![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
It should be mentioned that the waragi contained high amounts of methanol (mentioned in the article), as it's not clear why people got organ failure in the text. Obviously not any waragi gives anyone organ failure. notwist ( talk) 08:23, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
In the contaminated waragi headline, it notes 80 people have died from multiple organ failure. However, it specifically notes in the multiple organ failure article that "The use of "multiple organ failure" should be avoided since that term was based upon physiologic parameters to determine whether or not a particular organ was failing". Thus, I am proposing the multiple organ failure be changed to its proper medical term, Multiple organ dysfunction syndrome, to better inform visitors and not contribute to the incorrect use of medical terminology. Ryandinho14 ( talk) 20:16, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Could it not read Faisal Shahzad is charged...., linking to the article about him? Beach drifter ( talk) 19:18, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
A bit premature? Counting isn't even finished, and even if mathematically a hung parliament is unavoidable, where the Lib Dems will throw their support is still unknown. SGGH ping! 14:04, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
Please switch the image illustrating the Moscow parade. Who cares what it's logo looks like? It's a parade, not an organization! In my view the only appropriate illustration would be a photo of the parade itself. __ meco ( talk) 18:58, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
Per my post at WT:DYK#You know that rule about DYK and ITN?, it has been pointed out that there is no link in the ITN section to this project. Maybe it would be worth considering such a link, which could encourage new input to ITN. I believe the other question raised there has been discussed here, and consensus is that appearing as a DYK does not disqualify an article for ITN at some point in the future. Mjroots ( talk) 06:25, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
Please stop bringing more attention to people who do terrible things just to get attention. AJUK Talk!! 22:21, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
A comma is needed after 'Red Bull' in the item about the Monaco Grand Prix. It is needed to end the adjectival phrase "driving for Red Bull". Quantumelfmage ( talk) 21:10, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
I noticed that there wasn't a generic userbox for ITN contributors (just this one to state how many ITN articles you'd contributed to), so I created one. Feel free to use/tweak/ignore as you see fit: -- ThaddeusB ( talk) 23:19, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
Example: {{Userbox ITN}}
![]() | This user contributes to the In the news section of the main page. |
Politico says Obama is likely to nominate Elena Kagan to replace Justice Stevens on the Supreme Court tomorrow.
Last year, we posted the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor after a long and bitter discussion. I hope we have no such rancor this time. When Sotomayor was nominated, the number of hits her article was getting was astronomical. Clearly, a lot of people are going to be coming to Wikipedia tomorrow, or whenever, for information on whoever the new nominee is, and it makes sense to have the nominee's name on the front page. -- Mwalcoff ( talk) 17:42, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
It is my interpretation of the guidelines is that new nominations should go on the date the story occurred. Yet, most people just post at the very top no matter if that date is "correct" or not. So, which interpretation is correct? Either way, the blurb at the top should make it more clear as it is rather ambiguous currently. -- ThaddeusB ( talk) 03:10, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
Can someone please add the result of the 2010 ICC Women's World Twenty20 to the news item about the men currently on the main page. It is basically one event with two parallel tournaments, one for the men and one for the women - in a similar arrangement to a tennis Grand Slam event. -- Mattinbgn\ talk 00:29, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
We are now discussing, on two consecutive dates, Pakistan blocking Facebook and Pakistan blocking Wikipedia. Could this not be centralized? __ meco ( talk) 18:00, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
Death toll is 158.
Why is F.C. Internazionale Milano being referred to as "Inter Milan" here? Although this is a common name for the club, it is not usually considered to be an appropriate abbreviation. The most appropriate name for the club is "Internazionale". – Pee Jay 23:04, 22 May 2010 (UTC) ...:or just Inter. – Howard the Duck 01:54, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
The links in this text should go to the following, because that's were the stuff is located now:
Whether it is synthetic life is open for debate, so that article is not an appropriate target. Mikael Häggström ( talk) 06:15, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Would there be consensus for adding a link to the Expo on the Main Page until it is over? The first two paragraphs convince me of its importance to raise this and it is neither a national event nor an election, something like the Olympics.
Also, should List of world expositions not be included on ITNR? -- can dle • wicke 11:45, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Shouldn't Satellite, the song by Lena be put in quote marks instead of italicized in the In the news template? Sorafune +1 22:31, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
I'm concerned at the decision to remove Gaza flotilla clash from the template. This simply isn't credible. It's the biggest current events story in the world right now, as a look at any news website will show, and it makes Wikipedia look ridiculous to omit this. Please restore it. -- ChrisO ( talk) 00:38, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
I think the flotilla event should certainly be on ITN; however, I am concerned about the wording since right now we don't really know what happened. I would say something along the lines of: Nine people die in a clash between Israeli commandoes and a flotilla claiming it was bringing humanitarian aid to Gaza. -- Mwalcoff ( talk) 21:13, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
I just would like to understand the process. The Moratorium on logging in Indonesia had 8 supports and no oppose, but still wasn't posted, while other ITN nominations are instantly posted after one support. Why? -- Elekhh ( talk) 02:20, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
"the fourth person to leave the office in as many years." reads oddly, what does this even mean? I'm guessing it's a typo. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ τ ¢ 02:39, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Currently it says "At least five people are confirmed dead in a shooting spree in Cumbria, England.", however I believe it should say "At least five people are confirmed dead in a shooting spree in Cumbria, United Kingdom." as the United Kingdom is the sovereign state, not England. We don't want to support Regional Nationalism or misguide the reader by implying that England is a sovereign state. IJA ( talk) 15:31, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
I notice that Template:In the news/Last update is now fully protected by cascading protection (because it is part of the documentation for the fully protected Template:In the news). It is also semi-protected, having both is unnecessary. I recall that we downgraded the page from full protection a while back as vandalism there would have little impact on the process and it is occasionally useful for non-admins to be able to edit the page (if an admin forgets to reset it when updating, for example). Is there a way we can stop it from being cascade protected? If not can we at least remove the semi-protection, it just adds another box to scroll past to edit the thing - Dumelow ( talk) 22:53, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
It currently says she is the first Italian to win the French Open, surely it should say she is the first Italian to win a Grand Slam event, which is the case, and also more significant. JimmyMac82 ( talk) 08:21, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
We often have obscure events on ITN because they involve a lot of deaths. Things like, what was it, the mass poisoning in Uganda, and today we have more poisoning in Africa and a fire in Bangladesh. I understand why people want to put these things on ITN. They quite naturally see human deaths as a big deal and believe that 50 deaths in the Third World is as significant as 50 in the U.S. or UK or wherever the editor may live. I agree with those beliefs 100%.
However, we have to remember that tragedy and news (or tragedy and encyclopedic-ness) are not the same thing. A bus crash that kills 50 people in London may be equal in tragedy to the same crash in Burundi, but it is not equal in news value to the vast majority of the world's media. If all unnatural deaths were of equal news value, the news would be nothing but endless reports of famine and bloodshed in places like Congo, where countless thousands die in such a way every year.
I'm not saying we should adopt the same viewpoint as a small-town American newspaper that doesn't give the non-Western world the time of day. But if an event is so obscure that we have to write the article entirely ourselves, I don't really know if it is necessarily an appropriate item for ITN. My understanding is that ITN is supposed to reflect quality Wikipedia content of interest to our readers. If there is zero content about something out there before we have to make it ourselves, I don't see how that's reflecting quality content. If the subject matter is so obscure that it is hardly mentioned in the media in the places where the vast majority of our readers live, it's probably not "of wide interest to the encyclopedia's readers" as the criteria page says. And of course, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to put something that's not really in the news in a template called "In the news."
I don't mean to pick on the tragedies in Nigeria and Bangladesh. The Nigeria story is interesting, and the Bangladesh fire is getting some international media attention, although not very prominently. I didn't oppose either suggestion. I do think, though, that we ought to make it clear that we should not reflexively approve an item simply because it has a high death toll and that we should strive to abide by the mission and criteria of ITN. -- Mwalcoff ( talk) 23:49, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
The problem is that ITN is supposed to reflect quality Wikipedia content. If a topic, because of "systemic bias" or whatever other reason, does not have quality content on Wikipedia, we should be wary of featuring it in ITN. In addition, I have to say I'm personally against these kind of normative or subjective arguments about what "should be" in the news. I certainly am all in favor with improving Wikipedia's coverage of non-Western or developing countries. But who are we to say that readers, or the media, are wrong when they choose to be interested in certain topics more than others? Why are our views more important than those of the readership? I think we should base our decisions objectively on the required criteria -- the quality of the Wikipedia content, readership interest in the topic, the significance of the event and the newsiness of the event -- and not let our personal feeling about what "should be" in the news get in the way. -- Mwalcoff ( talk) 23:39, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
I'm not familiar with how to submit an item for ITN, but those who do may want to submit Arlington National Cemetery mismanagement controversy — Rlevse • Talk • 12:30, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
Why has the blurb about the Stanley Cup been taken down so fast? -- Plasma Twa 2 05:32, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
With the upcoming 2010 FIFA World Cup anticipated to generate lots of buzz and readers looking for updates, I was wondering if it's worth considering adding a link from ITN to 2010 FIFA World Cup schedule the way we did with Olympics summary page a few months ago? Arsonal ( talk) 17:30, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
Like any high level competition, the results of the final match will be included on ITN, when the article has been updated with a paragraph or more that reflects what happened. ITN is not a set of bookmarks and hot links. Its purpose is to point to encyclopaedic quality articles that expand on items that are currently being talked about in the World's news media. It's not a sports ticker. -- Monotonehell 16:21, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
The official number of victims has reached 113 people [2].-- MathFacts ( talk) 19:19, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
The "reviewer" userright, allowing you to to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).
The Flagged Protection trial is going to be starting very soon, and non-admins who have had access to edit semi-protected articles since roughly Day 4 of their editorship will now have their edits going into a vetting queue unless they are granted autoreviewer and/or edit reviewer permissions by an administrator. This will have a significant impact on editors who have, for years, been working on quality content. More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.
If you have not already done so, please request this "right" at WP:PERM/RW or ask any administrator. Cheers, Dabomb87 ( talk) 15:24, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
Due to the addition of the world cup sticky link at the bottom of the ITN box (on which I pass no judgment) we now have some extra white space we can use. I would like to suggest taking advantage of this opportunity by trying out a link to ITN/C on the main page. Most of the other main page templates include such a link, and I feel that this could go a significant way in both attracting more editors to ITN/C as well as "demystifying" the project a bit. I hereby propose that we add a link title "Suggest an event" to the template, to be placed to the right of the "More current events..." link, that pipes to wp:ITN/C. Random 89 21:33, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
Although this is not specifically related to the ongoing sporting event, it did spur this comment. I am interested in why our guidelines discriminate against non-prose updates, such as photos, tables, numbers, etc. Random 89 02:42, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
...that there are now six European items (seven if you count Kazakhstan like FIFA does) and one Japanese item on ITN? Not that I'm complaining -- but could you imagine the vituperation we'd get if there were seven North American items and no European items on at once? Just a thought no, really, I'm not complaining -- Mwalcoff ( talk) 01:18, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Well, at least that's the way it seems. It was already well noted in the first 21 hours 2010 FIFA World Cup was linked from the Main Page that the article received no update except in the form of tense changes (and there were very few to make, I might add). During none of those 21 hours did anyone make any effort to rectify that, even though it is not at all difficult to conjure up what could have been put in the article (a quick summary of the first couple matches, an overview of the opening ceremony, etc.). As most people probably noticed, the World Cup was removed from ITN (by me, if that's important here) around 09:30 (UTC), only to be re-added (by Tone, the person who added the item in the first place) around 16:15 (UTC), with the summary that there are now prose updates in the article.
Er... can someone please explain what updates were made? We have a single sentence on the opening ceremony, plus a largely irrelevant mention that a relative of Nelson Mandela died (so irrelevant that it is separated from the sentence actually about the ceremony), and a couple score updates. I'm sorry, folks, but we cannot just suspend the rules just because a large number of people care about an event. We had a similar brouhaha here over the nonsense that surrounded the UK election (when everyone wanted to announce "Hey, the UK elections are happening today" as if people didn't know). For big events such as this one, it is not at all difficult to find the relevant article, and we are not here to serve that purpose.
As the ITN guidelines clearly state, one of the main purposes of ITN is to highlight articles updated to reflect current events. We can debate for hours about whether an event is significant enough to be placed on ITN, but whether an article has been updated is quite clear cut. This case is no different; the World Cup article is still not updated with any reasonable level of prose, and it should not be there until one of the zillions of people who follow this event do so. -- tariqabjotu 17:57, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
^^ – HTD ( ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 06:32, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
Numbers of fatalities and missing people in the news need an update to match 2010 South China floods information. ~ Katoa ( talk) 00:21, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
There has been a change in leadership in Australian parliament. Julia Gillard was elected unopposed in the Australian Labor Party Caucus. Given we're seeing elections for countries as small as Nauru on the news page these days I guess this is notable enough.-- Senor Freebie ( talk) 02:30, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
The current hook (on mainpage) reads "defeating incumbent
Kevin Rudd in an
election for the leadership" (emphasis mine). However, the Rudd didn't run in the election, so "defeating" may be slightly incorrect. How about
Perhaps this could be tweaked for readability, but I feel it presents the information more accurately. Thoughts? - M.Nelson ( talk) 03:37, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
What is the point of the awkward closing on the discussion about posting the tennis world record story by JuneGloom07? Looks rather inappropriate to me. __ meco ( talk) 12:24, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
Please link the word 'dies' in the information about death of Algirdas Brazauskas to wikinews:Algirdas_Brazauskas_dies and bold it. Kubek15 write/ sign 11:21, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
This isn't Conservapedia, there's no need for such bias. Would the death of the longest-serving member of the Indian or Chilean parliament have made the main page?
The criteria are:
The deceased was in a high ranking office of power, and had a significant contribution/impact on the country/region.
The deceased was a very important figure in their field of expertise, and was recognised as such.
The death has a major international impact that affects current events. The modification or creation of multiple articles to take into account the ramifications of a death is a sign that it meets the third criterion.
None is true of Byrd. EamonnPKeane ( talk) 16:23, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
The text
is inaccurate, see 1RXS J160929.1−210524 ref 4: "First" Picture of Planet Orbiting Sunlike Star Confirmed. The "firstness" regards first published. The real first direct images were taken on Fomalhaut b. Rursus dixit. ( mbork3!) 06:48, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
It's really not, it's a pre-main sequence star. Buttle ( talk) 09:24, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
for Burundian presidential election, 2010 was not given. Lihaas ( talk) 17:02, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
{{
UpdatedITN}}
.
Modest Genius
talk 17:15, 4 July 2010 (UTC)Just a note: Please list countries for items. I know Toronto and Barcelona are major cities, but items should have a country listed with them. If you don't understand, see what I mean here. Thanks! Spencer T♦ Nominate! 03:14, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
LeBron James, the biggest name in basketball since Michael Jordan, is scheduled to announce his new team tomorrow evening at a Boys & Girls Club in Greenwich, Connecticut in a special live telecast on ESPN (and TSN in Canada). Because of the venue, speculation is he will announce he is signing with the nearby New York Knicks. If you're outside of North America, you might be unaware of this because, I understand, there's another sporting event of some type going on, but in the U.S., the LeBron James free-agency drama has received a ridiculous amount of attention for the past several months -- far more than any similar instance in the past with any other player in any North American sport. There are now more than 5,000 Google News hits on the subject nearly 24 hours before the actual announcement. Shares of the company that owns the Knicks, Madison Square Garden Inc., jumped 6.4 percent today.
I know we haven't had items of this type on ITN before, but considering the insane publicity this whole thing is receiving, perhaps this is a special case? -- Mwalcoff ( talk) 01:45, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
Record soccer transfers last year were refused ITN mention: these were verifiably the highest (although there was some debate about currency exchange rates), rather than simply the most hyped, and much more international. Kevin McE ( talk) 18:28, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
LBJ is going to the Miami Heat Forbes says Heat's franchise value is now at USD400 million (from 364 million), Cavs value goes down to 370 million from 476 million. – HTD ( ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 01:41, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Sporting equivalent of a celebrity wedding. We need to distinguish between newsworthiness and widely covered hype. Kevin McE ( talk) 06:20, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
For Spain winning the world cup, shouldn't we show an image of the World Cup instead of an image of the football used? IJA ( talk) 14:15, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
What it says about the demonstration in Catalonia is not right. Actually, it is quite subversive. There were not a million people and the goal was not protesting against restrictions on the autonomy of Catalonia within Spain, because actually they do have more "rights" than other regions in Spain. It was a demonstration against a decision (which has something to do with autonomy) about the new main Catalonian law made in an important court of Spain and also a demonstration showing their love for their region, Catalonia. That sentence should be written in a more neutral way. Thank you, Kadellar ( talk) 14:44, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
Is there a manual of style for ITN items? If so, then this should violate it:
In normal language, heavy noun phrases come last, as in:
Given that the newsworthy element is already highlighted by being in bold, it does not need to be fronted as well. Some of the other ITN items have boldlinks towards the middle, so there does not appear to be a prohibition on this. jnestorius( talk) 19:45, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
OK, someone here is having way too much fun--having something about a fossilized primate at the top of the column, with the picture of Roman Polanski right next to those very words (and Polanski is the fifth item on the list!). Is it still cocktail hour there? Cheers, Drmies ( talk) 01:06, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Since when did the ITN/C page become a bloody internet forum? This idiotic practice of moving nominations up the page to 'gather more attention' to certain items people seem to think are mucho important needs to stop now, it is beyond annoying, and it separates nominations from their correct day, possibly leading to incorrect filing in the template, and separating it from any relevant urls in the P:CE box, which a lot of people usually don't provide in their nominations. And this isn't even 'bumping', half the time we seem to be ending up with duplicate nominations because they are being copied, or re-filed. If the current system doesn't work, then change the system. It might help to keep worthy nominations near the top if people started aggresively removing the endless listing of speculative nominations that never have an article or supporting urls, or sometimes barely even an explanation as to wtf the story actually is. MickMacNee ( talk) 12:45, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
ITN candidates needing feedback Add nomination needing feedback purge |
---|
Suggestion: Perhaps we make a box linking to "Nominations needing more feedback" to be put at the top. For example, see (used at WP:FPC) Template:FPC urgents. At the top of the box, have an "edit to add another nomination needing feedback" at the top or something. I'm going to try to make something right now. Spencer T♦ C 04:29, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
If you check the bolded article, the toxic waste in question was not dumped 'off the coast' of Cote d'Ivoire, but at inland dumps in and around Abidjan, the largest city. Radagast ( talk) 18:25, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
I have registered on more than one occasion that a significant majority for posting a news story gathers, yet none of the admins actually go aheah and post it in the ITN box until spurred to do so. This is rather untenable! Now the story that isn't being posted is Discovery of most massive star. This should have been done five days ago! __ meco ( talk) 08:34, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
The headline states 17 dead. The current reported figure is 18 dead. [1] [2] [3] -- Marek. 69 talk 02:01, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
{{
editprotected}}
Hi. In the "In the news" section for today, 29 July, I'd say the phrasing...
...works more effectively. 212.84.100.213 ( talk) 12:56, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
{{
edit protected}}
template. This request is
six and two threes. It comes down to personal preference so I see no reason to change it.
Rambo's Revenge
(talk) 13:04, 29 July 2010 (UTC){{
editprotected}}
Misprint: "Airblue Flight 202 crashes near Islamabad, killing all 152 people on board in the deadliest air disaster in
Pakistani history" - extra "i" after Pakistan. --
Pavlo Chemist (
talk) 09:40, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
The Cluster Bombs entry needs completely rewritten. As written it sounds like people will stop making and using them. However the majority of the countries that make and use them have nothing to do with this convention, therefore rendering it pretty much useless. US, China, Russia and others. It implies something that isn't the case. Not sure how to rework it short of removing it completely. Canterbury Tail talk 21:14, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
I hardly think this qualifies for ITN.-- Barryob (Contribs) (Talk) 17:55, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
Surely this would be pretty easy to set up since it's exactly every 24 hours that the oldest level 2 header is archived. Anyone else think it's a good idea? Or where to find a bot to do it? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:14, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
This has become an issue lately, especially for those who may be new to ITN/C within the past month. Many blurbs are introduced without context. Please remember that the guideline for ITN/C states, "Make sure that you include a reference from a verifiable, reliable source." It will make the lives of administrators and contributors making assessments easier in determining the significance of the story. We don't want to dig it out of the current events portal or from the actual article, especially if they are long. The more sources, the better. — Arsonal ( talk + contribs)— 02:22, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Not sure if this is the right place (I wanna going to post on the portal's talk page, but it suggested otherwise) but does anyone else think the length of each day's events has gotten out of hand these past few months? ~DC Let's Vent 18:46, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
On a related point, why does the P:CE white background keep overflowing into the ITN/C entries? I assume some code to close the box is missing somewhere, but can't work out where. Modest Genius talk 13:54, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
I know I'm a bit late to the party on this one, but I agree. The P:CE box has gotten out of control long, and although that's great for the portal's original purpose, it has become of very little use at ITN/C. In fact, the length has made it an active hindrance to easy use of the nominations page. I'd prefer removing the transcluded template completely, but if that is not done can we at least give it some background shading so it can be easily differentiated from discussion?
Random
89 05:11, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
With a lot of help from User:Neutralhomer and User:Melesse, I've come up with an ITN barnstar to compliment the existing current events barnstar. Just use {{ subst:InTheNews Barnstar|Your message here ~~~~}}, which will produce:
![]() |
The In The News Barnstar | |
Your message here HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:00, 3 August 2010 (UTC) |
-- HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:00, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
The "In the news" events seem to be increasingly mundane and not that notable in nature. I mean, coronal mass ejections and new species of mongoose or something with little info and non noteworthyness? If they found a Mastodon in Alaska or something, that would be cool, but this? Do these really deserve a spot on this section that is seen by everyone who goes to the main page? I don't thin so. 72.95.95.217 ( talk) 22:44, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
the appointment of a judge on a country's national court. -- Leladax ( talk) 05:23, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
The current discord over the Elena Kagan matter seems to derive largely from non-Americans' lack of understanding of how big of a deal the Supreme Court is in the U.S. I can't blame them. The judiciary doesn't get nearly as much attention in other countries as it does in the U.S., nor is it nearly as politicized. Unless you live in the U.S. or follow its politics closely, you really can't grasp the importance of the matter in the country: The front page coverage, the vociferous debates, the confirmation hearings televised live. And people who live in other countries probably don't get how much of an influence the Supreme Court has in Americans' lives (school desegregation, abortion, etc.)
Unfortunately, this is not an isolated case. In quite a few instances, ITN editors have made arguments against an item that show a complete lack of familiarity with the subject matter, such as:
I realize people are trying to be helpful by contributing as much as they can to ITN decisions. But part of being intelligent is recognizing what you don't know.
People who are not familiar with a given subject matter should not try to judge for themselves whether a given news item that relates to that subject is important. That doesn't mean they should refrain from contributing. For example, if something happens in the U.S., they could point out that the story didn't make the front page of The Washington Post the following morning or wasn't the lead story on NBC Nightly News.
But please, ITN editors should recognize that they don't know everything! I would never try to judge whether a cricket record is a big deal, for instance. I'll leave that to people and the media in cricket-playing countries. Let's all be ready to defer to those more versed in subject matters when appropriate. -- Mwalcoff ( talk) 17:21, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
I took a week off for vacation and didn't think about ITN once and boy, was that refreshing. As I said above, I recognize that there are valid arguments against all of the items mentioned above, but some editors have been making what I would consider quite invalid arguments based on their ignorance of the subject matter. I think people, myself included, would be better off to take clues from the media or better-versed editors when it comes to determining the importance of an item on a topic they know little about. Daviessimo raises an important point, and that is the argument that items predominantly of interest to people in one country should not be on ITN. This is not (or is no longer) an ITN criterion -- nor should it be, in my opinion -- yet it is often used as an argument in ITN candidate discussions. If we can permanently settle the argument over this concept, we may be able to avoid the endless bickering that occurs whenever someone nominates an important U.S. domestic occurrence. -- Mwalcoff ( talk) 23:12, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Outside view: I don't believe I've ever contributed to ITN, but I frequently read it, and I believe there is some truth in what Mwalcoff says. Without meaning to assume bad faith, it seems to me that there is a anti-American bias on the part of some of its contributors (not intentionally, but in effect). Hence relatively unimportant stories about elections in Pacific island states get priority over American stories that, while 'only' about the United States, affect large numbers of people and are of great interest to our readers. It's worth remembering that Wikipedia exists to serve our readers, and unless I'm mistaken, the majority of our readers are in the United States. (I'm British, before you ask - this isn't a nationalistic thing, just a personal observation.) Robofish ( talk) 15:09, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Just a quick note, since I don't participate in In the News frequently: The Procedural subsection in the General criteria page has this statement:
The issue is that the style guide is listed as "inactive and kept as a historical archive". The statement has to be altered for certain, no? Do contact me at my talk page if you want a reply since I'm unlikely to check back soon. Thanks! ANGCHENRUI Talk ♨ 14:51, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Please don't put acts of terrorism in here unless it's something like 9/11, put into wiki news but not the main page, it gives it more credence than it deserves, all you're doing is giving the junkies their crack. AJUK Talk!! 10:26, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
I've long held the theory that ITN would benefit from having more eyes looking at ITNC. Well I looked at some stats for July and we had 134 people edit the page. However, only 30 (myself included) edited over 10 ten times, and 46 only edited once. Any thoughts? ~DC Let's Vent 20:10, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
{{
User ITN|nn}}
. I prefer topicons, though.
HJ Mitchell |
Penny for your thoughts? 20:53, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
I think what often happens is a person who's not an ITN regular makes a suggestion, finds that his suggestion does not meet the unwritten rules of ITN and doesn't return to make additional suggestions. Only masochists like me choose to stay and try to fight the system. I'd guess that those who agree with the way things are now on ITN, whatever that entails, are likely to stick around -- they thus become a self-selected "cabal" (using that term in the computer-geek sense, not the sinister sense). Perhaps if we had clearer written criteria as to what is or is not a good ITN item, we'd have more fresh blood on the page. I'd give a remake of the criteria an attempt myself, but I'm afraid anything with my name on it will be tainted to some people. -- Mwalcoff ( talk) 23:52, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
May I introduce to you my updated version of ITNC. The major change is a real table of contents, which will help people navigate the page better. I've also shortened it to five days, since conversation actually occurs on items under the last two days anyway. And cosmetically, Template:In the news is moved up to cover some of the whitespace left by the TOC. Thoughts? ~DC Let's Vent 10:29, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Hmm, the rather long section names we have at the moment means the ToC overlaps the ITN box, which looks ugly. Is there any way to resize the ToC box? We've also lost the 'add new day' button. Modest Genius talk 00:12, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
It should be mentioned that the waragi contained high amounts of methanol (mentioned in the article), as it's not clear why people got organ failure in the text. Obviously not any waragi gives anyone organ failure. notwist ( talk) 08:23, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
In the contaminated waragi headline, it notes 80 people have died from multiple organ failure. However, it specifically notes in the multiple organ failure article that "The use of "multiple organ failure" should be avoided since that term was based upon physiologic parameters to determine whether or not a particular organ was failing". Thus, I am proposing the multiple organ failure be changed to its proper medical term, Multiple organ dysfunction syndrome, to better inform visitors and not contribute to the incorrect use of medical terminology. Ryandinho14 ( talk) 20:16, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Could it not read Faisal Shahzad is charged...., linking to the article about him? Beach drifter ( talk) 19:18, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
A bit premature? Counting isn't even finished, and even if mathematically a hung parliament is unavoidable, where the Lib Dems will throw their support is still unknown. SGGH ping! 14:04, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
Please switch the image illustrating the Moscow parade. Who cares what it's logo looks like? It's a parade, not an organization! In my view the only appropriate illustration would be a photo of the parade itself. __ meco ( talk) 18:58, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
Per my post at WT:DYK#You know that rule about DYK and ITN?, it has been pointed out that there is no link in the ITN section to this project. Maybe it would be worth considering such a link, which could encourage new input to ITN. I believe the other question raised there has been discussed here, and consensus is that appearing as a DYK does not disqualify an article for ITN at some point in the future. Mjroots ( talk) 06:25, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
Please stop bringing more attention to people who do terrible things just to get attention. AJUK Talk!! 22:21, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
A comma is needed after 'Red Bull' in the item about the Monaco Grand Prix. It is needed to end the adjectival phrase "driving for Red Bull". Quantumelfmage ( talk) 21:10, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
I noticed that there wasn't a generic userbox for ITN contributors (just this one to state how many ITN articles you'd contributed to), so I created one. Feel free to use/tweak/ignore as you see fit: -- ThaddeusB ( talk) 23:19, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
Example: {{Userbox ITN}}
![]() | This user contributes to the In the news section of the main page. |
Politico says Obama is likely to nominate Elena Kagan to replace Justice Stevens on the Supreme Court tomorrow.
Last year, we posted the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor after a long and bitter discussion. I hope we have no such rancor this time. When Sotomayor was nominated, the number of hits her article was getting was astronomical. Clearly, a lot of people are going to be coming to Wikipedia tomorrow, or whenever, for information on whoever the new nominee is, and it makes sense to have the nominee's name on the front page. -- Mwalcoff ( talk) 17:42, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
It is my interpretation of the guidelines is that new nominations should go on the date the story occurred. Yet, most people just post at the very top no matter if that date is "correct" or not. So, which interpretation is correct? Either way, the blurb at the top should make it more clear as it is rather ambiguous currently. -- ThaddeusB ( talk) 03:10, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
Can someone please add the result of the 2010 ICC Women's World Twenty20 to the news item about the men currently on the main page. It is basically one event with two parallel tournaments, one for the men and one for the women - in a similar arrangement to a tennis Grand Slam event. -- Mattinbgn\ talk 00:29, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
We are now discussing, on two consecutive dates, Pakistan blocking Facebook and Pakistan blocking Wikipedia. Could this not be centralized? __ meco ( talk) 18:00, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
Death toll is 158.
Why is F.C. Internazionale Milano being referred to as "Inter Milan" here? Although this is a common name for the club, it is not usually considered to be an appropriate abbreviation. The most appropriate name for the club is "Internazionale". – Pee Jay 23:04, 22 May 2010 (UTC) ...:or just Inter. – Howard the Duck 01:54, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
The links in this text should go to the following, because that's were the stuff is located now:
Whether it is synthetic life is open for debate, so that article is not an appropriate target. Mikael Häggström ( talk) 06:15, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Would there be consensus for adding a link to the Expo on the Main Page until it is over? The first two paragraphs convince me of its importance to raise this and it is neither a national event nor an election, something like the Olympics.
Also, should List of world expositions not be included on ITNR? -- can dle • wicke 11:45, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Shouldn't Satellite, the song by Lena be put in quote marks instead of italicized in the In the news template? Sorafune +1 22:31, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
I'm concerned at the decision to remove Gaza flotilla clash from the template. This simply isn't credible. It's the biggest current events story in the world right now, as a look at any news website will show, and it makes Wikipedia look ridiculous to omit this. Please restore it. -- ChrisO ( talk) 00:38, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
I think the flotilla event should certainly be on ITN; however, I am concerned about the wording since right now we don't really know what happened. I would say something along the lines of: Nine people die in a clash between Israeli commandoes and a flotilla claiming it was bringing humanitarian aid to Gaza. -- Mwalcoff ( talk) 21:13, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
I just would like to understand the process. The Moratorium on logging in Indonesia had 8 supports and no oppose, but still wasn't posted, while other ITN nominations are instantly posted after one support. Why? -- Elekhh ( talk) 02:20, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
"the fourth person to leave the office in as many years." reads oddly, what does this even mean? I'm guessing it's a typo. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ τ ¢ 02:39, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
Currently it says "At least five people are confirmed dead in a shooting spree in Cumbria, England.", however I believe it should say "At least five people are confirmed dead in a shooting spree in Cumbria, United Kingdom." as the United Kingdom is the sovereign state, not England. We don't want to support Regional Nationalism or misguide the reader by implying that England is a sovereign state. IJA ( talk) 15:31, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
I notice that Template:In the news/Last update is now fully protected by cascading protection (because it is part of the documentation for the fully protected Template:In the news). It is also semi-protected, having both is unnecessary. I recall that we downgraded the page from full protection a while back as vandalism there would have little impact on the process and it is occasionally useful for non-admins to be able to edit the page (if an admin forgets to reset it when updating, for example). Is there a way we can stop it from being cascade protected? If not can we at least remove the semi-protection, it just adds another box to scroll past to edit the thing - Dumelow ( talk) 22:53, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
It currently says she is the first Italian to win the French Open, surely it should say she is the first Italian to win a Grand Slam event, which is the case, and also more significant. JimmyMac82 ( talk) 08:21, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
We often have obscure events on ITN because they involve a lot of deaths. Things like, what was it, the mass poisoning in Uganda, and today we have more poisoning in Africa and a fire in Bangladesh. I understand why people want to put these things on ITN. They quite naturally see human deaths as a big deal and believe that 50 deaths in the Third World is as significant as 50 in the U.S. or UK or wherever the editor may live. I agree with those beliefs 100%.
However, we have to remember that tragedy and news (or tragedy and encyclopedic-ness) are not the same thing. A bus crash that kills 50 people in London may be equal in tragedy to the same crash in Burundi, but it is not equal in news value to the vast majority of the world's media. If all unnatural deaths were of equal news value, the news would be nothing but endless reports of famine and bloodshed in places like Congo, where countless thousands die in such a way every year.
I'm not saying we should adopt the same viewpoint as a small-town American newspaper that doesn't give the non-Western world the time of day. But if an event is so obscure that we have to write the article entirely ourselves, I don't really know if it is necessarily an appropriate item for ITN. My understanding is that ITN is supposed to reflect quality Wikipedia content of interest to our readers. If there is zero content about something out there before we have to make it ourselves, I don't see how that's reflecting quality content. If the subject matter is so obscure that it is hardly mentioned in the media in the places where the vast majority of our readers live, it's probably not "of wide interest to the encyclopedia's readers" as the criteria page says. And of course, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to put something that's not really in the news in a template called "In the news."
I don't mean to pick on the tragedies in Nigeria and Bangladesh. The Nigeria story is interesting, and the Bangladesh fire is getting some international media attention, although not very prominently. I didn't oppose either suggestion. I do think, though, that we ought to make it clear that we should not reflexively approve an item simply because it has a high death toll and that we should strive to abide by the mission and criteria of ITN. -- Mwalcoff ( talk) 23:49, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
The problem is that ITN is supposed to reflect quality Wikipedia content. If a topic, because of "systemic bias" or whatever other reason, does not have quality content on Wikipedia, we should be wary of featuring it in ITN. In addition, I have to say I'm personally against these kind of normative or subjective arguments about what "should be" in the news. I certainly am all in favor with improving Wikipedia's coverage of non-Western or developing countries. But who are we to say that readers, or the media, are wrong when they choose to be interested in certain topics more than others? Why are our views more important than those of the readership? I think we should base our decisions objectively on the required criteria -- the quality of the Wikipedia content, readership interest in the topic, the significance of the event and the newsiness of the event -- and not let our personal feeling about what "should be" in the news get in the way. -- Mwalcoff ( talk) 23:39, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
I'm not familiar with how to submit an item for ITN, but those who do may want to submit Arlington National Cemetery mismanagement controversy — Rlevse • Talk • 12:30, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
Why has the blurb about the Stanley Cup been taken down so fast? -- Plasma Twa 2 05:32, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
With the upcoming 2010 FIFA World Cup anticipated to generate lots of buzz and readers looking for updates, I was wondering if it's worth considering adding a link from ITN to 2010 FIFA World Cup schedule the way we did with Olympics summary page a few months ago? Arsonal ( talk) 17:30, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
Like any high level competition, the results of the final match will be included on ITN, when the article has been updated with a paragraph or more that reflects what happened. ITN is not a set of bookmarks and hot links. Its purpose is to point to encyclopaedic quality articles that expand on items that are currently being talked about in the World's news media. It's not a sports ticker. -- Monotonehell 16:21, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
The official number of victims has reached 113 people [2].-- MathFacts ( talk) 19:19, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
The "reviewer" userright, allowing you to to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).
The Flagged Protection trial is going to be starting very soon, and non-admins who have had access to edit semi-protected articles since roughly Day 4 of their editorship will now have their edits going into a vetting queue unless they are granted autoreviewer and/or edit reviewer permissions by an administrator. This will have a significant impact on editors who have, for years, been working on quality content. More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.
If you have not already done so, please request this "right" at WP:PERM/RW or ask any administrator. Cheers, Dabomb87 ( talk) 15:24, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
Due to the addition of the world cup sticky link at the bottom of the ITN box (on which I pass no judgment) we now have some extra white space we can use. I would like to suggest taking advantage of this opportunity by trying out a link to ITN/C on the main page. Most of the other main page templates include such a link, and I feel that this could go a significant way in both attracting more editors to ITN/C as well as "demystifying" the project a bit. I hereby propose that we add a link title "Suggest an event" to the template, to be placed to the right of the "More current events..." link, that pipes to wp:ITN/C. Random 89 21:33, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
Although this is not specifically related to the ongoing sporting event, it did spur this comment. I am interested in why our guidelines discriminate against non-prose updates, such as photos, tables, numbers, etc. Random 89 02:42, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
...that there are now six European items (seven if you count Kazakhstan like FIFA does) and one Japanese item on ITN? Not that I'm complaining -- but could you imagine the vituperation we'd get if there were seven North American items and no European items on at once? Just a thought no, really, I'm not complaining -- Mwalcoff ( talk) 01:18, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
Well, at least that's the way it seems. It was already well noted in the first 21 hours 2010 FIFA World Cup was linked from the Main Page that the article received no update except in the form of tense changes (and there were very few to make, I might add). During none of those 21 hours did anyone make any effort to rectify that, even though it is not at all difficult to conjure up what could have been put in the article (a quick summary of the first couple matches, an overview of the opening ceremony, etc.). As most people probably noticed, the World Cup was removed from ITN (by me, if that's important here) around 09:30 (UTC), only to be re-added (by Tone, the person who added the item in the first place) around 16:15 (UTC), with the summary that there are now prose updates in the article.
Er... can someone please explain what updates were made? We have a single sentence on the opening ceremony, plus a largely irrelevant mention that a relative of Nelson Mandela died (so irrelevant that it is separated from the sentence actually about the ceremony), and a couple score updates. I'm sorry, folks, but we cannot just suspend the rules just because a large number of people care about an event. We had a similar brouhaha here over the nonsense that surrounded the UK election (when everyone wanted to announce "Hey, the UK elections are happening today" as if people didn't know). For big events such as this one, it is not at all difficult to find the relevant article, and we are not here to serve that purpose.
As the ITN guidelines clearly state, one of the main purposes of ITN is to highlight articles updated to reflect current events. We can debate for hours about whether an event is significant enough to be placed on ITN, but whether an article has been updated is quite clear cut. This case is no different; the World Cup article is still not updated with any reasonable level of prose, and it should not be there until one of the zillions of people who follow this event do so. -- tariqabjotu 17:57, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
^^ – HTD ( ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 06:32, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
Numbers of fatalities and missing people in the news need an update to match 2010 South China floods information. ~ Katoa ( talk) 00:21, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
There has been a change in leadership in Australian parliament. Julia Gillard was elected unopposed in the Australian Labor Party Caucus. Given we're seeing elections for countries as small as Nauru on the news page these days I guess this is notable enough.-- Senor Freebie ( talk) 02:30, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
The current hook (on mainpage) reads "defeating incumbent
Kevin Rudd in an
election for the leadership" (emphasis mine). However, the Rudd didn't run in the election, so "defeating" may be slightly incorrect. How about
Perhaps this could be tweaked for readability, but I feel it presents the information more accurately. Thoughts? - M.Nelson ( talk) 03:37, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
What is the point of the awkward closing on the discussion about posting the tennis world record story by JuneGloom07? Looks rather inappropriate to me. __ meco ( talk) 12:24, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
Please link the word 'dies' in the information about death of Algirdas Brazauskas to wikinews:Algirdas_Brazauskas_dies and bold it. Kubek15 write/ sign 11:21, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
This isn't Conservapedia, there's no need for such bias. Would the death of the longest-serving member of the Indian or Chilean parliament have made the main page?
The criteria are:
The deceased was in a high ranking office of power, and had a significant contribution/impact on the country/region.
The deceased was a very important figure in their field of expertise, and was recognised as such.
The death has a major international impact that affects current events. The modification or creation of multiple articles to take into account the ramifications of a death is a sign that it meets the third criterion.
None is true of Byrd. EamonnPKeane ( talk) 16:23, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
The text
is inaccurate, see 1RXS J160929.1−210524 ref 4: "First" Picture of Planet Orbiting Sunlike Star Confirmed. The "firstness" regards first published. The real first direct images were taken on Fomalhaut b. Rursus dixit. ( mbork3!) 06:48, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
It's really not, it's a pre-main sequence star. Buttle ( talk) 09:24, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
for Burundian presidential election, 2010 was not given. Lihaas ( talk) 17:02, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
{{
UpdatedITN}}
.
Modest Genius
talk 17:15, 4 July 2010 (UTC)Just a note: Please list countries for items. I know Toronto and Barcelona are major cities, but items should have a country listed with them. If you don't understand, see what I mean here. Thanks! Spencer T♦ Nominate! 03:14, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
LeBron James, the biggest name in basketball since Michael Jordan, is scheduled to announce his new team tomorrow evening at a Boys & Girls Club in Greenwich, Connecticut in a special live telecast on ESPN (and TSN in Canada). Because of the venue, speculation is he will announce he is signing with the nearby New York Knicks. If you're outside of North America, you might be unaware of this because, I understand, there's another sporting event of some type going on, but in the U.S., the LeBron James free-agency drama has received a ridiculous amount of attention for the past several months -- far more than any similar instance in the past with any other player in any North American sport. There are now more than 5,000 Google News hits on the subject nearly 24 hours before the actual announcement. Shares of the company that owns the Knicks, Madison Square Garden Inc., jumped 6.4 percent today.
I know we haven't had items of this type on ITN before, but considering the insane publicity this whole thing is receiving, perhaps this is a special case? -- Mwalcoff ( talk) 01:45, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
Record soccer transfers last year were refused ITN mention: these were verifiably the highest (although there was some debate about currency exchange rates), rather than simply the most hyped, and much more international. Kevin McE ( talk) 18:28, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
LBJ is going to the Miami Heat Forbes says Heat's franchise value is now at USD400 million (from 364 million), Cavs value goes down to 370 million from 476 million. – HTD ( ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 01:41, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Sporting equivalent of a celebrity wedding. We need to distinguish between newsworthiness and widely covered hype. Kevin McE ( talk) 06:20, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
For Spain winning the world cup, shouldn't we show an image of the World Cup instead of an image of the football used? IJA ( talk) 14:15, 12 July 2010 (UTC)
What it says about the demonstration in Catalonia is not right. Actually, it is quite subversive. There were not a million people and the goal was not protesting against restrictions on the autonomy of Catalonia within Spain, because actually they do have more "rights" than other regions in Spain. It was a demonstration against a decision (which has something to do with autonomy) about the new main Catalonian law made in an important court of Spain and also a demonstration showing their love for their region, Catalonia. That sentence should be written in a more neutral way. Thank you, Kadellar ( talk) 14:44, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
Is there a manual of style for ITN items? If so, then this should violate it:
In normal language, heavy noun phrases come last, as in:
Given that the newsworthy element is already highlighted by being in bold, it does not need to be fronted as well. Some of the other ITN items have boldlinks towards the middle, so there does not appear to be a prohibition on this. jnestorius( talk) 19:45, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
OK, someone here is having way too much fun--having something about a fossilized primate at the top of the column, with the picture of Roman Polanski right next to those very words (and Polanski is the fifth item on the list!). Is it still cocktail hour there? Cheers, Drmies ( talk) 01:06, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Since when did the ITN/C page become a bloody internet forum? This idiotic practice of moving nominations up the page to 'gather more attention' to certain items people seem to think are mucho important needs to stop now, it is beyond annoying, and it separates nominations from their correct day, possibly leading to incorrect filing in the template, and separating it from any relevant urls in the P:CE box, which a lot of people usually don't provide in their nominations. And this isn't even 'bumping', half the time we seem to be ending up with duplicate nominations because they are being copied, or re-filed. If the current system doesn't work, then change the system. It might help to keep worthy nominations near the top if people started aggresively removing the endless listing of speculative nominations that never have an article or supporting urls, or sometimes barely even an explanation as to wtf the story actually is. MickMacNee ( talk) 12:45, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
ITN candidates needing feedback Add nomination needing feedback purge |
---|
Suggestion: Perhaps we make a box linking to "Nominations needing more feedback" to be put at the top. For example, see (used at WP:FPC) Template:FPC urgents. At the top of the box, have an "edit to add another nomination needing feedback" at the top or something. I'm going to try to make something right now. Spencer T♦ C 04:29, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
If you check the bolded article, the toxic waste in question was not dumped 'off the coast' of Cote d'Ivoire, but at inland dumps in and around Abidjan, the largest city. Radagast ( talk) 18:25, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
I have registered on more than one occasion that a significant majority for posting a news story gathers, yet none of the admins actually go aheah and post it in the ITN box until spurred to do so. This is rather untenable! Now the story that isn't being posted is Discovery of most massive star. This should have been done five days ago! __ meco ( talk) 08:34, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
The headline states 17 dead. The current reported figure is 18 dead. [1] [2] [3] -- Marek. 69 talk 02:01, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
{{
editprotected}}
Hi. In the "In the news" section for today, 29 July, I'd say the phrasing...
...works more effectively. 212.84.100.213 ( talk) 12:56, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
{{
edit protected}}
template. This request is
six and two threes. It comes down to personal preference so I see no reason to change it.
Rambo's Revenge
(talk) 13:04, 29 July 2010 (UTC){{
editprotected}}
Misprint: "Airblue Flight 202 crashes near Islamabad, killing all 152 people on board in the deadliest air disaster in
Pakistani history" - extra "i" after Pakistan. --
Pavlo Chemist (
talk) 09:40, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
The Cluster Bombs entry needs completely rewritten. As written it sounds like people will stop making and using them. However the majority of the countries that make and use them have nothing to do with this convention, therefore rendering it pretty much useless. US, China, Russia and others. It implies something that isn't the case. Not sure how to rework it short of removing it completely. Canterbury Tail talk 21:14, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
I hardly think this qualifies for ITN.-- Barryob (Contribs) (Talk) 17:55, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
Surely this would be pretty easy to set up since it's exactly every 24 hours that the oldest level 2 header is archived. Anyone else think it's a good idea? Or where to find a bot to do it? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:14, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
This has become an issue lately, especially for those who may be new to ITN/C within the past month. Many blurbs are introduced without context. Please remember that the guideline for ITN/C states, "Make sure that you include a reference from a verifiable, reliable source." It will make the lives of administrators and contributors making assessments easier in determining the significance of the story. We don't want to dig it out of the current events portal or from the actual article, especially if they are long. The more sources, the better. — Arsonal ( talk + contribs)— 02:22, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Not sure if this is the right place (I wanna going to post on the portal's talk page, but it suggested otherwise) but does anyone else think the length of each day's events has gotten out of hand these past few months? ~DC Let's Vent 18:46, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
On a related point, why does the P:CE white background keep overflowing into the ITN/C entries? I assume some code to close the box is missing somewhere, but can't work out where. Modest Genius talk 13:54, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
I know I'm a bit late to the party on this one, but I agree. The P:CE box has gotten out of control long, and although that's great for the portal's original purpose, it has become of very little use at ITN/C. In fact, the length has made it an active hindrance to easy use of the nominations page. I'd prefer removing the transcluded template completely, but if that is not done can we at least give it some background shading so it can be easily differentiated from discussion?
Random
89 05:11, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
With a lot of help from User:Neutralhomer and User:Melesse, I've come up with an ITN barnstar to compliment the existing current events barnstar. Just use {{ subst:InTheNews Barnstar|Your message here ~~~~}}, which will produce:
![]() |
The In The News Barnstar | |
Your message here HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:00, 3 August 2010 (UTC) |
-- HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:00, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
The "In the news" events seem to be increasingly mundane and not that notable in nature. I mean, coronal mass ejections and new species of mongoose or something with little info and non noteworthyness? If they found a Mastodon in Alaska or something, that would be cool, but this? Do these really deserve a spot on this section that is seen by everyone who goes to the main page? I don't thin so. 72.95.95.217 ( talk) 22:44, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
the appointment of a judge on a country's national court. -- Leladax ( talk) 05:23, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
The current discord over the Elena Kagan matter seems to derive largely from non-Americans' lack of understanding of how big of a deal the Supreme Court is in the U.S. I can't blame them. The judiciary doesn't get nearly as much attention in other countries as it does in the U.S., nor is it nearly as politicized. Unless you live in the U.S. or follow its politics closely, you really can't grasp the importance of the matter in the country: The front page coverage, the vociferous debates, the confirmation hearings televised live. And people who live in other countries probably don't get how much of an influence the Supreme Court has in Americans' lives (school desegregation, abortion, etc.)
Unfortunately, this is not an isolated case. In quite a few instances, ITN editors have made arguments against an item that show a complete lack of familiarity with the subject matter, such as:
I realize people are trying to be helpful by contributing as much as they can to ITN decisions. But part of being intelligent is recognizing what you don't know.
People who are not familiar with a given subject matter should not try to judge for themselves whether a given news item that relates to that subject is important. That doesn't mean they should refrain from contributing. For example, if something happens in the U.S., they could point out that the story didn't make the front page of The Washington Post the following morning or wasn't the lead story on NBC Nightly News.
But please, ITN editors should recognize that they don't know everything! I would never try to judge whether a cricket record is a big deal, for instance. I'll leave that to people and the media in cricket-playing countries. Let's all be ready to defer to those more versed in subject matters when appropriate. -- Mwalcoff ( talk) 17:21, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
I took a week off for vacation and didn't think about ITN once and boy, was that refreshing. As I said above, I recognize that there are valid arguments against all of the items mentioned above, but some editors have been making what I would consider quite invalid arguments based on their ignorance of the subject matter. I think people, myself included, would be better off to take clues from the media or better-versed editors when it comes to determining the importance of an item on a topic they know little about. Daviessimo raises an important point, and that is the argument that items predominantly of interest to people in one country should not be on ITN. This is not (or is no longer) an ITN criterion -- nor should it be, in my opinion -- yet it is often used as an argument in ITN candidate discussions. If we can permanently settle the argument over this concept, we may be able to avoid the endless bickering that occurs whenever someone nominates an important U.S. domestic occurrence. -- Mwalcoff ( talk) 23:12, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Outside view: I don't believe I've ever contributed to ITN, but I frequently read it, and I believe there is some truth in what Mwalcoff says. Without meaning to assume bad faith, it seems to me that there is a anti-American bias on the part of some of its contributors (not intentionally, but in effect). Hence relatively unimportant stories about elections in Pacific island states get priority over American stories that, while 'only' about the United States, affect large numbers of people and are of great interest to our readers. It's worth remembering that Wikipedia exists to serve our readers, and unless I'm mistaken, the majority of our readers are in the United States. (I'm British, before you ask - this isn't a nationalistic thing, just a personal observation.) Robofish ( talk) 15:09, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Just a quick note, since I don't participate in In the News frequently: The Procedural subsection in the General criteria page has this statement:
The issue is that the style guide is listed as "inactive and kept as a historical archive". The statement has to be altered for certain, no? Do contact me at my talk page if you want a reply since I'm unlikely to check back soon. Thanks! ANGCHENRUI Talk ♨ 14:51, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Please don't put acts of terrorism in here unless it's something like 9/11, put into wiki news but not the main page, it gives it more credence than it deserves, all you're doing is giving the junkies their crack. AJUK Talk!! 10:26, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
I've long held the theory that ITN would benefit from having more eyes looking at ITNC. Well I looked at some stats for July and we had 134 people edit the page. However, only 30 (myself included) edited over 10 ten times, and 46 only edited once. Any thoughts? ~DC Let's Vent 20:10, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
{{
User ITN|nn}}
. I prefer topicons, though.
HJ Mitchell |
Penny for your thoughts? 20:53, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
I think what often happens is a person who's not an ITN regular makes a suggestion, finds that his suggestion does not meet the unwritten rules of ITN and doesn't return to make additional suggestions. Only masochists like me choose to stay and try to fight the system. I'd guess that those who agree with the way things are now on ITN, whatever that entails, are likely to stick around -- they thus become a self-selected "cabal" (using that term in the computer-geek sense, not the sinister sense). Perhaps if we had clearer written criteria as to what is or is not a good ITN item, we'd have more fresh blood on the page. I'd give a remake of the criteria an attempt myself, but I'm afraid anything with my name on it will be tainted to some people. -- Mwalcoff ( talk) 23:52, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
May I introduce to you my updated version of ITNC. The major change is a real table of contents, which will help people navigate the page better. I've also shortened it to five days, since conversation actually occurs on items under the last two days anyway. And cosmetically, Template:In the news is moved up to cover some of the whitespace left by the TOC. Thoughts? ~DC Let's Vent 10:29, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Hmm, the rather long section names we have at the moment means the ToC overlaps the ITN box, which looks ugly. Is there any way to resize the ToC box? We've also lost the 'add new day' button. Modest Genius talk 00:12, 23 August 2010 (UTC)