Jump to content

Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates/September 2015

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is an archive and its contents should be preserved in their current form;
any comments regarding this page should be directed to Wikipedia talk:In the news. Thanks.

September 30

[edit]
September 30, 2015 (2015-09-30) (Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

[Withdrawn] Update: Volkswagen's new CEO, Oliver Blume

[edit]
WITHDRAWN:

--George Ho (talk) 02:32, 2 October 2015 (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.

Sources like Bloomberg and Motor Trend report Oliver Blume as Volkswagen's new appointed CEO amid its emissions scandal. Shall we include it without hassle? --Gh87 in the public computer (talk) 18:00, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think you may have misread. Mueller is still CEO of Volkswagen. Blume replaced him at Porsche. Fuebaey (talk) 22:53, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Closed] Tesla Model X

[edit]
No consensus. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:22, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Tesla Model X (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ American automotive company Tesla Motors unveils the Tesla Model X vehicle. (Post)
News source(s): BBC, Wired, The Verge, ExtremeTech, TechCrunch, The Guardian, Business Insider, Gizmodo, CBC
Credits:

Article updated
 sstflyer 14:12, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Posted] Russian air strikes in Syria

[edit]
Articles: Russian intervention in the Syrian Civil War (talk · history · tag) and Syrian Civil War (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Russia begins air strikes against Islamic State in Syria. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Russia begins air strikes against anti-government forces in Syria in support of President Bashar al-Assad's government.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Russia begins air strikes against Islamic State and the anti-government forces in Syria in support of the Syrian government.
Alternative blurb III: ​ Russia mounts air strikes against jihadist Islamic State terrorists and reportedly against political anti-government forces in Syria.
News source(s): RT, France 24, BBC, Al Jazeera English, Euronews
Credits:

 Jenda H. (talk) 13:43, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I closed it as a speedy keep, since the article will grow or at least end up merged in the parent article. --Tone 15:07, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Right, Russia claims they attacked ISIL but nearly everybody else say they attacked moderate rebels who have nothing to do with ISIL. We could say they attacked anti-government forces without going into the disagreement in the blurb. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:21, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - notable development in this story. --BabbaQ (talk) 18:34, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for now. Countries bomb each other almost daily over there. France recently launched air strikes and no one so much as blinked. I am not seeing anything that suggests long term significance at the moment. If that changes we can revisit the topic. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:48, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Well there's a fundamental and obvious difference between France and Russia taking part, but never mind, it's very informative that you consider the two to be equitable. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:02, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support France and Russia are not the same. Russia's involvement with Syria is more significant, as the news coverage attests. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:03, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support though the name of the group should be that of the article (ISIL). It's not just that Russia is bombing Syria but that they have warned the US to stay away from its planes and also called for an international coalition. [1] 331dot (talk) 20:55, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Added altblurb, as it is abundantly clear that Russia did not strike ISIL positions and it has acknowledged it is acting in support of Assad's embattled government. -Kudzu1 (talk) 03:47, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Russia's intervention in Syria is a major development for sure and a clear step forward in the war against ISIL. The comments with strong anti-Russian sentiment above are completely irrelevant, as ISIL's presence is a much bigger problem than al-Assad's government. Even if confirmed that Russia extend military aid to al-Assad's government, it's simply because they both are allied parties in battling against ISIL. More striking to me is the United States' reluctance to join Russia in this intervention and their "willingness" to continue battling against ISIL without the legitimate Syrian government being one of their allies.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 07:20, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Not everyone questioning the truthfulness of Russian propaganda and the claims of the Russian government is anti-Russian. The claim that other editors have a strong anti-Russian sentiment is uncalled for, and I would kindly ask you to retract it. As for your statements about Russia's motives, this is what the Russian government says and claims, but it is unclear to what extent these public claims reflect the real motives. After all it is reported that Russia's air strikes so far did not target IS, but rather the Free Syrian Army. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.215.73.242 (talk) 08:45, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The news reporting that Russia don't target ISIL's troops is the official position of the United States echoed by the Western (mostly American) media. Under the given circumstances, when everyone accuses the other for doing something, including the non-sense claims made by the US that al-Assad's government aid ISIL, the worst thing is to politicise the matter and blame the actions undertaken by the others.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:38, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I requested that you retract the claim that I have an anti-Russian sentiment. Could you please do so, or is that the way you conduct discussions here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.215.73.242 (talk) 09:44, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't blame particularly you but, if you insist so, the use of the words "Russian propaganda" in all comments posted by a single user doesn't convince one to have different opinion.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:09, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Just wow. I am not anti-Russian, for your interest, and given your new comment I am expecting an apology from you. It' not your right to accuse other editors of being anti-russian. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.215.73.242 (talk) 17:12, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support big news and even bigger news trying to determine exactly who the Russians are targeting. Given that uncertainty, best if we used an alt blurb which just talks of Russia joining in bombing runs in Syria... The Rambling Man (talk) 07:25, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I have proposed another blurb which reflects exactly what is written in the target article. Russia join the Syrian government in the fight against ISIL and its other enemies (please see in the lead and the infobox). Of course, we may change it once the uncertainty of what they really target is cleared.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:48, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I agree with adding whole Syrian opposition (including ISIS) into blurb. The first blurb was added in rush and doesn't reflect reality properly. --Jenda H. (talk) 10:26, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That's why Alt3 sez reportedly. Sca (talk) 00:04, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Altblurb 3. Russian launching airstrikes is big news. Third altblurb captures nuance of current situation until more reporting comes in . -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 01:11, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Altblurb 2. It's the entrance of a major power into the war, and thus deserving of ITN. Supporting Altblurb 2 because the original blurb and altblurb 1 are both incomplete. Altblurb 3 calls IS terrorists and / or jihadists, which is not something Wikipedia should make a stance on. It's pretty clear at this point as well that Russia is targetting the Syrian opposition (see the main article). Banedon (talk) 02:57, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Objection: Where is the evidence, beyond the infamously mendacious Kremlin's say-so, that Russian jets attacked ISIL at all? As far as I've seen, they have exclusively hit areas where ISIL holds no territory (but the Free Syrian Army and other rebel groups do). -Kudzu1 (talk) 03:35, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Like this? The Telegraph, "The Russians continued their aerial bombardment on Thursday. Targets included Jisr al-Shughour and Jabal al-Zawiya, areas under the control of Jaish al-Fatah, the Army of Conquest, an alliance of Islamist groups which have won significant victories against the regime this year. They also included Isil targets in Raqqa and Deir Ezzour provinces, including a Syrian Air Force base which fell to Isil earlier this year after a long siege." Banedon (talk) 04:17, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Obviously this is a big news item precisely because the Russians are doing something the West and the Arab states do not want. One may suspect there is more to this, you have to consider what all the fuss is about for making sure that the forces don't accidentally target each other. That's really not a very complicated issue, as there is no air to air threat from ISIS. The Russians are not even attacking ISIS and only bombing in areas where the moderate rebels are active. US bombs won't accidentally hit Russian soldiers, but perhaps the worry is that Russian bombs may hit undercover US agents. That would also explain why the US asked Bulgaria to close its air space. The US knew that the Russians would simply fly over Iran and Iraq, this would only cause a few days delay. But that few days might have been enough to extract some of its undercover agents from the area. It could be that there are still quite a few agents left in the area or that the US also wants to extract rebel fighters out of that area. Count Iblis (talk) 03:50, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - This source criticizes mainstream media's omission about al-Nusra Front's alliance with al-Qaeda, a terrorist group, and believes that anti-government rebels are not as "moderate" as supposed to be. George Ho (talk) 05:02, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Altblurb 2: major news. 178.135.80.223 (talk) 12:57, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Update – U.S.-led anti-'IS' coalition calls on Russia to stop airstrikes outside 'IS'-controlled areas. Added to article. I think it's time to move on this. – Sca (talk) 15:07, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This is a major move that is shaking up a war that has been a virtual stalemate for the past few years. And it's rightfully receiving tremendous coverage.--Tocino 15:56, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Consensus to post; not a strong consensus on which alt blurb to use, so went with alt blurb 2. --Floquenbeam (talk) 16:48, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

September 29

[edit]
September 29, 2015 (2015-09-29) (Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Science and technology

[Closed] Nexus 5X, Nexus 6P

[edit]
Thanks for the nomination, and for the one above, but this isn't the sort of thing that get posted at ITN. BencherliteTalk 15:32, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Articles: Nexus 5X (talk · history · tag) and Nexus 6P (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Google announces the Nexus 5X and Nexus 6P smartphones in the Nexus family running the Android Marshmallow system. (Post)
News source(s): AnandTech, TechCrunch, The Verge, Times of India, The Guardian, Pocket-lint, Gizmodo
Credits:

Both articles updated
 sstflyer 14:30, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

September 28

[edit]
September 28, 2015 (2015-09-28) (Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Politics and elections

Science and technology

Sports

[Posted] Taliban captures Kunduz

[edit]
Articles: Battle of Kunduz (talk · history · tag) and War in Afghanistan (2015–present) (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Taliban seize control of the provincial capital of Kunduz in northern Afghanistan. (Post)
News source(s): Sky News, BBC, Al Jazeera English, RT, CNN, DW, France 24
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Taliban captures provincial city for first time since 2001. This is big event for whole Central Asia. Jenda H. (talk) 17:35, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] The Waters of Mars

[edit]
NO CONSENSUS
In the hope of saving people time and energy, I'm opting to close this nomination with "no consensus" (vote tally was 18 supporting and 13 opposing). Arguments on both sides are reasonable, but the rationale put forth by opposing arguments is stronger as many of those supporting put forth little reasoning (the strongest argument I read is that science is incremental and this particular discovery/confirmation has notable implications). This announcement, in essence, is a repeat of announcements by NASA in 2011 and 2013 but with greater confidence. The only notable difference in this announcement is additional evidence that further confirms the previous assumptions/theories. The media often suffers from amnesia and picked up on this announcement as if water had never been noted on Mars before, which is contrary to the truth. Continued reports in the media appear to mostly be rehashes of the same story that was announced on September 28, so this event can also be considered "stale" to a small degree. If you have concerns about my reasoning for closing this, or simply that it's been closed in general, feel free to bring up discussion on the talk page. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 05:43, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Articles: Mars (talk · history · tag) and Seasonal flows on warm Martian slopes (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ NASA has found key evidence that water is flowing on today's Mars (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ NASA announces that satellite images show evidence of liquid water flows on Mars.
Alternative blurb II: ​ NASA announces that its Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter captured spectrographic evidence of liquid water on Mars during warm seasons.
News source(s): Nature Geoscience The Telegraph
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Seems to me an interesting development Hektor (talk) 14:30, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Collapsed comments for convenience of viewing other nominations ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 05:43, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hence the name eau de vie. Sca (talk) 16:11, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support – But do keep "evidence of" in the blurb. (Altblurb offered above.) Sca (talk) 16:20, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong support Discovery of water on an extraterrestrial planet, even if in question is Mars, answers a highly debatable question which has been present in the mainstream scientific circles for decades.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 16:26, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question: wasn't this already discovered back in 2011? Indeed that's when the Seasonal flows on warm Martian slopes article was first written, and was featured in ITN on 5 August 2011 (diff). Unless I'm missing something, this is just confirmation of a story we already ran on ITN over four years ago. Modest Genius talk 16:37, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh and again in 2013. Modest Genius talk 16:39, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    My understanding, not being an expert here, is that the prior discovers were all that signs that water had flowed on Mars at some point in the past (million years or so). Today's announcement is that from evidence obtained in the last year with the Mars Observer, there is likely water flowing today on Mars, that all that water in the past hasn't just up and evaporated. --MASEM (t) 16:42, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Nope, the announcements were both for liquid water now. Quoting the 2011 announcement 'evidence of liquid water on the planet's surface today'. Modest Genius talk 16:49, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Okay, so reading more closely, the news appears to the result of detailed analysis from the Mars Observer via the use of infra-red spectrometry that observed - over the time the Mars Observer watched - the appearance of specific types of salts on hillsides where they had not previously been detected, timed with the seasonal changes on Mars, with the only possible way they could appear is via the flow of briny water. The 2011 news was mostly from visual images of darker-colored paths that could have been from the flow of water but could also be a geological related thing. The appears of these salts, on the other hand, per [2] is a smoking gun for the existence of water. --MASEM (t) 17:12, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes indeed, which is straightforward and rather boring confirmation of a result that was announced twice before. Modest Genius talk 22:31, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    It may be confirmation but it is confirmation that eliminates several other possible theories that they had at 2011 of what this was and leaves the "water on Mars" as the strongest hypothesis. That's key here. --MASEM (t) 00:27, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    It was always the strongest hypothesis. They've eliminated several other possibilities, which is great. But in 2011 we felt the evidence was strong enough already to post, so piling more on top doesn't really change things. Modest Genius talk 09:38, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Oppose. After more digging and following the discussion here, there's really nothing new. This is simply confirmation of a result that was already known, already reported, and already featured on ITN. There's so little new here that there isn't even properly updated article - almost all of the information on Wikipedia is based on the 2011 and 2013 announcements. Note that Nature didn't think this was important enough to feature in their flagship journal, but instead shifted it off to their less-prestigious subsidiary. Yes it's nice that they got confirmation via another method, and that's good science, but I still cannot fathom why the media is recycling old news based on an over-hyped press conference. Modest Genius talk 22:31, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose/Stale, NASA makes these announcements to try to ensure their funding requests are met. Note that the Wikipedia article on this was started in 2011. Abductive (reasoning) 16:44, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Bleve the 2011 announcement referred to salt water. Perhaps this is thought to be fresh water, since it supposedly condenses outta the atmosphere? Sca (talk) 16:47, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This water is as salty as water can get. Abductive (reasoning) 16:48, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, it is in fact a detection of wet salts etc., about as far from fresh water as it is possible to get. Modest Genius talk 16:51, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, experts, how do the little green men manage to survive drinking it? Sca (talk) 16:55, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If this gets posted, please use File:Warm_Season_Flows_on_Slope_in_Newton_Crater_(animated).gif. Nergaal (talk) 17:32, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Which was uploaded in 2011! Modest Genius talk 22:43, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
+ Extra "cool point" for the Latin. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:32, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
AD MAIOREM GLORIAM VIKIPAEDIAE μηδείς (talk) 00:24, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Admin note: I would post this, but I am having a hard time finding an article or section which we can link to that contains a prominent description of this stuff. I've scoured Mars, Water on Mars, and Seasonal flows on warm Martian slopes looking for a reasonable well-referenced and lengthy expansion, and can find nothing useful. IF we have a good article to direct readers to, the consensus is this is important enough to do so. As yet, we don't have such an article. If someone can point me to that article (in case I am missing it) or if someone can get on fixing the problem, I'll post this with all due haste. --Jayron32 19:08, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • The details updated are under "Brines" for the Seasonal Flows article (as I just looked). Mind you, its not written as clear to say "this discovery is clear evidence of water" as we are talking here, but it is included. --MASEM (t) 19:33, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • Is that information updated? All of the references in that section seem to be from 2011-2013, and seeing sentences like These observations are the closest scientists have come to finding evidence of liquid water on the planet's surface today. make it seem like it still needs to be updated with recent findings. Also added alt 2 - previous blurb - as a starting point to edit to come up with a blurb for this item. SpencerT♦C 21:01, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        • Yes, when I looked: it included the Nature paper that was published today and one of the news blurbs published today (See the sentence about finding chlorates and perchlorates). Also note that I modified that blurb from "photographic" to "spectrographic" evidence since they are using spectrometry to discover this. --MASEM (t) 21:17, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support confirmation of discovery that will have ramifications in terms of future scientific missions. -- Callinus (talk) 19:14, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Obvious support per above. A lot of people first visit Wikipedia to find out more about this kind of news, so the articles need to be top notch and updated. 1.39.62.181 (talk) 19:18, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - The new article is informative and well-sourced at first glance. Opposers fail to convince. Jusdafax 19:45, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    There is no new article. Seasonal flows on warm Martian slopes was written in 2011, following the original announcement by the same team. It was featured in ITN at the time. Modest Genius talk 22:32, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    I can't help that you are so gullible. Abductive (reasoning) 00:09, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose I intended to support this, as standard ITN procedure is to post science discoveries when a reputable source claims full confirmation; but the article not only dates to 2011, it was evidently posted ITN at that time, meaning we (Wikipedia) felt it was proof enough to be worthy of the front page at that time. I would find it hard to reconcile posting it twice on the same merits of strong evidence, and stripped of that, this announcement is just further confirmation of the same, which we do not typically post. - OldManNeptune ⚓ 23:00, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose NASA makes this "announcement" whenever their budget is up for renewal, in the hope that journalists won't bother to check their facts and will just reprint their press releases, and make it look like they do more than they actually do. They made this same announcement in June 2000, just to give an idea of how long this has been going on. ‑ iridescent 23:25, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. I would like to see sources for the claims about this being announced to influence NASA's budget. That's just personal speculation without them. This is further evidence of what has been just a theory and is being widely covered in the news. This is a notable aspect of space exploration. Wikipedia users will want to learn more about this, which is one of the purposes of ITN. 331dot (talk) 00:21, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • To clarify what is important about this paper from the past: In the past (including much earlier), the evidence for water on Mars is from two primary data points: the photographs from the number of probes we've sent, and surface samples that indicate salts do exist on the surface of Mars. The photographs have shown different-colored material moving in a manner that would suggest water flow but could have been from , say, granular motions as well. What the paper today has done is use spectrographic data to look at those different colored areas, throughout a Martian year, and identified that they have IR spectra that match very specific salts that were not present in the area before. Specifically: somehow those salts moved downhill during the course of Martian seasons, so that the only way they could do this per this paper and NASA is that there must be highly briny water coming to the surface to do that. While those were clearly hypothesis from the previous photographic and material evidence, they weren't as strong without actually "seeing" it happen and knowing what is moving as they have been able to do with the Mars Observer (even the 2011 announcement was still along the lines of "the best hypothesis of several" but far from being the cincher this is reported as) It remains a hypothesis that there is flowing water on Mars, but this paper makes an extremely strong case that it is the right conclusion eliminating other theories to the reasons for the different colors on the photographs. I also disagree that this was precluded on NASA's funding. The paper was done by a professor out of GA Tech and the timing is based on its completion of the peer-review and publishing cycle; that itself was likely work that had to be predicated on the 2011 discovery to plan out the best timing and locations to do the research to get the best results. Normal delay in science. --MASEM (t) 00:25, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Say whaaaat? Sca (talk) 00:36, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong support: Not the first time this theory has been seriously discussed, but a milestone in that Earth's premiere space exploration agency is now officially putting its weight behind it. This is a big deal, and just because scientists made a convincing case in 2011 that has now apparently been confirmed by NASA shouldn't prevent us from getting with the times and posting this ASAP. -Kudzu1 (talk) 00:51, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. If this must be posted, please use some variation of Alt Blurb II so that Wikipedia does not look quite so stupid. Abductive (reasoning) 00:53, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Even if it's not that significant (which I don't agree with), the hype around the announcement is grounds enough for me to support the proposal. Besides, the fact that this discovery resulted in a publication in Nature is clear indication that something happened here that didn't happen in 2011 or 2013. Banedon (talk) 01:11, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • My bad. Regardless, Nature Geoscience is a peer-reviewed journal which would presumably reject anything that wasn't novel (such as regurgitating of 2011 or 2013 material). It also has an impact factor in the double digits, which would imply it's one of the most prestigious specialist journals out there. Banedon (talk) 09:50, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong support: This is a historical scientific accomplishment that it should be known! 70Jack90 (talk) 02:14, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Too much recycled hype for something that has been up at ITN twice before. This seems like those perennial stories that a cure for cancer has been discovered. I'm also suspicious that this is happening when there's a movie called The Martian on release. For an interesting account of what's really going on, please see Emily Lakdawalla. For all that it's a blog, she seems more reliable than anything you'll find in the MSM. Andrew D. (talk) 07:10, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The news organizations running the story this week would seem to disagree that this is "old". Science sometimes takes time to be discovered and released. I don't really understand the 'old' criticism and am still waiting for evidence this was deliberately timed with a movie or with NASA budget requests. 331dot (talk) 22:14, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Fish, visitors, news
I meant that this announcement is getting old. It's been ballyhooed in the media for, as of Wednesday, three days. Sca (talk) 01:09, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That happens all too often. Instead of ITN it should be called ITNLW (as in "Last Week"). ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 02:07, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Marked Ready regardless of conspiracy theories on the timing of the announcement, we have a significantly updated target article, pretty strong (three to one) consensus towards posting, and our readers would, one assumes, come here to see what we have on the topic. I strongly suggest the posting admin go with the flowing water blurb, since we have known for quite a while that water had flowed on the surface. What we have now is direct visual evidence of water that is in the process of flowing. μηδείς (talk) 00:09, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Very notable. This is being covered everywhere and is certainly RTN material. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 01:18, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Why are the oppose votes being treated as conspiracy theorists? The article was already posted ITN in 2011 with this blurb: "NASA announces that it has found evidence there may be liquid water on Mars during warm parts of the year." Well, that's pretty much exactly what we have here, isn't it? The very same blurb, just slightly reworded? We didn't even upgrade from theory based on observation to direct sampling, it's still just further observation. This isn't to downplay it, I'm actually a space/rocketry enthusiast and would like to see as much science and space ITN as humanly possible, but are we really posting incremental advances in evidence (we didn't post the recent story on the moon's exosphere, for example)? I also feel obligated to point out that while a vote count provides clear consensus, a great number of those votes are little more than "clearly notable" with the expectation of SNOW, which is, if I may say, a poor practice for ITN to get into. - OldManNeptune ⚓ 05:22, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • As I've tried to point out before, while it is the same possible conclusion that the photographic studies have suggested, the methods used here are reaching the same conclusion with a much higher confidence level due to spectrographic methods, eliminating several other theories to explain what they had previously seen by photographs. It is the same blurb, for the most part, but approached from a stronger scientific background. And while I would be against normal "incremental" advances in science, we are talking about the nearest planet we can visit and that these readings provide greater possibility that such a mission would be possible, which is one of the pinnicles of scientific research here. --MASEM (t) 05:58, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • Sure, I understand the implications, I'm just unconvinced that they meet the bar for posting the same thing twice, especially when the results were "as expected." While I share your enthusiasm, I must also point out that you are crystal balling as a result - as well as conceding that my concerns are well founded, but for appeal to emotion (which I share, I couldn't bring myself to do more than a weak oppose). - OldManNeptune ⚓ 06:15, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • OldManNepture makes good points. Masem, we understand the science here. Simply re-stating it isn't going to change anyone's mind. The crux of the matter is that this is a new line of evidence for something that we were already pretty certain about, and that was posted on ITN before. Modest Genius talk 10:50, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
What work do you feel is needed? 331dot (talk) 06:49, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't mean article editing. The primary sources themselves still must research further to confirm existence of water in Mars. They said they confirm water flows, but they haven't tested the waters yet. George Ho (talk) 07:09, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm unclear on what your personal views on Mars exploration and science have to do with unmarking this section which seems to have clear consensus for posting. If that's your rationale for opposing it, fair enough, but there still seems to be consensus here to post this widely covered development. 331dot (talk) 07:15, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Re-marked as ready; personal opinion of the matter does not override consensus. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 07:28, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see how this is a "personal opinion". I read arguments, and somehow I'm compelling by arguments pointing out insufficient substantial developments on the topic. Supporters say it's still huge news development just because NASA says so. Marking it as "ready" with consensus split (50:50) would imply ignorance and bias. --George Ho (talk) 07:46, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If you disagree with an official government finding for whatever reason, it's your right to do so. You believing that more research or work is needed is just that, your belief. That doesn't change the fact that this development was widely reported as a notable advancement. 331dot (talk) 07:55, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) I count 18 supports (excluding stricken ones) and 7 stated opposes (8 if I am to assume you're in opposition). A roughly 70/30 split is hardly the same as 50/50. For what it's worth, I rescinded my support. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 07:56, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Long March 6 and 11

