• edit
• history
• watch

• American veteran journalist Helen Thomas, who covered the White House for nearly five decades, dies at 92. (BBC)

• Two US marine harrier jets forced to drop several unarmed bombs on the world-heritage listed Great Barrier Reef due to an emergency during a training exercise. (news.com.au)
• Bihar school meal poisoning incident:
  • Police say that a forensic report confirmed the cooking oil contained "very toxic" levels of monocrotophos, an agricultural pesticide. (The Guardian),(BBC)

• Venezuela ends its rapprochement with the United States due to a statement by Samantha Power, nominated to become the United States Ambassador to the United Nations. (AFP via News24)
• Israel announces that it will release Palestinian prisoners if peace talks are resumed. (Reuters)
• 17 government soldiers are killed in an attack by FARC revolutionaries in the Colombian department of Arauca. BBC

• Five Costa Crociere employees plead guilty to manslaughter and negligence charges in relation to the Costa Concordia disaster that cost 32 crew and passengers their lives off the coast of Italy. Captain Francesco Schettino is being tried separately. (AP)
• A man sets off homemade black powder explosive in Beijing Capital International Airport, injuring himself. No one else was hurt in the explosion. (CNN)
• Three female bodies are found in plastic sheets in East Cleveland, Ohio; a 35-year-old sex offender was arrested on suspicion of all three cases, but has not been charged. Police say he may have been influenced by convicted Cleveland serial killer Anthony Sowell. (Peoria Journal Star)

RD: Mel Smith

• Nominated by Bob Castle (talk · give credit)

• Support. A very prominent person in British comedy. Thryduulf (talk) 16:56, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose Awards? Honors? Influence? I'm not seeing sufficient significance to meet any of the death criteria. And "expectancy" of death is not a qualifier or disqualifier. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:00, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
• Mild oppose very prominent comedian but most likely not meeting the RD criteria because of lack of awards and international prominence. A shame as his death is quite a shock and having seen him on my telly box for 20 years, I think he'd make an ideal RD candidate, particularly after the Glee character waltzed it. But hey, this is Misplaced Pages. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:09, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

That Glee character was cute enough to pass for someone half his age. I wouldn't let the sister I hate date this Mel guy. μηδείς (talk) 19:07, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

I did miss the "dateability" criterion for RDs that obviously swung the Glee nom. Mel was funny and had a 30-year career, Glee-guy had one role for three seasons, presumably Tariq must post this based on that alone? The Rambling Man (talk) 20:40, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

That's the "date the sister you hate" criterion to be clear. I didn't vote for the Glee guy, he was posted before I had a chance to vote against him. μηδείς (talk) 21:03, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I get it. I guess it depends on Tariq's mood, whether or not this gets posted (although it has more support that I could ever have imagined). The Rambling Man (talk)

Oh, so you're jumping on an opportunity to be obnoxious, are you? (And it looks like you have company.) At the time of posting, the death of Cory Monteith clearly had consensus, as people felt the prominence of the story in the news outweighed the breadth of his contributions. You could discover that the article on him was the most-read on Misplaced Pages this week, so perhaps they were on to something. But I suspect we'll continue to see you needlessly whining about this story, believing that I posted the story because of what I felt about the contributions of the individual or what I wanted to do, rather than what the sum of commenters at that point felt about the prominence of the story. It's petty enough to bring up Monteith in nominations that aren't comparable, but it's just low for you to then proceed to attack me personally. -- tariqabjotu 00:07, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Like this is relevant, so he was popular? That does not mean that he was important enough to post according the criteria that we should all use to post these. Actors are almost by definition popular, luckily popularity is not part of the criteria here, nor should it. You should just admit already that you made a mistake there. 84.248.131.49 (talk) 00:26, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

There is no mistake to admit. I explained the matter a number of times there; among the purposes of ITN is "to help readers find and quickly access content they are likely to be searching for because an item is in the news". And yet some people still seem to think I should have discounted supports because they didn't agree with the claims of notability or didn't agree that the prominence of the story regarding his death mattered. There is simply no purpose to beating this dead horse. -- tariqabjotu 00:35, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Of course, well are you posting these two then (Mel Smith and Helen Thomas)? After all "recent death space is free" which is enough for you apparently already, and these have lot's of support as well. I admit that my support was a bit obnoxious too here, but it is also true, he really is quite famous and important comedian. Also that part of the rules you keep quoting is not relevant here, since dead people must meet 1 of the 3 criterias. 84.248.131.49 (talk) 00:44, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

That Tariq comment came out of the blue, I was not expecting this turn and didn't realize it was Tariq who had posted Monteith, nor do I think he was wrong to. μηδείς (talk) 01:16, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Systemic bias alive is alive and kicking! If posting admins are entitled to ignore the criteria for posting RDs, little hope remains. Sob. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:15, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

It doesn't look lke systemic bias to me. This looks like User:Tariqabjotu bias. Once again I have very grave doubts about his suitability as the ITN gatekeeper, with specific regards to his statements in recent days and the tone above. doktorb _words 09:53, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

• Support I like trucking, I like trucking, I like trucking and I like to truck. Lugnuts 17:21, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
  • I presume that's one of his bits? That doesn't give us who are unfamiliar with him any help. Convince me to change my vote. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:55, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
    • So you knew who Bert Trautmann was? Or anyone who has been listed in RD in the last 6 months? Lugnuts 08:21, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
      • While I don't expect it to convince you to change your vote, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9lmCpIzhFo will explain what Lugnuts is referring to. Thryduulf (talk) 20:51, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
• Support On the edge of notability for RD, I suppose, but coverage around the world and let's not forget that bloke from Glee. Black Kite (talk) 17:31, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
• Support Started career with Rowan Atkinson and while overshadowed by him still had an huge and succesfull career. Very important british comedian. 84.248.131.49 (talk) 17:34, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
• Article/update needs work - there are a half dozen or so tags and the update is only 1 sentence long. Both will need addressed before I can consider supporting. Also, most of the supports are utterly unconvincing - please explain why you think he is sufficiently important on his own merits. --ThaddeusB (talk) 17:40, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

• I've tidied it up, referencing what can easily be sourced and removing unsourced and irrelevant trivia. I'llput some reactions to his death in later if no-one else does. Black Kite (talk) 19:12, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

• Support A very significant person in British commedy. --Bruzaholm (talk) 21:39, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
  • "Significant" how? As far as I can tell, he was on a couple of successful shows, but that's it. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:25, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
• Support Boooyeaah well known in the UK. --85.210.109.89 (talk) 22:11, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
  • This isn't UKpedia. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:17, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
    • Objections relating to an event or person being from a single country are not valid. This doesn't have to be UKpedia. 331dot (talk) 22:30, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
      • What a hilarious hypocrite Muboshgu is considering his below nomination. Just hilarious. --85.210.109.89 (talk) 22:37, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
        • Being well known, no matter in how many countries, doesn't satisfy the death criteria. And has nothing to do with the nomination I made. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:18, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
          • How well known someone is is an indication of notability in their field. It's not the only factor, but it is there. 331dot (talk) 00:29, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
• Support. If we posted the actor from Glee we can surely post this one who had a longer career and was probably more well known. 331dot (talk) 22:30, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
• Support. I thought it was Mel Smith who passed away, otherwise I would had put more weight to the support. Same reason as the others, if we let this Glee guy in (and who is he), then we may as well let him in since he is a prominent name in British comedy. Donnie Park (talk) 22:42, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
  • If you click on the YouTube link just below, about half a minute in or something, you will see that the Glee guy is Mel Smith's comedy partner. Thank you Tim. Formerip (talk) 23:22, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
  • One mistake doesn't justify another. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:19, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
• Support http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9km3-fWJ7sg Nestrs (talk) 23:14, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose - if the only justification for posting is the "the Glee guy" was posted, then there apparently is no justification for posting. Whether one agrees with the posting of Monteith or not, the situations are not obviously comparable. As an admin, I would give little to no weight to most of the support votes - please make a case based on Mr. Smith's merits if you want this posted. --ThaddeusB (talk) 01:14, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Fair enough but you should also oppose then based on his merits or lack of them, there is no real reason to oppose in your post. 84.248.131.49 (talk) 01:32, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

My oppose is based on the lack of demonstrated importance. It is not my responsibility to prove there is insufficient notability, but rather the responsibility of supports to prove there is sufficient notability. So far, few have even tried. --ThaddeusB (talk) 01:38, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Your responsibility is to read his article I am fairly certain. Not just read what people say here. If you have read that and still oppose, fair enough. 84.248.131.49 (talk) 01:49, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

To be clear, nothing I have read - in the article, in the news, or here - convinces me. I don't see any significant awards, and no one has really attempted to argue for exceptional coverage or cultural impact. --ThaddeusB (talk) 16:20, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose per TRM. Neljack (talk) 02:02, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
  • There is some consensus (even after discounting most of the supports which are either OMG Glee was posted this should be to or YouTube links with no evidence of importance) to post as RD has a slightly lower threshold plus there is a free space, but where is the update? Secret 03:01, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose per Muboshgu. Has he won any honors/awards in recognition of his importance in the field? Not really, at least according to the article as it's currently written. Spencer 05:43, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
• Support Significant writer in two comedy shows still respected today, director and producer, helped set up significantly large (and successful) production company TalkBack. Only one flop that I can think of ("Morons from Outer Space"). doktorb _words 07:43, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
• Support the guy did actually seem to have some accomplishments beyond his recognizable looks: lead in two shows, owned production company. Just needs two sentence update to go, μηδείς (talk) 16:03, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose. We're starting to get really low on the actor notability meter here. fwiw I'd have opposed the Glee one as well. Wizardman 16:13, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
• Support as per doktorb. Three other thoughts.

Firstly, someone having received awards should count somewhat to showing that they were rated highly in their field but the lack of awards should not normally count against them. In the Helen Thomas discussion it says "Orson Welles never won an Oscar for directing. Mark Twain never won a Nobel Prize. F. Scott Fitzgerald never won a Pulitzer for fiction", awards can be made for seemingly capricious reasons and so someone who is significant can miss out. So I don't think that a lack of awards should count against Mel Smith, nor against Cory Monteith.

Secondly, the reason that he is know to many people only from two programmes from a long time ago is because he has subsequently done a lot of non-screen work. He (and Rhys Jones) made Talkback into a company worth GBP62 million.

Thirdly, the comparison with Cory Monteith has some validity but there is an element of apples and oranges here. Monteith's fame amongst the general populace is currently high because Glee is currently on air and to honestly compare against that you have to think about Smith dying whilst Alas Smith and Jones was at the height of its popularity. I cannot find any figures but it was very popular when originally broadcast.

FerdinandFrog (talk) 16:36, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

But the Glee guy was so popular that it simply had to be posted, regardless of the fact it failed to meet any of the RD criteria. Actual facts and adherence to criteria didn't get in the way of that ITN posting, apparently short-lived popular American TV stars have a free pass. Maybe we should add it to ITN/R. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:31, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

It's been a long established, unwritten, principle at ITN that with deaths if the person who died is young and in the middle of their career we can lower the threshold of notability. Thus it's simply not an apt comparison and really isn't helping along this nomination.--Johnsemlak (talk) 21:27, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

So Misplaced Pages is working at the level of a tabloid newspaper? I thought we were better than that. Clearly I was wrong. Black Kite (talk) 23:30, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Hah! I have worked at a tabloid newspaper. This is more like a low-scale chimp-typist civil war. μηδείς (talk) 01:37, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Request Can an admin other than User:Tariqabjotu look at this please? doktorb _words 20:14, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

• I'd post it right now, but I've already commented on it. Black Kite (talk) 23:30, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

• Updated technically, but with "found dead" and "nice guy" comments, not "groundsbreaking" comments. I am not sure why Tariq should neither post nor give his reservations if he wants. μηδείς (talk) 21:37, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
• Comment. I'm strongly against the criticism of Tariq that's been going on in this thread and elsewhere. To comment specifically: 1. As far as I can remember, he never posts without considering the ITN criteria. As far as I can remember he always posts with a detailed rationale and carefully considers both criteria and ITN consensus (which can at times overrule ITN guidelines). 2. He is not a 'gatekeeper'. He is one of 7 admins who has edited the ITN template only in the last two days, and one of many more in recent history and several admins are active on this particular nomination. 3. Several admins besides Tariq have already expressed reservations about this nom or opposed.--Johnsemlak (talk) 21:41, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

That comment belongs on the talk page, not here. This thread is not about Tariq. μηδείς (talk) 21:46, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

• Ready marked ready given 2 to 1 support. Yes some of the votes are "monteith", but the nom did have two leads in series (compare Jack Klugman) and was cofounder largest comedy production busines in Britain. μηδείς (talk) 21:43, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
• Posted though after Thomas as his death happened a day prior to her. Secret 00:07, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

RD: Helen Thomas

• Updated and nominated by Muboshgu (talk · give credit)

• Support I came here with the intention of nominating this. I actually think she is notable enough to justify an entry in the main section rather than just RD. For decades she was present at nearly every presidential press conference, and often got to ask questions. Looie496 (talk) 14:41, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Actually, when she became the senior wire reporter in the perss corps, she got to ask the first question at every briefing. Until she left UPI for Hearst in 2000. – Muboshgu (talk) 14:50, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
• Support There is a couple of uncited lines near the top, but otherwise the article is in very good shape. Miyagawa (talk) 15:07, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
• Support per nominator. –Randor1980 15:19, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
• Update needs work - update consists of one sentence at current. That is insufficient for ITN purposes. Otherwise, article looks good. --ThaddeusB (talk) 16:09, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
  • Working on it. I added statements from Judy Woodruff, Andrea Mitchell, and Dana Perino. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:19, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
    • Minimum requirements are now met, so I am neutral on the nomination. --ThaddeusB (talk) 18:30, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
• Support seems to be a very prominent person in US political journalism. Thryduulf (talk) 16:57, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
• Weak support I don't see the BBC using terms like "pioneer" without justification. Just because I'm not completely commensurate with her impact (because I'm outside the US), it shouldn't stop me supporting the nomination, albeit mildly. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:12, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose she had mild notoriety as a curmudgeon who occasionally insulted a president and for her rabid anti-semitism. She was certainly nowhere near the top of any field--just recognizable when occasionally seen on TV. μηδείς (talk) 17:55, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
• Support according to her wiki page there were at some point anyway journalist awards given in her name, and with career that spanned 60 years I think she certainly qualifies. 84.248.131.49 (talk) 18:12, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose this is a first rate example of the press glamorizing one of its former members. Hot Stop talk-contribs 18:41, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

support came here for this and her controversy (let alone career as the longest WH correspondent) was recent.(Lihaas (talk) 19:06, 20 July 2013 (UTC)).

