global media and indeed, much of the world's English speaking population looking to get background information, it is important that ITN reflect pertinent stories that are important to the widest-ranging audience. Someone looking for the most pertinent news of the day should be able to come onto the Wikipedia main page and not have to dig thru the stories of Portal:Current Events to find what s/he is looking for.

To this end, I would actually suggest that under the current blurbs section, we add a small section on "Other topics in the news" right below it, and simply add links to other events that are going on (inspured by Google News). This will at most take two lines, allow the current trend of news blurbs to continue, and allow for much easier navigation. Thoughts? Colipon+(T) 16:34, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

But ITN is not a news service - if people want that they can go to wikinews. The primary purpose of ITN is to highlight articles that relate to current events. That is why the absolute number one prerequisite for an item going up is a referenced update to a wikipedia article. Also, just to point out the reason political elections of all sovereign states are posted (no matter how small) is because more often than not it is the only time these nations ever get on the main page. I don't know if anyone can look through the previous listings, but I'd be suprised if the Soloman Islands have been on there before. Maybe it will be nice for once if people can click on an article like Soloman Islands and read up on a nation that 'no one cares about'. It is also important to remember that the whole purpose of the main page of wikipedia is to promote articles within, whether they be high quality articles (TFA), new articles (DYK) or articles that are significant with regards to the day they are posted (OTD). ITN should be no different. It should promote articles that relate to current events and not simply regurgitate information listed on Google News --Daviessimo (talk) 17:07, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

I absolutely agree that on principle Wikipedia is not a news service, and that the primary purpose of everything on the main page is to link to articles. That being said, we cannot ignore the fact that many people come onto Wikipedia to learn about current events - and some even find Wikipedia's article format to be very convenient when different news sites are all reporting different things. We have to come to terms that Wikinews has thus far failed in its viability as a reputable news source - yet Wikipedia has been extremely successful, not even on its own accord. Several major newspapers have already commented on Wikipedia's role in news stories such as the Air France crash and the Iran election protests. Wikipedia is a project that is constantly evolving. This new reality makes it reasonable for Wikipedia to revise some of its former policies on ITN articles. Colipon+(T) 17:44, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

This, food for thought from User:Madcoverboy: "WP:ITN embodies the sui generis potential of Wikipedia to not simply be replicative but transformative of how knowledge can be created and communicated. News of all types from across the world are often featured on ITN and expose readers to up-to-date, detailed, and high-quality encyclopedic articles to provide a context for issues that no newspaper can. Moreover, the active community of editors who participates there has developed a strong ethic and set of rules that allows them to weed out the trash new and infotainment that degrades and demeans journalism as an essential component of a free and open society and to instead focus on issues of international importance and encyclopedic interest." Colipon+(T) 17:52, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

But I don't necessarily think reducing the number of politics items from the outset is the way to go. I'm more in favour of increasing the turnover of ITN items. When I first joined it was very slow and not uncommon for it to go 48hrs+ without an update. Realistically, there is no reason why we shouldn't get at least two items on per day, something which we do get on occasions today. However, the issue is, and always has been, a lack of contributors. If it wasn't for User:BorgQueen, I'm fairly certain ITN would collapse because he is the only admin who takes a sustained interest in it. My concern is that many users shoot in, nominate and support items important or interesting to them and then disappear, leaving myself and the other half a dozen or so regulators having to update other articles to get them on the main page. The simple fact is, if we had more contributors who were willing to provide fair and impartial views and chip in with updating articles, ITN could easily be twice as productive.--Daviessimo (talk) 18:29, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Daviessimo, thank you for compliments but please use feminine pronoun in the future when referring to me... (Sorry for the off-topic comments...) --BorgQueen (talk) 18:37, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

I do apologise --Daviessimo (talk) 19:02, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Removing the Cyber Attacks ?