[edit]
Articles: Long March 6 (talk · history · tag) and Long March 11 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Long March 6 and Long March 11 successfully perform their maiden orbital launch. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Over less than one week, China successfully performs the maiden flights of Long March 6 and Long March 11
Alternative blurb II: ​ In under one week, China launches the maiden flights of Long March 6 and Long March 11
News source(s): spaceflightnow
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: And two new launchers in less than one week is an impressive feat. Also LM-6 marks the transition of China to kerosene propulsion. Hektor (talk) 14:30, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • General support but I feel the articles are lacking. For example both mention payloads but what are they for? The articles both need expansion before this can be ITN. --MASEM (t) 14:32, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I just checked the zhwiki versions of the two articles and they are no better, so we cannot expand these articles by translation from Chinese Wikipedia. sstflyer 15:04, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I agree with Masem, this seems significant but both articles are stubs, and the payload lists on both are all redlinks with no summary. The rocket performance details are the strongest point in the current article but most front page readers aren't likely to gain much from that alone. That said, I'd like to see this posted, because rockets. - OldManNeptune ⚓ 20:49, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • The ITNR list has first launches of a type of rocket listed. 331dot (talk) 00:26, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • No need to support as this is on ITNR. It should go up once the articles are in shape, but at the moment they're both uninformative stubs. Not the sort of thing we want to show off on the Main Page. If we get some actual referenced articles before this goes stale then it can go up. Modest Genius talk 09:11, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose based on articles as it is at the moment. -- KTC (talk) 11:59, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment As a close follower of Chinese spaceflight, the reason that there isn't more information on both pages is that the Chinese really don't like to talk about both of them. Unlike the development of their larger siblings, the development of LM-6 has been in tight wraps and almost nothing is known about the LM-11 (hence the lack of technical parameters on that page, because we have no idea!). Heck, the Chinese apparently refuse to show any photos of the LM-11 first launch because it apparently uses a TEL launcher car (in contrast with the Russians, which have no problem showing off their Topol-M TEL)! Given how little the Chinese have released, the current articles are probably as best as they could right now. Alas, that doesn't really give them a chance on the front page. On the other hand, when the Long March 7 and Long March 5 rockets fly next year, I think they have a much better chance because the Chinese do show them off a lot as their next generation flagship rockets. Galactic Penguin SST (talk) 18:33, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • I fully appreciate that because the Chinese generally don't broadcast their scientific achievements, that we can't really develop the articles. I will point to my previous suggestion: What if we use Long March (rocket family) as the target article, which does need clean up but is more complete about the program, with the two above articles as non-bolded links for that? --MASEM (t) 20:47, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • It is certainly unfortunate that China is so secretive about it's space programme, but ITN exists to highlight decent-quality Wikipedia articles that have been updated to reflect recent news. If there isn't enough information to update the article, there is nothing ITN can do with it. Shifting the bold link to Long March (rocket family) might help, but that article would still need several sentences of update on the new launches. That might still be impossible if there simply aren't any available sources. Modest Genius talk 10:55, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose—the articles simply aren't of sufficient quality for highlighting in this way. For example, I've looked for basic information about (any) of the long list of redlinked payloads listed in the LM6 article, and can't find any info. Purpose? Mass? Orbital altitude? etc. I've started a discussion on the Talk page to try to find others with more information. My guess is that a bunch of Chinese students might have flown some microsat educational payloads of the size that would have allowed a single LM6 launch to transport that bunch of payloads, and I hope one of them may have links to Chinese university PR media that might tell us what was launched. But none of that info is in the article today. Cheers. N2e (talk) 14:29, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Astrosat

[edit]
Article: Astrosat (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ India launches its first ever astronomical satellite, Astrosat. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The Indian Space Research Organisation launches Astrosat, India's first space telescope.
News source(s): Time, BBC, Nature
Credits:

 Banedon (talk) 03:35, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Phil Woods

[edit]
Article: Phil Woods (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NPR NY Times
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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.

 shoy (reactions) 12:53, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

September 27

[edit]
September 27, 2015 (2015-09-27) (Sunday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

International relations

Politics and elections

Science and technology

Sports

[closed] Catalonia election

[edit]
CLOSED FOR NOW
Consensus is not to post this election result at this time. There's a general feeling, even among the opposition, that the Catalonian independence/sovereignty movement is an active, newsworthy story, but that this specific moment in it is not the right one to post to ITN. --Jayron32 14:42, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Catalonian parliamentary election, 2015 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The pro-independence parties Junts pel Sí and Candidatura d'Unitat Popular win a majority of seats in the Catalonian parliamentary election. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The pro-independence parties Together for Yes and Popular Unity Candidacy win a majority of seats in the Catalonian parliamentary election.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Pro-independence parties win a majority of seats in the Catalonian parliamentary election.
News source(s): Guardian
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Normally, a state election wouldn't be notable. However, separatist parties have crossed the 50% line, and have promised to begin the process of declaring independence. Per ITN/R "Disputed states and dependent territories should be discussed at WP:ITN/C and judged on their own merits." This is of course not an actual declaration of independence, which would be obvious posting material. Smurrayinchester 07:49, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, because the results were a little ambiguous. The pro-independence parties won an overall majority of seats, but did not win an overall majority of votes. Therefore it is not yet clear whether or how the government of Catalonia will push its mandate. Obviously if it did make a declaration of independence, or if a binding sovereignty referendum were held, that would be newsworthy. At this stage it is more analogous to the Scottish National Party winning an overall majority in the 2011 Scottish election (not recorded in ITN, I would have thought), which created the mandate for the 2014 referendum (which was, even though the pro-independence side lost). Jmorrison230582 (talk) 07:59, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I did consider the similarity between the two. The difference is that the SNP promised a referendum on independence, while the Catalonian nationalist parties promise unilateral independence (since, unlike in the UK, the Spanish national government refuses to allow a referendum). Smurrayinchester 09:35, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I would be willing to post a referendum for independence of Catalonia, but the pro-independence party getting >50% of seats (and not the vote) in the region doesn't necessarily cut it for me. If someone has a compelling argument in favor of posting, I'm willing to reconsider. SpencerT♦C 08:20, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose this sub-national election. They may well intend/threaten to unilaterally proclaim independence (unlikely) or hold a non-binding referendum (possible), but equally neither of those things might happen. If/when they do we can consider posting, but for now we should not be a crystal ball. Modest Genius talk 10:50, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Maybe 'sub-national' but an autonomous region with 7.5 million inhabitants - that places it in the midfield of countries by population. And Catalan independence would significantly affect Spain and the EU. I wonder even if considering nation-states (regardless of population) more notable in a dispute about statehood doesn't conflict with WP:NPOV. --ELEKHHT 13:26, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Independence would certainly have major impact. So let's post it if/when it happens. Sub-national entities are not sovereign, regardless of their degree of autonomy (which is hardly binary anyway). If we simply went with the size of the electorate we would be continuously posting a stream of Indian, Brazilian, US etc. state elections. Modest Genius talk 22:47, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, I think many state elections in federal systems with high level of local autonomy are much more relevant than that of tiny nation states with small populations and limited power. --ELEKHHT 07:11, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
In the text, the word "majority" occurs once, in a sentence about the 2012 election. Sca (talk) 14:36, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
PS: Analysis here seems to say: One thing's sure, the issue won't go away. (Yawn.) Sca (talk) 14:02, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

RD: Frank Tyson

[edit]
Article: Frank Tyson (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ABC (AU) The Guardian BBC AFP
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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: Renowned and accomplished English cricketer whose career was short but who then made a lengthy second career as a well-respected commentator. Death is receiving international attention. Kudzu1 (talk) 17:39, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Collapsing side discussion. SpencerT♦C 08:22, 28 September 2015 (UTC) [reply]
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
    • Dunno about baseball and American football, but Moses Malone, the only basketball (arguable played in more countries than cricket) player RD that we had ever since RD was added, was almost certainly the best basketball player in 1983... (I realize basketball coaches are a different beast altogether, so I'd reckon our standards for them are quite low.) –HTD 20:53, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Why has America been brought up in this thread? μηδείς (talk) 21:16, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
A good question. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:42, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
At any rate, Hall of Fame is for a lifetime of playing not merely 1 season.
Not to mention there is a cricket of the year EVERY year. To set the precedence with that criteria there will be far more postings than any U.S. sport.120.62.13.133 (talk) 21:46, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hardly, there have been only 80 distinct winners of the leading cricketer in the world award since 1900. We might, on average, see one every 18 months at RD. Scaremongering is not required. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:09, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support As a cricket follower, this is the sort of name I'd expect to see on RD. He played in the 50s and his name is still well known to followers of the modern game. His playing career may have been cut short by poor circumstances, but he was clearly a great player, and he had a supplementary career as a well known and respected commentator. My support is only weak because I'd place him below Arthur Morris (who was definite RD material), and there has to be a cutoff somewhere. (On the other hand, I wouldn't be surprised if Dean Jones didn't make the RD cut - his main claim over Tyson is recentism, in my opinion.) --dmmaus (talk) 23:33, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, per the IP comment. Diego Grez-Cañete (talk) 23:38, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support - Although he wasn't at the same level as Marshall or Lillee, he was one of the fastest bowlers of all time and quite successful in the limited number of Tests he played. 1.39.62.111 (talk) 06:55, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Shoaib, Lee and particularly Bond's limited career are all just current examples of "one of the fastest bowlers of all time and quite successful". Where do you draw the line if you were to set this precedence?120.62.35.224 (talk) 12:23, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Tyson bowled genuine fast about 50 years before Shoaib and Lee. He was also the world's leading cricketer, unlike Shoaib and Lee. But Shoaib and Lee would both be reasonable shouts for RD (in many years to come one imagines). The Rambling Man (talk) 12:36, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Just out of curiosity, does the name Johnny Unitas mean anything to you?--WaltCip (talk) 18:05, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, but only because I enjoy sports from around the world, not just from own little microcosm of specialist games like association football and cricket and kabaddi and freediving. I also like Frankie Goes to Hollywood songs. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:08, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, just checking. I'm okay with having a diverse selection of sports at ITN.--WaltCip (talk) 14:21, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose a one year best of six decades ago in one of the world's smaller countries not internationally followed or feted hardly deserves to be called influential or major. Did they change the wickets from bone to metal due to his violent slam dunks? μηδείς (talk) 05:16, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    "Please 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." The Rambling Man (talk) 07:38, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    An addendum needs to be added to that rule which says "...except regional amateur sports, which are fair game for criticism" so that we can avoid the bitching and bellyaching that occurs at ITN anytime one of those is nominated and fails.--WaltCip (talk) 14:21, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I'm not seeing any evidence that the subject was at the top of his field, other than for a few games in 1955. --Tocino 09:00, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Query I occasionally close/post ITN stuff, but not frequently enough to make this judgment call alone. Opinion is evenly divided on this - no consensus - but ITN is a little stale (currently nothing at RD, and I just removed a blurb from 9/20, bottom one from 9/22), this article looks in good shape, it wouldn't be pushing any other article off the page, and it seems better to give the reader something rather than nothing, so... what harm can it do? Is there any opposition to posting borderline cases when (a) there is a lack of current items to post, and (b) the article quality is not disputed, just the noteworthiness? If it was up to me I'd post this particular item. Any strong objection? if we don't do it now, we should close this, it will be considered stale soon. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:15, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    All good with me, RD is empty, this will get a couple of days... The Rambling Man (talk) 18:44, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

September 26

[edit]
September 26, 2015 (2015-09-26) (Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Businesses and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

September 25

[edit]
September 25, 2015 (2015-09-25) (Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Health
  • The BBC reports that Nigeria will be removed from the list of countries where polio is endemic. (BBC)

Law and crime

International relations

Politics and elections

[Closed] John Boehner resigning

[edit]
WP:SNOW
Good faith nomination, but there's no chance of this passing. Usually, anything less than head-of-state or head-of-government getting replaced. Party leadership changes (unless it results in changes of other more important positions, like in Australia earlier) rarely merit ITN posting. I know this just opened, but the purpose of WP:SNOW is to avoid wasting time on good-faith nominations that stand no chance. This stands no chance. --Jayron32 16:12, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: John Boehner (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ John Boehner, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, announces that he will resign from the United States Congress at the end of this October. (Post)
News source(s): USA Today New York Times BBC
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Boehner is a very high ranking politician, and as the speaker he is second in the presidential line of succession. In addition, this story is the lead story on the NY Times homepage and has also received coverage from the BBC, as indicated by the link above. There is also international coverage from the Guardian [4] and Reuters [5]. Everymorning (talk) 15:58, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose not significant, or at the very least, the significance of an American politician announcing his retirement is not clear, even if he is "speaker". We would never post the speaker of the House of Commons moving on, would we? The Rambling Man (talk) 16:02, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Fair point, but I would say the Speaker of the US House functions differently from the Speaker of the House of Commons(from what I know). 331dot (talk) 16:06, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose This is indeed big news in the US. However, to put it into perspective, it is as notable/significant as a cabinet reshuffle. Changing the individual leadership for the lower house of a country does not seem to rise to the level of ITN. Mamyles (talk) 16:03, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. It was looking like his caucus might vote to remove him, but he beat them to it. He's not resigning due to a scandal, and will be replaced by someone of the same party(though likely more conservative). I might be less opposed to posting the actual change when it occurs. 331dot (talk) 16:04, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait-Oppose this is an announcement that he will resign, the actual news will be whoever replaces him. This could possibly have a huge effect on the rest of Obama's term, since Boehner has been consistently siding with the president and against his own party. But this certainly won't merit two postings, so let's wait and see who is selected to be his successor before discussing this. μηδείς (talk) 16:05, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • (edit conflict × 3) Weak oppose I think this may be unprecedented (has a Speaker ever stepped down mid-term before?) but Speaker isn't head of state, and his likely successor is going to step into the same position of discord with Tea Partiers that Boehner is leaving, so not much changes. The real news is that the U.S. government will apparently not shut down on October 1, but that's a status quo story. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:06, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Snowball oppose per above Cyclonebiskit (talk) 16:08, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

September 24

[edit]
September 24, 2015 (2015-09-24) (Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture
Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

[Posted to ongoing]: 2015 Southeast Asian haze

[edit]
Article: 2015 Southeast Asian haze (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: No blurb specified (Post)
News source(s): Today: Euro News, Fox News, Al Jazeera America. Previous: Al Jazeera, Reuters, Associated Press, Australian Broadcasting Corp, Time, BBC
Credits:

Nominator's comments: See the above nomination. Affects millions of people and multiple countries, particularly more disruptive and long-lasting than previous years (we did post one in 2013), international coverage. HaEr48 (talk) 00:06, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] Colombian justice deal

[edit]
obviously a reasonable and good faith nom, but no traction after 60 hrs. μηδείς (talk) 00:01, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Articles: Colombian conflict (1964–present) (talk · history · tag) and FARC (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The President of Colombia Juan Manuel Santos and the leader of FARC Timoleón Jiménez announce an agreement on how to punish human rights abuses committed during the fifty-years-old conflict. (Post)
News source(s): DW, CNN, Al Jazeera English, BBC
Credits:
 Jenda H. (talk) 12:50, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Posted] 2015 Hajj stampede

[edit]
POSTED
I'm closing this because discussions have veered off the purpose of this venue, which is to discuss the posting, or non-posting, of an item. Discussions over specific words should happen elsewhere 1) If the use of the word "stampede" in the article title is incorrect, start a WP:RM discussion on the article talk page itself. 2) If the current, already posted, blurb is incorrect, use WP:ERRORS. Recent discussions over wording, while worthwhile, are incorrectly placed in this venue and need to happen elsewhere. --Jayron32 14:36, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: 2015 Hajj stampede (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ At least 700 people are killed in a stampede during the Hajj pilgramage at Mecca, Saudi Arabia. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ A stampede during the Hajj pilgramage at Mecca, Saudi Arabia kills more than 700 people and injures at least 800.
News source(s): BBC
Credits:
 The Rambling Man (talk) 09:11, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • What I find more pejorative is the notion that raw fact should somehow be subordinate to yellow journalism. There is nothing special about people that means words have to be bent to fit them. GRAPPLE X 14:00, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree with your first sentence; the second one, not so much; most language is altered when we use it in reference to humans rather than animals or objects. Belle (talk) 14:18, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

September 23

[edit]
September 23, 2015 (2015-09-23) (Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Business and economy

Law and crime

[Closed] Ugrunaaluk kuukpikensis

[edit]
Consensus against posting. Subject lacks contextual significance that would set it apart from other regularly identified dinosaur genera. Topic is far better suited at WP:DYK. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 14:50, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Ugrunaaluk kuukpikensis (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A new species of dinosaur, Ugrunaaluk kuukpikensis, is discovered in Alaska. (Post)
News source(s): CBS News SCI-News The Washington Post
Credits:
Nominator's comments: As mentioned above it is late so the article is not in good condition whatsoever (I just created it with about two sentences so there was an article when I nominated this.) Andise1 (talk) 08:03, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It looks like the article has been expanded into a credible stub. But I have to agree with some of the other comments, there is nothing here that is exceptional or unusual enough for ITN coverage. On the other hand this looks like an excellent candidate for DYK. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:38, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • So? A new dinosaur genus is described every 2 to 3 weeks. Most new species will never appear on ITN. What makes this one special? Dragons flight (talk) 08:08, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment new dinosaurs do sometimes get posted if they are special in some way. From the article, I can't see that just yet. Still, if it fails ITN and you expand it enough, DYK is always a good venue to go. --Tone 08:39, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article needs expansion before it can be considered. Right now, I cannot see enough significance. sstflyer 09:09, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose (in addition to article issues) - Unlike, say, the more recent discovery of a feathery-wing dinosaur in the last year (IIRC), which there was considered a major evolutionary find, here it's more "A dino that would have appeared to survive in cold and odd light-cycle climates" which is not yet established why this is a major evolutionary find. I don't know if, say Dragons flight says, we're finding new genus of dinos that often but they are often enough that not every discovery is ITN-worthy. --MASEM (t) 13:57, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: Another day, another dino. Not sure why or how this discovery is very significant. -Kudzu1 (talk) 14:30, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: Nothing special to make this stand out amongst other dinosaur related discoveries in order to prompt a spot. However, once expanded it would be fine for a DYK placement. Miyagawa (talk) 14:49, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose but simply because I know nothing about the alleged frequent discovery of new dinosaurs every few weeks and that the article is sub-stub and doesn't appear to have been touched in any great form for the past 12 hours, perhaps indicative of its general interest to anyone out there who really cares. So, in short, it's an oppose from me until, at the very least, the article is much larger and explains why I should care about this particular discovery beyond all the others that Dragons flight has stated are noted every few weeks. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:21, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • DYK This should definitely go to DYK. It's a run-of-the-mill duckbill, and dinosaurs living in the polar regions have been known of for decades. μηδείς (talk) 18:28, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

September 22

[edit]
September 22, 2015 (2015-09-22) (Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Sports

[Posted] RD: Yogi Berra

[edit]
Article: Yogi Berra (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  Former Major League Baseball catcher and manager Yogi Berra dies at the age of 90. (Post)
News source(s): KNBR CBS13
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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: Legendary baseball player and manager, Hall of Fame inductee, pop culture icon for his "Yogi-isms", etc. Kudzu1 (talk) 06:29, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Conditional Support – Unsourced pieces scattered about the article (including his death at the time of this comment) holding back my full support. Once those are covered this is a no-brainer for RD. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 06:31, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Weak support for blurb – I'm not terribly familiar with how notable someone has to be to warrant a blurb, but I'd venture to say Berra was about as notable as you can get in Baseball. I may have some personal bias, however, since I grew up in New York. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 07:20, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm a New York Mets fan and thus no great fan of the Yankees. But even I grasp that Yogi was a giant in sports. The standards for blurbs are not spelled out with great clarity and a good deal of it is discretion based on consensus. But in general blurbs are given only very rarely if the death was not unexpected. Past precedent suggests that if your death was not a shock, then you have to be a truly iconic figure to get one on your death. The last such case I can recall was Sir Christopher Lee. -Ad Orientem (talk) 07:31, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb per my above comment. -Ad Orientem (talk) 07:35, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Do you mean "support RD only"? Nelson Mandela was also posted as a blurb so your current vote reasoning is inaccurate. Andise1 (talk) 07:35, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:37, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That "Nelson Mandela" standard holds no water anymore. One of the latest persons to get a blurb was a German book author, who clearly did not rise to the level of influence of Mandela.--WaltCip (talk) 12:42, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It depends on global influence. This fella, while clearly loved by the US, is a nobody elsewhere. No disrespect, he just lived a long time, made some daft quotes, and Americans love him. The rest of the world is "meh" about the situation. The Mandela standard is something we should strive for, whether or not it's been degraded for American actors or German authors. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:31, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb, support RD A great player, but not among the absolute top echelon of all-time baseball greats. His odd sayings were entertaining and made him an iconic figure but hardly warrant a blurb. Neljack (talk) 08:08, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – There's virtually a "pick-em" of sources that consider him the greatest catcher of all time. Literally too many to list here. Being considered a top player out of 10 positions in a sport that is ~150 years old certainly qualifies one as "among the absolute top echelon of all-time baseball greats." Also appeared in (and won) more World Series over the course of his playing & managing career than anyone else in the history of the sport. Twirly Pen (Speak up) 08:31, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, but Yogi Berra was a legend - he's one of only a handful of baseball players I (as a non-sport-following Brit) can name. AlexTiefling (talk) 09:13, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]
Article: Happy Birthday to You (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A U.S. federal judge rules that the lyrics of "Happy Birthday to You" are not under copyright of Warner/Chappell Music, potentially placing the song into the public domain. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The copyright to "Happy Birthday to You" claimed by Warner/Chappell Music is held to be invalid by a U.S. federal judge.
News source(s): LA Times, BBC, Billboard
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: One of the most famous copyright battles, and while there is possibility of more legal action (including potentially someone else claiming copyright on the lyrics), this is a big point in this. There's also additional legal aspects of the case (Warner/Chappell paying back licensing fees) but that's less a key factor here. MASEM (t) 05:40, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support if article found up to snuff, which it looks like it might well be. Most importantly, this is a victory for the free-culture movement of which Wikipedia (and by extension all of us) has been a major part. I think that gives us extra incentive to front-page this. Daniel Case (talk) 06:35, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
OK, fair point. But that's about the scale of the competition. AlexTiefling (talk) 12:50, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Volkswagen emissions cheating scandal

[edit]
Article: Volkswagen common-rail TDI diesel engine emissions controversy (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ As a result of EPA testing, Volkswagen's CEOs admit widespread rigging of emissions test results. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ As a result of United States Environmental Protection Agency testing, Volkswagen's CEOs admit widespread rigging of emissions test results.
Alternative blurb II: ​ As a result of EPA testing, Volkswagen's American and German CEOs admit widespread rigging of emissions test results.
Alternative blurb III: ​ The United States Environmental Protection Agency announces, and Volkswagen's CEOs confirm, widespread rigging of emissions test results.
News source(s): Reuters BBC euronews
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Though new, the article is of reasonable size and well-referenced Jusdafax 10:18, 22 September 2015 (UTC) [reply]

collapse four-page long discussion merely for scrolling convenience. μηδείς (talk) 23:48, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I support altblurb1 with the suggestion of pluralizing CEO as two (US and Ger) have weighed in. 331dot (talk) 13:19, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Last year the CEO of General Motors admitted that her company was responsible for 13 deaths and met with relatives of some of the killed people. More than 2 million unsafe cars and 13 dead people (these numbers are from the RS given in the GM nomination) and the CEO admitting guilt - and it was clear consensus not to post this to ITN. What is the rationale why this story should be posted even though there was clear consensus not to post the General Motors story? LoveToLondon (talk) 13:22, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That nomination was for the recall, not for the deaths. 331dot (talk) 13:22, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The original blurb said General Motors' CEO, Mary Barra, testifies before Congress regarding her company's recall of 6.3 million of its vehicles due to faulty ignition switches. It was changed after several complaints that the fact that the CEO admitted it should not be mentioned. So when an US CEO does it before Congress it is consensus that this must not be mentioned in the blurb, but when a German CEO admits guilt this should be mentioned in the blurb and is considered a reason for posting? And when I see that one editor who supports this nomination here opposed the GM nomination due to the low (multi-million) number of recalls and stated that the (Congress) testimonial by the GM CEO should not be mentioned, I really start to wonder whether this different treatment is based on a pro-US and anti-German bias. Why is rigging emission test results so much worse than not telling for two years that your cars have a deadly flaw? The number of recalled cars is lower, the CEO admission was not at US Congress (or any other parliament) and VW did not cause the death of 13 people. LoveToLondon (talk) 14:03, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support 18B is ITN worthy and this is noteworthy as the first admission of a CEO of fabricating that test. -- Callinus (talk) 13:34, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – The "Abgasaffäre" has drawn major coverage in Europe but less in VW's biggest market, the U.S., where diesel cars aren't very popular. Although the potential fines seem huge, it's too early to tell what the impact on this mega-corporation may be. Sca (talk) 13:49, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait This is important news, and VW has admitted fault, but we should wait to see what actual fines and fallout might be from it. If they are going to get a $18B fine, that's a news story. --MASEM (t) 14:01, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    I think the fact that the CEO himself has said that 11 million vehicles around the world have this "feature" is sufficient alone for ITN, the fines and class actions etc would just be a bonus to the story. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:10, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    But what we don't know is exactly how "bad" this is yet. The device added is designed to force compliance with testing standards, and while without the device that the engine is allowed to run out of specs we don't know exactly how much emissions are generated, etc (the 40x number is only an estimate at this point); it could be that the cars still run under all standard compliance without the device fixing things. So while still highly unethical and likely to still be a fine, the net result could be a lot less significant as it initially seems. Hence waiting until we actually have full details on what the impact is. --MASEM (t) 14:20, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    And then it will be stale, as seems to be the problem with all of these kinds of stories. Anyway, we both understand each others' position, no need to prolong the debate. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:23, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is an interesting fact that you seem to be the same person who last year strongly opposed posting to ITN the recall of several million cars and the CEO of a US company herself admitting before Congress that her company was not telling for two years that their cars had a flaw (that killed 13 people according to the source in the nomination). But now you try to push posting the admission of a non-deadly rigging by a German company to ITN as quickly as possible. LoveToLondon (talk) 14:39, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Honestly, you can badger me as much as you like, it won't make any difference to me. Oon the other hand, it will definitely continue to detrimentally impact your own reputation. If you'd like to talk about previous contributions, we'd need to check all the various accounts each of us have used, would you like to do that? The Rambling Man (talk) 14:48, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have nothing to hide. Why do you strongly try to push this VW case, even though strongly (and successfully) opposed posting to ITN when the CEO of GM admitted their wrongdoing that had killed 13 people? LoveToLondon (talk) 15:19, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • The larger point is that no legal charges have yet to be filed. There is clearly an investigation, and given the admissions of the CEO, there will likely be results affirming misdoings and fines, but whether this amounts to civil (unlikely criminal) charges, or something else, we don't know. Just as we would not post an ITN about the arrest of a person before their trial (with very limited exception) we shouldn't be doing the same for companies. --MASEM (t) 14:42, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
In virtually all cases of discussing criminal charges, the person charged does not admit guilt, as is the case with this company. I believe TRM is correct that when fines come down in the future it is unlikely it will make the news it is making now(unless it is a record fine, which also seems unlikely given they have admitted guilt); and if it is even nominated again, the argument against will be that it is stale. 331dot (talk) 14:48, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The criminal investigation has been opened and, as 331dot notes, it's an open-and-shut case because VW have pleaded guilty to this already. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:51, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I strongly disagree the fine will be downplayed in the news if it ends up being $1B or more. Take the recent GM ignition switch/recall issue which has been ~2-3 years in actual case-finding aspects (the issue going back more than 10 years) [8]. Even there, it ended up a $900M fine and was widely reported this last week, but we didn't post it. Every major car manufacturer situation like with VW or GM here where there is gov't investigation and fines paid, that I can remember, always gets at least two news blips - on the discovery of the fault, and the resolution of what the fine was and how paid. And remember; they have admitted to having this device that affects performance during testing but they have not admitted (best I can read) that the cars exceed emissions performances when the device is inactive, or even if this is the situation. The investigation will likely work to determine if the cars purposely perform out of spec, which is a much more problematic situation than if it was the case that the cars' emissions are just better managed with the device and only drift in and out of spec during normal use. --MASEM (t) 15:21, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is clearly being covered prominently by many news sources, however I have some concerns about the article, most importantly that it doesn't cover the full worldwide impact of the problem; for example here is a source which discusses the impact of the scandal in Britain, the article currently only covers U.S. perspective. If the article was expanded showing all countries affected, it would be an easy support based on coverage of the scandal. --Jayron32 15:00, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Jayron32, the toughest pollution requirements in the world are in the U.S. and California in particular, and that's the focus of the scam. Now, obviously I don't agree with those who oppose, since I nominated this, and let me tell you why: as TRM notes, the CEO's in question have admitted designed malfeasance that went on for years, and therefore admitted cynically marketing their diesel engines as "clean" when they were 10-30 times beyond the legal pollution limit. Literally breathtaking arrogance, to plan a long-term corporate strategy to get past even the stringent California clean air requirements and deceive the very people most concerned about vehicle emissions: making them pay to get the opposite of what they wanted to buy. "Clean" diesel? No, dirty, nasty gasses! So those facts alone makes this astonishing story ITN-worthy. Repeat: the VW CEO's admitted it, and it's big news worldwide, and it's highly notable and ITN-worthy. And if you want bonus legal charges, those are not unlikely. But this blurb can, and most likely will, go to the Main page. And soon. Jusdafax 15:10, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why do you consider what VW did worse than the clear consensus not to post to ITN case when the CEO of GM explained to US Congress that her company was for 2 years not telling about a deadly fault in their cars (that resulted in 13 people dying and 28 million cars recalled)? LoveToLondon (talk) 15:26, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • And can you provide RS for your bold claims like Literally breathtaking arrogance, to plan a long-term corporate strategy to get past even the stringent California clean air requirements that you use here to justify pushing this to ITN? You as nominator are basically claiming that the CEO himself approved doing this as part of the long-term corporate strategy he is responsible for, and I haven't yet seen that claim being made anywhere else. And with this edit you made the lead section of the article sound as if the CEO had admitted being personally responsible - which he did not. LoveToLondon (talk) 16:09, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Regardless of what the fines and/or charges end up being it's already a major news item due to the CEOs admissions and their stock being in free fall. Prefer the original blurb as the most succinct. Kmusser (talk) 16:15, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - major news. Notable.--BabbaQ (talk) 16:16, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support providing the article remains in decent shape given the rapid updates. Showing that Wikipedia can illustrate a story which is at or near the top of news bulletins is multiple countries is exactly what ITN is supposed to be, rather than the "things a Wikipedia editor feels are cool" it sometimes feels like it too often becomes. ‑ iridescent 16:18, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • (edit conflict)Support. Covered in major news sources, article is in decent shape, and coverage of companies on Wikipedia has historically been weak. sstflyer 16:24, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support pending renamed title. The current title is both wrong an absurdly long. I added a suggestion to its talk page. --Light show (talk) 16:34, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment As far as I know, all blurbs suggested so far are factually incorrect. None of the support votes seems to have read the article - otherwise they would have noticed that the article is completely silent on how the violation was found. If there is any RS stating that this was found As a result of EPA testing, then this statement should be added (backed by a RS) into article. As far as I know, this is yet another incorrect claim by the nominator, and it was not the EPA that found it. All article is in decent shape votes must not be considered since they did not even notice that part of the blurb is not at all covered by the contents of the article. Why does noone seem to care whether the suggested blurb is factually correct? LoveToLondon (talk) 16:47, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That only means the article needs further updating; the sources clearly state the EPA found the violation. 331dot (talk) 17:10, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You do realize that putting your demands in bold doesn't actually make what you say a rule we have to follow. People tend to ignore people when they are both unreasonable and obviously have no idea what they are talking about. So before you start telling is about what admins will and won't do based on the rules, perhaps you should spend a few years around here and maybe learn the rules yourself. Specifically that WP:CONSENSUS determines what admins will do, and if consensus is that the article is in decent shape, it is. --Jayron32 17:38, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
LoveToLondon is no stranger to Wikipedia Jayron, he knows the "rules", this is standard behaviour I'm afraid. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:15, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Subject is getting massive global news coverage and article is in good shape overall. Marking as Ready given the condition of the article and the clear consensus in favor of posting. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:14, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Unmarking Ready A blurb containing a claim that is not in the article (backed by a RS) is a huge warning sign that the article is not ready. If 331dot has a RS clearly stating that it was EPA testing that found it first as he claims, he should add that to the article. As far as I know, both the blurb and 331dot are not telling the truth. LoveToLondon (talk) 17:24, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If you are going to accuse me of "not telling the truth" at least say it to me directly. I'd also suggest you read the sources given on this nomination, but if you need it pointed out to you: Reuters: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) said on Friday that Volkswagen, the world's biggest carmaker by sales, used software that deceived regulators; BBC: Last Friday, the regulators said VW diesel cars had much higher emissions than tests had suggested.(referring to US regulators);NBC: The U.S. Environmental Protection Administration announced Friday that the automaker had surreptitiously equipped its diesel vehicles with software designed to recognize when those products were being tested on a dynamometer. 331dot (talk) 17:33, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The article states with citations: "On September 18, 2015 the US EPA and California Air Resources Board served notice to VW that approximately 480,000 VW and Audi automobiles equipped with 2 litre TDI engines, and sold in the US between 2009 and 2015, had an emissions compliance "defeat device" installed". 331dot (talk) 17:35, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know why this has to turn into a whole "You're a liar" "No, you're a liar" thing. I was considering posting this, as it has consensus to post when ready, and several knowledgable editors are satisfied with the article. But LoveToLondon is right in that this apparently was not uncovered due to actual "EPA testing". The standard EPA testing was faked out, but it appears the actual testing that uncovered the cheating was done by WVU and by California's version of the EPA, at least some of which at the behest of an environmental group. They then told the US EPA, which has more muscle, and which together with CARB started issuing letters and notices. All that needs done is a revised blurb, and this appears good to go. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:41, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Might be as simple as changing "testing" to "investigation". --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:45, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • From what I've seen in sources, the first preliminary findings were actually in Germany. Was there actually an "investigation" by the EPA ongoing, or what is the correct term? This word is used in the article only in a completely unsourced section. LoveToLondon (talk) 18:05, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The best description I've seen of the testing background (haven't read all the refs) is here. It says the EPA launched an investigation in 2014. --Floquenbeam (talk) 18:14, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This seems more accurate than saying the EPA did the investigation as per Scientific American article. yorkshiresky (talk) 17:48, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Should the blurb not reflect that VW has admitted to the violation? That is somewhat rare. 331dot (talk) 17:49, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I support posting this newsworthy event, and propose the blurb "Following an EPA investigation, Volkswagen admits to rigging emissions test results. Mamyles (talk) 18:08, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Restoring "Ready" label LoveToLondon I respect your right to a dissenting opinion. I've been there myself a few times and understand that it can be frustrating when you believe you are right and the majority is wrong. But the bottom line is that consensus does not support your view and is overwhelming in favor of posting the article. You have made your objections clear. Perhaps it is time to drop the stick?. For now I would ask that you please respect the consensus, even if you disagree with it, and refrain from editing against it. Thank you. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:54, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it's quite ready either; unless people just want me to come up with my own blurb and post it. The current blurbs are not correct. We (rightly) complain when DYK posts things on the main page that are inaccurate; let's not let this start happening at ITN too. If it's posted like this, this is a guaranteed WP:ERRORS report. --Floquenbeam (talk) 18:00, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see a problem with the blurbs, RS like the BBC are saying " rigging of US car emissions tests" so it's ready to go as far as I can tell. Worst case is use the alt blurb and remove "widespread" if you're feeling precious that 11 million vehicles around the universe doesn't constitute a clear and unambiguous "widespread" problem. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:09, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ia this replying to me? I've never expressed an opinion that this isn't widespread. My point remains that EPA tests didn't catch the cheating, other tests did. --Floquenbeam (talk) 18:14, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Then simplify it, for the sake of brevity and posting: "Volkswagen's CEOs admit widespread rigging of emissions test results." The Rambling Man (talk) 18:22, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It's certainly not a "controversy," and saying so is inaccurate. In fact it's another cheating violation in what could become part of a larger article, such as Automobile emissions violations. (cough, cough)--Light show (talk) 18:17, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Neither the blurb nor the article title include the word "controversy". The Rambling Man (talk) 18:21, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Photo comment - Note that the copyright objection is not to the photo, but to the flowery decoration on the Volkswagen diesel vehicle. To me, this deletion request is a real stretch, since the artist knew at the time that their work would be photographed, seeing as the vehicle was going to be prominently displayed at a major auto show. Again, this is a very debatable issue, and I suggest we keep the photo, which itself is not being challenged. Jusdafax 23:04, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Update: Martin Winterkorn resigns