Are you saying her anti-semitism is a reason to support her nomination? μηδείς (talk) 19:23, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Who ever said she's anti-Semetic? She was Semetic. She was anti-Zionist. What does any of this have to do with her accomplishments, anyway? – Muboshgu (talk) 19:26, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Are you Lihaas? Did you just answer why the controversy surrounding her would be a reason to post according to Lihaas? μηδείς (talk) 19:33, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

• Support for RD. Widely recognized by other journalists and some of the Presidents she questioned as significant in her field. 331dot (talk) 19:52, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

So widely recognized for her work she never won a Pulitzer Prize. Hot Stop talk-contribs 19:57, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Specific awards, while a consideration, are not the be-all end-all in making someone notable. She has won awards. 331dot (talk) 19:59, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

I'm aware she won other awards. But she didn't win the award that matters most in her field. The fact is she isn't Woodward and Bernstien -- she never broke any major stories. Or actual journalism as it is called. Hot Stop talk-contribs

Orson Welles never won an Oscar for directing. Mark Twain never won a Nobel Prize. F. Scott Fitzgerald never won a Pulitzer for fiction. This really isn't a winning argument. Gamaliel (talk) 02:07, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Orson Welles didn't sit in the White House press room a few times a year as the president spoke and insult him Rumplestiltskin-like either. It's rather unclear what her not winning a prize for her investigative journalism or brilliant writing says in her favor. What field does her not winning prizes put her at the top of? μηδείς (talk) 02:26, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose. She certainly qualifies, but the article is appalling and should not be linked to the main page. For someone who had a 60-year career and reached the top of her profession, far too much coverage is given to the supposedly controversial comments she retired over. The article is 3,800 words long and less than half of those words are not about that incident. Formerip (talk) 20:07, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
  • I trimmed it some, since it was a little too much, but I don't know that any more should be cut, as it was a major controversy that led directly to her leaving the press corps. Even if it is still too long, I don't think that it's so bad that it shouldn't go up on the front page, and I hope you reconsider your !vote. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:32, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
    • It's directly relevant to the nomination. Helen Thomas was basically the bugaboo of the press corps from the time of the Carter administration. She was much better known for "there goes Helen Thomas again" moments except to a small cadre of admirers who enjoyed her rude, and finally career-ending antics. She sometimes was the story, but she didn't break any. She was certainly not an important journalist in the sense of Woodward and Bernstein or even Andrew Breitbart. If she's posted it will be as a celebrity along the lines of (but much less notable to the average American than) Mel Smith, not as a professional newswoman. μηδείς (talk) 21:51, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
      • I know nothing about her except what I have read in the article, so I'm not denying the relevance to the nomination or her article. But there is no way that a two-minute conversation can merit taking up half of her bio, given that she was in the public spotlight for sixty years. It's just an embarrassing collision of WP:RECENT and WP:POVPUSH. Formerip (talk) 23:12, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
        • I would say the problem is not the amount of material about the incident, but rather the limited description of the rest of her career. --ThaddeusB (talk) 01:18, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
• Support - Longtime questioner of presidents with a notable career. Early female journalist and iconoclastic reporter. Certainly worthy of an RD mention on ITN. Article shortcomings exist but do not justify an oppose, in my view. Jusdafax 22:24, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose It's clearly not certain what is the specific field she was famous and respected in. If she was so because of the longevity of her career and the fact she served ten US presidents, then it would have surely made her much more notable and influential. We cannot simply post her death because of the records for being the "first female in something paltry". Please first resolve these issues and explain what are the things that she influenced in the US politics or anything else in the world before to convince me vote the opposite.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 22:32, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

To clarify, she held no political position. She sat in the White House press room as a journalist and usually placed one question per conference to either the president or, more usually, his press secretary. This is what Sam Donaldson is known for having done, if you are familiar with him. She then wrote a weekly column or more when news warranted it. She was much more famous for occasionally asking presidents hostile and loaded questions than anything she ever wrote, and she had no effect on political developments. μηδείς (talk) 02:33, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing it up, but it doesn't seem something important either.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:58, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

• Support per nominator. An institution. Gamaliel (talk) 22:48, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
• Support The quotes in the article (from figures ranging from Fidel Castro to Dana Perino, as well as various journalists and news articles) would seems to establish that she "was widely regarded as a very important figure in her field". I would, however, like to see the sections in her article on the controversial comments further trimmed, per WP:Undue. Neljack (talk) 01:58, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
• Support (preferably blurb) or RD, you can easily argue that Thomas was probably the most influential female journalist in history. Being a political reporter at a time that it was a field fully dominated by men and female journalists mostly were regulated to the gossip or society pages is groundbreaking (Another candidate for "most influential" Katherine Graham was a publisher). Secret 02:52, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
• Comment Ignoring the imbalanced weight of the article, the update on the death itself seems like it could be better. -- tariqabjotu 03:15, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
• Comment: As mentioned by Tariq, the article is horribly imbalanced. The infobox says that her "years active" was 1943–2013, yet it seems that over 90% of the text written about her career is about events after 2000. Spencer 05:46, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

  As mentioned by Tariq... Well, a lot of people have mentioned that; I was just repeating. -- tariqabjotu 05:50, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

• Update I've trimmed the Playboy interview section, which was just three paragraphs on her talking about the Palestine comment. I've added a bunch more for her earlier career as well, so hopefully it's a little less slanted towards the more recent events. – Muboshgu (talk) 14:19, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

  Not perfect, of course, but that definitely seems to help. -- tariqabjotu 16:01, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

  Thanks. It's not perfect indeed, but it's not terrible either. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:23, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

• Support I can't believe that there's any debate about this. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 14:50, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
• Support Highly important in her field. --LukeSurl 15:31, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
• Posted -- tariqabjotu 15:58, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Costa Concordia trial

• Nominated by Kiril Simeonovski (talk · give credit)

• Oppose We posted the original disaster; the manslaughter convictions afterward aren't as important. Spencer 16:01, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose based on this quote in the BBC News article, "Prosecutor Francesco Verusio told reporters that Capt Schettino's trial was the most important.". When even the prosecutors talk about this being minor it really isn't that significant. Possibly this might be covered in the blurb when the verdict on the Captain happens (trial due to resume in September). Thryduulf (talk) 17:03, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose These are the small fish in this case, according to that bbc article they agreed to plea pargain and are even unlikely to ever sit on a jail. Now when Captain of that ship is sentenced I think we should report that whatever the result might be. 84.248.131.49 (talk) 17:32, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose. Only a conviction of the Captain should be posted. 331dot (talk) 19:58, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
• Support I can't say I really care about the nomination, but I have to say I am surprised a conviction on manslaughter in this case isn't going up, regardless of whether it's the captain scapegoated in the press. This is a major conviction in an historic shipwreck case. μηδείς (talk) 22:05, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
  • It's a conviction, yes, but the prosecutors, victims groups and media all say that it's minor. About half the BBC article is not about this conviction but about the Captain's trial. Thryduulf (talk) 06:25, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
• Oppose Doesn't warrant posting. ★★KING RETROLORD★★ 09:41, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