The July 2009 cyber attacks page is going through a rough time at the moment. Its notability is being challenged at AFD and it's a very short and stubby article. While I understand there is a shortage of nominations for ITN, surely we don't want to be linking to an article of this standard from the Main Page ? -212.139.90.81 (talk) 22:55, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

The AfD discussion has been closed; the article is kept. No, I don't think the article is too short; if you think it is, you are welcome to expand it. --BorgQueen (talk) 03:39, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Space Shuttle lightning strike error

The launch pad for STS-127 was not struck by lightning 11 times. There were 11 strikes within .35 miles of the pad which is distinctly different, though no less significant to the prospect of a launch tomorrow. I'm not sure what the wording should be, but this is a subtle inaccuracy that has been reported in several news media outlets. The article itself is correct, it's just the 'In the News' front page item that needs adjustment. Thanks, aremisasling (talk) 04:55, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Reworded. Better now? --BorgQueen (talk) 04:57, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Much better. Thanks. I hope my original post didn't come off rude. It was certainly not the tone I was aiming for. But I guess that's what I get for posting while tired. Thanks again. aremisasling (talk) 14:12, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Shuttle Link

The bulletin for the Space Shuttle's launch delay provides a link to the Wikipedia article on launch pads (The launch of Space Shuttle Endeavour, carrying astronauts on the STS-127 mission, is delayed after its launch pad area was struck by lightning at least 11 times).
For the reader's sake would it not be more appropriate to change the linking to: its launch pad, in order for the audience to learn more not about launch pads in general, but the actual platform being used for STS-127? Ryandinho14+(T) 16:22, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Done. --BorgQueen (talk) 15:39, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Future events

There really needs to be a time limit on added future events to ITN. There is no reason to be adding stuff thats 7 months in the future. -CWY2190(talk • contributions) 01:13, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

I trimmed it down to events at least a year from now. I'd propose cutting it for events 2 months from now. –Howard the Duck 12:49, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Zac Sunderland

I have been off wikipedia for awhile, the format for suggesting ITN items is way different now. Can someone in the know please suggest Zac Sunderland? Just broke the record for youngest person to sail around the world solo. Top news on most US organizations right now, not sure about international coverage. (just checked, its on BBCs website too). A 17 year old circumnavigating (with an article going through updates about it) seems ITN worthy to me. Russeasby (talk) 00:22, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Nominated. --candle•wicke 03:53, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

CAN WE HAVE SOME GUIDELINES ABOUT SOME VARIETY OF SUBJECTS?

LATELY ONLY POLITICAL NEWS AND PEOPLE DYING/GETTING KILLED HAVE MADE IT TO THE itn; DO PEOPLE REALLY WANT TO REPLACE, OR PERHAPS MIRROR cnn.com? CAN THERE BE SOME GUIDELIENS ABOUT GETTING MORE COVERAGE FOR NEWS MORE PERTAINING TO AN ENCYCLOPEDIA? Nergaal (talk) 02:02, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Firstly please don't YELL. Secondly as Mwalcoff and others like to remind us, we already have a lot of news that gets limited coverage in CNN and other news sources. Most elections get minimal coverage in news sources outside of the home country and perhaps neighbouring country but are of significant encylopaedic interest as they effect international relations and policy and the way a country proceeds in the future. And we ignore certain stuff which while being tops stories in CNN and similar sites are of limited encylopaedic interest Nil Einne (talk) 02:44, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

If you want to see more of a certain type of item on ITN, the constructive thing to do is find items that are in the news that you think would make good ITN items and suggest them. Just knocking other people's ideas isn't too helpful. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 03:31, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

I just did that (see Copernicum) but people here care more about 4 people dying through [choose any of the next 10 or so options: bobming, terrorist attack, plane crash, serial killer, political order, work-related-accident, etc] to get on the ITN than a purely encyclopaedic news like a new chemical element. Nergaal (talk) 05:08, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

@Nergaal. Without being impolite, can I just ask why it is that you feel the need to come here and insult what people are doing, when you are evidently not a regular contributor. I you want more encyclopaedic items, you can help find them. If you were a regular contributor, you would be aware that many of the contributors you are 'attacking' (e.g. Candlewicke, Ashishg) are also contributors who have actively attempted to put more encyclopaedic items on ITN.

Regarding the element Copernicium, I would point you in the direction of Talk:Ununbium, where the articles contributors seem to be fairly unanomously in favour of not moving the article to Copernicium until it is officially recognised. As the nominator I can easily accept that it will reflect bad on us, if we state that the element has been renamed, yet the article is not. You are more than welcome to stay on ITN and continue helping, however, I hope you understand that with a distinct lack of contributors we are doing the best I can.--Daviessimo (talk) 07:23, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

When the element was officially recognized, there was no ITN and it is deferred until it gets a name (but there were 20 news on random people dying); when it gets a name, it gets deferred until "things cool down and it gets officially accepted" (while there are 20 news on random people dying); when the name will get officially accepted, it will be a silent and old news, and nobody will care anymore, so it won't get ITN (while 20 other random people will die and get put there). The obvious conclusions are: deaths are encyclopedic content, while chemical elements are not; and ITN should be renamed to lates ways of random people getting killeded get covered by wikipedia. Nergaal (talk) 15:43, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh no, if were all about death, we'd never be rid of Iraq... it would have its own section. Yet I believe deaths in Iraq have only featured twice this year and on both those occasions records have been broken. --candle•wicke 03:58, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

not that i disagree that there is quite a bit of death/destruction/politics (DDP for simplicity) on ITN but here is the thing to put encyclopedic content, it first needs to happen then we need to find it, get article updated, get consensus and then put it up. It is a lot harder to do that for non DDP items as "noteworthy" things dont happen that often. we had the flute, that salamander etc on ITN. so these items do make it to ITN and if u feel that there should be more then please help digging them up. no need to yell at everyone here for not trying... Ashishg55 (talk) 01:44, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

and regarding the element. It just didnt get proper consensus. so lets move on and find another item. it will get posted sooner or later when it becomes more official Ashishg55 (talk) 01:47, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Somehow, I knew this was about copernicium. To be quite honest, I really don't think you have a right to blast us all here for not putting it up when you failed to nominate it yourself. Therequiembellishere (talk) 03:50, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm appalled by the double standard. We didn't (and "shouldn't") wait "for a decade" when Iceland gets to be a EU member, yet we added the blurb when their parliament agreed to issue an application. WTF. Can somebody justify that in comparison to the element. –Howard the Duck 07:19, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

There was no nomination after the element's naming! I would have support had there been, but there wasn't. I couldn't make heads nor tails of the sources and didn't feel like nominating a page I knew absolutely nothing about. Therequiembellishere (talk) 07:38, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

I did nominate a few weeks(?) ago but I was told to wait. –Howard the Duck 08:29, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Was the naming nominated? If so, I hadn't seen it. Therequiembellishere (talk) 09:21, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

I dunno. I did nom its discovery. –Howard the Duck 12:18, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Which I remember. I believe I declined because it hadn't really been "discovered", it had just been acknowledged. I also seem to remember that we were going to wait for it's naming -- that naming will become official in a few months. Therequiembellishere (talk) 16:58, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Hypothetical situations

This section has been moved to Wikipedia:In the news section on the Main Page/Hypothetical situations. --candle•wicke 03:44, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

July 26th Headline: "India launches its first nuclear submarine INS Arihant, becoming the sixth country in the world that can construct the vessels."

First of all, I apologize if this is the incorrect place to to post this, if so, please let me know so I can raise the issue in the appropriate area.

The current version of the headline posted on ITN is "India launches its first nuclear submarine INS Arihant, becoming the sixth country in the world that can construct the vessels." What concerns me is the word 'can'. It is a subjective statement, and implies that any country that hasn't done so is incapable of constructing such a vessel. However many countries, including for example, Canada, arguably have both the financial and human resources to produce their own versions of a nuclear submarine if their respective governments decided to.

Therefore, I propose the altering of the headline to the following: "India launches its first nuclear submarine INS Arihant, becoming the sixth country in the world to construct such a vessel."

Obviously, please comment with any other views on the issue. In addition, if consensus is reached, would someone more 'wikiwise' than myself alter the headline? Much appreciated.

--Dbo789 (talk) 03:55, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

You want WP:ERRORS, I think. Algebraist 03:58, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

I just found Wikipedia:Main_Page/Errors and have re-posted there. I think that's the correct spot. Thanks! --Dbo789 (talk) 04:01, 27 July 2009 (UTC)