[edit]
* Whoever finally got diesel into the blurb, thank you. Sca (talk) 18:51, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

September 21

[edit]
September 21, 2015 (2015-09-21) (Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime
  • In Auckland, New Zealand, an extradition hearing for Kim Dotcom, former owner of a file sharing website, for alleged copyright infringement, racketeering, and money laundering begins, seeking to bring him to the U.S. (BBC)
  • At least eight people are killed and 45 wounded in shootings over the weekend across Chicago. (Fox Chicago)
  • A Denver, Colorado federal jury convicts Harold Henthorn of murder in the death of his wife Toni Henthorn, who fell off a cliff as they hiked in Colorado's Rocky Mountain National Park to celebrate their wedding anniversary. His previous wife had also died in suspicious circumstances. (AP)
  • Peanut Corporation of America owner Stewart Parnell is sentenced to 28 years for Salmonella typhimurium-tainted peanut butter, the most severe punishment ever handed out to a producer in a foodborne illness case. In late 2008 and early 2009, nine people died and at least 714 people in 46 states, half of them children, fell ill. Parnell and his brother were convicted in September 2014 of 71 criminal counts. His brother Michael Parnell is sentenced to 20 years, and the plant's former quality control manager Mary Wilkerson is sentenced to five years. (LA Times), (USA Today)

Politics and elections

[Closed] 67th Primetime Emmy Awards

[edit]
Soft Close: There is a strong consensus that the article quality is well below ITN standards and no effort appears to be underway to fix the article. Any editor should feel free to re-open the nomination if they believe significant improvements have been made. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:42, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: 67th Primetime Emmy Awards (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In the 67th Primetime Emmys, Game of Thrones wins Outstanding Drama Series and Veep wins Outstanding Comedy Series. (Post)
News source(s): BBC, LA Times, Straits Times, Times of India, Variety
Credits:

The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
 Allen3 talk 10:58, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose in current state The article needs a synopsis of the broadcast/ceremony itself. Right now all it has are tables. For awards ceremonies and sporting events, we usually expect some marginally comprehensive synopsis of the event itself, tables of results are usually insufficient. If the synopsis is added, I would fully support this. --Jayron32 12:32, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The subject is likely ITN material, but the article quality is far below acceptable standards for linking on the front page. Once you get past the lead, sourcing is virtually non-existent. Will happily reconsider if the article is drastically improved. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:48, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. This article needs improvement and some prose addition, but otherwise it would be a great addition. An ITN mention would invite new edits. Epic Genius (talk) 18:10, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I put the {{ITN Nom}} tag on it. Hopefully some editors will work on it. But we don't link articles with serious deficiencies on the front page. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:31, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
OK. Well, in that case, oppose for now. Epic Genius (talk) 19:10, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If the Emmys make news in India and elsewhere, they clearly have interest and scope outside of the US. The US TV (and movie) industry is known around the world. If there are other similar awards in other countries, please offer them. There is no international body (AFAIK) that gives out TV awards. 331dot (talk) 11:01, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It does seem like real systemic bias to have the Emmys and not, say, British Academy Television Awards. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:50, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If they get the coverage of the Emmys but are not posted, yes, it would be. 331dot (talk) 11:52, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You seem to be suggesting that "not important" means "I don't like it". Others may find it important, as Wikipedia covers virtually all topics, all of which are unimportant to someone. Recognition of the best in a field seems notable, and is covered in media around the world, despite what you say. 331dot (talk) 17:12, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I did actually see an article on this late yesterday, which I read given the nomination. Apparently the ceremony was at or near the bottom of ratings for all Emmy Awards shows ever, depending on how you calculate it and account for various factors. Yet another reason not to post. μηδείς (talk) 19:37, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

September 20

[edit]
September 20, 2015 (2015-09-20) (Sunday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations
  • European migrant crisis
    • U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry says that the United States will accept 85,000 refugees from the world in 2016, up from this year's 70,000 refugees, and will increase to 100,000 refugees in 2017. (Washington Post)
    • Austrian officials report 11,000 migrants crossed into the country from Hungary on Saturday, and another 7,000 are expected today. Seven trains are scheduled to transport 3,500 of these travelers to Germany. (CBS News)

Law and crime

Politics and elections

[Posted] Borno State bombings

[edit]
Article: September 2015 Borno State bombings (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A series of bombings kill more than 100 people across Borno State, Nigeria. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Following a military offensive in August that drove Boko Haram out of their bases in Nigeria, a series of bombings kill more than 100 people across Borno State.
Credits:

Nominator's comments: This is a revision to the previous nomination that includes the events in Monguno. As before, my suggested blurb excludes mention of Boko Haram since they're only assumed to be behind it but have yet to claim responsibility. Alt blurb is based on suggestions by Signedzzz on their talk page to give greater context. Still working on expanding the article and cleaning up some info, but wanted to get a head start on this and restart discussions. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 21:54, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] RD: Jagmohan Dalmiya

[edit]
Article: Jagmohan Dalmiya (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Times of India BBC
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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: Noted cricket administrator. Former President of the International Cricket Council, Board of Control for Cricket in India and Cricket Association of Bengal. Brought about radical changes in international cricket. Regarded as the greatest sports administrator of India. 117.216.148.215 (talk) 13:35, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support: Article appears suitable for posting, and his high position in the most popular sport in one of the world's most populous countries seems to qualify him as notable enough for RD inclusion. -Kudzu1 (talk) 13:50, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose According to the source, it is only the current secretary of the organization he was president of who made the claim greatest sports administrator of India. I also have doubts when a person who was leading an organization for one sports in one country should be posted to RD, even more in this case where the combined time presiding over this oranization was less than 5 years. Everyone looking at the article immediately notices that claims like In 1996, the BBC declared him to be one of the world's top six sports executives. are not backed by sources. LoveToLondon (talk) 14:34, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support upon improvement. Reading the page, he seems notable to cricket for working to bring its World Cup to India(and outside of the UK) for the first time, which led to increased interest in the sport. It is true that some citations are needed. 331dot (talk) 17:17, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Improvement Needed I won't oppose at this point, although I am not sure I would support an RD candidate just because he was an NFL or MLB commissioner. That being said, the article needs some going over by someone familiar with the topic. And it needs to be written so people unfamiliar with the subject will understand the claims. Sentences like "Dalmiya's death was condoled" are not particularly well written, and saying that his wife was associated with the Ghosh family might make just as much sense as saying he married into the Kennedys to an American, but it should be amplified on and linkified for those of our readers who do not know who the Ghoshes are. μηδείς (talk) 19:33, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: The article does appear to be improved to the point of being ready to post, but I'd like to see a clearer consensus. -Kudzu1 (talk) 14:29, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support article is half-decent, I'll head there shortly to tweak obvious things but there's nothing stopping this being posted in the mean time. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:18, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ghosh The article is indeed improved, but the personal life section has only two sentences, one of which is the unexplained "Dalmiya’s wife hails from the Ghosh family." First of all, people "hail" from locations, and second, why mention the Ghosh family? It sounds like namedropping by Hyacinth Bucket. We wouldn't say a woman inherited the Johnson family wealth without mentioning if it were the talcum powder Johnsons or the floorwax Johnsons There should be something either linking to the family or explaining their notability as in the Bush political dynasty or the Barrymore acting family or the scientific and literary Huxley family. With that addressed I see no problems with the article, and TRM can post if he likes. μηδείς (talk) 18:23, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    No, I'll try not to post things I support. I hope another admin will be here to do that. I'm not sure why the personal life section needs expansion, that's not why he's notable, but hey, YMMV. In articles that you want to see posted, you normally just comment out the bits you don't like. Perhaps you could do that here if you want to remain consistent. I won't replace the ready tag in case you threaten me with Arbcom sanctions again. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:28, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I thought the point of my voluntarily dropping the iban restriction on you was that you were not going to make everything personal again. I just said above that you have my full support to post this article once fixed. I don't see how you can possibly take that as anything "personal", an attack, or a threat of "arbcom", as I was not involved with that complaint. My argument above is quite clear, based solely on the text, and it would be like posting an RD for Caitlyn Jenner saying he married a woman who "hailed from the Kardashians" with no explanation of whom or what they are. μηδείς (talk) 22:20, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The article has since been updated to remove the "offending" text. Hope that helps. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:37, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I noted this, and am wondering why this hasn't been posted yet. μηδείς (talk) 16:55, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: His death has not made a big news within India. It has mostly been covered in sports section and not like a national news. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 07:20, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    The death of Arthur Morris received lesser news coverage than this, but got posted anyway last month. Notability of the individual and article quality are what they consider for posting RD, if I'm not wrong. 117.221.127.208 (talk) 14:41, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support making my support explicit, assuming my comments above were ambiguous. I have also marked this ready, based on the 5-3 support. But I do think the admin considering posting should take the opinion of Indian citizens over mine on the gentleman's notability. μηδείς (talk) 22:49, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted While not unanimous, there is consensus to post and the article quality is quite decent. SpencerT♦C 01:41, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting support I think this was the right decision. I'm Australian, and Dalmiya was certainly a well-known name to anyone who follows cricket. He influenced the game in India (its biggest market) enormously, and his reigns as head of the BCCI and ICC had significant onflow effects to the sport in all the major cricketing nations. He was arguably the most influential administrator in the sport since Kerry Packer in the 1970s. --dmmaus (talk) 23:11, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Withdrawn] Maiduguri bombing

[edit]
Article: September 2015 Maiduguri bombing (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A series of explosions kills at least 54 people in Maiduguri, Nigeria. (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Well, so much for Boko Haram being defeated... Not a topic I'm familiar with but I've put together a basic article to start from. Opted to leave Boko Haram out of the blurb since they're only speculated to be behind it. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 20:18, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] Syriza wins majority of seats in Greek legislative election

[edit]
Article: Greek legislative election, September 2015 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ SYRIZA wins 145 seats in the Greek legislative election and is set to form a minority government. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Syriza wins the most seats in the Greek legislative election
Credits:

Article updated
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.

Nominator's comments: Greek election held on 20 September and is a Wikipedia:In the news/Recurring items item. Gfcvoice (talk) 22:48, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support on article improvements I would reasonably expect a bit of discussion (prose) about the results, rather than just a table dump. --MASEM (t) 22:51, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Conditional Support on article improvement. If Greece holds anymore elections this year we should charge them rent for the front page space. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:59, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Conditional Support – Needs a prose discussion on the results, as stated above. Reactions to the results may also be of interest. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 23:34, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: Clear notability as a national election. Prose has been added. It can be expanded as desired, but it should be sufficient now to post. -Kudzu1 (talk) 01:22, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - per Kudzu1. Major international news. Article improvements ongoing but make this postable. Jusdafax 01:37, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support but the blurb should just say that they won the most seats (without knowing the size of the legislature, the figure of 145 seats means little) and avoid speculating on whether there will be a minority government or a coalition (which is what the article suggests). Neljack (talk) 05:21, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, and support adding it ASAP - It looks very strange coming to the Main Page and looking at In The News and seeing no mention of it. No doubt there are rules-based reasons for this, but, given that we've had plenty of warning about this event, I suspect the average reader is at least as mystified as I am by the current state of affairs, which, incidentally, at least appears to be a violation of WP:IAR, and of the related Pillar of Wikipedia (the fifth of our 5 Pillars), as it at least appears to show Wikipedia in an unflattering light. Tlhslobus (talk) 06:13, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm with you, but chill: sometimes it takes a day or two for stuff to get posted. There's no conspiracy here. -Kudzu1 (talk) 06:41, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • There is something massively ironic about claiming that WP:IAR has been violated.--WaltCip (talk) 17:14, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • The article hasn't been posted yet because there are still outstanding concerns about its quality, particularly with sourcing issues. Posting this article in its current state would reflect poorly on Wikipedia as it would show a lack of care to properly verify material before putting it in the limelight. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a news site, so there's no rush to have it ready. ITN is meant to showcase quality articles of current events, not just any article of a current event. Whether or not this article receives the necessary improvements is up to the people who volunteer their free time. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 17:27, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I concur that we should get this up as soon as it is ready. Unfortunately, as of this posting it is not ready. There are some fairly glaring gaps in sourcing that need to be corrected before this can be linked on the front page. -Ad Orientem (talk) 06:50, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • No need to support as this is on ITNR. It can go up once the article is ready - there is no need to break our own rules and this event is no more urgent than most others we post. I've suggested an alternative blurb that addresses the issues raised above. Modest Genius talk 09:30, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • As oft pointed out, ITNR is not an automatic guarentee of posting. The article quality, likely all other ITNC, must be there before it hits the front page and, like in the case of the US Open (tennis), if no one bothers to update the article, it won't be posted, ITNR or not. It would be breaking the rules to post the article in a poor shape just because it is on ITNR. --MASEM (t) 15:27, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support because it is international news and likely to get many hits. Epic Genius (talk) 18:11, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Article looks pretty good to me. Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:14, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. ITNR and the article is in fine shape (and has been since at least yesterday).128.214.53.18 (talk) 11:34, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posting. In such cases, we use the term plurality. --Tone 11:47, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Pull The article is not in "fine shape." Entire sections are unsourced. The article is no where near our standards for linking on the main page. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:49, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Can you indicate which entire sections are unsourced? Almost all of the prose paragraphs I can see have at least one clear source, and a while a few CN tags could be added, the presence of a small number of such tags is not usually grounds to keep something off the main page. --Jayron32 16:53, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my objection. I just noticed that the sourcing for all of the polling and voting results were embedded in the collapsed tables as external links. A somewhat unconventional method but it works. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:02, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

EuroBasket 2015

[edit]
Articles: EuroBasket 2015 (talk · history · tag) and EuroBasket 2015 Final (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In basketball, Spain defeats Lithuania to win EuroBasket 2015. (Post)
Credits:

Nominator's comments: The EuroBasket is one of the strongest continental basketball tournaments with many NBA players representing their national teams. It also attracts millions fans every time it takes place. --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:28, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support on notability, and please discount this incorrect claim from an IP. The results of two amateurs-only US basketball tournaments ave been posted this year, and the participants at EuroBasket are professional players. LoveToLondon (talk) 07:56, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] Ongoing: Rugby World Cup

[edit]
Consensus is against posting: There is and has been for sometime a strong consensus against posting most sports related events in ongoing. The Olympics appear to be a generally agreed upon exception. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:04, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: 2015 Rugby World Cup (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: No blurb specified (Post)
Credits:

The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
 Torqueing (talk) 09:54, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question – Does the event warrant ongoing status or simply a blurb when a country claims victory (the final is set for October 31 if I'm reading the article right)? ITN/R doesn't specify. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 10:05, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    ITNR does state this: 'the conclusion of the tournament or series, unless otherwise specified'. So we wait for the final. Modest Genius talk 09:33, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose ongoing The recent consensus has been that sports events that are just a series of matches to determine one winner do not get added to ongoing, which is something I completely agree with. The Olympics and Paralympics are massive, top-level mutli-sport events that produce many different winners in all sorts of different competition formats that would overwhelm ITN if posted separately. As there is almost no chance that the winners of the individual matches in a single-sport tournament would be posted if nominated, I do not consider it an appropriate use of the feature. If we had a sports section then this might be different but we don't (and I have a vague feeling there was a recentish consensus against having one?). Thryduulf (talk) 10:35, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The paralympics is nowhere near as big as even the rugby wc. Nergaal (talk) 18:57, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The difference is that the Rugby World Cup has only one winner '''tAD''' (talk) 21:03, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Thryduulf expressed my view quite well, though I would add the FIFA World Cup made it because it is such a large sporting event(though I also opposed posting it for the same reason). Ongoing is not meant to be a sports ticker of events in progress. 331dot (talk) 10:47, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The ITNR listing means that the final result will be posted(pending update and blurb selection). 331dot (talk) 10:49, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, those of us who know ITNR (and this entry) pre-date the Ongoing section are all aware of this, but the listing in ITNR now could use an update to make it explicit, as I think this is the second time such confusion has arisen. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:09, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: I'd only support ongoing for the Olympics, which has both a wide popularity and an intrinsic number of events which can't be posted one-by-one. The only global story of a World Cup in any sport is often its winner, nobody remembers the quarter-finalists etc. '''tAD''' (talk) 21:02, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