July 19

Portal:Current events/2013 July 19

July 19, 2013 (2013-07-19) (Friday) edit history watch Armed conflicts and attacks Iraqi insurgency (post-U.S. withdrawal): A suicide bombing inside a Sunni mosque in the eastern Iraqi province of Diyala kills at least twenty people. (BBC) Colombian FARC offer to release Kevin Scott Sutay, an American soldier captured last month. (AFP via France 24) International relations The Prime Minister of Australia, Kevin Rudd, announces a plan to settle asylum seekers who come by boat in Papua New Guinea. (The Australian) Law and justice Pope Francis names a new Pontifical Commission to investigate current accounting practices among all Vatican offices and bodies and to help devise new strategies for greater fiscal responsibility and fiscal transparency. (Catholic News Service) A Russian court releases Kremlin critic Alexei Navalny a day after being sentenced for alleged embezzlement. (AP via The Hindu) Politics and elections Cambodian opposition leader Sam Rainsy returns home to contest the general election after receiving a royal pardon for a conviction in 2009. (AP via Calgary Herald) The Muslim Brotherhood calls for millions of supporters to hold rallies across Egypt two weeks after Mohamed Morsi was deposed as president. (NBC News) Asylum in Australia No consensus to post. However, this looks like it would meet DYK criteria and would provide an interesting hook as well. Spencer 15:17, 22 July 2013 (UTC) The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. Article: Asylum in Australia (talk · history · tag) Blurb: ​ Prime Minister Kevin Rudd announces that Australia will no longer grant asylum to anyone arriving in the country without a visa. (Post) News source(s): Ny Times Credits: Updated and nominated by ThaddeusB (talk · give credit) Article updatedNominator's comments: The New York Times remarks "No issue looms larger over Australian politics than how to deal with asylum seekers". I'm not sure that is 100% true, but it certainly is a very important issue for the country as thousands of people try to get asylum by coming via boat (and hundreds die in the process) each year. The new policy effectively ends asylum the these refugees, and so is a major development in this highly important issue. Story is drawing a lot of international coverage. --ThaddeusB (talk) 18:48, 19 July 2013 (UTC) There's been a strong consensus in the past against posting policy announcements. I could see posting the Australian government firing on boats or one sinking, as that would be an historic incident. But a policy announcement is basically a something that hasn't happened yet. μηδείς (talk) 18:55, 19 July 2013 (UTC) As a side note, these boats sink all the time, so that wouldn't qualify at ITN either. Unless it was absolutely huge, the current record is 300+ deaths from memory. ★★RetroLord★★ 04:40, 20 July 2013 (UTC) Oppose. Simple policy change; if as Medeis says it results in something tragic (or was in response to a specific tragic incident) then we might have something. 331dot (talk) 20:55, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Oppose Australia has a federal election coming up, possibly within weeks. This is part of the election campaign. If the current opposition wins (a strong probability), something different will happen. If the government wins, something different could happen. (Ever seen a politician break a promise?) Wait to see what really happens. HiLo48 (talk) 21:29, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Oppose Fortunately, the circus known as Australian asylum seeker policy isn't notable enough for ITN. This is about our 200th policy in 10 years. ★★RetroLord★★ 03:02, 20 July 2013 (UTC) On the plus side, the article (which surprisingly didn't exist before yesterday) is evolving quite nicely. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:21, 20 July 2013 (UTC) Support - I believe the policy change is significant and agree with ThaddeusB that the article is now Main page material. With all due respect to opposers, including resident HiLo48, I feel this is a very good time to put up an article about "Down Under." Jusdafax 10:33, 22 July 2013 (UTC) The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. Navalny freed Article: Alexey Navalny (talk · history · tag) Blurb: ​ Russian opposition leader Alexey Navalny released after being held in custody for one day. (Post) News source(s): BBC, Guardian, LA Times Credits: Nominated by Yerevanci (talk · give credit) Article needs updating --Երևանցի 17:58, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Comment See the original nomination below; this doesn't need a separate nomination. -- tariqabjotu 18:14, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Comment already pulled having been noted at WP:ERRORS for a while. The release is not significant, just part of the "legal" process. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:15, 19 July 2013 (UTC) So what should we have in the news for Navalny? Leave it as it is, no update? --Երևանցի 18:27, 19 July 2013 (UTC) It's been removed, there's nothing much to report right now. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:30, 19 July 2013 (UTC) OK --Երևանցի 18:33, 19 July 2013 (UTC) RD: Bert Trautmann Article: Bert Trautmann (talk · history · tag) Recent deaths nomination (Post) News source(s): Eurosport Credits: Updated and nominated by The Rambling Man (talk · give credit) Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Misplaced Pages article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.Nominator's comments: Not many sportspeople can claim to have been a Nazi paratrooper, then play as a goalkeeper for Manchester CIty, in an FA Cup Final with a broken neck. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:28, 19 July 2013 (UTC) SupportFeatured article, very nice, but doesn't have anything about his death? ★★RetroLord★★ 12:49, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Three sentences in the Personal life section, all referenced, more to come as it filters through. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:01, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Changed to support, ★★RetroLord★★ 13:08, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Support Typically I wouldn't be sure, but the very high article quality describing his life and career is to me a solid example of the type of content we should encourage at RD. Spencer 16:07, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Support - significant player and influence in post-war relations between the British and Germans. Mjroots (talk) 17:56, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Support a ManU legend --Երևանցի 18:04, 19 July 2013 (UTC) You mean City, right? The Rambling Man (talk) 18:16, 19 July 2013 (UTC) haha yes --Երևանցի 18:29, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Altblurb "Captured decorated Nazi converted to soccer superman who won British final with broken neck dies"? μηδείς (talk) 19:01, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Perfect summation to us Brits who hold him in such high and unique esteem. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:09, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Posted -- tariqabjotu 19:12, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Comment This was an appalling discussion for a global encyclopaedia. The sport this guy played wasn't mentioned until the very end. We have to stop writing as if the audience already knows what we're talking about. HiLo48 (talk) 21:34, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Yeah, after all, you obviously couldn't have clicked on the link: Bert Trautmann (or the link in the nomination comments) and discovered all this to be true? The "audience" seldom gets involved in this cess pit, what's your real issue here? RD means his name gets put up in lights, nothing more.... The Rambling Man (talk) 21:38, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Oh come off the grass. Simple question. Why didn't the blurb, or the title, or the nominator's comment, name the sport? HiLo48 (talk) 21:46, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Because I guess the sources provided covered that issue? There is no blurb (it's RD), there is no title (it's RD) and the comment was linked to sources describing his legendary status. Did you actually read the nomination? The Rambling Man (talk) 22:10, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Yes, I did, and it didn't name the sport. My goal here is simply to raise the standard of discussion. We are a global encyclopaedia. We must write for all of our audience. I wouldn't write about an Australian footballer without naming the sport. HiLo48 (talk) 22:21, 19 July 2013 (UTC) I think you've confused "audience" with "editors"! The article the audience reads is a featured one, which is clear about the nature of Bert's prominence. Here, as editors, we expect a level of competence which means internal and external links provides sufficient background. Cheers! The Rambling Man (talk) 22:27, 19 July 2013 (UTC) I say again, with a minor clarification, I wouldn't write on this page about an Australian footballer without naming the sport. Makes it easier for everybody. Just trying to make it all work better :-) HiLo48 (talk) 22:37, 19 July 2013 (UTC) July 18 Portal:Current events/2013 July 18 July 18, 2013 (2013-07-18) (Thursday) edit history watch Armed conflict and attacks Eight Afghan labourers are killed on their way to work at a U.S. military base in Logar Province. (BBC) Indian paramilitary forces shoot dead seven protesters outside a Border Security Force station in Kashmir with dozens injured. (AFP via Ahram Online) Business and finance The Dow Jones Industrial Average hits its intraday high of 15,552. (CNN) With $18.5 billion in debts, the city of Detroit, Michigan files for Chapter 9 bankruptcy protection, becoming the largest municipal bankruptcy in U.S. history. (Detroit Free Press) Disasters and accidents A massive wildfire burns over 19,000 acres of forest on and around the San Jacinto Mountains and engulfs numerous buildings including seven homes, prompting the evacuation of Idyllwild-Pine Cove, California. (Reuters) Steam begins to rise at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant with utility company Tepco saying that it is possibly because of rain and that the levels of radioactivity in the surrounding areas have remained unchanged. (Reuters) Law and crime 2012 Kunsthal Art theft: Romanian investigators find the remains of paint, canvas and nails in the oven of a woman whose son is charged with stealing seven paintings by Picasso, Monet and Matisse from the Kunsthal gallery in October 2012. (AP via Australian) New Zealand police decide not to proceed with manslaughter charges against the managers of the Pike River Mine over the deaths of 29 workers in the 2010 Pike River Mine disaster. (AFP via Fox News) Russian opposition figure Alexei Navalny is convicted of embezzlement from a state-owned timber company. (The Guardian) The Supreme Court of India has ordered acid sales to be regulated by local and national governments. Acid is mainly used for attacks on people, especially women. (BBC) Politics and elections The Hellenic Parliament passes a bill that will cut thousands of public sector jobs. (Reuters) Science A study published in The Archives of Diseases in Childhood states that breastfeeding, in addition to its numerous more well-known physical and psychosocial benefits, may increase the infant's future upward mobility. (MSN) Pandoravirus Article: Pandoravirus (talk · history · tag) Blurb: ​ Researchers announce the discovery of Pandoravirus, a new type of giant virus with a genome twice as large as any previously known virus. (Post) Alternative blurb: ​ Researchers announce the discovery of Pandoravirus, a giant virus with a genome twice as large as any previously known. News source(s): Science, NPR, New York Times Credits: Updated and nominated by Looie496 (talk · give credit) Article updatedNominator's comments: Important discovery, this organism is very different from anything previously known and appears to be distributed worldwide. Looie496 (talk) 21:56, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Support based on very radical difference from any known life form. μηδείς (talk) 23:39, 18 July 2013 (UTC) I'd like the article to explain how it is radically different before supporting. In fact, I'd like the article to be expanded quite a bit. Abductive (reasoning) 01:14, 19 July 2013 (UTC) The article needs only three paragraphs to be eligible as a new article for ITN, which it meets. The organism is reported the largest known virus, apparently with hundreds of genes, while the average virus has less than a dozen. See National Geographic delaying this until there's a huge corpus on this will only mean guaranteeing the nomination goes stale. μηδείς (talk) 01:42, 19 July 2013 (UTC) The article should state these facts, no? Abductive (reasoning) 01:46, 19 July 2013 (UTC) It does to some point. (It was edited more recently than your first question). I am leery of adding side material that may be seen as clarificatory by some and fluff by others. I suppose the judgment to be made is, how much do we need to spoonfeed the layman. I think the nominator would be a better judge of that than me. μηδείς (talk) 03:24, 19 July 2013 (UTC) There's a difficult conflict here. Normally the rule we follow in scientific articles is to avoid "recentism" -- to not use information until it has been thoroughly reviewed by the field. But if we followed that rule rigorously, we would never be able to have news stories about science. On the other hand, churning out a long and detailed article about something on the very day its discovery is reported doesn't seem right either. My view is that the best approach is to report the discovery with a short article, and then gradually expand the article as the information solidifies. Looie496 (talk) 03:44, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Also, it would be bad to use any superlatives put out by the scientists themselves. For example, "radically different" is pure hype and scientifically meaningless. Best to stick to the facts. Abductive (reasoning) 04:23, 19 July 2013 (UTC) "Radically different" was my choice of words in my support comment here. But do feel free to blame the scientists for putting the phrase in the blurb if it helps. Looie has given the proper opinion on not padding out articles on new discoveries. μηδείς (talk) 04:48, 19 July 2013 (UTC) That language was in an earlier version of the article. (And put there by User:Looie496) Nevertheless, I Support posting now that the article is in better shape. Abductive (reasoning) 05:47, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Well, I have paraphrased Looie again, and added a slightly more concise alblurb. :) μηδείς (talk) 18:22, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Comment. Before posting anything based on a research paper we need, as a bare minimum, quotes from experts independent of the research expressing general credulity and a sense of awe within the field. That's as a bare minimum. Formerip (talk) 19:45, 19 July 2013 (UTC) The paper was peer reviewed, which indicates it has been credited by its peers. Credulity is not the word you mean to use here, FormerIP; it means something else. μηδείς (talk) 19:49, 19 July 2013 (UTC) No I mean credulity. Have they discovered a giant virus or is it, as suggested in passing by one of the news articles, possibly a small bacterium? Pandoravirus is a closer match to the amoebas they infect. (See page 11.) Abductive (reasoning) 03:35, 20 July 2013 (UTC) Peer review gives us some degree of confidence that the research is sound (although, even in that case, consider Andrew Wakefield). It doesn't tell us anything about whether the the findings and proposals of the authors are important or uncontroversial. Formerip (talk) 20:12, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Credulity means gullibility--being likely to believe nonsense. I highly doubt that's a quality you are looking for to show the nomination is well-supported. μηδείς (talk) 22:28, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Well, Nature opines that it might well be important. That holds more weight than Science clapping itself on the back. As you may have noticed, I generally am not a fan of hyped-up science news stories. But this has a chance of being a new Domain. So, if this doesn't get posted but crap about a new frog species does, it just makes ITN look bad. Abductive (reasoning) 20:18, 19 July 2013 (UTC) I don't know if you meant to link to Nature, but you linked to Science. My bad, here is the Nature link. Abductive (reasoning) 01:19, 20 July 2013 (UTC) Posting any science story without exposing it to basic rigour makes ITN look bad. Formerip (talk) 20:49, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Of course, but my argument is based on what could not be better secondary commentary for this sort of story at such short notice. Abductive (reasoning) 01:21, 20 July 2013 (UTC) It's a legitimate point, but I think the New York Times story addresses it. A New York Times story is itself a mark of importance, because their science writers have expertise in the topics they write about, but also the NYT story includes quotes from two independent experts in the field. I don't think those quotes belong in our article, but they are useful in supporting the importance of the story. ("Dr. Embley and other researchers hail pandoraviruses as an important discovery. 