September 19

[edit]
September 19, 2015 (2015-09-19) (Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Disasters and accidents

Health

International relations

Law and crime

Sports

[Posted] RD: Brian Sewell

[edit]
Article: Brian Sewell (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Independent, BBC, Look, a Dutch article!,
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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: Variously described as the "nation's most outspoken art critic " and "Britain's most famous and controversial art critic". Even the article is in decent shape.... No doubt it will be shot down because he is British and is little known to the gun-belt, but it's worth a punt. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:59, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Did you not realize that America has no gun belt or were you joking? It has a Bible Belt and an Unchurched Belt and ones for corn, snow, wheat, sun, salt rusting your car, Mormons, economic decay, frost, Blacks, cardiovascular disease, fruits, lead, "Borscht", pines, rice, warmth and others but the zone of gunness is not in the shape of a belt. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 22:01, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
TRM seems to of created a cult of snark around here...86.135.158.125 (talk) 22:31, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Those are all real belts you know. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 23:31, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Collapsing side discussion. SpencerT♦C 06:48, 21 September 2015 (UTC) [reply]
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
This user is firmly opposed to waltzing coaches of any nationality on the Main Page. Sca (talk) 23:07, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]
Articles: 2015 Japanese military legislation (talk · history · tag) and Japan Self-Defense Forces (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Japan's upper chamber of Parliament approves new legislation expanding the role of the Japanese Self-Defense Forces overseas for the first time since World War II. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Japan's upper chamber of Parliament approves legislation allowing the use of Japanese military forces overseas for the first time since World War II
Alternative blurb II: ​ Japan's upper chamber of Parliament approves legislation allowing use of Japanese military forces outside Japan for the first time since World War II.
News source(s): CNN, The Guardian, BBC, Yahoo news, South China Morning Post
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Historical change of Japanese security policy, with implication for whole Eastern Asia. Jenda H. (talk) 08:21, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, I have rewritten it, now located at 2015 Japanese military legislation, so it makes more sense. Also I support. C628 (talk) 05:00, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Er, I think new is redundant – the Parliament wouldn't be approving old legislation, would it? But agree that controversial isn't necessary.
How about: "Japan's upper chamber of Parliament approves legislation allowing use of Japanese military forces overseas for the first time since World War II" – ??. Sca (talk) 23:38, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support Sca's alt blurb, it gives a clearer indication of what the legislation was about. Banedon (talk) 01:03, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] RD: Jackie Collins

[edit]
Article: Jackie Collins (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NY Times, People, The Guardian, Stuff.co.nz
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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: Jackie Collins started out as an actress, but soon became a successful novelist. All of her books have appeared on The New York Times Best Seller list, and she sold over 500 million copies around the world. Her most recent book was published in June of this year, while her death was quite unexpected. JuneGloom07 Talk 00:54, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

September 18

[edit]
September 18, 2015 (2015-09-18) (Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Health

International relations

Law and Crime

Politics and elections

Sports

September 17

[edit]
September 17, 2015 (2015-09-17) (Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Health

International relations

Politics and elections

[Closed] General Motors agrees to pay $900 million to the US government

[edit]
Closing good faith nomination as stale. The oldest news item currently on ITN is newer than this so it would not appear. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:34, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: 2014 General Motors recall (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ General Motors agrees to pay $900 million to the US government after admitting to not telling about a serious malfunction for over a decade that resulted in at least 124 deaths and nearly 30 million cars recalled. (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: pretty big regarding fine, number of people killed and recalled cars LoveToLondon (talk) 18:33, 22 September 2015 (UTC) [reply]
Collapsing side discussion. SpencerT♦C 16:07, 23 September 2015 (UTC) [reply]
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
  • I would have said that both are not important enough, but the pro-US selection of posting only the less severe one is not good for WP. Are you just looking for revenge, or do you have a constructive contribution to the merits of the GM case? LoveToLondon (talk) 18:46, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think that questioning motives for the nomination is particularly constructive. What we should be focusing on are the merits, or lack thereof, of the nomination and whether or not it should be posted on that basis. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:12, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I agree to have no further comment on motives, but there are times when they are relevant. 331dot (talk) 19:15, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:54, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Stale. This was five days ago and even then did not get as much attention. Punishments or other final dispositions of cases like this always get less attention than the actual incident(with companies, at least). Maybe this should have been posted when it occurred, I don't know, but all I know is that consensus can change and that this nomination seems intended to make a point, as I describe above. 331dot (talk) 18:53, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Support Subject is significant news and the article is in good shape. My concerns are that the reference to the fine is so passing as to be trivial and is confined to the lead. It would need expansion in the article. Additionally, as noted above, this is a late nomination. It would still fit on the ITN column but it will be near the bottom. So yeah there is some legitimate concern with it's being stale. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:57, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Posted] RD: Sir David Willcocks

[edit]
Article: David Willcocks (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC, Gramophone, The Daily Telegraph
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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: "The most influential choirmaster of his generation", says one obituary. Director of Music at King's College Cambridge for many years, where his arrangements of Christmas carols, as performed in the Nine Lessons and Carols service, have become internationally known standards. BencherliteTalk 23:59, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Collapsing side discussion. SpencerT♦C 17:40, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
  • Interesting development, suddenly we need multi-national RS? Where is that in policy? The Rambling Man (talk) 07:58, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    That's the same guy who, in April, was calling the NCAA basketball tournament a "youth competition". ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 15:35, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment How much would you trust an Indian source stating that some Indian actor you have never heard of was internationally known and the most influential actor of his generation? If someone claims that someone was the most influential choirmaster of his generation and some of his works have become internationally known standards, and the person is not a liar, then it should be easy to find international sources for such claims about international recognition. These are the claims of the nominator, that caused people to vote support. Support voted based on claims by the nominator of international recognition that are only based on British sources must not be considered. If it is true that he was considered the most influential choirmaster of his generation, then add US RS for that claim to the article and I will support this nomination. LoveToLondon (talk) 18:11, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    If it's an RS, it's an RS. Your bold claim is simply untrue and must not be considered. You're way outside policy here so your "vote" should be discounted. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:14, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Your claim that any RS should be trusted on anything is a bold violation of a WP content guideline: Whether a specific news story is reliable for a specific fact or statement in a Wikipedia article should be assessed on a case-by-case basis. Sources from the home country are not the most reliable source for claims about international recognition or being a leader in a field. LoveToLondon (talk) 18:46, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Your approach, much like that of IP98, is hostile and unnecessarily so. It's fascinating that you don't like this particular nomination, I have seen you and IP98 support plenty of items based on RSs from a single country claiming international notability. However, I am aware that neither your nor IP98 like to be questioned, so let's leave it for the closing admin to assess your brand new approach to RS. It's good that you appreciate that you have lied here too, that your claim we must not consider the sources given directly contradicts the guideline you have just quoted........ The Rambling Man (talk) 20:34, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    I did not lie, my must not was referring to support votes based on incorrect (?) claims by the nominator. Please name three nomination I supported based on RSs from a single country (should be easy for you assuming your plenty claim is not a lie). LoveToLondon (talk) 08:02, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    This isn't the place to continue your misguided view of how RS works, if you'd like to continue elsewhere, please do so, but stop trying to deceive people with your erroneous interpretations. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:11, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    I showed you the WP content guideline proving your claim that any RS should be trusted on anything is misguided. Why do you consider this the right place to deceive people by telling lies about how I voted in other nominations? LoveToLondon (talk) 08:18, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Your "interpretation" is misguided and misleading. Stop it now, if you wish to discuss this further with me, do it elsewhere. Your position is clear, you don't need to bloat this nomination further with your ongoing misinterpretations. As Blythwood said some twelve hours ago, the debate was already interminable and unconstructive by that point. Enough is enough, you oppose and you oppose the supports made on British RS. We all get it. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:38, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    You are doing everything you can (including personal attacks against me by telling lies about my past edits) in your attempts to silence me? LoveToLondon (talk) 10:11, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    If you believe that to be the case, then it clearly isn't working, is it? You have made your misguided position clear. So have many others. Time to move on to something constructive, like article building. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:58, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    This debate is becoming interminable and unconstructive. Support and close. Blythwood (talk) 21:14, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    You agree that some of the support votes above might be based on incorrect claims by the nominator? LoveToLondon (talk) 08:02, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    My friend, as has been indicated in the above collapsed side discussion, the consensus is clearly against you. There is absolutely nothing that says having British sources disqualifies the notability of an article or event. Moreover, your badgering of !votes is considered disruptive and not constructive to discussion - to say nothing of the fact it makes you look hopelessly desperate.--WaltCip (talk) 20:01, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    My friend, why do you support editors making incorrect claims in their attempts to push an article to ITN? It is sad to see how many people who insist on proper sourcing in articles defend not properly sourced (and often incorrect) claims in ITN nominations. The nominator based his nomination mainly on the international acclaim of the person, which makes it his duty to prove his claims with international sources. Sources from the home country only cannot be considered reliable sources for international acclaim. You can base a nomination mainly on importance inside the UK (which is explicitely allowed by the rules), but this is not what the nominator did. Do you want to encourage editors telling lies in ITN nominations, or do you first want to get the facts right before discussing the importance based on the actual facts? LoveToLondon (talk) 08:11, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    SHOUTING never got anyone very far. Move along please, or else you may be requested to stop posting here. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:54, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Articles are not lists of sources. They are text summarizing the important or essential parts of a topic with RS serving as a justification for claims in the text. If the article is to be featured at RD it should explain to the reader unfamiliar with the subject why he meets the RD requirements, and I think it is quite clear with the examples I have given above that that importance is not evident from the article. If these RS'es do make clear his many awards and influence in the field of choir that information should be added, and there would be no question as to the merit of the nomination. μηδείς (talk) 22:28, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] FIFA Secretary General dismissed

[edit]
Consensus against posting. BencherliteTalk 07:22, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: No article specified
Blurb: ​ The Secretary General of FIFA Jérôme Valcke is dismissed after probes into FIFA corruption case. (Post)
News source(s): BBC, The Guardian
Credits:

Article needs updating
Nominator's comments: Looks like new high-level FIFA corruption revelation. Haven't updated myself as it's bedtime, so going to sleep. Brandmeistertalk 21:48, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

September 16

[edit]
September 16, 2015 (2015-09-16) (Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy
  • Hewlett-Packard, which has struggled for years in a declining PC market, will cut up to 33,300 jobs over the next three years, mostly in its enterprise business. (Reuters)

Disasters and accidents

Health

International relations

Law and crime

Sports

[Posted] 2015 Chile earthquake

[edit]
Closing the discussion. Further comments on the blurb, if necessary, should be brought to the attention of WP:ERROR. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 23:48, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: 2015 Illapel earthquake (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ An 8.3 magnitude earthquake strikes about 34 miles (55 km) from Illapel, Chile, killing at least one person and sending tsunami alerts across the southern Pacific coastlines. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ An 8.3 magnitude earthquake strikes in the Pacific off the coast of Chile, killing at least one person and prompting the evacuation of about 1 million Chileans from coastal regions.
Alternative blurb II: ​ A magnitude 8.3 earthquake strikes in the Pacific off the coast of Chile, killing at least ten people and prompting the evacuation of about 1 million Chileans.
News source(s): CNN BBC
Credits:
Nominator's comments: One of the largest recorded quakes, and there are sights of 10-ft high tsunami waves as a result. MASEM (t) 02:02, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

2015 Chile earthquake

  • Wait – Although it's the largest earthquake since May 24, 2013, effects appear to be relatively limited (thankfully). Disruptive effects, namely 1 million people evacuated, are probably the most notable aspect of this from an ITN standpoint. Would opt to wait a bit longer when morning comes so we have a better idea of the scale of impact. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 09:05, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait. Reports of damage and casualties are so far surprisingly light for a quake of this magnitude. At the moment there isn't enough to be worth posting. That might change if parts of the country which currently haven't been reached have taken a major hit, but we won't know that until perhaps 24 hours times. Modest Genius talk 09:41, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The 2010 Chile earthquake that was posted to ITN was more than 5 times stronger and killed over 500 people. 2014 Iquique earthquake was a similar earthquake at the same area as the current one, also comparably weak and followed by a tsunami, mass evcuations and a small number of deaths. It's just an earthquake in an area where earthquakes are normal. LoveToLondon (talk) 11:28, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, although I might be biased. As a Chilean, having experienced three 8+ magnitude earthquakes, I think this is huge news for a number of reasons: 1) as many people here have noted, events this big are a less than once-in-a-year world event, perhaps comparable to a big hurricane or typhoon, 2) the fact that the dead toll is small (it will doubtless grow, but not too much) does not diminish the event's notability, maybe it increases it, and undoubtedly makes it better news (if your country suffers half of the world's biggest earthquakes, you have to be prepared. Besides, the trauma of the 2010 tsunamy is still fresh, and that is why the authorities overreacted, ruling out most or all potential tsunamy-realted deaths) 3) I've seen 6th magnitude quakes listed ITN because of their effect on people. Well, today no one speaks of anything else here, even though we are used to tremors (you never get really used to them, especially 8th magnitude). Cato censor (talk) 12:43, 17 September 2015 (UTC) - sorry but I can't remember my password right now 200.9.73.21 (talk) 12:55, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Agree that the apparently low death toll isn't a reason not to post. In terms of human impact, it seems to be forcing a great many people to leave home. Sca (talk) 15:29, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Reports keep coming about coastal streets either flooded or full of derbis and even small ships. 200.9.73.21 (talk) 16:08, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: The article seems noteworthy for ITN, but currently it is just about the 1500 bytes, still has a stub template, and no article sections. I think that it should be improved a bit before posting. Cambalachero (talk) 15:46, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Marked as ready – Consensus in favor of posting (9 support, 5 wait, and 1 oppose) at the time of this comment. Aspects warranting its posting include the magnitude (8.3 MW, largest in over 2 years), number of evacuees (~1 million), Pacific-wide tsunami alert, and to a lesser degree the resulting damage and deaths (10 killed). As brought up by other users, a lack of deaths isn't necessarily a reason to oppose a natural disaster being placed on ITN. They can be quite disruptive without claiming many lives, as this earthquake demonstrates. Additionally, the 2014 Iquique earthquake serves as sufficient precedent as a nearly identical event that was posted. Before actually posting, I want to have a more solid agreement on a blurb. I've provided a second alt blurb, a variation of the first alt blurb, as my own suggestion. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 15:54, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support altblurb 2 – which obviously may be updated periodically. Sca (talk) 16:21, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support recent reports indicate that few of the million evacuees remain evacuated, so that part of the blurb is stale now. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 17:02, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Large earthquake event that affected millions of people. Article is long enough and of sufficient quality to post. Mamyles (talk) 17:23, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - The article is still skimpy but this was a major event per IP200. Agree that the bottom Altblurb 2 is best. Jusdafax 20:08, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted alt blurb 2 Cyclonebiskit (talk) 23:30, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Posted] 2015 Burkinabé coup d'état

[edit]
Closing the discussion. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 23:48, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: 2015 Burkinabé coup d'état (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Burkina Faso's Regiment of Presidential Security dissolves the nation's government in a coup d'état. (Post)
News source(s): NYT
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Adding this here since I noticed it has been overlooked. The article is decent already. Tone 08:50, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

September 15

[edit]
September 15, 2015 (2015-09-15) (Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health

International relations

Politics and elections

2015 Southeast Asian haze

[edit]
Article: 2015 Southeast Asian haze (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Indonesia declares a state of emergency in Riau, and thousands flee the province capital Pekanbaru due to haze that also affects the neighboring Singapore and Malaysia. (Post)
News source(s): Al Jazeera, Reuters, Associated Press, Australian Broadcasting Corp, Time, BBC
Credits:

 HaEr48 (talk)

It was showing in the international headlines on September 15/16 (around the day the emergency was declared), see the news source. Otherwise it's consistently in the local news in the affected places. As @Thue: said millions are affected (counting just the population of Sumatra and Singapore it's more than 50 million people). HaEr48 (talk) 00:37, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@The Rambling Man: added more news sources starship.paint ~ KO 01:27, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
As noted in previous comments, this year's one is more severe, affects more countries/area, and last longer, so it's more notable than just an annual phenomenon. HaEr48 (talk) 03:35, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
About the tens of millions thing - Indonesia is a country of 200+ million people, and Malaysia + Singapore is something like 40? million people also. Banedon (talk) 04:10, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

September 14

[edit]
September 14, 2015 (2015-09-14) (Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

Health and medicine

[Closed] Utah flash floods

[edit]
Closing own nomination as stale. No consensus to post and the event has long since dropped out of international media. Only being covered locally now. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 02:58, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: 2015 Utah floods (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Flash floods kill at least 19 people in Utah, the deadliest such disaster in the state's history. (Post)
News source(s): WUnderground, USA Today, BBC, The Washington Post
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Although the effects have been localized, this was the deadliest flash flood event on record in Utah and the deadliest weather event in the US this year (previous was 13 people when the Blanco River in Texas saw record floods). Cyclonebiskit (talk) 08:10, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: Plus it's highly unusual to have a tropical cyclone impact Utah, which is well inland and is mostly desert. -Kudzu1 (talk) 16:39, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note – After looking into the meteorological aspect further, it seems as though I jumped to conclusions. Currently in the process of splitting off the Utah flood event from Linda as the remnants of the hurricane were not the primary factor but merely a contributing one. Will update the nomination when the new article is up. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 17:01, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Relatively small disaster, and we don't need everything to be U.S.-centric. Rcsprinter123 (remark) 19:19, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support yes, a relatively small disaster, but a notable one nevertheless, many deaths in a first world country from this kind of event is unusual. Article is fine too. The Rambling Man (talk) 23:50, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support a significant disaster in an unlikely place. We also need to fight Rcsprinter's anti-U.S. systemic bias. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:01, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Floods occur all the time. This isn't a big flood, didn't kill the most people, didn't affect the most people. Banedon (talk) 05:53, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Per the instructions at the top of the page: "Please 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" Oppose votes which are based on the location of an event are routinely ignored. Which is not to say that this should be posted, but in the future, if you want to have your vote counted, don't bring up the locale as the reason for your opposition. Instead, discuss the quality of the article and the prominence given to the story in the news, NOT where it happened. --Jayron32 15:07, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    No offense but threatening to ignore the perfectly valid first half by concentrating only on the second half is, in my opinion, quite silly. I've simply deleted the last line of my vote in response. Banedon (talk) 04:50, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm going to make a stupid and likely false assumption here, but it's to make a point with your given reasoning. By your statement, a flood that kills 1,000 people may not necessarily be notable because there have been floods that killed millions and by comparison 1,000 isn't that much. You have to take each even into consideration within their context. There has never been a flood this deadly in Utah before. It's also the deadliest flood in a national park in the US since 1997. It has local notability. Other areas, particularly in Asia and Africa, see deadly floods far more frequently and necessitate higher tolls or impact to warrant notability by ITN standards. Opposing because "it didn't kill the most people...[nor]...affect the most people" is a poor argument to shrug off certain events, and that's where the frustration comes from. I'm probably shooting myself in the foot (going against my own nomination...but it's unlikely this will be posted anyways) but give something like "Although notable for the number of fatalities, the event was localized and affected a relatively small number of people. It was only briefly mentioned in international media and has since only been covered locally." Something tangible that doesn't simply shrug off events because of statistics. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 05:18, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    If you look through the list of floods I linked, you'll see that the death toll of most of them is generally under 250. Therefore a flood that kills a thousand people is notable and I will support posting. This flood killed 19 people, putting it well in the lower range of that scale. On this metric, this flood is not worth posting. The next question is whether this flood is worth posting because it's in Utah. Utah is a state, not a country. It there has never been a flood this deadly in the entire of the United States, maybe. In Utah? I'm sorry but I cannot support this nomination. Banedon (talk) 06:05, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Banedon. 117.192.181.149 (talk) 09:03, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose And just to point out that the other oppose votes are also valid. The point is not that it happened only in one state of one country, the point is that it is not a big event making frontpage headlines all over the world. And local records like worst event of this kind in this city/state or worst event of this specific kind in this country this year so far are not sufficient reason for ITN. We already had floods with over 100 people killed this year, and I fully agree with Jayron32 that this should not be judged on where it happened or what local (state or country) records it broke. LoveToLondon (talk) 18:24, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Please refer to the 2015 Shoreham Airshow crash, which was posted without opposition. A plane crash that killed 11 people when we've had plane crashes that kill hundreds annually. The argument of "it didn't kill X number of people and Y already killed Z people" is grasping at straws and simply bogs down the ITN/C process more than it already is. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 21:21, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    It was posted without opposition because I didn't have the time to oppose it. I would've opposed it. Banedon (talk) 04:50, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. This is an unusual enough event for Utah that it merits posting. We aren't exactly loaded down with US stories right now(a grand total of zero, by my count) so "US centric" arguments are not valid. 331dot (talk) 22:00, 18 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support — very significant event from both meteorological and disaster management perspectives, and an excellent article. – Juliancolton | Talk 14:46, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

RD: Fred DeLuca

[edit]
Article: Fred DeLuca (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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: Founder and CEO of the largest restaurant chain in the world, Subway (restaurant). Article is short, but not too short, and well referenced. Jayron32 19:35, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted and closed] Malcolm Turnbull to become Prime Minister of Australia

[edit]
Posted, further debate over possible errors in the hook belong at .... errors. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:41, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Proposed image
Article: Liberal Party of Australia leadership spill, September 2015 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Malcolm Turnbull elected the leader of the Liberal Party of Australia and set to become the 29th Prime Minister of Australia following a Leadership Spill (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Tony Abbott is replaced as Liberal Party leader by Malcolm Turnbull (pictured), who will succeed him as the Prime Minister of Australia, following a leadership spill.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Tony Abbott loses party confidence in a leadership spill, with new Liberal Party leader Malcolm Turnbull (pictured) set to succeed him as Prime Minister of Australia.
Alternative blurb III: ​ Tony Abbott is replaced as Liberal Party leader by Malcolm Turnbull (pictured), who is set to succeed him as Prime Minister of Australia, following a leadership spill.

Nominator's comments: Although not the result of an election, the Leadership spill has seen the ousting of the current Prime Minister and in a few days Malcolm Turnbull will be sworn in as the new Prime Minister. Gfcvoice (talk) 12:14, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's not clear (it was 8 years ago, and things were very basic back then. That said, this is more dramatic - Brown was elected unopposed to Labour leadership after Blair's resignation. This however was a messy vote of confidence - as I said below, it's more like Margaret Thatcher getting chucked out of number 10 in the Conservative Party (UK) leadership election, 1990 (although technically she was still the candidate with the most support, she didn't get a large enough majority to win the election and decided to stand down). Smurrayinchester 14:29, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It's entirely clear that we did. ‑ iridescent 16:55, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Malcolm Turnbull (pictured) replaces Tony Abbott as the Liberal Party leader, and is set to be the next Prime Minister of Australia.
It is shorter, and gives a clear idea what happened. Also the wording "leadership spill" is hidden in the link title which already has the text "replaces", so I hope it will make it clear that it's some Australian party leadership change kind of thing. HaEr48 (talk) 17:49, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@HaEr48: I like it - it's concise, uses active voice, and makes the point without extra clauses. -- Callinus (talk) 18:04, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post posting Support I would have preferred a blurb with the active voice and the main subject at the start - "Malcolm Turnbull is set to become the next Prime Minister of Australia after defeating Tony Abbott in a Leadership Spill" -- Callinus (talk) 18:01, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post posting Support – HaEr48's suggestion avoids the problem and reads better than current blurb, IMO. Sca (talk)
  • We should reword and remove the words "set to be", now that Turnbull's been officially sworn in. Something like: "Malcolm Turnbull (pictured) replaces Tony Abbott as the Liberal Party leader, and as Prime Minister of Australia." Or even, "Malcolm Turnbull (pictured) replaces Tony Abbott as Prime Minister of Australia.", because (as others have mentioned), all the detail is in the link "replaces". Adpete (talk) 04:03, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

September 13

[edit]
September 13, 2015 (2015-09-13) (Sunday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Science and technology

Health and medicine
  • Doctors at Salamanca University Hospital in Salamanca, Spain implant a 3-D printing-produced artificial titanium sternum (breastbone), and a portion of the ribs (as opposed to the current standard, a non-customized, flat piece of titanium, which can loosen over time) in a patient who had numerous cancerous tumors in that area, the first use of 3D printing technology to take the place of these specific body parts. (Quartz, via MSN)

Sport

[Closed] U.S. Open

[edit]
Closing nomination as stale; one week since the event and no consensus to post. Despite being listed on WP:ITN/R, no noticeable effort has been made to improve the article and address quality concerns. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 20:04, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: 2015 US Open (tennis) (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ At the U.S. Open, Novak Djokovic wins the men's singles and Flavia Pennetta wins the women's singles. (Post)
News source(s): CNN NPR
Credits:

The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: Surprised this hasn't been nominated yet. Kudzu1 (talk) 06:42, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Posted] 2015 Vuelta a España

[edit]
Article: 2015 Vuelta a España (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In road cycling, Italian Fabio Aru wins 2015 Vuelta a España (Post)
Credits:

Article updated

 EugεnS¡m¡on(14) ® 06:16, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Posted] RD: Moses Malone

[edit]
Closing discussion Cyclonebiskit (talk) 15:58, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Moses Malone (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ESPN, ABC News
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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: Three-time NBA MVP, 2001 Hall of Fame inductee bender235 (talk) 14:15, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
A shoe-in on notability, easily one of the best players of his generation. Must oppose solely for article quality. A lengthy career bio, but much of it lacks sourcing. If someone could fix upl the article, we could post this.Jayron32 17:25, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That should really be brought up on the talk page, so other editors are aware. Modest Genius talk 16:15, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Good point. I linked it here so that we can all see when the issue is resolved. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:41, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

September 12

[edit]
September 12, 2015 (2015-09-12) (Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Disasters and accidents

Politics and elections

Sport

[Posted] Petlawad explosion

[edit]
Closing discussion Cyclonebiskit (talk) 15:58, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Petlawad explosion (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A blast in Petlawad in Madhya Pradesh kills 104 people and injures many more. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ An accidental explosion in Petlawad in Madhya Pradesh kills over 100 people.
News source(s): 104 killed in Jhabua explosion; 'people were thrown away like pebbles'
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: A gas cylinder exploded causing illegally stored gelatin sticks to explode. Not your routine, everyday explosion. Rsrikanth05 (talk) 07:26, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Posted] RD: Adrian Frutiger

[edit]
Article: Adrian Frutiger (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): http://graffica.info/adrian-frutiger-fallece/
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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: Appears to have been a major player in the world of typeface design. Creator of Avenir (typeface) and Univers. Many accolades inc. European Design Award. Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 17:33, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] UK Labour Party leadership election

[edit]
Large majority in opposition to this. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:08, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Proposed image
Article: Labour Party (UK) leadership election, 2015 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Jeremy Corbyn (pictured) is elected Leader of the Opposition as the new leader of the Labour Party in the United Kingdom. (Post)
News source(s): Telegraph
Credits:
  • Nominated by [[User:120.62.18.210 (talk) 12:45, 12 September 2015 (UTC)|120.62.18.210 (talk) 12:45, 12 September 2015 (UTC)]] ([[User talk:120.62.18.210 (talk) 12:45, 12 September 2015 (UTC)|talk]] · [{{fullurl:User talk:120.62.18.210 (talk) 12:45, 12 September 2015 (UTC)|action=edit&preload=Template:ITN_candidate/preload_credit&preloadtitle=ITN+recognition+for+%5B%5BLabour+Party+%28UK%29+leadership+election%2C+2015%5D%5D&section=new&preloadparams%5b%5d=Labour+Party+%28UK%29+leadership+election%2C+2015&preloadparams%5b%5d=nominated}} give credit])[reply]
Nominator's comments: While it's not ITNR, such a far-left leader (possibly future PM?) as leader of a major party is quite darn notable. As the source says the first in over 30 years. Symptomatic of a system on the verge of breaking, perhaps? Another step in hyper-polarized global politics?
(I imagine certain people to be scared shitless at the new Tony Benn 120.62.18.210 (talk) 12:45, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose a) shadow prime minister does not exist in the UK - it's leader of the opposition, which has no formal power. b) Leader of the opposition is an important role within British politics, but it carries little recognition and no power outside the Westminster bubble. For you Americans, his role is comparable to Nancy Pelosi's right now. We wouldn't post party leadership elections for any other country, even when they might one day become leader (we didn't post e.g. Mitt Romney's selection as US presidential candidate). c) He's firmly left wing, and in many respects more so than his predecessor, but he's not (by most definitions) far left. Smurrayinchester 13:18, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    He is entitled to all-party meetings with your head of state and, hence, a voice there. Although would be darn interesting to see how an anti-monarchist goes about it.120.62.18.210 (talk) 13:21, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This is quite a significant political development; a much bigger deal in the English-speaking world than the Guatemalan President scandal (which has been up at ITN for ages now). It's as if a maverick like Donald Trump won the Republican nomination... Andrew D. (talk) 13:56, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - not a Prime Minister nor a President, not significant enough. starship.paint ~ KO 14:26, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Probably this is a big step for him to challenge the present government. Other leadership elections didn't achieve consensus's approval, especially when David Cameron became the opposition leader in 2005. Of course, Ed Milliband's opposition leadership didn't attract consensus well. Perhaps Corbyn's Labour leadership might. --George Ho (talk) 14:43, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support it's an interesting one this; I strongly suspect that if Trump was elected as Republican Presidential candidate it would be posted here, so I don't see how a candidate on the other wing of politics being elected as the formal challenger for a Government of one of the major countries in the world is in any way less notable. Black Kite (talk) 14:46, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Absolutely not. We've never posted the nomination of a U.S. presidential candidate by a major party (I assume that's what you're referring to, not winning the presidency), only the results of the general election. We're not gonna start because Trump. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:02, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – May attract interest internationally, but still basically a domestic UK story. Sca (talk) 14:49, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Political impact is domestic. International interest among readers in the British Commonwealth of Nations. Sca (talk) 16:23, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
In which world are Russia and france part of our great empire, if you must.120.62.18.210 (talk) 17:27, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - I don't think that a political party's internal leadership election result warrant main page wikipedia news. I'm saying this as a Labour Party member and as someone who voted for Corbyn. It's not notable enough globally, it is a UK domestic story. Also it'd set a precedent. IJA (talk) 15:09, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I am not aware that we have posted presidential primary nomination results in the US in the past. μηδείς (talk) 16:06, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    USA is not god almighty...and its exceptionalist comments like this making the USA the barometer that breed the anti-US comments Wikipedia gets. Anyways, criticize me away if that'll temper your reasons to see why the USA is criticized. (and I'm a fiercely proud TX son, btw)120.62.18.210 (talk) 16:27, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, one of those Bombay proxy Texans interested solely in UK Labour Party politics, I see. I don't think your actual problem is my comment. μηδείς (talk) 18:46, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose This isn't even a British story: it's a British intraparty story. This is parochial on the level of the Republican National Committee chairmanship election, 2011. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:00, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. This may be a domestic development (which is no reason to oppose per se), but it is global news - it is currently no. 1 in Google News Norway, no. 3 in Germany, no. 2 in France, no. 3 in the Netherlands, no. 3 in Greece, no. 2 in India among others. It has been covered extensively in other countries: it is the current lead story of Rádio e Televisão de Portugal and is a major story on the front page of this Argentinian news website. It is certainly having much more coverage than the Singaporean election and I daresay that it will have more impact than the "re-election" of Islam Karimov. This is a very unusual, as Ad Orientem put it, "breathtaking" development (and thus will set no precedent for any internal election to come), which IMHO cannot be simply dismissed as an internal leadership election with little impact - international coverage strongly suggests that this is of global interest and ITN-worthy. --GGT (talk) 18:04, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment Kim Kardashian's breathtaking ass was also a leading story all over the world, easily beating the coverage of Jeremy Corbyn. Either we set the precedent and add opposition leader changes to ITNR, or we do not put Jeremy Corbyn to ITN until he gets elected Prime Minister. LoveToLondon (talk) 18:27, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment not sure how it can be "breathtaking" when it's been slated as the result for the past six weeks. Labour party leadership has been in the doldrums for a while now, this is no surprise to most people who follow politics. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:19, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Good news, but not ITN-level; the result of his first contested general election would be the necessary item. GRAPPLE X 18:32, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Election of the leader of a party that is not in government, not even change of prime minister outside of election (i.e. governing party changing leader out of election who then gets appointed prime minister). -- KTC (talk) 19:22, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. This is an internal election within a party which isn't even in government. To the people supporting this, have you actually stopped to think about the precedent running this would set? Something like this happens somewhere in the world almost every day. ‑ iridescent 19:29, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Opposition parties changing leaders is not unusual(it might be more notable if it was the ruling party and would change who was PM, much like this election). 331dot (talk) 20:05, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Gennady Padalka

[edit]
Proposed image
Articles: Gennady Padalka (talk · history · tag) and Soyuz TMA-16M (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Russian astronaut Gennady Padalka has returned from his fifth space mission with the record after spending a cumulative 879 days in space. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ With his just completed fifth space mission, Russian cosmonaut Gennady Padalka has spent record-breaking 879 days in space.
News source(s): RT.com, BBC, Detsche Welle, NDTV
Credits:

 Jenda H. (talk) 12:21, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest make it present tense. Sca (talk) 14:52, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

September 11

[edit]
September 11, 2015 (2015-09-11) (Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

[Closed] RD: Alan Purwin

[edit]
No consensus to post. SpencerT♦C 02:27, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Alan Purwin (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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: Film pilot for several major Hollywood movies as well as the founder and president of Helinet Aviation, a company which "provides aerial surveillance technology to government agencies and law enforcement". Died in a plane crash on the set of a film. 117.192.190.21 (talk) 13:57, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Article might be a candidate for AfD, not for ITN. LoveToLondon (talk) 16:02, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Subject does not meet ITNDC guidelines. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:25, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment bizarre, he's clearly at the top of his field for what he did before he died. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:13, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. He was clearly at the top of his field - a field he had been working in for over 30 years. Sourcing looks very good to me. Challenger l (talk) 03:19, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment At the top of what field exactly do you claim he was, and what RS do you have to support your claim that it was generally accepted that noone was better in this field? LoveToLondon (talk) 23:06, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Looks good to me. I don't blame the above opposes though, the article was rather substandard and somewhat promotional until a few hours ago. Nohomersryan (talk) 03:27, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - neither persuaded that this is newsworthy (supporters please add news sources to the nomination) nor persuaded that he's at the top of his field. Article claims aided in the filming of dozens of Hollywood movies, yet somehow only two films are mentioned in the article (Mena (film) and Tropic Thunder, with the latter not even mentioning Purwin in the article) and four television series (three of which don't mention Purwin in their articles and one doesn't have an article). starship.paint ~ KO 05:00, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    IMDb has more movies. The actual problem is: Are there any objective rankings that put him clearly ahead of everyone else in a relevant field? There is no indication that he was a leading stunt pilot, and also in the less relevant field of flying cameras around there is no indication that he was the leading person in his field. LoveToLondon (talk) 07:07, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    CNN says he was a "prominent Hollywood stunt pilot". Ben Stiller and Michael Bay have called him one of the best pilots in the world. There are no rankings for these things, and therefore we have to judge their work ourselves. 117.192.172.72 (talk) 08:22, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Media calling someone prominent is just a phrase without any value, and friends/colleagues calling someone one of the best in the world in an obituary is also of very limited value for assessing the relevance of a person. In one source in the article he actually claims that he stopped doing his old stunt job in 1987 (!) since he found a more lucrative business - he might have occasionally done stunts afterwards, but that was not his actual job. Everyone who claims he was an important stunt pilot is either too lazy or too stupid for understanding what his actual profession was during the last 28 years. LoveToLondon (talk) 10:02, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Nicely put IP98. A little hostile, but not far from the truth, Purwin is still widely acclaimed despite what you say. As for objective rankings, that's a bizarre request. What objective rankings would have put Paul Walker up there? The Rambling Man (talk) 21:00, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. He was at the top of what field? It seems like if you narrow down any field enough you can make someone the top of it...and that seems to be what this is. Obviously there are far more accomplished pilots out there. There are also aerobatic pilots out there who have won awards and competitions and there is no indication that this person did anything other than own a business. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.95.148.249 (talk) 16:39, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Posted] Singaporean general election, 2015

[edit]
Closing discussion Cyclonebiskit (talk) 15:57, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Proposed image
Article: Singaporean general election, 2015 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The ruling People's Action Party, led by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, retained its large majority in the Singaporean general election. (Post)
News source(s): BBC, Associated Press, Reuters, Xinhua, The Economist
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: Election in a rather important country? We posted a blurb for Lee Kuan Yew's death. HaEr48 (talk) 19:40, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
A lot of it depends on news coverage, I think. Even if this technically is ITNR, if it isn't getting a decent amount of coverage in the news, we can't really say it is "in the news" and thus don't need to post it. If this was top level news around the world, it wouldn't matter that the outcome was essentially known in advance. I will say this doesn't seem like it is a top story. 331dot (talk) 22:02, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, the winner was predictable and the PAP has a lot of advantages in the political landscape, but the elections themselves are normally considered free and fair. HaEr48 (talk) 00:18, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't really oppose this per se, though the sources are much improved. Thanks 331dot (talk) 08:46, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Posted] Mecca crane collapse

[edit]
Closing the discussion. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 13:03, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Mecca crane collapse (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A crane collapses at Masjid al-Haram in Mecca, Saudi Arabia, killing at least 87. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ A crane collapses at the Grand Mosque in Mecca, Saudi Arabia, killing at least 87 and severely damaging the building.
News source(s): BBC, Guardian, Newsweek
Credits:
Nominator's comments: 52 is significant death toll for Saudia Arabia. Saqib (talk) 17:02, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Looks much better. Thanks to the editors who worked on this. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:04, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
User:The Rambling Man, User:Eugen Simion 14, User:Ad Orientem, User:Cyclonebiskit: Article expanded and blurb shorten. Please suggest alternative blurb, if any. --Saqib (talk) 17:38, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Closed] Tropical Storm Etau

[edit]
Closing own nomination as stale. Four days without consensus to post and the event has now shifted into full recovery mode. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 22:00, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Tropical Storm Etau (2015) (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Flooding triggered by Tropical Storm Etau in eastern Japan affects thousands of homes and prompts evacuation warnings for nearly 3 million people after multiple levee breaches. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Flooding triggered by Tropical Storm Etau in eastern Japan kills at least 4 people and prompts evacuation warnings for nearly 3 million others after multiple levee breaches.
News source(s): TWC, BBC, The Japan Times, Japan Today
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Widespread and destructive flooding across eastern Japan, from "unprecedented" rains. Search and rescue operations ongoing after a levee breach along the Kinugawa River in Ibaraki Prefecture. This marked the first time the river broke its banks in 66 years. At least 3 people are confirmed dead and 22 are missing; more than 90,000 people have been evacuated while more than 700,000 others have been advised to do so, including 410,000 in Sendai. Thousands of homes damaged or destroyed across the country. The Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant also spilled more contaminated water into the Pacific because of the floods. Although Tropical Storm Erika was posted recently (and only just left the main page) for its severe damage in Dominica, Etau has affected a far more developed nation and overwhelmed its extensive flood control network. Effects are widespread and disruptive and the death toll is likely to rise.

The blurb could probably be better but I'm having some issue encapsulating the event properly without over-generalizing it. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 06:12, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

September 10

[edit]
September 10, 2015 (2015-09-10) (Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

[Closed] Leopoldo Lopez sentenced

[edit]
Closing as stale with no consensus after nearly six days. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 10:09, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Proposed image
Article: Leopoldo López (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Venezuelan opposition leader Leopoldo López is sentenced to thirteen years and nine months in prison on charges of inciting violence during protests the previous year. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Leopoldo López, leader of the Venezuelan opposition party Popular Will, is sentenced to over thirteen years in prison on charges of inciting violence during protests the previous year.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Leopoldo López, leader of the minor Venezuelan opposition party Popular Will, is sentenced to 13 years and 9 month in prison for inciting violence during protests the previous year.
News source(s): BBC New York Times The Guardian
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Lopez is described as "prominent" by both the BBC and the New York Times links above. Additionally, the sentence's length seems to make this story exceptionally significant, as does the fact that it is being covered around the world. Everymorning (talk) 19:11, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Uncertain. This does seem like a notable event, but it doesn't seem surprising that Venezuela would jail its opposition leader, given the current government. I'm not yet sure how to balance those two points. 331dot (talk) 21:12, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I believe we posted the release of Yulia Tymoshenko(maybe even her jailing), did we not? 331dot (talk) 21:15, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Sort of. We posted an item on the Maidan riots, which included Tymoshenko being freed ("Following demonstrations, the Ukrainian parliament restores the 2004 constitution and frees Yulia Tymoshenko, while Oleksandr Turchynov (pictured) becomes acting President." if you want the exact wording). The two aren't really comparable though; Tymoshenko was a former head of government of a major nation, while Lopez's only public office was as mayor of Chacao. "Opposition leader" is also stretching the truth to breaking point; while he is indeed the leader of an opposition party, it's a tiny party with all of one seat in the National Assembly, not the main opposition in any way. ‑ iridescent 21:25, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for pointing that out. 331dot (talk) 22:00, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support: Sad to see how Venezuela has devolved over the past 15 years into a mafioso state. -Kudzu1 (talk) 00:58, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Marxist authoritarian thugs lock up political opponents. In other news the sun will rise in the East tomorrow. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:03, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Non-election related political events in Latin America tend to be ignored by ITN (with the recent exception of the events in Guatemala). If opposition leaders in the United States or Europe were sentenced to thirteen years in prison, you betcha it would be posted on ITN. The severity of this sentencing was unexpected and unprecedented even in Venezuela, despite the dubious government there. This news trended #1 worldwide on Twitter for quite awhile. --Tocino 07:48, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If Barack Obama had Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, or Reince Priebus jailed on trumped up charges, it would merit posting because that doesn't typically happen in the US and would shock most of the US and world. It's different when it occurs in a country with essentially a one-party system that is hostile to opponents of it, as Venezuela has. 331dot (talk) 08:48, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
But the thing is, even for Venezuela, this ruling is viewed as "harsh" and an "outrage". Washington Post headline: Harsh sentence for Venezuela opposition leader widely condemned Globe and Mail (Canada) headline: Politician’s harsh sentence draws criticism of Venezuela
I can't think of another recent instance where an opposition politician in Venezuela was jailed for more than a decade. --Tocino 09:36, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Posted] Homo naledi

[edit]
Closing the discussion as there's unambiguous support for this. Any further comments regarding the blurb can be brought up at WP:ERRORS if necessary. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 07:27, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Homo naledi (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The discovery of a new species of hominid, Homo naledi, is announced. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The discovery of a new species of hominid, Homo naledi, at Rising Star Cave in South Africa, is announced
Alternative blurb II: ​ Scientists announce the discovery of Homo naledi, a new species of early humans.
News source(s): The Guardian, National Geographic, The Telegraph
Credits:

Article updated
  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 10:18, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
There was almost 10 years between discovery and publication of Ardipithecus ramidus - there is a certainl correlation of the length of the lag period between discovery and publication, and the scientific robustness of claims about a discovery being a new species.·maunus · snunɐɯ· 16:12, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

September 9

[edit]
September 9, 2015 (2015-09-09) (Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Business and economy

International relations

Law and crime

[Posted] Elizabeth II becomes longest-serving British monarch

[edit]
Closing the discussion, a vast majority to post, most other discussions can take place elsewhere, e.g. WP:ERRORS. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:19, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Proposed image
Articles: List of monarchs in Britain by length of reign (talk · history · tag) and Elizabeth II (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Queen Elizabeth II surpasses the reign of her great-great-grandmother Victoria, and becomes the longest-reigning British head of state. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Elizabeth II becomes the longest-reigning British head of state, surpassing Queen Victoria.
News source(s): (BBC News), (The Independent), (Reuters), (Time)
Credits:
 SusanLesch (talk) 00:21, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I can't speak for anyone else, but I was looking at it from a content perspective rather than a policy one for DYK vs. ITN. The information conveyed is more appropriate for a DYK blurb as it's an interesting fact. It garners greater notability because of who it is and how far back the British monarchy extends. However, the article obviously can't be brought to DYK since it fails the expansion criteria. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 06:41, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Exactly. DYK isn't just a dumping ground for what ITN throws away, it actually has rules on what can be included, which continually seems to be overlooked here. GRAPPLE X 07:49, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
But note that I also support the suggestion, below, to wait until 1630 UTC. GoldenRing (talk) 11:02, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – I do not support posting, as noted above, but if this is to be posted, I certainly cannot accept the phrase "British head of state". This sounds like a neologism or foreignism, or something. The correct term would be "British monarch". In addition, I'd argue that this should be changed to "Commonwealth monarch". Her record also applies to Canada, for instance. RGloucester — ☎ 19:05, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Closed] Boko Haram defeated

[edit]
No consensus to post. -Ad Orientem (talk) 06:58, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Boko Haram (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The spokesman for the Defence Headquarters in Nigeria announces the destruction of all known Boko Haram camps (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Boko Haram is claimed to be in disarray as the Nigerian Defence spokesperson announces the complete destruction of its camps
News source(s): Premium Times (Nigeria) This Day Live (Nigeria) News 24 IBTimes Vanguard (Nigeria)
Credits:

Article updated
 zzz (talk) 20:45, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose at least until more reliable sources comment on this. The end of the Boko Haram insurgency is a no-brainer ITN posting, but as the nom says, the press were sorta taken in by a similar announcement last year, and I'm not seeing places like the BBC, NYTimes, or the like comment on this despite the story being > 8 hrs old. We should wait for better sourcing to support the claim to come out. Also, if this story is true [15] ( which is Bloomberg reiterating what Nigeria forces on twitter said) they also have the kingpins of BH in custody, which if also confirmed should be part of the story. --MASEM (t) 20:57, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait Let's get a couple of reports citing western military/intelligence sources before we start taking Nigerian government announcements on this subject at face value. -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:51, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait until the kidnapped girls are returned. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 00:47, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait: The Nigerian government should not be treated as a definitive source when we're considering posting news of this magnitude. -Kudzu1 (talk) 01:01, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait – What one would assume to be a major achievement by the Nigerian Government and Military is not being covered by major news outlets. Makes the claim questionable at best for the time being. Leaning in favor of opposing this, but given that it could be real there's no harm waiting Cyclonebiskit (talk) 07:38, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose No point in waiting - even the government does not claim that Boko Haram has surrendered. Even a verification of their claim that they destroyed all Boko Haram claims they knew about (their wording implies that this is likely not the same as all) would not bring that to ITN. LoveToLondon (talk) 13:07, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose [16] Explosive attack on refugee camp makes it likely that this declaration of victory is not reciprocated. I'm not an expert on Nigeria at all, but it seems that the problems are not gone in a flash '''tAD''' (talk) 08:34, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note - No one is/was claiming miracles. I won't speculate further on why the western news cycle don't like the story. Western intelligence, NGOs etc. have no presence in the conflict zone, so corroboration is unlikely to materialise soon, unfortunately. zzz (talk) 18:19, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I'm afraid, there's absolutely no real objective evidence to independently support this tabloid headline. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:54, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"Tabloid headline" - so you would classify all Nigerian media as "tabloid". zzz (talk) 21:18, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That's not what I said, I suggested the blurb was tabloidesque because we have no way of confirming this objectively, and that's precisely what a tabloid publication does. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:31, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) If they made a claim like that with no evidence, I certainly would. I would note that not a single one of the sources you give actually says "Boko Haram defeated"; the first says that a military spokesman claims they have been driven out of one particular part of the country, the second says that one town has been recaptured and warns that "it would require a collective effort to detect and apprehend would-be suicide bombers in the North-east", the third just reprints a military press release with a disclaimer that "The information could not be independently verified", and the fourth says that a military spokesman has said "We are making a lot of headways and a lot of achievements and people should know that Boko Haram is no longer strong enough to hold ground. Very soon this issue of whether they are in control of any territory in Nigeria or not will come to the open", and notes that the same claim has been made previously and transpired to be untrue. ‑ iridescent 21:32, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The blurbs attribute the claim to the Nigerian military. The blurbs do not say "Boko Haram defeated". The military claim to have defeated them in terms of territory and command and control capability. The blurb is therefore %100 accurate and reliable, since there is no doubt that that is what the military have claimed. zzz (talk) 21:44, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I would agree however that "independent confirmation", which unfortunately, in this case is not an option, may be necessary to proceed with this. zzz (talk) 21:51, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This discussion is irrelevant. It is an unverified claim from one side, and even if it would be verified it would not appropriate for ITN. The end of a (civil) war is relevant for ITN, a major victory in the middle of a (civil) war is not. LoveToLondon (talk) 06:21, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

September 8

[edit]
September 8, 2015 (2015-09-08) (Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Sport

[Closed] Kim Davis released from jail

[edit]
Snow Close: Closing this good faith nomination. It does not meet ITN guidelines. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:35, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Kim Davis (county clerk) (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Kim Davis, a county clerk in Kentucky who was jailed for refusing to issue marriage licenses to homosexual couples, is released from jail after five days. (Post)
News source(s): BBC News The Guardian New York Times
Credits:
Nominator's comments: This story has received a considerable amount of news coverage from around the world since it began last week. Everymorning (talk) 21:20, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

September 7

[edit]
September 7, 2015 (2015-09-07) (Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy
  • The patent office in India rejects Pfizer's petition for a patent on an arthritis drug, tofacitinib, re-affirming their rejection of the same drug in 2011. The drug is a chemical reformulation of the active compound in the medicine and thus the Indian Patent Office says that the company would have to establish that the compound for which it is seeking a patent is therapeutically more effective than the active compound. (Reuters)

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and Crime
  • Just before the Brooklyn, New York West Indian J'ouvert Labor Day Carnival, lawyer Carey Gabay is shot in the head and critically wounded, caught in crossfire between feuding gangs. Two others are wounded in shootings and one man is stabbed to death. (ABC News), (Breitbart)
  • In Cass County, Missouri, a family of four is fired upon after they passed a slower vehicle, which then pulls up alongside and opens fire, hitting the father and a 2-year-old girl. Police believe the motive may have been road rage after flashing headlights. (KCTV5)

Politics and elections

Science and technology

[Ready] Trinidad and Tobago general election

[edit]
Proposed image
Article: Trinidad and Tobago general election, 2015 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The opposition People's National Movement wins a majority in Trinidad and Tobago with Keith Rowley (pictured) becoming prime minister. (Post)
Credits:
  • Nominated by [[User:120.62.18.210 (talk) 12:45, 12 September 2015 (UTC)|120.62.18.210 (talk) 12:45, 12 September 2015 (UTC)]] ([[User talk:120.62.18.210 (talk) 12:45, 12 September 2015 (UTC)|talk]] · [{{fullurl:User talk:120.62.18.210 (talk) 12:45, 12 September 2015 (UTC)|action=edit&preload=Template:ITN_candidate/preload_credit&preloadtitle=ITN+recognition+for+%5B%5BTrinidad+and+Tobago+general+election%2C+2015%5D%5D&section=new&preloadparams%5b%5d=Trinidad+and+Tobago+general+election%2C+2015&preloadparams%5b%5d=nominated}} give credit])[reply]

The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.

Nominator's comments: Far more notable than that tin pot dictatorship that is singapore (yes I know ive lived there)
Plus the only second PM from Tobago
Not to mention the underlying racial implications in a highly diverse country...(as was in the Guyana election recently...although he did reach out to indians to break the monopolistic party of ramotar (even have a south indian pm)) \120.62.18.210 (talk) 12:45, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Amount of content is also a factor in article quality. Too little prose is a problem. starship.paint ~ KO 03:39, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[Closed] RD: Candida Royalle

[edit]
No consensus to post. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:39, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Candida Royalle (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): New York Daily News New York Post
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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: Well-known and influential performer, director, and producer in the adult entertainment industry. Recognized in the AVN Hall of Fame, which is apparently a thing. Seems to have been at or near the top of her field, such as it is. Kudzu1 (talk) 06:15, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - For our purposes, recognition in the Porn Hall of Fame is about as useless an honor as there is - 98% of those names aren't going anywhere near the Main Page when they pass. Nothing in the article or the obits suggests she was particularly significant within the porn industry. She does appear to have been the first female director in the industry, so I guess there's that, but it seems like a pretty weak straw to grab. --Bongwarrior (talk) 06:29, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD. Article's in fine shape for appearing, and it does list her as being in two industry halls of fame, which is as good a benchmark as any. The "first female director" thing would be another qualifying factor but at the time of this comment it's not in the article and I think it would need to be to count. 86.188.148.242 (talk) 08:12, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Article doesn't seem to be in the greatest shape, but I've seen worse. It's short, but sourced. I'm also unclear on whether or not the HoF indicates she's important enough in her field. It would seem that it should? – Muboshgu (talk) 21:34, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose the NYP article suggests she was famous as a friend of Annie Sprinkle and because she was shooting a now-unlikely to be released documentary on her search for the mother who abandoned her, and had died of the same cancer that eventually killed Candice herself at 64. μηδείς (talk) 21:55, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose There are undoubtedly RD-worthy people in the porn field—if Ron Jeremy, Hugh Hefner or Traci Lords fell under a bus tomorrow I'd support them wholeheartedly for RD—but this one easily fails the "if I asked an expert in the subject to name the ten most important people in their field, would this person be on the list?" test. ‑ iridescent 23:20, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Evidence that the deceased was a really major figure in the field seems pretty dicey. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:50, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Quality of "European migrant crisis" article

[edit]

Currently, the article, European migrant crisis, is tagged as non-neutral. Shall it affect the article's status as "Ongoing"? --George Ho (talk) 18:58, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It could, better response would be to fix it. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:41, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It's already discussed in the article talk page. As long as the article is frequently edited, registered editors would be aware of this. --George Ho (talk) 20:40, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
An Ongoing article is expected to be in a constant state of construction. There are indeed some neutrality and bias issues present, but it looks like they are actively being resolved. I would recommend keeping the article in Ongoing. Mamyles (talk) 23:44, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

September 6

[edit]
September 6, 2015 (2015-09-06) (Sunday)
Disasters and accidents
  • At least 10 people die and 8 are missing from a South Korean fishing charter that capsized Saturday night off the country's southern coast. Coast Guard officers said three people survived by clinging to the wreckage for 10 hours. (Sydney Morning Herald) (AFP via New Delhi Television)
  • The death toll from the September 1 chemical factory blast in China rises to 13. (AP)
  • A Spain car rally race crash leaves six dead after a car veers off a straight section into spectators. (BBC)

International Relations

Law and crime
  • In Tampa, Florida, former University of South Florida football player Elkino Watson is killed and Desmon Watson, another former player, is injured after an early morning stabbing after an argument broke out outside a nightclub in Ybor City. (WFLA)
  • In North Carolina, the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department announces an unprecedented 11 people have been shot, 5 fatally, over the Labor Day weekend, including a boy shot at a birthday party. (Charlotte Observer)
  • In the second police officer shooting in the city in three days, a man ambushed a marked police SUV stopped at a traffic light in Las Vegas by walking up and firing multiple rounds, striking one officer in the hand. The shooter was arrested. (Fox News)
  • Crystal Cortes of Dallas, Texas is charged with capital murder of dentist Kendra Hatcher on September 2. Her borrowed Jeep Cherokee was seen entering a parking garage on video. She told police she conspired with an unidentified man who paid her to drive him to the garage with the intention of robbery. (WFAA)[permanent dead link]

Politics and elections

[Closed] Italian Grand Prix

[edit]
WP:SNOW close. Just another race, even if we're having slow news week. -- KTC (talk) 12:05, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: 2015 Italian Grand Prix (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In Formula One, Lewis Hamilton wins the 2015 Italian Grand Prix. (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:
Nominator's comments: If I'm not mistaken, ITNR. Anyway, one of the longest running events in F1, according to Italian Grand Prix. Brandmeistertalk 17:42, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

September 5

[edit]
September 5, 2015 (2015-09-05) (Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

International Relations

Law and crime

[Closed] U.S. ship reaches North Pole

[edit]
Consensus against posting. BencherliteTalk 17:57, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: USCGC Healy (WAGB-20) (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The USCGC Healy becomes the first U.S. surface ship in history to reach the North Pole unaccompanied. (Post)
News source(s): Navy Times [17], Fairbanks Daily News-Miner [18]
Credits:
  • Nominated by [[User:LavaBaron (talk) 00:40, 9 September 2015 (UTC)|LavaBaron (talk) 00:40, 9 September 2015 (UTC)]] ([[User talk:LavaBaron (talk) 00:40, 9 September 2015 (UTC)|talk]] · [{{fullurl:User talk:LavaBaron (talk) 00:40, 9 September 2015 (UTC)|action=edit&preload=Template:ITN_candidate/preload_credit&preloadtitle=ITN+recognition+for+%5B%5BUSCGC+Healy+%28WAGB-20%29%5D%5D&section=new&preloadparams%5b%5d=USCGC+Healy+%28WAGB-20%29&preloadparams%5b%5d=nominated}} give credit])[reply]
  • Weak oppose: I've actually been aboard the Healy, and she is a fine ship. But this seems like kind of an Americocentric nomination and I think it's more suitable for DYK. It's not like this feat has never before been done. -Kudzu1 (talk) 07:10, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question: According to the blurb, this is the first American ship with this accomplishment. Have ships of other nations done this before? SpencerT♦C 07:12, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The blurb is wrong. USS Nautilus (SSN-571) did it more than 50 years ago. USCGC Healy is the first US surface vessel to do so.My other car is a cadr (talk) 10:14, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It was a typo. It should have read "surfaced" - I've fixed it. LavaBaron (talk) 15:07, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. I'm not seeing the significance of this event. We didn't post the Russian ship that did this earlier this year [19]. Quoting from that article: 'surface ships were there 118 times including 100 visits by ships flying the flag of USSR and Russia, 8 times – Sweden, 4 times – Germany, 3 times – Canada and the USA each'. It's stretching things a bit to call this a first for the US too: from [20] 'The Healy's voyage marks the fourth time a US surface vessel has reached the North Pole'. This is the first that was both a) American and b) on its own. That seems overly specific to me. Modest Genius talk 10:09, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
USS Nautilus (SSN-571) passes both a) and b), so USCGC Healy needs a c) Surface vessel as well. My other car is a cadr (talk) 10:17, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Good point, thanks, although I don't think Nautilus surfaced. USS Skate (SSN-578) did though. Modest Genius talk 10:20, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It was a typo. It should have read "surfaced" - I've fixed it. Aside from the USSR/Russia, the other countries you've named (Sweden, Germany, and Canada) have not had an unaccompanied mission to the North Pole, which is what the blurb says, for the attentive. LavaBaron (talk) 15:07, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Uh, actually, no it hasn't. It was only 28 years ago when a surface ship of any kind reached the North Pole and that was an accompanied mission. There have only been three total unaccompanied surface missions prior to this one. Conventionally "one dozen" means "12" and "dozens" indicates "at least 24." So you're off by a factor of 6, but thanks for the feedback! LavaBaron (talk) 15:07, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, to clarify, oppose, just because it's the USA doing something that's been done before, I'm not (nor is most of the rest of the world) interested. Thanks for your clarification, by the way. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:45, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

September 4

[edit]
September 4, 2015 (2015-09-04) (Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and Culture

Business and economics

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

[Withdrawn] RD: Aadesh Shrivastava

[edit]
Closing this one myself. Clear consensus against posting. -Kudzu1 (talk) 15:40, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Aadesh Shrivastava (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Times of India Business Standard NDTV
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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: Acclaimed composer of music for Bollywood films and television personality. Kudzu1 (talk) 22:48, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I am not seeing any indication of his importance or influence in the field. He was clearly steadily employed. But that's not one of the criteria in ITNDC. Also as noted by the nom, the article is not in good shape. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:01, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I am not saying he's not ITN-level recognizable. But if he is, there's nothing in the article to indicate that he is. If the article were expanded greatly in the next day or two, we may get a better sense of how much esteem his career was held in. But as of right now, there's nothing in the text of the article to indicate much about his standing. --Jayron32 03:01, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose many, mainly unreferenced, credits, but no clear indication that he was actually of notability within his field. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:53, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. What little there is of facts on him, I can find nothing to indicate his notability or influence in his field - and the fact that more than half the length of the article is simply a bullet list of his credits, I don't see how he meets the RD criteria. Challenger l (talk) 23:05, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Closed] RD: Chandra Bahadur Dangi

[edit]
No consensus -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:21, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Chandra Bahadur Dangi (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  The world's shortest man ever recorded, Chandra Bahadur Dangi, dies from pneumonia in an American Samoan hospital at age 75. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The world's shortest man ever recorded, Chandra Bahadur Dangi, dies at age 75.
News source(s): Daily News, India Times, The Independent, ABC on line
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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.

-EugεnS¡m¡on(14) ® 16:11, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ha, good one. Everymorning (talk) 16:36, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The Kathmandu Post reported that he had been suffering from pneumonia when admitted to the hospital the previous week. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:16, 4 September 2015 (UTC) p.s. have added links to blurb, but I don't see that a blurb will really happen.[reply]
More heat than light, etc. etc. -Kudzu1 (talk) 22:42, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't revert to the "Really?" "Wow" mode with me, TRM. I recently assented to your request to lift the IBAN between us, and will happily ask that it be reinstated and remind arbcom that you asked for it to be removed as part of your campaign to retain your sysopdom. That being said, yes; according to the article's claims, he was the shortest verified person ever, and she was the oldest verified person ever. There seems to be consensus that Calment met the criteria. If so, Mr. Chandra Bahadur Dangi meets them as well. μηδείς (talk) 21:22, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It was simply an exclamation of surprise that anyone would seriously seriously consider a short person to be notable along the lines of award-winning scientists, Nobel-award-winning politicians etc. I apologise if you somehow have taken it badly, your reminder that you can, at any time, ask for the iban to be reinstated and, at any time, ask Arbcom to wave their magic wand, is entirely unnecessary. I'm sorry if you're having a bad day, I had no intention to make it worse. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:26, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"You got to pick 'em up. Just to say hello." Allegedly. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:30, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. There was no campaign for me to remain as an admin, in fact I deliberately asked the community, openly and honestly, to make that decision for me. I was, and remain, entirely open and honest about this. If you have an issue with that, I suggest you do something about it or put it to bed. None of that has anything to do with this ITN candidate, so I suggest you take the discussion somewhere more appropriate if you feel the need to do so. Cheers! The Rambling Man (talk) 21:28, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Which criteria at ITNDC do you see him meeting? -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:29, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Wouldn't WP:CONSENSUS be enough? --Jayron32 20:00, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It would depend on the posting admin, of course. Consensus is fine, albeit often blind, but if still fails to meet criteria then the admin should justifiably so no, in order to maintain standards. We have IAR, sure, but if we really start posting items at RD like "smallest man to have lived" then we should address the significance of this classification of individual at the RD criteria. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:25, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
What sort of improvements do you see as possible? Martinevans123 (talk) 22:18, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well I've just fixed a pile of spelling and grammar issues. There are loads of sources out there, but I'm not sure if there's a lot more to be said in the article - after all he was only discovered to be the world's shortest man three years ago. Black Kite (talk) 22:36, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Should the lede just summarise the main points? It seems too large for such a short article. Martinevans123 (talk) 07:13, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ready per Martinevans, Jyron, and BlackKite μηδείς (talk)

The , """ready" label appears premature as there is no consensus to post at this time. I have removed it for now. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:05, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I opposed? Martinevans123 (talk) 07:06, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see support, explicit or otherwise, from any of those noted by Medeis. This is the third time in a row that this has happened... The Rambling Man (talk) 19:42, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I must need a new prescription for my spectacles. I count four supports (including the nom) and three opposes. That doesn't meet my understanding of the term "consensus." I believe that when someone is supporting a nomination, or opposing one, it is customary to include the bolded word "Support" or "Oppose" as appropriate somewhere in a comment with their signature at the end of it. Absent that, I don't think it appropriate to label someone else's comment as a vote one way or another. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:12, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This is becoming problematic and disruptive. Imagining a support from someone who hasn't actually supporting something is inexcusable. Stop this please. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:38, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I have certainly not been pung and would strongly object if I was. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:04, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't actually give an opinion but if I had it would be Weak Support. I think this one is on the cusp of RD (it would certainly be a useful DYK if expanded a bit). Black Kite (talk) 08:12, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't the proposed blurb be for the world's shortest adult? The article states that he was the tallest adult ever, not just man. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 20:50, 7 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure it shouldn't state that. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:47, 8 September 2015 (UTC) [reply]
Right, right, it says shortest.
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.

September 3

[edit]
September 3, 2015 (2015-09-03) (Thursday)
Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Sports

[Closed] Death penalty sought for Dylann Roof

[edit]
Snow Close: Closing good faith nomination. This does not meet ITN guidelines and there is no chance it will be approved for posting. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:17, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Dylann Roof (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Prosecutors are to seek the death penalty for the Charleston church shooter, Dylann Roof. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ There has been official confirmation that Dylann Roof will face capital charges for his role in the Charleston church shooting.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Dylann Roof will face death penalty trial, prosecutors have confirmed.
News source(s): http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-34146798
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Ongoing interest in the case. Ceannlann gorm (talk) 22:09, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Closed] Wildfires for ongoing

[edit]
In three days of discussion, more edits have been made to this discussion than the target article in question. It's a pretty nice article, but does not meet the standards for an Ongoing link which generally requires a continuously edited article. Discussion quality is also degrading rapidly. --Jayron32 04:29, 6 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: 2015_Washington_state_wildfires (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: No blurb specified (Post)
Credits:
Nominator's comments: The wildfires were posted by this discussion, and are getting close to falling off. Unfortunately, the wildfires are getting worse and are still in the news. I think the blurb should be converted into an "ongoing" before it falls off. We may need a new target article, though, because that WaPo source talks about the West Coast fires, and there isn't one page for that. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:54, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • support - per ready article. and notable event.--BabbaQ (talk) 19:03, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support at least to start with the Wa state ones, but agreed there probably should be a larger landing article about the overall West coast state wildfire season which has been very bad this year. --MASEM (t) 21:45, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Seems like the sensible course given the constantly updating nature of the news. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:23, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per above, including notion by Masem that there should be a more encompassing article. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 00:00, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for ongoing, fire season in western North America is a regular, natural (yes, global change but still natural), annual event. According to the WaPo article proffered above, "There are only six other years that have seen more than 8 million acres burned — 2012, 2011, 2007, 2006, 2005, and 2004". This is far too commonplace for ongoing. I have no objection to individual fire articles being posted or bumped. Abductive (reasoning) 04:50, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • And that same article says the record year was only 6 million 7.66 million on Sept 1 and it went to 10 million ed:(9.87 million to be precise). So it's on pace to break it by a few million. Also, the unextinguished fires in Washington State total almost a million acres. Drought since winter = fires. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 05:23, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • All of that can be true, and none of it really matters for Wikipedia in general or ITN in specific. This years current wildfires are currently, and prominently, in the news. Other arbitrary measurables one pulls out of the air to give justification of why it shouldn't be in the news is irrelevent. Wikipedia is not built on the principle of "what I can prove about my own opinions after the fact with arbitrary statistics". It is built on what reliable sources say and report. Reliable sources give this prominence, so if we have a quality article on it, there's very good reason (people are absolutely hearing about the topic through their news sources) to direct them to our article. Remember, ITN is not about changing world culture to fit our perceptions about what we want the world to find important. ITN is about directing potential readers and main page visitors to quality, Wikipedia content on topics they may be hearing about through other means. Since this is a prominent topic in the news right now, there's no way to deny that... --Jayron32 10:23, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • Actually, I was supporting the ongoing. It's on pace to break the record. Which I guess is not that persuasive only indicative that it might be big (it could be bothering mostly empty marginal land, for example) but it's big news that is bothering large populated areas or even making them almost unliveable, and burning houses and killing people in a smaller area so it should be ongoing. Obviously it goes without question that something doing that will be in the reliable news sources. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 16:40, 4 September 2015 (UTC)][reply]
  • Support it happens from time to time? So what? It's in the news and of interest, no reason not to add it to Ongoing. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:55, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I was trying to start a landing article and it should be important to note (in considering this for ongoing) that we've got 8+ million acres burnt in the US along but this includes 5+ million in Alaska along with a number I can't immediately find for several western Canadian provinces over July/August. And as a recent WaPost article noted, we've not yet hit the high point for California's Santa Ana-driven wildfire season. The record has already been passed and expected to grow. I'm thinking we do need a 2015 Western North America wildfires to cover all these broadly which should be the ongoing topic. --MASEM (t) 21:03, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose How much more do you want to push these fires with a handful of deaths in part of one country at ITN? This is not a huge event like the Great Fire of 1910, it is just a stronger than average annual wildfire season. And it's a local topic only substantially covered in the US (or perhaps in Canada), here in Europe all frontpage news about ongoing wildfires is about wildfires in Southern Europe. And all records claimed are also only relevant for the local region, everyone in Australia still remembers the recent Black Saturday bushfires with more than 100 fatalities and would laugh at the attempts here to market these puny fires as something huge. LoveToLondon (talk) 19:47, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    See the guidelines above "Please 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." Votes which oppose for reasons related primarily to geography should be summarily ignored in assessing consensus by posting admins. --Jayron32 20:02, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Welcome back IP98, but as Jayron says, unless you have something more useful than a localisation objection, better that you refrain from complaining. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:27, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    What is IP98? My objection is not that it relates only to a single country, my objection is that it is a relatively minor event even for a wildfire. Bigger than usual annual wildfires destroy 200 homes in Western Namibia. would sound absurd as an ITN blurb, but replace Western Namibia with Western US and everyone here from the US thinks it would be extremely important. Votes which support for reasons related to geography (event is in the same country as the support voter) should be summarily ignored in assessing consensus by posting admins. LoveToLondon (talk) 21:44, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    I wonder! The Rambling Man (talk) 21:50, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Unmarked, for anyone reading the article, it's not updated for over a week, so it's clearly not ready. As I said above, update the article, we may have a decent Ongoing item, clearly that hasn't happened, and clearly those who have subsequently supported haven't even looked at the article. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:50, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't disagree with that, if it hasn't been updated for 7 days, it shouldn't be posted. μηδείς (talk) 22:03, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Of course, SounderBruce and others who've expanded the article and updated it since Aug 30 might disagree. I'm off to dinner. μηδείς (talk) 22:07, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Posted] Otto Pérez Molina resignation

[edit]
Proposed image
Article: Otto Pérez Molina (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ President of Guatemala Otto Pérez Molina presents his resignation amid charges of customs fraud. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Guatemalan President Otto Pérez Molina presents his resignation amid charges of customs fraud.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Alejandro Maldonado Aguirre succeeds the Guatemalan Presidency after Otto Pérez Molina is arrested after resigning amid charges of customs fraud
Alternative blurb III: ​ Guatemalan President Otto Pérez Molina is arrested after resigning amid charges of customs fraud.
News source(s): The New York Times, BBC America
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Resignation of current President. Seattle (talk) 13:47, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I recommend alt blurb 1 until the Vice President assumes as Interim President, then change to Alt Blurb 2. Article updates are sufficient (but could definitely be improved further). Mamyles (talk) 19:25, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support; resignation of a head of state due to scandal/alleged criminal activity is notable. A change in head of state is ITNR, though I believe we wait until there is an actual new head of state(as opposed to an acting one), am I correct? 331dot (talk) 15:40, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think that we can post both. If the county's Congress accepts the resignation, we can use a combined blurb to state that Alejandro Maldonado Aguirre is the interim president. I've proposed Alt Blurb 2 to reflect this, which should only be posted when the Vice President does succeed. The next election is set to conclude late this year, and is ITNR so will likely also be posted. Mamyles (talk) 19:14, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

September 2

[edit]
September 2, 2015 (2015-09-02) (Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Science and technology

Sports

[Closed] RD: Aylan Kurdi

[edit]
Strong consensus against this, we already have the migrant crisis at Ongoing. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:29, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Death of Aylan Kurdi (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  A photo of refugee Aylan Kurdi's dead body is broadcast around the world. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Three-year old Aylan Kurdi dies in the Syrian refugee crisis.
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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.
 --BabbaQ (talk) 21:37, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Oppose This is a human interest sub-story that has gained enormous attention due to various photographs that have understandably created a lot of emotion. But we don't post stories based on emotion. To the extent it warrants coverage on ITN, it belongs in the immigration crisis ongoing section. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:32, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • There has been an massive amount of attention to this boy and this story in particular and it has had effects on political level a well. In my opinion not a sub-story. --BabbaQ (talk) 23:35, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
There are all kinds of stories that get massive attention and that we pass over here. This one is being generated primarily by emotion. To the extent that it may have political ramifications, that can be covered in the ongoing section dedicated to the immigration crisis. That's what it is there for. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:41, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It has also become a hot political issue in the upcoming Canadian election, as Alan's aunt had applied for their immigration visa with the help of a (leftist) NDP MP but the application was rejected by the authorities in June in part because Turkey did not grant them exit visas. Canadian immigration minister has suspended his election campaign as result of this incident. So it is not just the photograph, it may actually cost the Conservatives the federal election. Vekoler (talk) 23:56, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

[Closed] Pull European migrant crisis from ongoing

[edit]
Snow close. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:04, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

While the European migrant crisis reaches its peak, the article seems to be in very poor shape, lacking important information about the routes, the incidents and the ongoing protests in support of the migrants across European cities. Inclusion in the ongoing section inevitably means that the article has to, at least, be updated with the relevant news regarding the crisis. Also, it is not a good idea to have an article with an orange tag on the top standing for days on the main page. Once these issues are resolved, we can insert the article again.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 12:44, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose I disagree that the article is currently bad quality. There have been 40 updates in the last day, some of them significant. I've removed the orange-level tag and requested more information on the talk page of the user who added it, since the problem was unclear. Feel free to post about missing route information on the article's talk page. I've added information about Malta. Mamyles (talk) 13:59, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose in much better shape than the nominator leads me to believe. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:05, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Topic has been in the news, at top headlines, nearly daily. The article itself has been updated daily or more often (indeed, many times per day), and as of now, there is no orange-level problems. Article looks well referenced, and a heavily-edited article is expected to undergo periods of instability as exact wording is negotiated. This is not a bug, but a feature, of Wikipedia. I can see no good reason to remove this, and LOTS of reasons to keep it in Ongoing. --Jayron32 14:47, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Subject is clearly an ongoing major news story/event. As noted above the article appears to be in generally good shape. Is there room for improvement? Yes. But that could be said of almost all articles. Overall this one is pretty solid and more than meets the standards for linking on the front page. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:29, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

September 1

[edit]
September 1, 2015 (2015-09-01) (Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Disaster and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

[Closed] RD: Dean Jones (actor)

[edit]
No consensus to post. SpencerT♦C 07:20, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article: Dean Jones (actor) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): New York Times BBC NBC News
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia 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: He was best known for appearing in "the Love Bug", the first Herbie movie. In addition to being a member of the Disney Legends Hall of Fame, he "appeared in 46 films, five Broadway shows and numerous TV series and specials over his career. His film grosses exceeded $960 million and six of his ten films for Walt Disney are on Variety's all-time hit list." [21] Everymorning (talk) 02:50, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates/September_2015&oldid=1087609811"