'I think it’s wonderful that such crazy and divergent lifeforms continue to be discovered,' said Tom Williams, Dr. Embley’s colleague at Newcastle University.") Looie496 (talk) 20:28, 19 July 2013 (UTC) An article in the NYT proves that a story is in some sense newsworthy, not that it reaches the threshold for ITN. The BBC wesbite doesn't seem to be covering this at all (although they have published a number of science stories today). And you're selectively quoting. Williams quote basically says "neat" rather than "groundbreaking" in any case, but paired with the other quote ("They provide no evidence for that notion, so it seems a distraction to me"), I don't think the case is at all made. Formerip (talk) 20:49, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Support - A rare and potentially very important discovery. (Coverage + potential importance is all we can expect for ITN - proven importance is not possible in a "news" setting.) The NYT article and discussion above are sufficient to prove to me that we should be covering this. --ThaddeusB (talk) 18:41, 20 July 2013 (UTC) Posted -- tariqabjotu 19:50, 20 July 2013 (UTC) Snow Line No consensus to post. Spencer 19:27, 22 July 2013 (UTC) The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. Articles: Snow line (astronomy) (talk · history · tag) and TW Hydrae (talk · history · tag) Blurb: ​ Scientists discover the first carbon monoxide Snow line in TW Hydrae. (Post) News source(s): Latinos Post Space International Business Times Nature World News Credits: Nominated by Andise1 (talk · give credit) Both articles need updatingNominator's comments: Scientists have discovered the first carbon monoxide Snow Line. I think this is pretty big because it is the first one discovered. Andise1 (talk) 22:07, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Comment It's difficult to tell whether this is important. All of the cited sources (and every other source I can find) are taken directly from a press release or from interviews with the authors of the paper. As far as I can tell, there are no stories with critical evaluation from outsiders, which is the mark of a reliable science story. I would like to see stories from good science outlets such as the BBC, New York Times, or Scientific American before I would consider supporting this. Looie496 (talk) 23:16, 18 July 2013 (UTC) The news here seems to be that this is the first time, according to the source, such a snow line has been "imaged" (not sure how that's different from detected). But it's certainly not unexpected. It seems a bit too incremental for an ITN lead, better for a portal. μηδείς (talk) 03:21, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Hun? Isn't it self-evident that at some "line" the temperature is low enough for this to occur? What exactly is supposed to be significant here? I am struggling to see any significant within astronomy, let alone why this would be of any interest to a general reader. If there is some reason to post this, please explain. However, there are literally hundreds of "first ever" discoveries every day - every scientific paper that is not in direct response to another is in principle reporting the discovery of something. --ThaddeusB (talk) 05:08, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Oppose due to lack of significance. Even within astronomy, this has caused no story whatsoever. It's a minor advance, nothing more. There isn't even any particular importance to the CO snow line, except that CO is relatively easy to observe.. Certainly not enough for ITN. Modest Genius 17:44, 21 July 2013 (UTC) Oppose Minor scientific advancements don't warrant ITN posts. ★★KING RETROLORD★★ 09:43, 22 July 2013 (UTC) Detroit Bankruptcy Article: No article specified Blurb: ​ The government of the city of Detroit files for the largest municipal bankruptcy in US history (Post) News source(s): NBC News, CNNMoney, BBC News, Business Insider Australia, Montreal Gazette, Le Monde Credits: Nominated by Ashishg55 (talk · give credit) Article needs updatingNominator's comments: I dont have time right now for proper nomination but quickly wanted to add this. As i believe this will end up going on ITN... discuss away! ---- Ashish-g55 20:56, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Support - definitly for ITN, an entire city going bankrupt.--BabbaQ (talk) 21:00, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Support in principle but would need to see an article and blurb first. Headline story on CNN.com right now. Also on the front of the BBC's page (the main page, not the US section). As I understand it, the bankruptcy is the largest Chapter 9 one by far. 331dot (talk) 21:12, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Oppose ...without much further justification. Companies go bankrupt every day. What exactly is going bankrupt here? HiLo48 (talk) 21:13, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Oh, just an entire city of hundreds of thousands of people. 331dot (talk) 21:16, 18 July 2013 (UTC) That sounds impressive, but what does it mean to anybody? How does it affect the residents? The property owners? The businesses? Who DOES it affect? A city going bankrupt isn't something that happens where I come from. It's really not obvious to me what this really means. HiLo48 (talk) 21:20, 18 July 2013 (UTC) It will affect the city's creditors, the city's services, and most especially the city's retirees and employees (pensions, wages, and benefits are usually some of the first things to see deep cuts in bankruptcy.) It will affect the city's credit rating, meaning that it will have to charge higher interest in bond issues, leaving less money for future projects and operating costs. It may well scupper some long-term projects, although that's unlikely (the alternative without declaring bankruptcy was probably abandoning them anyway). And so on. Also, I do believe this is the largest municipal bankruptcy in the US ever (the next largest Stockton, California, about half Detroit's size). Lockesdonkey (talk) 21:27, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Support Pretty major city going under, and the largest in the U.S. to file for bankruptcy. It's RoboCop coming to life, without the RoboCop to save us. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:30, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Support - Largest municipal bankruptcy in American history, with large numbers of creditors and residents effected by the declaration. Hello32020 (talk) 21:45, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Support A truly peculiar story. Once the fourth largest US city, then desolate and now even bankrupt. --hydrox (talk) 21:49, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Not to mention its loss of featured status this year. Poor Detroit. -- tariqabjotu 21:55, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Support Certainly something that we should report, i do think this needs it's own article however. 84.248.131.49 (talk) 22:04, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Question what is the precise legal entity that has filed for bankruptcy? I would assume we probably have an article on that. --LukeSurl 22:12, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Government of Detroit I presume. Should that be bold or Detroit? --LukeSurl 22:16, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Support and who didn't see this coming? --Somchai Sun (talk) 22:23, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Support Certainly unusual, particularly for such a large city, and it does seem that it is likely to have a major impact. Neljack (talk) 23:22, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Support Post it already? ★★RetroLord★★ 01:21, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Needs Update there are various targets, Detroit, Decline of Detroit. none are even close to updated. μηδείς (talk) 01:32, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Comment - There is now an article on the bankruptcy: Detroit bankruptcy, 2013. Hello32020 (talk) 02:04, 19 July 2013 (UTC) That seems like an ideal target article. It has some minor issues I will work on. I have moved it to the simpler Detroit bankruptcy and created the redirect bankruptcy of Detroit. μηδείς (talk) 02:42, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Ready the target article has been updated and referenced and the bare url tag removed. This is quite well pdated and supported at this point. μηδείς (talk) 03:09, 19 July 2013 (UTC) I would disagree. The body of the article talks about what led to Detroit's bankruptcy, but it doesn't actually talk about the filing itself; the Bankruptcy Filing section is rather slim at the moment. (P.S. I notice this is the second time you've used double brackets rather than single brackets in the header around "Ready".) -- tariqabjotu 03:20, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Feel free to fix the brackets issue if it happens again. The nominated article will be stale if we wait for bunches of technical details--one reason for ITN is to get such improvements from interested readers. It is well referenced, relevant, updated, and the nomination is hugely supported. There's no need to start adding new requirements on top of ITN noms. μηδείς (talk) 03:55, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Insisting that a target article include information about the actual event up for nomination is not "adding new requirements"; those are the requirements. That being said, Hello32020 (talk · contribs) was kind enough to provide the required update in the time since my comment here. -- tariqabjotu 04:06, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Posted -- tariqabjotu 04:19, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Question What did we actually post here? A big city going bankrupt? The biggest? (We don't often post records, because they can be broken.) A famous city? As somebody asked above, what actually went bankrupt? I'm pretty sure this couldn't happen in my country. Is this something that could only happen in the USA? I'm still really unclear on what this is all about. HiLo48 (talk) 08:08, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Please read Lockesdonkey's post above, he explained it pretty well. Any government anywhere can go bankrupt if their debt exceeds their ability to pay it; Greece would have if not for being bailed out. (The US federal govt. said they would not bail out Detroit) If the government has no money to function, it cannot do so. This event is also representative of the decline of a major city in the world at one point (Detroit was once the fourth-largest US city) which does not happen every day. 331dot (talk) 09:49, 19 July 2013 (UTC) I suspect the cause of confusion (not clarified in Lockesdonkey's otherwise very helpful post) is the use of the term 'City' to refer to the Government of the City, as I understand it Detroit per se isn't bankrupt (and it is hard to see how a city in the broad sense could be), but its local government is? ReadingOldBoy (talk) 10:46, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Yes, it seems that editors here are using "city" to mean something quite different from City. That really needs to be made clearer. And I really doubt if Greece is a valid comparison. It cannot do a Chapter 9, whatever that is. HiLo48 (talk) 12:49, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Absolutely nothing is preventing you from researching Chapter 9 bankruptcy.--WaltCip (talk) 12:51, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Would you demand that an American research the equivalent legislation for another country? This is the most US-centric posting this week by far. We are a global encyclopaedia. We must act more globally. HiLo48 (talk) 21:23, 19 July 2013 (UTC) "Do not complain about an event only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. This applies to a high percentage of the content we post and is unproductive." Also, this could have affects beyond just Detroit; anyone who loaned them money, collects retirement benefits from them, etc. is affected. 331dot (talk) 21:29, 19 July 2013 (UTC) False accusation. I have not complained that the nomination affected only one country. I am complaining about the very poor explanation of what this event actually is. HiLo48 (talk) 21:42, 19 July 2013 (UTC) It is not false. You said "This is the most US-centric posting this week by far.". 331dot (talk) 21:55, 19 July 2013 (UTC) OK, to ease your paranoia (Why ARE people from the world's most powerful nation so defensive?) let's change that to "This is the most US-centric conversation this week by far." HiLo48 (talk) 22:01, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Based on the eleven asterisks I see, the only one acting defensive here is you. Ease off.--WaltCip (talk) 01:50, 20 July 2013 (UTC) Defensive? Stupid choice of adjective for me. My aim here is to improve the standard of discussion. This posting was based on very poorly worded argument, with lot's of missing information. (Note that I am not opposing it. I just had a lot of questions, and still do.) It could have been a lot better. If an equivalent story for a country other than say the US or the UK was proposed and discussed in the same shallow and parochial way, it wouldn't stand a chance. HiLo48 (talk) 01:58, 20 July 2013 (UTC) I think if Melbourne's government went bankrupt it would be incredibly newsworthy.--WaltCip (talk) 02:27, 20 July 2013 (UTC) Melbourne's "government" cannot go bankrupt, or at least certainly not in the same way. To my knowledge no Australian municipality has ever "gone bankrupt". There is no equivalent situation in this country and, I suspect, many others. That's why I was asking questions. They haven't been answered. It didn't cross the minds of the nominator and American supporters, and you, despite my efforts, that things might work differently elsewhere, and that a little more explanation may have been desirable. HiLo48 (talk) 02:58, 20 July 2013 (UTC) This needs to be taken elsewhere at this point. The United States is a federation of fifty sovereign states, each of which has its own constitution and each of which is divided into municipalities which derive their authority from the state according to state law. Michigan as a sovereign state appointed a financial controller for one of its municipalities, Detroit, under its state law. That controller has determined the city is bankrupt, and has appealed to the federal government, in one of its few powers above the states, to file for municipal bankruptcy. The federal government is not authorized to bail out Detroit or any state or municipality, and Michigan has chosen not to do so either. If the suit proceeds, the creditors of the City of Detroit will find they are getting pennies on the dollar what's owed them, including pensioners whom, by state law, the city would not otherwise have been able to default on. But federal law is supreme in this matter, as it is anywhere it constitutionally conflicts with state law. Full stop. What used to be the richest per capita city in the nation has gone begging to the federal government under a 1937 law for relief from its creditors. Full stop. It is unprecedented, at least 4-5 times larger than any such prior bankruptcy. Full stop. Hundreds of thousands of people will lose their pensions, in a default larger than the size of Malta or Tasmania. Full stop. We have a reference desk where questions such as this can be further investigated if the Detroit bankruptcy and other articles linked to in its lea are not sufficient. Full stop. End telegram. μηδείς (talk) 04:28, 20 July 2013 (UTC) Comment apparently not so straight-forward, our blurb will need revision or pulling per this. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:43, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Pull I agree with Rambling Man, not much here now I think. Repost if court of appeals disagree with judge. 84.248.131.49 (talk) 21:16, 19 July 2013 (UTC) pull its unconstitutional and has to be nullified/withdrawn. Hence no story here.Lihaas (talk) 21:30, 19 July 2013 (UTC) It is unclear if a state judge can order a party to a federal case to drop their action- we should wait to see if this is the final word before pulling; though a blurb reword would be OK for now. 331dot (talk) 21:31, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Oppose pulling Detroit filed for bankruptcy is a fact. Even if some judge orders them to withdraw. Its been a major news for 2 days... if it were to be withdrawn then edit the blurb to say so, no need to pull. -- Ashish-g55 23:15, 19 July 2013 (UTC) This is a county circuit judge who seems to have overstepped her bounds on a political basis, threatening to "notify" President Obama who is entirely without jurisdiction in the case. μηδείς (talk) 00:18, 20 July 2013 (UTC) Oppose pulling: bankruptcy is an exclusively federal matter in the US; this is a state circuit court judge who has no jurisdiction to dismiss a bankruptcy filing. Even with her ruling, the City of Detroit has still declared that it is insolvent to the appropriate and competent court of law, it has still requested relief under Chapter 9 of the Federal Bankruptcy Code, and no state judge has jurisdiction to challenge such a federal court filing. Imzadi 1979 → 02:24, 20 July 2013 (UTC) Thanks, Imzadi. It is nice to hear something so clearly and competently put. μηδείς (talk) 03:00, 20 July 2013 (UTC) 2013 Maccabiah Games No consensus to post. ★★RetroLord★★ 10:02, 19 July 2013 (UTC) The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. Article: 2013 Maccabiah Games (talk · history · tag) Blurb: ​ The 2013 Maccabiah Games commence in Jerusalem, Israel. (Post) Credits: Nominated by HonorTheKing (talk · give credit) Article updatedNominator's comments: More than 9,000 Athletes will be participating in the games, The 3rd largest of its sort (after Olympics and Universiade). All are Jewish who take parts in the games from all arround the world, 80 countries.    – HonorTheKing (talk) 20:46, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Oppose Hardly a top-level event, given that competitors are limited on a racial basis. Nor does it get a lot of international attention. Neljack (talk) 23:42, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Opppose Oddly sectarian. μηδείς (talk) 23:46, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Oppose Not at the highest levels of competition among countries. Spencer 00:29, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Oppose. Not a top-level competition, and specific to a single group (Jewish by birth or religion) and not athletes in general. 331dot (talk) 09:51, 19 July 2013 (UTC) The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. Alexei Navalny jailed Article: Alexei Navalny (talk · history · tag) Blurb: ​ Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny sentenced to five years in prison for alleged embezzlement. (Post) News source(s): Washington Post BBC CNN NY Times Credits: Nominated by Yerevanci (talk · give credit) Article updated --Երևանցի 18:29, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Support very significant event for Russia, might even hurt its relations with the West --Երևանցի 21:40, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Support might I also suggest we also but Sergei Magnitsky on the blurb, he was sentenced posthumously just a week ago for tax evasion, it is I think relevant here because it seems to me anyway that these both are political trials. 84.248.131.49 (talk) 22:09, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Support This judgement marks the end of a very important trial that started almost three months ago. Navalny was definitely one of the most important political figures in Russia, who was hailed by many as a future presidential candidate.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 22:43, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Support per Kiril. 331dot (talk) 23:06, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Support per Kiril. Neljack (talk) 23:44, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Support significant development in Russia moving towards full dictatorship, well-known figure internationally Josh Gorand (talk) 23:55, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Updated see . μηδείς (talk) 01:29, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Posted -- tariqabjotu 03:07, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Pulled He's apparently been released from prison on bail, pending appeal. Unless someone has a more up-to-date blurb that's still interesting, there doesn't appear to be anything ITN-worthy to post right now. -- tariqabjotu 18:12, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Guinea violence Article: 2013 Guinea clashes (talk · history · tag) Blurb: ​ At least 56 people are killed in ethnic clashes in Guinea prior to an election. (Post) Credits: Updated and nominated by Lihaas (talk · give credit) Article updatedNominator's comments: Death toll is high per recent precedence for disasters. Its also in the context of the election so I added thatlink. Lihaas (talk) 00:30, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Comment: From the article, "In late February 2013, political violence erupted ... upcoming May 2013 elections." Why is this being nominated now? Are there new clashes or something? Spencer 01:25, 18 July 2013 (UTC) The nominator failed to provide any news sources which is why some may think this is not a recent event. These clashes are new recent clashes according to Washington Post, Reuters, BBC, Al Jazeera etc. Andise1 (talk) 03:55, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Ah, okay thank you. In that case, the article needs substantial updates to reflect recent events. Spencer 14:07, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Support The elections have been postponed until September. The BBC says at least 54 deaths, so we should probably replace 56 with that. In any case, it is undoubtedly serious civil strife. Neljack (talk) 04:06, 18 July 2013 (UTC) The article (and especially the lead) will need more information on the election re-scheduling. (Lead implies elections happened in May; body says postponed "indefinitely", which apparently is not the case any longer.) Also, I see no real reason to mention the elections in the ITN blurb. - that would imply the violence happened because of the elections which is speculation at best. --ThaddeusB (talk) 05:12, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Cleaned it.Lihaas (talk) 20:39, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Comment: The update could use copyediting and more references. Spencer 22:04, 19 July 2013 (UTC) July 17 Portal:Current events/2013 July 17 July 17, 2013 (2013-07-17) (Wednesday) edit history watch Armed conflicts and attacks Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula confirms that its former deputy Said Ali al-Shihri was killed in a US drone strike. (ABC Online) Protests break out in Egypt when envoys from the European Union visit the country, protesting for Morsi to be brought back to power. (Al Jazeera) Syrian civil war: 1 man and a 15-year-old boy are killed near the Turkish border town of Ceylanpınar after clashes erupted between Al-Nausra and female Kurds of the YPG. (Hurriyet Daily News), (Daily star News) 7 people are killed by a car bomb close to Damascus. (Sky News) A bomb detonates inside a teahouse in Mosul, Iraq killing at least 10 people. (Reuters) Disasters and accidents At least 58 people are dead and 175 missing in floods in China's Sichuan province. (xinhuanet) A heat wave settles over the United States with at least one death reported. (AP via Newser) Law and crime A Bangladesh war crimes tribunal sentences Ali Ahsan Mohammad Mojaheed, Secretary General of the Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami political party, to death for atrocities committed during the Bangladesh Liberation War. (Reuters) German authorities indict Formula One boss Bernie Ecclestone for alleged bribery. (Guardian) Same-sex marriage becomes legal in England and Wales after the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill receives Royal Assent. (BBC) In a new law the United Arab Emirates is offering citizens a gram of gold for every kilogram of weight they lose in an attempt to curb the rising obesity rate in the nation. (NPR) Asiana Airlines redacts their lawsuit of San Francisco news station KTVU over displaying racist names. (NPR) Movies The Movie Premiere of Turbo From the People Who Brought You Madagascar, Kung Fu Panda, The Croods, How to Train Your Dragon and Shrek Politics and government Rivers State governor Rotimi Amaechi and his convoy are pelted with stones, coming days after he was suspended from People's Democratic Party, allegedly for lodging his opposition against Goodluck Jonathan. (BBC) Senior Syrian government official Mohammed Darrar Jamo is shot dead in Sarafand, Lebanon. (BBC) Thousands of protesters gather outside the Hellenic Parliament in opposition of a new bill that would cut thousands of public sector jobs. (Reuters) Chilean politician Pablo Longueira withdraws his candidacy for the presidential election, less than a month after winning the primaries of the right-wing coalition. (Reuters) Science Researchers from different medical centers at major cities in the United Kingdom, led by Cancer Research UK's London Research Institute and University College London, are embarking on a massive long-term effort to study lung cancer's resistance to treatment by mapping involved genes using patient profiles. (BBC) War crimes conviction #2 Article: Ali Ahsan Mohammad Mojaheed (talk · history · tag) Blurb: ​ Jamaat-e-Islami Secretary-General Ali Ahsan Mohammad Mojaheed is convicted of war crimes committed during the Bangladeshi War of Independence. (Post) Credits: Nominated by Lihaas (talk · give credit) Article needs updatingNominator's comments: Follow up to the below. This is the party secy general, that was the leader. Since last time there have been deaths in protests.. Lihaas (talk) 20:07, 15 July 2013 (UTC) If the two post they should be combined as one item. μηδείς (talk) 19:53, 17 July 2013 (UTC) I concur. Post them together. Abductive (reasoning) 01:59, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Same-sex marriage (United Kingdom) No consensus to post. Spencer 05:49, 21 July 2013 (UTC) The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. Article: Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013 (talk · history · tag) Blurb: ​ Royal Assent is given to the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013, legalising gay marriage in England and Wales. (Post) News source(s): (BBC) [http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2013/07/17/breaking-equal-marriage-bill-for-england-and-wales-given-royal-assent-and-is-now-law/ (Pink News) Credits: Nominated by Doktorbuk (talk · give credit)  --doktorb words 14:58, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Comment I was considering posting this but reviewing the ITN/C articles, basically realized that most "Country affirms same-sex marriages" have all pretty much been rejected as of late due to the fact its not a novelty nor anything affecting international matter. I would otherwise support this as the fact the Queen gave her assent for it, but doubt based on past nominations this will go through. --MASEM (t) 15:06, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Support like I've supported the French, New Zealand, et al., because of its significance. Lack of international impact is irrelevant, and in fact questionable, since the movement to marriage equality is happening worldwide. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:11, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Oppose only because it was known this was coming since it was passed as the Queen's approval was only a formality. I actually support this but precedent tells me this probably won't be posted. It is a novelty until a significant portion of nations and/or the world's population has same-sex marriage as legal, though. 331dot (talk) 15:15, 17 July 2013 (UTC) It was actually only passed on Monday, I believe, so it is not stale either way. I've changed the blurb, because this is not UK-wide law. Support, since we've recently broken with precedence by predictably posting a minor gay marriage related story because it was American. Formerip (talk) 15:23, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Oppose Whilst I appreciate, as has been said above, that same-sex marriage is nowhere near becoming the law of the land in a majority of countries, passage of a new law is becoming fairly routine now, even if happening at an infrequent pace. Are we supposed to post the next 50 countries who pass a gay marriage law? It would have been notable if it was the first couple of countries passing a new law, but now we're onto however many and it isn't really notable in the same way now. Redverton (talk) 15:48, 17 July 2013 (UTC) strong oppose we didn't post nEW ZEALAND and that was a first in the region. This is not the first in Europe and sets no precedence.Lihaas (talk) 19:15, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Oppose regardless of the national comparisons, this law essentially means churches can choose to officiate in and call already available civil unions marriages in their church. That's been state law in the US for years. μηδείς (talk) 19:55, 17 July 2013 (UTC) This is untrue. It also means that same-sex unions are covered by the generic law on marriage, rather than the slightly lesser and recently-coined civil partnerships law. AlexTiefling (talk) 23:33, 17 July 2013 (UTC) I am entirely undisposed to take any disagreement you have with me on good faith, at this point, Alex. If you want to state that argument a little more clearly (I am not sureI get your point) and link to the relevant articles or facts to support it I will read the material. μηδείς (talk) 17:24, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Oppose Seems to of gotten too little coverage in the UK media. --Somchai Sun (talk) 21:25, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Support Would be absurd to not post this after posting the DOMA decision, which didn't even legalise same-sex marriage. This is getting plenty of media attention in the UK and around the world, it was nominated at the proper time (when it becomes law), and it doesn't just mean that churches can call civil partnerships marriages - it means that same-sex marriage is now recognised by the state. Neljack (talk) 23:30, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Support per Neljack 84.248.131.49 (talk) 10:14, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Oppose: Given how little coverage there is compared to other controversial bills, I don't think it should appear on ITN. It's also nothing new compared with other countries. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 10:54, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Oppose File under slow news day. Lugnuts 13:28, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Strong support, per Neljack. Midnightblueowl (talk) 15:23, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Comment from beyond the grave The repeal of DOMA was very different from the legalization of gay marriage in France, Brazil, England + Wales, and New Zealand. In the case of the USA, the elected national legislature had passed a law (DOMA) explicitly outlawing gay marriage, and that law was (much) later overturned by the unelected constitutional court. In all the other cases, a national legislature passed a law. Had the Queen vetoed (can she?) a law which legislated gay marriage either way, that would be comparable to the DOMA story. This, however, is not. --76.110.201.132 (talk) 20:04, 18 July 2013 (UTC) I'm not an expert but I think that in theory, the Queen could have refused to give Royal Assent, but by tradition and custom that is virtually never done. 331dot (talk) 20:14, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Support, again very significant like the previous ones, i. e. in France. Hope it would be posted. Otherwise I and maybe some others would think that the WP editors have some bias.Egeymi (talk) 22:16, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Support - This is a very important event for supporters of equality worldwide and should certainly be featured here. Some of the opposes have an almost homophobic ring to them... PantherLeapord (talk) 22:53, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Oppose local news. New laws are enacted every day, there are million of laws around the world. The European Commission produces huge amounts of directives that we don't post. And this is not something new as pointed out, and it doesn't even affect a significant number of people. Josh Gorand (talk) 23:40, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Oppose For the reasons given above, not the first, or even close to the first time this law has been passed somewhere. ★★RetroLord★★ 02:29, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Oppose No more same-sex marriage ITNs until Afghanistan legalises it. It's just not news anymore. --RA (✍) 23:13, 20 July 2013 (UTC) Strong support - I cannot fathom how an entire country legalizing same-sex marriage should not be ITN, yet Misplaced Pages will gladly put up a Supreme Court case that allows gay marriage to stand in a single US state (California) and strikes down DOMA (which did not come close to legalizing same-sex marriage). At this point, the !votes suggest there will be no consensus to post... yet the inconsistency truly boggles my mind. You know all those people who constantly complain about the English Misplaced Pages having a US-bias? Yeah, maybe they have a point. –Prototime (talk · contribs) 03:26, 21 July 2013 (UTC) Oppose a new country legalizing same sex marriage is not really news anymore. Until a strongly religious country does it (Poland? Ireland?) I don't think such news are - I guess luckily - that notable anymore. Nergaal (talk) 04:32, 21 July 2013 (UTC) The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. Queensland wins Rugby League State of Origin 8th time in a row No consensus to post. Spencer 00:33, 19 July 2013 (UTC) The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. Article: 2013 State of Origin series (talk · history · tag) Blurb: ​ The Queensland Maroons win Rugby League's State of Origin for the 8th year in a row. (Post) News source(s): Credits: Nominated by Mike lomas (talk · give credit) Article updatedNominator's comments: I'm not sure how the recurring sports news works exactly or if this is important enough, but the State of Origin is one of the most watched Rugby League events in the world and has just been won by the Queensland Maroons for the 8th time in a row. Mike lomas (talk) 13:35, 17 July 2013 (UTC) How come this is "generally considered important enough to post", but the British Lions is not? There isn't a single credible argument that can be made that one is more important/significant/watched than the other. Mission Twelve (talk) 13:55, 17 July 2013 (UTC) I guess the news here is not so much the single event in itself but the winning streak, it's completely unheard of. The better part of a decade. Mike lomas (talk) 14:53, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Oppose minor local competition. To win eight times in a row is not that big a deal when the contest only includes three teams. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:33, 17 July 2013 (UTC) I think it's two teams. If we posted this, can someone explain why we wouldn't start posting soccer derbys? Formerip (talk) 19:01, 17 July 2013 (UTC) I don't know if you can call it minor; according to the commentators, the match was broadcasted in over 90 countries, that's more than a few ITN/R items we have listed. YuMaNuMa 00:08, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Okay, but this is a competition localised to just half of Australia, one half of the rugby code, and conducted between just a couple of local teams, not national teams (like The Ashes as noted below). Also, "cultural significance" is noted, but this contest started in 1980 didn't it? The Ashes started just under 100 years before that. Between two teams separated by half the globe. This is of minor interest and should not be ITN or ITN/R. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:19, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Oppose Good on them. μηδείς (talk) 19:56, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Oppose. Not a top-tier competition. 331dot (talk) 19:59, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Oppose Good on them indeed. --Somchai Sun (talk) 21:23, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Support With respect, many of the opposes indicate that the people concerned haven't looked very carefully at this competition. Nobody who is familiar with rugby league would describe State of Origin as a "minor local competition" or "not a top-tier competition". It is probably the most intense and high-quality rugby league that is played anywhere in the world - even above international matches. I think it would be widely regarded as being as important as the NRL and Superleague, which are ITN/R, so it would seem to be important enough to post. The fact that it only involves two teams shouldn't disqualify it - The Ashes, for instance, are rightly ITN/R, despite involving only two teams. Queensland winning a record eighth consecutive series makes this even more notable. Neljack (talk) 23:47, 17 July 2013 (UTC) The problem you have is that the Ashes involves two nations, so a genuine international sport, and has been running for over 100 years. State of Origin is much newer and only involves two states of one of those countries, out of six states and several territories. You'll need to explain it better to non-aficionados. HiLo48 (talk) 07:36, 18 July 2013 (UTC) The intro to the State of Origin article explains it well (the numerous references omitted; see the article for them): Touted as Australian sport's greatest rivalry, the State of Origin series is one of the country's and the region's premier sporting events, attracting a huge television audience and usually selling out the stadiums in which the games are played. Despite the existence of international tournaments and State of Origin being a domestic competition, it is frequently cited as being the highest-level of rugby league played anywhere in the world. I would suggest that it is a bit like college football and basketball in the US - an event with huge cultural significance and following despite not being an international competition, so if (like me) you support them because of that huge cultural significance and following then you should support this too. If you oppose them because they are amateur university tournaments, then you should still support this, because that rationale is inapplicable here. Neljack (talk) 08:29, 18 July 2013 (UTC) You could write a similar paragraph to that regarding football fixtures between Man Utd and Liverpool, though. Formerip (talk) 12:22, 18 July 2013 (UTC) That article doesn't help itself with language like "Touted as..." That means "Attempt to sell (something), typically by pestering people in an aggressive or bold manner" or "To solicit customers, votes, or patronage, especially in a brazen way." It certainly not the language one uses for truth or reality. HiLo48 (talk) 09:02, 18 July 2013 (UTC) One argument that can be used is by using money. The NCAA basketball tournament's TV rights is $10.8 billion in 14 years, or about $771 million annually, or about $11.5 million per game. The latest NBA TV rights was $7.8 billion for 9 years, or about $867 million annually (I dunno how many national games are aired annually). If you're using the amount of money the league receives each year, the NBA earns more than the NCAA -- although the NCAA doesn't pay their athletes so... –HTD 09:16, 18 July 2013 (UTC) That isn't the only meaning of "touted". In this context, it basically just means "claimed". Neljack (talk) 09:25, 18 July 2013 (UTC) "Claimed" would prove nothing either. HiLo48 (talk) 09:55, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Naturally it would prove nothing except that people claim that, but WP can't come out as declare it as Australia's greatest sporting rivalry (that is subjective and would be POV), so no doubt that's why that say it's "widely touted" and then cite quite a few sources. Neljack (talk) 12:13, 18 July 2013 (UTC) This seems to be like posting the results of a hypothetical series between the Boston Red Sox and New York Yankees billed as a "tournament". It's just two teams each representing parts of a nation. They might play at a high level, more than other teams, due to a rivalry, but it doesn't determine the championship of an entire league of many teams. 331dot (talk) 08:34, 18 July 2013 (UTC) It's more like an interleague series between two strong baseball teams before interleague play was instituted, TBH. –HTD 09:16, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Oppose Local competition that is only active in half of Australia.color="gold">★★RetroLord★★ 07:47, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Comment It may help to explain the "football" situation in Australia. (League fans aren't doing a very good job here.) The Barassi Line divides Australia into two parts. On one side, Rugby League (the game we're discussing here) is the main football code. That sport is not at all strong on the other side of the line, where Australian football is the popular football code. The strong area for Rugby League is the state of Queensland and most of the state of New South Wales. These are the two states that play in the State of Origin competition. The National Rugby League is a competition played by players from those two states. The best players in that league play in the State of Origin matches. Fans and media argue that the State of Origin series is more important and a higher standard than the finals (playoffs) in the National Rugby League. I'm from the wrong side of the Barassi line, so I'm not a strong fan, and not in a good position to judge if that's true. What is true is that the deciding match in the series was just last night, and fans are still very excited. There is naturally a lot of media hype surrounding the games (that's professional sport!) and many fans, unsurprisingly, buy it all. Hope this helps. HiLo48 (talk) 10:31, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Just for the record, I'm not a league fan (I'm a union man). It's been quite a while since I've watched a league game, much less a State of Origin one. And, not being Australian, I don't pretend to have a full understanding of its cultural significance there. I didn't expect this to get posted; I just wanted to correct the misapprehension regarding the significance attached to State of Origin. Neljack (talk) 12:10, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Support - we should seek to post items of high cultural significance (which apparently is the case here) even when they aren't "top level" competitions. The cultural impact of sports is what makes it important - a championship itself has no meaning if no one attaches any to it. ITN should not be judging Australia's assignment of significance to this event as invalid anymore than it tries to do with American college sports. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:28, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Oppose, this nomination rests on the premise that winning streaks are important. Unfortunately they are open-ended, and as can be seen in ITN/C debates about stock market moves, gold prices and oil prices, the consensus has been never to post those. Abductive (reasoning) 17:11, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Yes, the argument should probably be for making this annual event ITN/R. HiLo48 (talk) 18:02, 18 July 2013 (UTC) It does not rest on that premise. That was merely noted as something increasing the notability and interest. None of the supporters have stated that it wouldn't otherwise be sufficiently important. Neljack (talk) 23:09, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Oppose local news of very limited interest to most readers of the main page. We should only post the most important international sports events, most people are not interested in sports at all. Quite frankly, even the blurb is completely cryptic to me. Josh Gorand (talk) 23:48, 18 July 2013 (UTC) The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. July 16 Portal:Current events/2013 July 16 July 16, 2013 (2013-07-16) (Tuesday) edit history watch Armed conflicts and attacks Pro-government militiamen kill six mediators in the Syrian province of Homs. (BBC) Business and economy Unions in Greece call a general strike over new austerity measures. (France 24) McDonald's announces that it will open its first outlet in Viet Nam early next year, which will be in Ho Chi Minh City, and will be operated by Henry Nguyen, a Vietnamese businessman and the son-in-law of Vietnam's Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung. (Marketwatch) Arts and culture The British Columbia coroner's office reports that actor Cory Monteith died of an overdose of heroin and alcohol. (MSN) Disasters and accidents As many as 27 children die and 25 others are hospitalised after eating lunch served at their school in eastern India. (AFP via News24) (Times of India) Initial indications are that a jar previously used to hold an insecticide was reused for cooking oil and was thus thereby contaminated by organophosphorus. (CNN) International relations Panamanian authorities seize North Korean bulk carrier Chong Chon Gang after a missile is found on board. The captain of the ship, which was en route from Cuba, attempted to commit suicide. (BBC News) (USA Today) South Korea blames North Korea for cyberattacks on government websites last month. (Wall Street Journal) Law and crime Clashes continue between Egyptian police and supporters of deposed President Mohamed Morsi in central Cairo with 22 people injured. (Reuters) Norwegian black metal musician, Kristian "Varg" Vikernes, and his wife are arrested in France on suspicion of alleged plans for a terrorist act after buying 4 rifles at the same time. (BBC) Science Italian astronaut Luca Parmitano almost drowns while undertaking a spacewalk on the International Space Station. (ABC News America) Sport In baseball, the American League defeats the National League 3–0 in the 2013 Major League Baseball All-Star Game played at Citi Field in New York City. New York Yankees closer Mariano Rivera, in his final MLB season, is named MVP. (Detroit Free Press) RD Alex Colville Article: Alex Colville (talk · history · tag) Recent deaths nomination (Post) News source(s): Globe and Mail CBC Ottawa Citizen The Toronto Star National Post Credits: Nominated by Zanimum (talk · give credit) Updated by CAWylie (talk · give credit) Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Misplaced Pages article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.Nominator's comments: Colville is recipient of the Order of Canada, columnists have commented that his art "transcended the art world to become emblems of national consciousness", and has been described as Canada's "painter laureate". --Zanimum (talk) 15:09, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Comment. The article makes no such claims. Abductive (reasoning) 15:11, 18 July 2013 (UTC) I added the OCCC part just now. — Wyliepedia 17:25, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Oppose largely unknown painter (only 2 interwikis, very short article) Josh Gorand (talk) 23:51, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Since recent death space is free yet again, certainly this should be posted too, since that seems to be one of the criteria for posting these days. 84.248.131.49 (talk) 12:45, 19 July 2013 (UTC) Saran school lunch poisoning incident Article: Saran school lunch poisoning incident (talk · history · tag) Blurb: ​ At least 25 children die in Bihar, India, after consuming food tainted with organophosphorus. (Post) News source(s): Credits: Nominated by Bongwarrior (talk · give credit) Updated by Andise1 (talk · give credit) and ThaddeusB (talk · give credit) Article updatedNominator's comments: I'm nominating this on behalf of an IP who had tried to do so. ----Bongwarrior (talk) 18:01, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Support the death of dozens of children due to negligence or otherwise is newsworthy. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:37, 17 July 2013 (UTC) oppose there really needs a discussed criteria for all these news events to fit into an enecylopaedia? Wheres is legacy and last value? this has no significance anywhere in the world. (even india)Lihaas (talk) 19:16, 17 July 2013 (UTC) The purpose of this page is to have that discussion. Further, large scale deaths of children are generally notable, especially in a public facility like a school. 331dot (talk) 19:45, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Comment. The title is terrible. Abductive (reasoning) 19:39, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Support. Large-scale deaths of children are generally notable; agree that the title could use improvement. 331dot (talk) 19:45, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Weakly neutral unusual event, not really encyclopedic, though. The blurb should say "a free lunch" rather than a meal. Obviously it was a meal. μηδείς (talk) 19:59, 17 July 2013 (UTC) It doesn't say 'meal' at all. Why is the freeness relevant? AlexTiefling (talk) 23:35, 17 July 2013 (UTC) It said "meal" originally. I changed it to "food" when revising the blurb to bring it up to date. --ThaddeusB (talk) 00:13, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Support - incident has led to violent protests and scrutinization of India's food safety. (Impact like that is exactly we look for to prove a topic is encyclopedic, at the very least.) --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:40, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Support I disagree with Lihaas this might have real effect for better or worse in India if this becomes big enough story in there. 84.248.131.49 (talk) 20:53, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Weak Oppose Large-scale food poisoning does happen - happening at a school, particularly in a nation with the socioeconomic climate of India, is sad but not unheard of. If it was clear that a major revamping of school lunch programs throughout the nation was to come of the incident, I feel this would be a stronger news story for ITN. But as it is, it is an unfortunate event but nothing that seems to have legs. --MASEM (t) 20:59, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Conditional Support the incident is tragic and newsworthy, but the article is a bit too short. Support on the condition that the article is expanded. -Zanhe (talk) 21:19, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Article expansion is now underway. --ThaddeusB (talk) 21:27, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Support. Significant worldwide coverage, and that coverage will continue as long as the investigation into this matter continues. EricLeb (Page | Talk) 22:12, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Marked Ready the article is quite well updated at this point and well supported. μηδείς (talk) 22:37, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Posted --Jayron32 02:00, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Pleeeease change "organophosphorus" to "organophosphorus compounds". I do understand that media is lazy, but the former is an adjective not an actual noun. Nergaal (talk) 03:21, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Agreed and done. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:30, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Actually, 'tis indeed a noun . Formerip (talk) 08:53, 18 July 2013 (UTC) When it comes to chemical nomenclature I would stay away from sites like freexyz.com. According to that site, it is the same thing to Organophosphate. Nergaal (talk) 14:37, 18 July 2013 (UTC) @Nergaal: No, no, no. "Organophosphorus" is a noun. "Organophosphor'ous" or "organophosphoric" would be adjectives. Phosphorus is an element; organophosphorus comes from the carbon- (organo-) phosphorus bonds. It does function as an adjective in the construction "organophosphorus compound," the same way "sodium chloride" would in "sodium chloride solution," but that's beside the point.  — TORTOISEWRATH 00:14, 21 July 2013 (UTC) By the same analogy, what does organoiron mean to you? Nergaal (talk) 04:29, 21 July 2013 (UTC) July 15 Portal:Current events/2013 July 15 July 15, 2013 (2013-07-15) (Monday) edit history watch Armed conflicts and attacks Mexican Drug War The Mexican Army captures Miguel Treviño Morales, the supreme leader of Los Zetas drug cartel. (CBS News) Militants open fire on a bus carrying workers from a cement factory in Arish, Northern Sinai, Egypt, killing three and injuring 17. The gunfire is believed to have been intended for a police vehicle.(AFP via NDTV) The M23 rebel movement and the Congolese Army are engaged in heavy fighting in the environs of Goma. (BBC) A car bomb strikes Deir Atiyah, north of Damascus, killing 13. (BBC) Arts and culture International linguists announce the discovery of a new language in Australia called Light Warlpiri. (news.com.au) Business and finance Asiana Airlines says they will sue Oakland, California television station KTVU for defamation after the station reported the wrong names of the pilots of Asiana Airlines Flight 214. (CNN) Loblaw Companies Limited, one of Canada's largest supermarket chain owners, agrees to purchase Canada's largest pharmacy retailer Shoppers Drug Mart for almost $12.4 Billion dollars. (Reuters) Disasters and accidents Two British soldiers die during a training exercise as they take part in a gruelling selection process for the elite SAS unit on the hottest day of the year. (AFP via News24) International relations Thein Sein, the President of Burma (Myanmar) visits the United Kingdom. (The Telegraph via the Brisbane Times) Law and crime Indonesian police report that at least 18 people were killed and 47 injured following a riot at a boxing match. (Associated Press via Inquirer) (AFP via Yahoo News South Africa) A war crimes tribunal finds Bangladeshi ex-politician Ghulam Azam, former leader of the Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami, guilty of war crimes during the Bangladesh Liberation War in 1971. (BBC) The House of Lords, the upper house of the United Kingdom, approves the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill, meaning it will become law, enabling gay marriage in England and Wales to take place from 2014. (BBC) Sports Oakland Athletics outfielder Yoenis Céspedes defeats Bryce Harper of the Washington Nationals to win the 2013 Major League Baseball Home Run Derby. (ESPN) Mexican top drug kingpin captured Discussions about the process of posting should continue at WT:ITN. The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. Article: Miguel Treviño Morales (talk · history · tag) Blurb: ​ Los Zetas leader Miguel Treviño Morales is arrested by the Mexican Navy. (Post) Alternative blurb: ​ Reputed Zetas leader Miguel Treviño Morales is arrested on drug, kidnapping, torture and murder charges News source(s): Credits: Nominated by ComputerJA (talk · give credit) Article updatedNominator's comments: Not sure if this is noteworthy enough for ITN, but I guess I'll just give it a try and get some feedback from you guys. The arrest is described as the biggest victory (so far) in Mexico's drug war in the administration of Enrique Peña Nieto. ComputerJA (☎ • ✎) 00:38, 16 July 2013 (UTC) Wasn't the last one caught or killed recently? Given our presumption of innocence, I doubt this would go anywhere anyway. μηδείς (talk) 01:29, 16 July 2013 (UTC) Yeah, Lazcano was killed back in October. Treviño Morales is considered his "natural successor," although some argue that he had ousted Lazcano before and was actually the big guy in Los Zetas. ComputerJA (☎ • ✎) 02:28, 16 July 2013 (UTC) Comment We posted the death of another Zetas leader, Heriberto Lazcano Lazcano, back in October (which was touted as one of the biggest victories in the War on Drugs for outgoing President Felipe Calderon). Also, Nieto has been president of Mexico for less than eight months. I'm not saying that means this isn't significant; I'm just pointing that out. -- tariqabjotu 01:33, 16 July 2013 (UTC) You're right. Maybe if the one captured today were El Chapo Guzmán this would be a easy pass... ComputerJA (☎ • ✎) 02:28, 16 July 2013 (UTC) Support he has one of the largest bounties n the world. US is paying $5 mil for his capture. Nergaal (talk) 10:04, 16 July 2013 (UTC) Question I want to support this, but has he been found guilty in absentia or anything like that? Presumably he will go to trial and conceivably be found not-guilty? I thought normally we would post this if/when someone is found guilty. CaptRik (talk) 12:22, 16 July 2013 (UTC) I don't really think that applies here; there's no doubt from anyone that he's a Zetas leader. "Zetas leader" is basically his job description, not an accusation of a crime. To say that, for example, "Preschool teacher John Q is a pedophile" requires the pedophile bit, not the fact that he's a preschool teacher, to be proven in a court of law. -- tariqabjotu 14:48, 16 July 2013 (UTC) You've got this wrong, Tariq. Look up defamation per se. There's a very important difference in the law between asserting someone has a job and asserting that that job is a criminal enterprise.μηδείς (talk) 18:43, 16 July 2013 (UTC) Mild support. Leader of the largest criminal syndicate in Mexico and one of the main figures in the Mexican Drug War. It's comparable to the capture of a major warlord in a civil war that has cost 100K lives. The blurb might need some background to make sense for people not familiar, e.g "drug cartel Los Zetas." (P.S. Arguing that we can't report this until a trial is like arguing we couldn't have reported Bin Laden was leader of al-Qaeda without a court decision.) - BanyanTree 19:09, 16 July 2013 (UTC) No, Bin Laden filmed videos and identified himself and openly declared war on the US and so forth. Has this Mexican gentlemen issued press releases claiming to be the head of a criminal enterprise? μηδείς (talk) 19:18, 16 July 2013 (UTC) ITN used to post things like the arrest of Thomas Lubanga Dyilo or death of Vincent Otti, with their reported positions, as a matter of course. If the standard is now that you need a press release confessing crimes, <shrug>. I'll let the reviewing admin decide the validity of my support. - BanyanTree 20:27, 16 July 2013 (UTC) We're not talking about a mere criminal enterprise here, we're talking about a massive drug cartel that has cause the deaths of thousands. It's closer to a civil war than a criminal enterprise. Even if that isn't the case, the arrest of notable wanted criminals or fugitives has been posted before. 331dot (talk) 21:15, 16 July 2013 (UTC) Dyilo was tried and found guilty, Otti was killed, so bLp didn't apply. The fact that this is allegedly a "massive" crime is irrelevant. The fact that Treviño's been arrested is fine, we can report that. But we can't call him a drug kingpin unless he's either called himself that or been convicted. This is really very simple. μηδείς (talk) 21:33, 16 July 2013 (UTC) What do you suggest we call him? "Accused" drug kingpin? Someone doesn't have to legally be adjudicated to be a drug kingpin to be one. 331dot (talk) 21:38, 16 July 2013 (UTC) (edit conflict) Medeis, if you feel referring to Mr. Morales as a Zetas leaders is a BLP violation, I suggest you try getting that information removed from the article about him first. -- tariqabjotu 21:35, 16 July 2013 (UTC) You are quite aware of "WP:OTHERSTUFF". Don't lay that "fix the other article" excuse on us. Articles have footnotes, and accusations can be attributed and referenced in them, but not on the front page, and you are quite aware we hold to a strict standard here. IF it is the case they have announced it, it should be possible to say something along 331 Dot's suggestion like "Mexican authorities arrest Treviño as the head of the Zetas". But it absolutely has to be attributed, not assumed as fact. μηδείς (talk) 23:56, 16 July 2013 (UTC) Mexican officials report I have been looking for an official and Spanish source that says Trevino was arrested as head of the Zetas. But CNN is reporting that arresting Mexican officials refused to identify Trevino by his supposed alias or as head of the drug cartel when he was arrested: Sánchez nunca lo llamó por su alias ni dijo que era el jefe máximo de uno de los cárteles más violentos en México, tampoco dio información sobre quién podría ser su posible sucesor en la organización criminal. Sanchez never called him by his nickname nor said he was the top leader of one of the most violent cartels in Mexico, neither did he give details on who might be his possible successor in the criminal organization. The best we can say is that Mexican Federal agents report the arrest of Trevino on drug, kidnapping, torture and murder charges. Even they are avoiding calling him head of he Zetas. μηδείς (talk) 00:58, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Thanks. In this new administration, the President has pledged to soften the language of the drug war. The past administration did have reports on him being a leader, though I'm fine if we put "reported" leader on the blurb and/or article. ComputerJA (☎ • ✎) 02:03, 17 July 2013 (UTC) I'm still not ready to modify the wording on the Main Page. Yes, I see you've added the word "alleged" in the lead, but the genie's already out of the bottle. The Miguel Treviño Morales article says he's a Zetas leader dozens of times. The article would be a mess if you had to keep saying "allegedly" after every statement that no one contests. -- tariqabjotu 02:27, 17 July 2013 (UTC) You're right. I don't think it will hurt anyone if we leave it as it is. Not sure what Medeis thinks, though. Thanks for your concern. ComputerJA (☎ • ✎) 02:34, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Posted -- tariqabjotu 01:55, 17 July 2013 (UTC) This is shameful, Tariq. did you even read CNN on the arresting Mexican official? He announced charges of kindnapping, torture, murder and drug trafficking and refused to call the man head of the Zetas or identify him as a zeta. Your recent actions are unbefitting an admin and the front page. Not to mention there's absolutely no consensus to post in any form. μηδείς (talk) 02:38, 17 July 2013 (UTC) (edit conflict) Maybe you like the glacial pace of ITN, but I certainly don't. There are no objections, and it's been twenty-four hours. And, yes, I saw what you said, but their refusing to call him a Zeta seems to be, from context, about not elevating him and the organization's profile. This is heavily implied in the Spanish-language source you provided in preceding paragraphs, as well as in English-language sources that discuss this point: He was taken to Mexico City for questioning, but unlike the days of former President Felipe Calderon, there was no perp walk by a handcuffed suspect or piles of cash and guns put on display for the TV cameras. Instead, the government released a single video of a rumpled-looking, un-handcuffed Trevino Morales walking through prosecutors' headquarters, saying it wanted to avoid glamorizing drug traffickers or risk rights violations that could lead to a dismissal of charges. Authorities didn't even refer to his nickname, Z-40. (AP) We do not have the same motives; we are here to provide verifiable information, as reported in our articles. That he is a Zetas leader is verified many, many places (including by Mexican government sources on a number of occasions). You're fighting the wrong fight here. -- tariqabjotu 02:59, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Altblurb I have added a blurb that avoids contradicting the Mexican prosecutor. μηδείς (talk) 02:50, 17 July 2013 (UTC) I support the usage of the word "reputed". ComputerJA (☎ • ✎) 06:38, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Pull Oh come on User:Tariqabjotu, this is not worth the megabytes its written with. Another low in ITN/C. doktorb words 15:01, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Huh? Why? Is there actually something wrong with the article, or do you object to the story? I can't decipher what "not worth the megabytes its written with" could possibly mean, other than an insult to the editors who put their time and energy into writing the article. -- tariqabjotu 15:08, 17 July 2013 (UTC) It's an insult to ITN/C that this page 43 curiosity has been upgraded to the front page. On what grounds? There's almost no support in this nomination, it wasn't up for long enough to garner consensus, and is barely worth coverage on news sites outside Mexico. This is exactly the kind of story which would, ordinarily, be shot down. Why did you chose to accept it? doktorb words 15:24, 17 July 2013 (UTC) We can't just have stories languish on ITN/C as others that take place in the Anglosphere garner attention and devolve into lengthy debates. I imagine that had this not been posted, you would not have even noticed or cared to comment on the nomination. Twenty-four hours is enough time for people to see and review a nomination and register their opinion, and it took more than thirty-six hours for someone (you) to object. During that time there was no objection while the article received a healthy update and cleanup. And I don't know what you're talking about with non-Mexican news sites not covering it. From my vantage point, this story has received prominent news coverage in a number of sources, more prominent still than the UK's legalization of gay marriage. What you see as a "Page 43 curiosity" is not the same around the world. And, of course, a story being primarily related to one country (if we can even say that about this case) does not make it ineligible for ITN. -- tariqabjotu 15:47, 17 July 2013 (UTC) User:Tariqabjotu, can you tell me what opinion User:Medeis had on this story, and when that opinion was posted here? doktorb words 16:33, 17 July 2013 (UTC) I can't say I have liked everything User:Tariqabjotu have posted lately, but this is not really fair, it is hardly his fault that people don't bother to support or oppose this. There was few support true, but there also weren't anyone who really opposed posting this before you. I also happen to think that this is fairly important news and certainly worth it to post. 84.248.131.49 (talk) 16:00, 17 July 2013 (UTC) The usual procedure is four supports and a ready tag, so I didn't feel it helpful to add an oppose while working to try to improve the nomination. It's called collegiality. μηδείς (talk) 17:46, 17 July 2013 (UTC) The premature and unilateral psting here is the problem. We usually have at least 4 supports before a posting. This one had one and a half supports and my implicit oppose while the way to handle the blurb was discussed. While looking in good faith for a verbatim source from Mexican officials I found a CNN source explicitly saying the Government would not identify him as a kingpin, but only state the charges. Before a discussion of this could be held, before there was consensus, before the article had ben marked ready, Tariqabjotu posted the most controversial blurb. At this point, I am not sure whther there is consensus to post. With the nom with a support and a half, a pull, and my oppose as is, t seems not. Yet, if the item is not going to be pulled, using the altblurb ("Reputed Zetas leader Miguel Treviño Morales is arrested on drug, kidnapping, torture and murder charges") would be a much better situation than the current one. μηδείς (talk) 17:37, 17 July 2013 (UTC) It's a shame User:Medeis that Tariq acted in such a slap-dash manner on such a contentious nomination doktorb words 17:42, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Seems Tariq is okay about ignoring consensus and criteria. Perhaps he needs to let someone else do these more contentious candidates. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:04, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Don't any of you have something better to do? -- tariqabjotu 18:05, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Yes, of course, but a few recent promotions to the main page have been against any criteria and against any consensus, so we should discuss it and suggest solutions. One solution is you stop promoting articles which don't meet the criteria or don't have any consensus. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:09, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Well, this is not the right forum for bringing out your pitchforks. -- tariqabjotu 18:15, 17 July 2013 (UTC) I notice User:The Rambling Man that User:Tariqabjotu has not addressed my direct question about when ] placed his doubt over the exact details of this nomination. Tariq implied that my "pull" was the first rejection in 36 hours. Not entirely accurate. doktorb words 18:28, 17 July 2013 (UTC) (ec) This is the place to discuss mis-listing of ITNs. There are no pitchforks, simply questions as to why certain items have been posted by Tariq against consensus and against the criteria. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:30, 17 July 2013 (UTC) If we focus on the item, can we either pull it or switch to the altblurb, which has more support? μηδείς (talk) 18:36, 17 July 2013 (UTC) I'm not sure I've read any encyclopaedia that suggests a "reputed" classification for an individual. Pull. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:39, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Agree to Pull I will start a discussion on the talk page doktorb words 18:43, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Pull if the blurb isn't changed--it implies he was arrested for being the zeta kingpin, not on the actual specific charges the government announced. μηδείς (talk) 18:55, 17 July 2013 (UTC) I don't think this needs either a pull or an altblurb but, if an altblurb is used, "reputed" should be avoided because it is easily confused with "of repute". Formerip (talk) 19:29, 17 July 2013 (UTC) I think renaming the blurb is better than pulling the article. May I suggest "Alleged" instead of Reputed? ComputerJA (☎ • ✎) 19:58, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Alleged implies by a charging authority like the government or a victim. In this case the government is not alleging he was a a Zeta, just a drug dealing , kidnapping, and multiple murdering torturer. I do agree if it is supported that changing the blurb is acceptable if there's not enough support for pulling. The issue of pulling is separate. Procedurally a pull is called for. On the merits it is borderline. μηδείς (talk) 20:05, 17 July 2013 (UTC) In this case the government is not alleging he was a a Zeta What? Of course they are. Their refusal to use the term, or his nickname, during a press conference is about not elevating the status of the organization. You're really bending over backward to make your point. -- tariqabjotu 20:20, 17 July 2013 (UTC) (edit conflict) Or, it can just stay as it is. We defer to article content. This happens all the time. If Medeis wants to claim that this headline is a BLP violation, he has to claim the entire article is a BLP violation (as it repeatedly treats Morales as known member of Los Zetas). For some reason, Medeis is unwilling to do that. This is a tempest in a teapot, and it's obvious no one actually agrees with his position on the blurb except to merely appease him or to claim impropriety on my part. -- tariqabjotu 20:09, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Your personal contempt for me is a convenient excuse, but this article has three pull votes and two and a half supports, so regardless of the blurb it does not have consensus and ddid not have consensus when you posted it. μηδείς (talk) 22:33, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Now (as well as at the time of your comment here) the number of people who support this nomination numbers six: ComputerJA, Nergaal, BanyanTree, 84.248.131.49, Formerip, and LukeSurl. If we include 331dot's comment on WT:ITN saying he " think the arrest of a highly sought after criminal suspect who is essentially waging a civil war is as 'contentious' as it is made out to be", we get seven. -- tariqabjotu 23:07, 17 July 2013 (UTC) I will specifically say that I support this being posted. 331dot (talk) 23:35, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Support. Seems a notable development in the Mexican drug war. I agree that "Zetas leader" is sufficiently undisputed by reliable sources to be placed, unqualified, in the blurb. --LukeSurl 20:28, 17 July 2013 (UTC) I now call for an uninvolved admin to close this discussion as it is going nowhere and devolving into criticism of the admin who posted this, which is already being discussed. 331dot (talk) 23:35, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Your command is my wish. --Jayron32 01:50, 18 July 2013 (UTC) New moon: S/2004 N-1 Articles: S/2004_N_1 (talk · history · tag) and Moons of Neptune (talk · history · tag) Blurb: ​ A moon named S/2004_N_1 is discovered orbiting the planet Neptune. (Post) News source(s): Fox News Los Angeles Times Credits: Nominated by Andise1 (talk · give credit) First article updated, second needs updatingNominator's comments: Neptune's fourteenth moon named S/2004 N-1 was found by NASA's Hubble Telescope. Andise1 (talk) 23:50, 15 July 2013 (UTC) Support (after article is ready) - Significant discovery.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 00:25, 16 July 2013 (UTC) Actually, it is quite an insignificant moon. Its discovery might be more interesting. Abductive (reasoning) 00:40, 16 July 2013 (UTC) Oppose - Yet another tiny space rock. Just last week, Medeis was assuring us that the chance to name a body like this would never come along again. In truth, the giant planets have scores of little bits of rock and ice orbiting them. This isn't news outside a specialised circle. AlexTiefling (talk) 00:31, 16 July 2013 (UTC) Your unending crush on me is flattering, Alex, but I am not interested and you are probably grossing out everybody else with it. μηδείς (talk) 01:28, 16 July 2013 (UTC) Oppose "The moon is so small it was missed by Voyager 2 in 1989." μηδείς (talk) 01:28, 16 July 2013 (UTC) Support. Not a bad article for a moon discovery announced yesterday. It may not be a large moon, but this is exactly the type of subject that people turn to Misplaced Pages for information on. Regarding the rareness of the event, this is the first Neptunian moon discovered in the past 10 years. Kaldari (talk) 07:52, 16 July 2013 (UTC) Support Quite Interesting science story. Lugnuts 09:09, 16 July 2013 (UTC) Support as this is the moon of a planet, not a dwarf planet. 331dot (talk) 09:36, 16 July 2013 (UTC) Oppose Too many of these minor discoveries to be legitimately notable doktorb words 10:19, 16 July 2013 (UTC) Support A new planetary moon is quite notable, unlike asteroids and the so-called minor planets that pop out almost every day. Brandmeister 10:37, 16 July 2013 (UTC) Support as per Kaldari. --LukeSurl 10:57, 16 July 2013 (UTC) Support This is the moon of a planet in our own solar system therefore the casual reader is likely to have heard of Neptune and be interested in this story. CaptRik (talk) 12:23, 16 July 2013 (UTC) Support per the comments of Kaldari, although the blurb is a bit weak. Suggest: Analysis of images taken by the Hubble Space Telescope leads to the discovery of Neptune's fourteenth moon. or something similar. Pedro :  Chat  13:23, 16 July 2013 (UTC) I agree with playing up the method of discovery in the blurb. Abductive (reasoning) 14:15, 16 July 2013 (UTC) Question. I'm leaning towards a weak support, but isn't there any sort of hurdle such as getting the moon recognised as a moon by the next International Moon-recognising Convention or whatever? Formerip (talk) 15:08, 16 July 2013 (UTC) Oppose I normally auto-support these kind of news, but this is the 14th moon of neptune, about 10 km in diameter... Nergaal (talk) 18:09, 16 July 2013 (UTC) Comment The issue with these small moons of the gas giants is that given their primaries have ring systems (and this body is in the rings system) in essece composed of moons; you are basically looking at moons all the way down to the size of dust. Finding them just depends on how hard and long you want to look. I think someone posted a link of the recently found gas giant moons in the debate over the recent Pluto posting. A chart like that would be informative as to the notability of this satellite. μηδείς (talk) 18:24, 16 July 2013 (UTC) Here's the Pluto discussion. Here are some of he recent gas giant (multiple) moon naming announcements: 2002 naming of moons of Jupiter http://www.cbat.eps.harvard.edu/iauc/07900/07998.html 2003 naming of moons of Jupiter, Saturn and Uranus http://www.cbat.eps.harvard.edu/iauc/08100/08177.html 2005 naming of moons of Uranus http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:iAbkiaqSAlMJ:www.cbat.eps.harvard.edu/iauc/08600/08648.ps 2006 naming of moon of Saturn http://www.cbat.eps.harvard.edu/iauc/08700/08730.html 2007 naming of moons of Neptune http://www.cbat.eps.harvard.edu/iauc/08800/08802.html 2007 naming of moons of Jupiter and Saturn http://www.cbat.eps.harvard.edu/iauc/08800/08826.html 2007 naming of moons of Saturn http://www.cbat.eps.harvard.edu/iauc/08800/08873.html 2009 naming of moon of Jupiter (Subscription required) http://www.cbat.eps.harvard.edu/iauc/09000/09094.html 2011 change the spelling of a moon of Saturn http://www.cbat.eps.harvard.edu/iauc/09100/09191.html Here are some of the most recent named moons of Saturn, note these are satellites XLIX through LII: Saturn XLIX Anthe = S/2007 S 4 IAUC 8857 Saturn L Jarnsaxa = S/2006 S 6 IAUC 8727 Saturn LI Greip = S/2006 S 4 IAUC 8727 Saturn LII Tarqeq = S/2007 S 1 IAUC 8836 I am frankly not at all worried about the prospect of this posting. I just want to point out small moons of gas giants are pretty much discovered whenever we take a close look. μηδείς (talk) 18:36, 16 July 2013 (UTC) Posted --ThaddeusB (talk) 05:16, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Comment - There are a few photos (http://commons.wikimedia.org/File:S-2004_N_1.jpg) and (http://commons.wikimedia.org/File:Orbits_of_inner_moons_of_Neptune_including_S_2004_N_1.jpg) if/when the current photo is to be replaced. Andise1 (talk) 05:49, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Support photo use μηδείς (talk) 20:07, 17 July 2013 (UTC) I don't think either picture is discernible at 100px: --ThaddeusB (talk) 22:55, 17 July 2013 (UTC) If there should be a picture of something related to this item, it should just be a picture of Neptune. -- tariqabjotu 23:08, 17 July 2013 (UTC) War crimes conviction Article: Ghulam Azam (talk · history · tag) Blurb: ​ Head of the Jamaat-e-Islami Bangladesh Ghulam Azam is convicted of war crimes committed during the Bangladeshi War of Independence. (Post) Credits: Nominated by Lihaas (talk · give credit) Article needs updatingNominator's comments: We generally post war crimes convistions for notable people (as in Balkans and Africa), so this seems notable as head of a major political organisation. Lihaas (talk) 20:07, 15 July 2013 (UTC) Support. War crimes convictions are generally notable. 331dot (talk) 20:41, 15 July 2013 (UTC) Support - war crimes convictions are indeed notable.--BabbaQ (talk) 20:43, 15 July 2013 (UTC) Comment: Issues with the POV tag need to be resolved; see the article talk page for details. Spencer 20:51, 15 July 2013 (UTC) Support - War crimes convictions are usually notable.--WaltCip (talk) 20:52, 15 July 2013 (UTC) Comment, per Spencer the article should be improved not to have POV tag.Egeymi (talk) 21:00, 15 July 2013 (UTC) Conditional support – Support only if POV issues are resolved in the article. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 01:10, 16 July 2013 (UTC) Support there were major riots (2013 Bangladesh riots) over this case earlier this year. --Երևանցի 05:36, 16 July 2013 (UTC) Note I'd really like to post this: based on support and referencing and overall quality of article (at first glance) this would be an easy post, but there's an orange-level dispute tag that needs to be resolved, and a talk page discussion currently going on regarding that tag. If that discussion can reach a consensus, please ping this page or myself, and I'll see what I can do to post. --Jayron32 02:08, 17 July 2013 (UTC) That talk page is by a partisan editor on the south Asian topics. I don't see it gaining anywhere till someone (an admin) overlooks it.Lihaas (talk) 19:18, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Combine this with the new nom if they're posted. μηδείς (talk) 20:08, 17 July 2013 (UTC) Oppose Neutrality issues need to be solved. Faizan 14:54, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Support the dispute in Misplaced Pages is itself likely to be of interest to readers, and appears unlikely to be resolved soon. This is clearly an important news item and should be listed as such. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 17:18, 18 July 2013 (UTC) Bupati Cup riots No consensus to post. Spencer 00:35, 19 July 2013 (UTC) The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. Article: Bupati Cup riots (talk · history · tag) Blurb: ​ Eighteen people are killed as riots break out in Jakarta, Indonesia at the Bupati Cup. (Post) News source(s): Associated Press via Inquirer USA Today Credits: Nominated by Andise1 (talk · give credit) Article needs updatingNominator's comments: Eighteen people were killed when trying to get out of the stadium (1,500 spectators were there altogether trying to leave the stadium) when riots broke out between the supporters of the boxer who lost the championship match at the Bupati Cup. Andise1 (talk) 05:39, 15 July 2013 (UTC) There needs to be a Bupati Cup article for context here. --LukeSurl 11:10, 15 July 2013 (UTC) Oppose. Bupati Cup riots is three sentences and there is no Bupati Cup article. Gamaliel (talk) 22:53, 15 July 2013 (UTC) Oppose. As above, a three sentence article, and no article at all about the Bupati Cup can't be posted at ITN. And really, who cares about football riots. ★★RetroLord★★ 10:14, 16 July 2013 (UTC) Oppose For the reasons given above doktorb words 10:20, 16 July 2013 (UTC) References Nominators often include links to external websites and other references in discussions on this page. It is usually best to provide such links using the inline URL syntax rather than using <ref></ref> tags, because that keeps all the relevant information in the same place as the nomination without having to jump to this section, and facilitates the archiving process. For the times when <ref></ref> tags are being used, here are their contents: