Misplaced Pages

:In the news/Candidates: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:In the news Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 19:41, 19 May 2013 editIP98 (talk | contribs)1,696 edits →Heineken Cup← Previous edit Revision as of 19:42, 19 May 2013 edit undoThe Rambling Man (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, IP block exemptions, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers, Template editors286,429 edits →Heineken Cup: +Next edit →
Line 138: Line 138:
**Stop posting trite Youtube videos Meds. And you can find where this was added to ITN/R, I'm sure you can manage that. And note, please follow IP98's lead and do some research to get this actively removed from ITN/R before just wasting more community time. Thanks. ] (]) 19:36, 19 May 2013 (UTC) **Stop posting trite Youtube videos Meds. And you can find where this was added to ITN/R, I'm sure you can manage that. And note, please follow IP98's lead and do some research to get this actively removed from ITN/R before just wasting more community time. Thanks. ] (]) 19:36, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
***I believe that Medeis has indicated that he does not like to be called "Meds". It's only a few extra characters. Medeis, I've nominated this item for removal at ]. --] (]) 19:39, 19 May 2013 (UTC) ***I believe that Medeis has indicated that he does not like to be called "Meds". It's only a few extra characters. Medeis, I've nominated this item for removal at ]. --] (]) 19:39, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
****Yes, and I've indicated that I'm not keen on "Rambler" or being told to "take meds" but hey ho. ] (]) 19:42, 19 May 2013 (UTC)


====Marriage extended to same-sex couples in France==== ====Marriage extended to same-sex couples in France====

Revision as of 19:42, 19 May 2013

For administrator instructions on updating Template:In the news, see Misplaced Pages:In the news/Admin instructions.
↓↓Skip to nominations
Click here to nominate an item for In the news. In the news toolbox
Shortcut

This page provides a place to discuss new items for inclusion on In the news (ITN), a protected template on the Main Page (see past items in the ITN archives). Do not report errors in ITN items that are already on the Main Page here— discuss those at the relevant section of WP:ERRORS.

This candidates page is integrated with the daily pages of Portal:Current events. A light green header appears under each daily section – it includes transcluded Portal:Current events items for that day. You can discuss ITN candidates under the header.

Tibet earthquake aftermathTibet earthquake aftermath Ongoing: Recent deaths:

view — page history — related changes — edit

Glossary

  • Blurbs are one-sentence summaries of the news story.
    • Altblurbs, labelled alt1, alt2, etc., are alternative suggestions to cover the same story.
    • A target article, bolded in text, is the focus of the story. Each blurb must have at least one such article, but you may also link non-target articles.
  • Articles in the Ongoing line describe events getting continuous coverage.
  • The Recent deaths (RD) line includes any living thing whose death was recently announced. Consensus may decide to create a blurb for a recent death.

All articles linked in the ITN template must pass our standards of review. They should be up-to-date, demonstrate relevance via good sourcing and have at least an acceptable quality.

Nomination steps

  • Make sure the item you want to nominate has an article that meets our minimum requirements and contains reliable coverage of a current event you want to create a blurb about. We will not post about events described in an article that fails our quality standards.
  • Find the correct section below for the date of the event (not the date nominated). Do not add sections for new dates manually – a bot does that for us each day at midnight (UTC).
  • Create a level 4 header with the article name (==== Your article here ====). Add (RD) or (Ongoing) if appropriate.
Then paste the {{ITN candidate}} template with its parameters and fill them in. The news source should be reliable, support your nomination and be in the article. Write your blurb in simple present tense. Below the template, briefly explain why we should post that event. After that, save your edit. Your nomination is ready!
  • You may add {{ITN note}} to the target article's talk page to let editors know about your nomination.

The better your article's quality, the better it covers the event and the wider its perceived significance (see WP:ITNSIGNIF for details), the better your chances of getting the blurb posted.

Purge this page to update the cache

Headers

  • When the article is ready, updated and there is consensus to post, you can mark the item as (Ready). Remove that wording if you feel the article fails any of these necessary criteria.
  • Admins should always separately verify whether these criteria are met before posting blurbs marked (Ready). For more guidance, check WP:ITN/A.
    • If satisfied, change the header to (Posted).
    • Where there is no consensus, or the article's quality remains poor, change the header to (Closed) or (Not posted).
    • Sometimes, editors ask to retract an already-posted nomination because of a fundamental error or because consensus changed. If you feel the community supports this, remove the item and mark the item as (Pulled).

Voicing an opinion on an item

Format your comment to contain "support" or "oppose", and include a rationale for your choice. In particular, address the notability of the event, the quality of the article, and whether it has been updated.

Please do...

Shortcut
  1. Pick an older item to review near the bottom of this page, before the eligibility runs out and the item scrolls off the page and gets abandoned in the archive, unused and forgotten.
  2. Review an item even if it has already been reviewed by another user. You may be the first to spot a problem, or the first to confirm that an identified problem was fixed. Piling on the list of "support!" votes will help administrators see what is ready to be posted on the Main Page.
  3. Tell about problems in articles if you see them. Be bold and fix them yourself if you know how, or tell others if it's not possible.

Please do not...

Shortcut
  1. Add simple "support!" or "oppose!" votes without including your reasons. Similarly, curt replies such as "who?", "meh", or "duh!" are not helpful. A vote without reasoning means little for us, please elaborate yourself.
  2. Oppose an item just because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. We post a lot of such content, so these comments are generally unproductive.
  3. Accuse other editors of supporting, opposing or nominating due to a personal bias (such as ethnocentrism). We at ITN do not handle conflicts of interest.
  4. Comment on a story without first reading the relevant article(s).
  5. Oppose a recurring item here because you disagree with the recurring items criteria. Discuss them here.
  6. Use ITN as a forum for your own political or personal beliefs. Such comments are irrelevant to the outcome and are potentially disruptive.

Suggesting updates

There are two places where you can request corrections to posted items:

  • Anything that does not change the intent of the blurb (spelling, grammar, markup issues, updating death tolls etc.) should be discussed at WP:Errors.
  • Discuss major changes in the blurb's intent or very complex updates as part of the current ITNC nomination.

Suggestions

Discussions of items older than seven days are automatically archived

February–March 2005 • April 2005 • May 2005 • June 2005 • July 2005 • August 2005 • September 2005 • October 2005 • November 2005 • December 2005 • January 2006 • February 2006 • March 2006 • April 2006 • May 2006 • June 2006 • July 2006 • August 2006 • September 2006 • October 2006 • November 2006 • December 2006 • January 2007 • February 2007 • March 2007 • April 2007 • May 2007 • June 2007 • July 2007 • August 2007 • September 2007 • October 2007 • November 2007 • December 2007 • January 2008 • February 2008 • March 2008 • April 2008 • May 2008 • June 2008 • July 2008 • August 2008 • September 2008 • October 2008 • November 2008 • December 2008 • January 2009 • February 2009 • March 2009 • April 2009 • May 2009 • June 2009 • July 2009 • August 2009 • September 2009 • October 2009 • November 2009 • December 2009 • January 2010 • February 2010 • March 2010 • April 2010 • May 2010 • June 2010 • July 2010 • August 2010 • September 2010 • October 2010 • November 2010 • December 2010 • January 2011 • February 2011 • March 2011 • April 2011 • May 2011 • June 2011 • July 2011 • August 2011 • September 2011 • October 2011 • November 2011 • December 2011 • January 2012 • February 2012 • March 2012 • April 2012 • May 2012 • June 2012 • July 2012 • August 2012 • September 2012 • October 2012 • November 2012 • December 2012 • January 2013 • February 2013 • March 2013 • April 2013 • May 2013 • June 2013 • July 2013 • August 2013 • September 2013 • October 2013 • November 2013 • December 2013 • January 2014 • February 2014 • March 2014 • April 2014 • May 2014 • June 2014 • July 2014 • August 2014 • September 2014 • October 2014 • November 2014 • December 2014 • January 2015 • February 2015 • March 2015 • April 2015 • May 2015 • June 2015 • July 2015 • August 2015 • September 2015 • October 2015 • November 2015 • December 2015 • January 2016 • February 2016 • March 2016 • April 2016 • May 2016 • June 2016 • July 2016 • August 2016 • September 2016 • October 2016 • November 2016 • December 2016 • January 2017 • February 2017 • March 2017 • April 2017 • May 2017 • June 2017 • July 2017 • August 2017 • September 2017 • October 2017 • November 2017 • December 2017 • January 2018 • February 2018 • March 2018 • April 2018 • May 2018 • June 2018 • July 2018 • August 2018 • September 2018 • October 2018 • November 2018 • December 2018 • January 2019 • February 2019 • March 2019 • April 2019 • May 2019 • June 2019 • July 2019 • August 2019 • September 2019 • October 2019 • November 2019 • December 2019 • January 2020 • February 2020 • March 2020 • April 2020 • May 2020 • June 2020 • July 2020 • August 2020 • September 2020 • October 2020 • November 2020 • December 2020 • January 2021 • February 2021 • March 2021 • April 2021 • May 2021 • June 2021 • July 2021 • August 2021 • September 2021 • October 2021 • November 2021 • December 2021 • January 2022 • February 2022 • March 2022 • April 2022 • May 2022 • June 2022 • July 2022 • August 2022 • September 2022 • October 2022 • November 2022 • December 2022 • January 2023 • February 2023 • March 2023 • April 2023 • May 2023 • June 2023 • July 2023 • August 2023 • September 2023 • October 2023 • November 2023 • December 2023 • January 2024 • February 2024 • March 2024 • April 2024 • May 2024 • June 2024 • July 2024 • August 2024 • September 2024 • October 2024 • November 2024 • December 2024

May 19

Portal:Current events/2013 May 19
May 19, 2013 (2013-05-19) (Sunday) Armed conflict and attacks
  • Syrian civil war:
    • Heavy fighting is reported in Qusair, Syria, as the Syrian army launches a major counter-offensive against rebel forces. (BBC)

Arts and culture

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics

Science and technology

Sport

Syria

Article: Syrian civil war (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Syrian government forces commence a counter-attack in the opposition stronghold of Al-Qusayr, Syria. (Post)
Credits:
Article needs updating

 --Lihaas (talk) 19:17, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Nigeria

Article: Boko Haram#State counter-offensive (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Nigeria continues its offensive operations against Boko Haram, including air strikes and a blockade against its traditional base. (Post)
Credits:
Article updated

 --Lihaas (talk) 19:17, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

2013 IIHF World Championship Final

Premature nomination. Might be re-nominated later. --hydrox (talk) 19:36, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

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

Article: 2013 IIHF World Championship Final (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In ice hockey, the IIHF World Championship concludes with Sweden/Switzerland defeating Switzerland/Sweden in the final. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In ice hockey, the IIHF World Championship concludes in the as Sweden/Switzerland defeats Switzerland/Sweden in the final.
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: Some historical statistics bits to consider: if Switzerland wins it is the first time in the tournament's history that Switzerland has won, and if Sweden wins it is the first time sine 1986 that the host country has won the tournament. The suggested blurb is a copy of last year's, but should any of the statistics be reflected in this year's blurb? --hydrox (talk) 09:46, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Support When a match summary is available due to it's listing at WP:ITNR as a major tournament with participants from numerous nations. --wintonian 16:49, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

As for the stats I would say no as the important thing here is the first ever win (by a host since 1986). --wintonian 16:53, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
So do you mean you are for the altblurb in case Switzerland wins, but not in case Sweden wins? --hydrox (talk) 17:03, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
Yes thats right the Alt blurb which ever way it ends up. - Sorry I should of made that clearer. --wintonian 17:07, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
That makes lots of sense. First-ever victory is obviously much bigger deal than first victory by the host since X years. --hydrox (talk) 17:11, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose completely unreferenced at this time (per the Heineken Cup example below, seemingly irrelevant that it's in ITN/R). The Rambling Man (talk) 19:08, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
    • TRM, thank you so much for pointing that out. I've added the appropriate template to that section in the hopes that it's corrected for posting. --IP98 (talk) 19:20, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
    • Could you at least wait until the game has ended and there's something to reference? --hydrox (talk) 19:22, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
      • Could you have waited until there was something to post before nominating it or was it simply a case of getting another nomination? I don't understand. Opposing on quality ground for ITN/R is perfectly justified, surely, since that's the only ground to argue with these types of nominations. Oh, and all of the existing article can be referenced while you wait for the final result. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:26, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
        • Sorry for nominating this item prematurely. For my defense, it clearly says in the nomination that the game's result will not be known until 21:00 UTC. I requested opinions regarding the blurb in hopes of establishing a consensus, if you read above. Sorry for nominating this again, I guess it'd be better that no nominations are added here. --hydrox (talk) 19:32, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

May 18

Portal:Current events/2013 May 18
May 18, 2013 (2013-05-18) (Saturday) Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Business and economy
  • One hundred thousand people march in Rome, the capital of Italy, to protest the austerity measures of the new government, demanding a new policy focus on the creation of jobs. (BBC)

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Sport

Heineken Cup

Articles: 2012–13 Heineken Cup (talk · history · tag) and 2013 Heineken Cup Final (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In rugby union, the Heineken Cup concludes with Toulon defeating Clermont in the final (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:
Both articles need updating
One or both nominated events are 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: The top club rugby tournament in the northern hemisphere. On ITNR. --Modest Genius 21:12, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

  • Oppose based on article quality. No update, article still written in the future tense, no synopsis of the game, giant orange tag at the top. Fix this up to something we'd be proud of on the main page, and you can consider this opposition withdrawn. --Jayron32 21:16, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
For what it's worth, I agree with those observations. Unfortunately I don't have time to work on the articles right now. Modest Genius 21:22, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
Have done some work on the "final" article, at least to remove the orange tag. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:30, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
Updated to correct tense, to include final score, scorers etc. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:28, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Comment If you really want to convince non-aficionados of the merits of this, put the name of the sport in the title or the blurb. HiLo48 (talk) 23:29, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
Good point. Done. Modest Genius 00:28, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
  • C It's ITN/R so a vote is not really warranted, but Rugby items are more uncommon and frankly less hyped than AFootball ones. That would work for/against it, depending on your POV. --85.210.96.53 (talk) 01:08, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
    • It's not a "vote" on it's notability(nor is it ever a "vote"; consensus decides things, not a vote), it's a discussion about the quality of the article suggested; it can still be rejected on those grounds. 331dot (talk) 01:11, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose didn't we already post a rugby union cup contested between the exact same 6 nations? One which has been around for 130 years? I think called the 2013 Six Nations Championship? The Heineken Cup is played by "regional and provincial teams". Sounds like not top of sport to me. --IP98 (talk) 15:48, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Comment for those of you who understand ITN/R, could you let me know precisely what more you need for the "update" to be sufficient quality for it to be ready to post? Despite most of the blustering editors here, I'm still prepared to actually fix things. Please let me know soonest what you want to see. By the way, I've looked for "reactions" all over the internet, and have failed, if you think I've missed something there, perhaps you can present alternative information that's missing. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:22, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
    • Maybe it would make sense to add a prose update to the 2012–13 Heineken Cup#Final and bold link that article. From a WP reader standpoint, I don't see what value a list of players has for me, which is a big part of 2013 Heineken Cup Final. Just a thought. --IP98 (talk) 16:34, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
      • The final is bold linked in the blurb, the list of players is information useful just as you'd expect to know who played in the final of a Superbowl or who played in the final of the FA Cup. What more prose do you expect? (compare 2012 Heineken Cup Final which was happily posted last year)... The Rambling Man (talk) 16:39, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
        • My sincere apologies if I was unclear. I propose bold linking "2012-13 Heineken Cup" and adding a prose update to the Final section. If an interested reader really cares about the players, they'll find it in 2013 Heineken Cup final. --IP98 (talk) 16:43, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Comment the article has already matched last year's final article in content and refs which was posted at ITN. Can someone identify what's actually wrong with the "final" article to stop it being posted? The Rambling Man (talk) 19:06, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Marriage extended to same-sex couples in France

Article: Same-sex marriage in France (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ President François Hollande signs legislation extending marriage rights to same-sex couples in France. (Post)
News source(s): Guardian, BBC, Washington Post, Al Jazeera, Sydney Morning Herald
Article updated

Nominator's comments: The article is up to date. Here's the chance to right a much talked about recent omission on the ITN space. -- 81.153.226.246 (talk) 17:33, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Further comment, France is a major country and this is a major development plus the previous discussion was probably in support of posting now makes me want to support this. However are we going to post this every-time a major country legalises same-sex marriage? and how do we determine what is a major country or not? --wintonian 22:54, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
Perhaps the same way it is determined what is a major killing. The threshold for that seems to be around 10, so maybe for major civil rights changes the threshold could be 10,000,000? --ELEKHH 01:17, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. Seems like significant world news. France is the 4th biggest country in Europe so this affects a lot of people. Kaldari (talk) 19:43, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose This was already basically nominated and failed a week or two ago. And no, we did not post the New Zealand one either I cannot remember it passing.75.73.114.111 (talk) 19:50, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose only because this came up before and was not posted. I won't beat the dead horse. 331dot (talk) 20:21, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Support on the merits and on a reading of the previous discussion. First, France is a reasonably large and influential country and the opening of a long-standing social institution to a significant proportion of its population is important news worthy of ITN. Second, I'd read the previous discussion as either "no consensus" or weak support for posting. Part of the issue appears to have been that it was premature, as the bill hadn't yet been signed into law.--Chaser (talk) 21:29, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose France is the 14th country to legalise same-sex marriage, so it's not particularly novel. -- Hazhk 22:34, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose These stories have ceased to present any meaningful threshold. It is a minor, and no longer novel, change in internal legislation that is gradually rolling out across the world. There is no merit in spotlighting every step in the journey. Kevin McE (talk) 23:33, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
I can cut and paste as well: It's so minor that groups on each side around the world engage in massive protests(on some occasions violent) and spend large sums of money to persuade people to support them. The pro side is still a minority view, as it's legal in less than 10% of sovereign states. I oppose posting this story, but this isn't minor or novel. 331dot (talk) 23:39, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. As historically a Catholic country, this is a major step. (Although, if this is rejected it won't upset me too much because from then on only a fool would nominate another US state.) HiLo48 (talk) 23:47, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
France is a legally secular country, with a nominally Catholic Majority but Mass attendance of <5% and only 3% placed "Belief" among the four most important governing principles of their life in a 2008, the 25th out of 27 countries surveyed. The "Catholicism" of the country is not an issue. Kevin McE (talk) 09:42, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Support Widely reported world-wide, and as it hasn't been posted when passed in parliament despite 2/3 support. --ELEKHH 01:02, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose It was never really illegal, all that's happened is that any ambiguity has been cleared up. Less than 10 years from the first attempt to legalization. The left leaning parties control the national assembly and senate. No Tiblisi style street protests. Generally this seems to be a continuing trend in highly developed western societies. I'm opposing this so that we don't become a "Gay marriage ticker". I'm reserving support now for societies where there is significant social opposition (Russia), legal opposition (USA), or where a constitutional change would be required (rather than a legislative one) (IE Poland). --IP98 (talk) 11:17, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. It's estimated that a million people demonstrated in Paris the weekend before the bill entered the legislature and it's the biggest change to gay rights in France since the Revolution. 11:34, 19 May 2013 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by FormerIP (talk • contribs)
More like since 1981/82 given the repeal then of the last criminal laws and the equalization of the age of consent. μηδείς (talk) 15:21, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
I'm not really sure I know what you are referring to. Looking at our article, gayness was an aggravating factor for indecent exposure until 1980. I'm not dismissing that, but I think gay marriage and adoption rights are a bigger change that more people are likely to notice. Formerip (talk) 16:38, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
strong oppose nothing landmark or unexpected about it. It breaks not hirsotry/traditionLihaas (talk) 19:04, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

DSM-5

Article: DSM-5 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The 5th edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders is published. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Following publication of DSM-5, Asperger's syndrome is incorporated in a group of autism spectrum disorders.
News source(s): Guardian, Washington Post
Credits:
Article needs updating

Nominator's comments: Article is in good shape. Although this is an American publication it has a global influence in the field of mental health. The new content is not without it's controversies but nevertheless will set the tone in the diagnosis of mental health and discourse around this field for many years to come. The renaming of Asperger's syndrome within the broader group of ASD is arguably the most newsworthy change. --yorkshiresky (talk) 17:05, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

  • Comment changed updated to no. Article needs a tense update. --IP98 (talk) 17:14, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Support posting after update. DSM is used worldwide, so an update like this one has a huge impact on clinical providers as well as on individuals with mental disorders. There's been a lot of controversy related to its contents, and it's been almost 20 years since the 4th edition came out. Mikael Häggström (talk) 17:51, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Support when updated - The pending publication has been in and out of the news for weeks, so clearly this is a major story. I prefer the main blurb which does not try to decide what is the most important update of the manual. --ThaddeusB (talk) 18:49, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose This isn't exactly In The News (unless...), it's been discussed for months, and it amounts to a commercial role-out, no different in essence from the debut of Windows 8 (ad perhaps eqally lamented). μηδείς (talk) 19:08, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
oppose;;; not in the news anywhere. At any rate, doesn't indicate global noteworthiness.Lihaas (talk) 20:32, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Support I doubt that this is about a commercial product. It is a notable manual for a very notable section of public health. I don't think it would hurt to feature this on ITN for a few days. Nergaal (talk) 20:34, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Support The DSM is not just another product. It is the Bible for mental illness. It is the key guide for anyone who regularly deals with mental illness in their profession (not only psychiatrists and psychologists, but also for other professionals and paraprofessionals, such as attorneys, paralegals, medical doctors, health care providers of all kinds, etc.). New editions are rare, with the years of publication of prior editions being: 1952, 1968, 1980, 1994 (with intervening revisions in 1987 and 2000; see the article for more details). Of course, much of the news is past, in the sense that a lot of the controversy and discussion about the contents of the DSM-V necessarily happened prior to publication. But readers who click through will get to read about that, many for the first time.--Chaser (talk) 21:40, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Support sadly the opposes show distinct lack of understanding of the significance. Links to unrelated Youtube videos are twee and entirely unhelpful. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:42, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Support, only because we did not bring this up in December, when it should have been a no-brainer. This is a very important publication in psychiatry, and aside from the text revision in 2000, it hasn't been updated in almost twenty years. Not to mention how damn controversial this is... so I think this is still worth posting now. EricLeb (Page | Talk) 01:07, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Support — Per Chaser above, the DSM is the #1 professional resource for all things dealing with mental health. A new edition is a pretty notable event. Kurtis 06:56, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Support - Unusual, but an interesting change of pace. I lean towards the alt blurb as the way to go. Jusdafax 08:18, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
Willing to post. Reading the comments, the book being published is a big deal. However, I am not fully convinced we should stress Asperger here. Some more thoughts maybe? --Tone 08:24, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
Leave Asperger out. I'm generally opposed to any sort of "highlight" in a posting. --IP98 (talk) 15:18, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
Agreed. Use the main blurb.--Chaser (talk) 19:00, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
  • The DSM is a product of the American Psychiatric Association, not a peer-reviewed scholarly work. It's latest rollout has been rejected by the NIMH under the Obama administration as the basis for Federal grants. This posting would be highly uninformed--a blurb saying the NIMH has rejected the DSM would be appropriate. Nonprofit Quarterly: "The DSM is used not only by practitioners to diagnose conditions, but also by insurance companies to determine treatments to be covered, so it is a socially powerful document. Insel, however, believes that the DSM is less than scientific." μηδείς (talk) 15:28, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
    • We're not here to play psychiatrist and assess the validity of the thing. We're here to judge whether or not it makes for a good news piece. And it does. If users are really interested, they will read the article we're advertising and learn all about the controversies (and I don't deny that they are valid arguments) that you mention. EricLeb (Page | Talk) 17:04, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
      • I have no idea what you mean by "play psychiatrist", and the criticisms of this guild handbook still stand, but the sources evinced for this are book reviews. That's not news. μηδείς (talk) 19:27, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Comment. The altblurb may be slightly misleading, since it gives the impression that DSM is a list of things that do and don't exist. AS will still be diagnosable and it will still be in other manuals such as ICD-10, it just isn't included in DSM-V. Formerip (talk) 17:29, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

RD Aleksei Balabanov

Article: Aleksei Balabanov (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): KM.ru
Credits:
Article needs updating
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Misplaced Pages article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Directed such films as Brother and Brother 2, that are popular in Russia and feature Sergei Bodrov, Jr. Brandmeister 16:25, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

  • Oppose: the article is a stub which contains little more than a filmography. It cites hardly any sources (there is a "citation needed" tag right now). This is not the sort of article we want to present on the main page. --RJFF (talk) 17:03, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
I take it that's not a hard oppose, and that like me you might support this if the nominator or someone else improves the article sufficiently? μηδείς (talk) 20:44, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
BTW, this is NOT updated, and the nominator should look at the update requirements for an obit. μηδείς (talk) 20:46, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
That's update "guidelines", of course. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:50, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Eurovision Song Contest 2013

Proposed image Article: Eurovision Song Contest 2013 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Emmelie de Forest (pictured) with the song Only Teardrops wins the Eurovision Song Contest 2013 for Denmark. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ "Only Teardrops", by Danish singer Emmelie de Forest (pictured), wins the Eurovision Song Contest.
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.

 --EugεnS¡m¡on(14) ® 08:41, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

  • Support ITNR, notable event.--85.210.99.147 (talk) 10:32, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Support per ITN/R. The largest annual music competition in Europe with about 500 million people watching it every year is a very big deal. Australia is one of the non-European countries that broadcast it, and the event is widely followed on the Internet.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:37, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Comment I've removed the links to the Denmark's entry because we don't know yet who will it. Misplaced Pages does not predict the future to document anything that will or is likely to happen, regardless of its favourite role according to the odds by the bookmakers.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:37, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
Track of Cyclone Mahasen
  • Support big international event. I guess the purpose of the links was to show how the blurb might look when the winner is known. Last year ITN said:
A similar blurb if Denmark wins:
PrimeHunter (talk) 11:52, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Yes, but why to use Denmark as an example? Why not any other country? However, it's better and simple not to use any of them. And yes, Denmark has the best song this year and deserves to win the contest finally after having good songs for many years.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 11:57, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
The bookmakers have Denmark as a huuuge favorite. They are basically refusing to take bets on Denmark. The next-lowest odds gives the money back 6 times. Since the bookmakers are usually right, the contest is very close to a done deal. Thue (talk) 14:15, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
We need something which is 100% sure. Your opinion that it's very close to a done deal is not appropriate as per one of the main rules on Misplaced Pages. As for your information, two years ago France was given evens and even 4/7 by the bookmakers, but the contest was won by the Azerbaijani entry.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:33, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
...or maybe prepare a really shocking blurb for when Romania wins: 'It's My Life' by Cezar... etc., etc Martinevans123 (talk) 14:37, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
For gods sake what difference does it make whether the blurb mentions Denmark when it's only a hypothetical. Nobody's going to post it to the MP until it's official.--Johnsemlak (talk) 14:39, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
And what if there's dead heat?! Martinevans123 (talk) 15:04, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Support, no question of inclusion as recurring and importance in EU, just the wording.(And please let it be "My Lovely Horse" by the Craggy Island Parish :) ). --MASEM (t) 15:13, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Support - definitly for ITN. And if posted, I want credit to as I nominated this article already yesterday a bit premature bit still.--BabbaQ (talk) 15:21, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Support when updated and if of a good enough standard at the time etc. Europe's annual political relationship bickering update - of course it should be posted, plus it is the largest and most prestigious music competition in Europe. --wintonian 16:58, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Note I was ready to post this, but in scanning the article I don't see a suitable prose update of the final, just charts and infobox update. If someone can do a referenced synopsis of the final (like we would expect for sporting events and other contests of a similar nature) and/or some meaningful prose about the winning entrant, something like that, I will post. --Jayron32 22:33, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
    • I'm not sure what you expect other than "Denmark won". This is all that's happened. The overall article is in good condition, I don't really know what more you want to see there. But hey ho. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:44, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
      • Surely something happened in 4(?) hours of TV coverage besides the host announcing "Denmark won" to which not one RS in the world reacted. --ThaddeusB (talk) 22:53, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
        • A mere 3 hours and 30 minutes, in fact. 1) The winner was announced before all the votes had been counted (apparently by mistake). 2) UK got more that 20 points. 3) Graham Norton stayed awake. So all quite extraordinary really. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:38, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
    • That's not what we did last year or in 2011 when Eurovision Song Contest 2012 & Eurovision Song Contest 2011 were linked to respectively. --wintonian 23:46, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
      • So bad decisions from the past should be perpetuated merely because they were done before? That's a pretty lousy reason to refuse to make an article better, which should be our goal at Misplaced Pages regardless. --Jayron32 02:27, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
        • I haven't said or suggested that, what I have done however is to meraly point out that this hasn't been necessary in at least the last two occurrences at ITN as I thought such history may be useful in aiding the discussion. Perhaps you misunderstood me? --wintonian 02:58, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
          • I understand you would rather post substandard articles on the main page than fix them up into a decent shape. You know, the time you spend arguing that you shouldn't add some prose to the article could have been spent adding that prose. Had you done that, I would have already posted this instead of leaving this response. --Jayron32 03:13, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Support - Contest has now ended, Denmark has won. --] 23:07, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Support alternative blurb only. Quite a significant competition for a large percentage of the world population. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:32, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
Posting. Regarding the prose update - Denmark won is pretty much all that happened. Reactions here are mostly personal opinions of commentators and are not encyclopedic material per se. --Tone 07:59, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
I'm not sure where anyone asked for reactions or personal opinions. Synopsis of the four hour event or an overview of the winner and/or her song would have been appropriate and would not have required any opinions or reactions. --Jayron32 18:32, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
Maybe you're not familiar with Eurovision. It follows this format every year: half an hour about the previous winner and the host city/nation, 26 (or so) songs from the nations who qualified for the final, half an hour (or so) of padding while the voting happens, then results. The winner and her song have a separate article already. That's it. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:02, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Posting articles with essentially zero prose update makes a mockery of having update standards. It would have taken 10 minutes of work to describe the voting phase, for example. Tables of stats do NOT sufficiently convey what happened. And yes, a sampling of reactions from notable media sources is perfectly appropriate and "encyclopedic". It is a standard part of articles on music albums, for example. It amazing how when something is a European sporting event/cultural item it gets supported/posted with "a sentence update is all that can be said" (yah right) but when its an American sport/cultural item its "this update is insufficient until multiple paragraphs are written" (the appropriate standard). --ThaddeusB (talk) 19:18, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Philippine general election

Article: Philippine general election, 2013 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In the Philippine general election, Team PNoy wins a majority in the Senate and Y wins a majority in the House of Representatives. (Post)
News source(s):
Credits:
First article updated, second needs updating
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: ITN/R election. --LukeSurl 19:41, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

May 17

Portal:Current events/2013 May 17
May 17, 2013 (2013-05-17) (Friday) Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy
  • The United States government paves the way for expanded exportation of natural gas by approving a US$10 billion facility in Texas. (Reuters)

Disasters and accidents

Politics and elections

Law and crime

Science and technology

Sports

Tbilisi gay rights protests

Article: 2013 Tbilisi gay rights protests (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ An anti-homophobia demonstration in Georgia clashes with Orthodox priests and a mob (Post)
News source(s):
Credits:
Article updatedNominator's comments: My apologies if I overestimate the importance of this event. This part of the world is rarely featured in the news. It's rare to see 10,000 protestors led by priests attack a tiny demonstration by rights activists. It's what one would expect from the Taliban, but it's happening right there in a Christian country that aspires to accede the European Union. Note also that the scale of the counter demonstration is unheard of. -- Nestrabonk (talk) 09:17, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
BTW, the article could use a little work getting it into polished idiomatic English. μηδείς (talk) 19:00, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose Especially the blurb as it is. No evidence of priests "attacking" as the blurb implies. I have watched many videos of it and have only seem them marching, so I wonder where that came from. The attacking was not too violent, there were no deaths. Although quite a few injuries!75.73.114.111 (talk) 19:58, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Support - If you look in the NYT article the priests removed the police barricades cause the police don't want to stop priests in Georgia and the busses saved the incident from being much worse. It's got priests, it's got gays, it's got ex-Soviet politics, it's got future EU member, it's got violence. Almost as many diverse things as a Stalinist + Big-Ben -esque world's biggest building financed by petroleum built next to the Kaaba by an absolute monarch. And I learned something today about Georgia. We post many things that are merely interesting. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 20:17, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Support per SMW. 331dot (talk) 20:25, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Comment the new blurb is much better, but might want to change "mob" to "protesters". Or perhaps even change it to just mention a clash with "protesters" and various injuries, not sure how important mentioning priests are. but I am no professional. but i am almost learning in support now75.73.114.111 (talk) 21:24, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Iraq attacks

Article: 17 May 2013 Iraq bombings (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A series of bombings in Iraq leave at least 76 people dead. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ An upsurge in violence leaves 130 dead over three days in Iraq.
News source(s):
Credits:
Article updatedNominator's comments: Deadliest day in Iraq in 8+ months (specifically since Sept 9, 2012); part of trend of increasing violence in the country --ThaddeusB (talk) 04:57, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

RD Ken Venturi

Article: Ken Venturi (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s):
Credits:
Article needs updating
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Misplaced Pages article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.Nominator's comments: World Golf Hall of Fame Member; Nominated on the combined basis of his playing career and "longest-ever" (in the US) broadcasting career --ThaddeusB (talk) 01:37, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose His playing and broadcasting are both notable, but I don't think that (even combined) they make him a very important figure in golf. Neljack (talk) 03:37, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Weak Oppose at this stage Obviously successful, but I'm wondering, given the attention to media people here lately, if we're going down the Marshall McLuhan path and attirubuitng too much improtance to commentators. After all, these aren't the people who are doing the great sporting things. They are the people talking about those people. It's hard to get my head around how important it is to talk about other successful people for a long time. (PS: I note ThaddeusB's thoughtful qualification on his broadcasting career record. It's interesting that only one source seems to mention the record, and that's a golf source claiming a golf person is the best in all sport. Hmmmm. The source doesn't qualify it as being only an American record, but American sources tend not to do that sort of thing anyway. Not questioning it. Just noting...) QUESTION: Did he ever play golf internationally? HiLo48 (talk) 03:53, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose per Neljack. Not the top of his field. Only recognition seems to be being in the Hall of Fame for his combined body of work(golf and broadcasting) but not particularly notable in either field individually. 331dot (talk) 08:52, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

RD Jorge Rafael Videla

Article: Jorge Rafael Videla (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
Credits:
Article needs updating
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Misplaced Pages article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.Nominator's comments: Putting the header on the nom created by EdwardLane --IP98 (talk) 17:31, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

was going to nom Jorge Rafael Videla for RD but wondered what happened to the header for the 17th, I thought that was automated ? EdwardLane (talk) 15:34, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Came here to check on this. Made a few grammatical edits. Totally ready and support as full blurb the infamous deathLihaas (talk) 21:21, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
The article is not linked in the template... --IP98 (talk) 22:02, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
Woops now fixed. Spencer 22:06, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
  • I support a full blurb, let alone an RD uptade. Am I in the minority here? Kurtis 22:40, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
    • I oppose full blurb. He was long out of power, had been tried, convicted and was in prison. His natural death does not in any way impact the future of Argentina. His death is noteworthy, and belongs on RD. --IP98 (talk) 22:48, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
      • Well yes, but the fact remains that he was a significant figure during Cold War era Argentina. His regime was considered one of the world's most brutal, alongside those of North Korea, Cambodia, Vietnam, Equatorial Guinea, Uganda, Somalia, Nicaragua, Albania, Ethiopia, etc. Kurtis 01:46, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
        • Don't go to the extremes, his rule may have been brutal, but "the world's most brutal" is for people like Hitler, Mussolini or Stalin. As for a full blurb, I'm not sure. IP98 is right, as of 2013 Videla was just a man who played a role in a historical period of Argentina, but not an active actor of the day-to-day politics. His death will generate comments by noteworthy people, but nothing else, his death does not change anything in the current politics of Argentina. This is completely unlike the death of Néstor Kirchner, who was not a sitting head of state either when he died, but he was highly influential, and his death became a turning point in the administration of Cristina Kirchner: in that case, the blurb was justified. I think in an article "Death of Jorge Rafael Videla", and I really can't think of anything interesting to write about that. Cambalachero (talk) 03:25, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
          • He was directly responsible for killing tens of thousands, Cambalachero. At the time of his presidency (mid-to-late 1970s), Argentina was among the world's worst violators of human rights — perhaps eclipsed only by North Korea, Cambodia, Vietnam, Equatorial Guinea, Uganda, and Ethiopia. No, he's obviously no Hitler or Stalin, but he was still very brutal. Kurtis 06:18, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
            • That's not the point. Yes, from a historical point of view, he's very notable, but from a "in the news" point of view, he has long left the political life of the country. Check the latest news of Argentina (18A cacerolazo, the Lázaro Baez embezzlement scandal, the floods, Kirchner's bills to control the judiciary, her projects to expropiate newspapers, the decree of Macri against that, the "CEDIN", etc.), Videla is not even remotely related to any of them. All those other news will continue their development without any influence from Videla's death. Cambalachero (talk) 13:38, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

May 16

Portal:Current events/2013 May 16
May 16, 2013 (2013-05-16) (Thursday) Armed conflict and attacks

Arts and culture

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Science and technology

Sports

RD: Dick Trickle

No consensus to post. Spencer 20:59, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

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

Article: Dick Trickle (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CNN, ESPN
Credits:
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Misplaced Pages article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.Nominator's comments: He was a well known former NASCAR driver who died from committing suicide. Andise1 (talk) 23:27, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose I rarely, if ever, oppose anything, as I think that we're far too elitist around here in enforcing our own opinions of what should be important to the world at large, but in this case, I can't see this being up to RD standards. Broadly, Trickle was famous mainly for his double-entendre name, he was a marginal NASCAR driver who raced mainly in the lower circuits, a minor league driver who won NASCAR's rookie-of-the-year in 1988 at age 48. His never finished higher than 3rd place on any regular Winston Cup (now Sprint Cup) race, the senior NASCAR circuit. He became a bit of a "meme" in the 1990s for his funny name, especially with the late-nite ESPN SportsCenter crew who never gave up the opportunity to say his name on the air; but that's all he was. I would not really object strongly to this getting posted, but in general, based on the standards most people hold at this desk, I can't see anyone else supporting this, and I hope I have laid out the case why people may object to posting this. His death is sad and tragic, given its circumstances, but he's a marginal figure in his field whose greatest claim to fame is a funny-sounding name. --Jayron32 00:14, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose. Doesn't meet the criteria. He was not near the top of his field; while he was successful in lower levels of racing, that didn't translate to success in higher levels, nor do I see any evidence of some other significant influence in auto racing. While his unfortunate death was tragic and sudden, that is not enough in and of itself to be posted. Like IP98 it won't really bother me if this is posted, but I can't support it. 331dot (talk) 00:29, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose If we include this person then we should include Paul Shane because he was a well known actor (in a single country) and well liked. In my opinion neither are notable enough, if they were a well known head of states or religious leaders for example I would support it. --wintonian 01:23, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Comment has Paul Shane been nominated? Trickle's article says he was "bllied as" the winningest short track racer in history. I have no idea what hat means, or why he would be billed that way, instead of actually being such. Clarification would help. μηδείς (talk) 01:49, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
He would be described that way because an awful lot of what comes out of industries like that is marketing hype rather than reality. HiLo48 (talk) 02:00, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
Being the winningest short-track driver of all time is not unlike being the minor league baseball homerun champion. It means you're really good against mediocre competition. Short track driving is minor league driving for the most part, as the small towns that support lower-tier stock car tracks couldn't afford to build and maintain a large tri-oval like Talledega or Daytona. It should be noted that his so-called "short track success" in the lower levels did not translate similarly to the Winston Cup, which has always featured several short tracks. Just as an example from the 1990 NASCAR Winston Cup Series, which was during Trickle's era, when he would have run a full season at the top circuit, there were seven races run on "short tracks", defined as less than 1 mile in length. Richmond twice, Bristol twice, North Wilkesboro twice, and Martinsville. I picked that season because Trickle took his highest finish that year, a third place at Dover Downs, a race track that he started from the Pole; Dover is not a "short track". Among the short track races on the calendar that year, Trickle's best finish was 5th at the Pontiac Excitement 400, the first Richmond race. He did win the Winston Open that year, which is a non-points race, and it's also not on a short track. So, even the claim that he was the best short track racer doesn't hold up against the evidence, because when he raced on short tracks against top level competition, he didn't hold up to the hype. No, he's maybe the best minor league racer of all time. That's not much to hang one's hat on. His death is also not being covered heavily as it was with Joyce Brothers below, who was the subject of long obits in print sources and televised retrospectives. All I've seen is very short blurbs about Trickle's death. So, unlike Joyce Brothers below, this can't even be claimed to be "in the news". --Jayron32 02:29, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
Comment Is winningest even a word? If not I suggest we don't use it in any blurb that my be considered. --wintonian 02:46, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
For 31 years it has been. It is a bit of an Americanism, as OED notes its as a North American informal usage, but its a common enough word that many American sources use it; sports journalism uses it all the time. In other English varieties, it may not be, but Misplaced Pages does not give a preference to one variety of English over another. --Jayron32 03:02, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
In that case I suggest it's use is either wikilinked to somewhere or avoided, so those of use that use the Queens English as well as possibly a few Aussies etc. aren't left scratching our heads. But it's probably a moot point by the looks of things. --wintonian 03:30, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
Even though this nomination most likely won't succeed, "winningest" is still in his article. Do we care if it's crap? HiLo48 (talk) 03:38, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
The word "winningest" isn't any more crap than "petrol" is for what Americans call "gasoline". It's a valid recognized word in a national variety of English. Just because it isn't your variety of English isn't important, a factor which is enshrined in Misplaced Pages policy, which clearly states that Misplaced Pages does not itself recognize any one variety of English as superior to any other. --Jayron32 03:42, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
Absolutely true, but we have a global audience. If parochial words are used we really should try to explain them to the world. If we don't have to, then strewth, we Aussies can go the whole hog with jargon in our articles, can't we? Australian usage everywhere. You beauty! HiLo48 (talk) 03:49, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
No, it's not that we favor one usage everywhere, we use American English on American topics, British English for British Topics, Australian English for Australian topics, Indian English for Indian topics, etc. No one of those is "parochial". Different =/= worse. --Jayron32 03:58, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
Gee, I think I've just proven (without trying that hard) that there are big linguistic differences between us. Jayron - I think we're really in furious agreement here on the basic principle. Maybe we just have different understandings of parochial. HiLo48 (talk) 04:02, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
Perhaps. I don't define "parochial" as "Common and frequently used words from varieties of English other than my own". That's how I interpret the context of your usage. Perhaps parochial is one of those words with different meanings in different varieties of English... --Jayron32 04:06, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
Using an American word in an article about an American is not "crap" it is the normal, consensus backed thing to do, just as using British words in articles about British subjects. See WP:ENGVAR. (Also, I am sure the meaning of winningest is obvious to any native English speaker even if it looks like a non-word to them) --ThaddeusB (talk) 03:45, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
Misunderstanding there. My use of "crap" was to refer to the whole article. Irrespective of whose English it's written in, it ain't a great article. HiLo48 (talk) 03:51, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
Fair enough, that may well be an accurate assessment of the article. --ThaddeusB (talk) 03:53, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
(edit conflict × 2) I was thinking about it's inclusion in any blurb on the main page rather than the article. In any case it's a North American type article so American English should be used there. --wintonian 03:47, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Cyclone Mahasen

Proposed image Article: Cyclone Mahasen (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Cyclone Mahasen strikes Bangladesh, killing 14 people there, after leaving at least 79 casualties across five other counties in Southern and Southeastern Asia. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Cyclone Mahasen causes significant damage in Southern and Southeastern Asia and Bangledesh, resulting in over X deaths.
News source(s): CNN, Reuters, The Washington Post, Wall Street Journal
Credits:
Article updatedNominator's comments: Significant meteorological event in the Bay of Bengal that has resulted in widespread damage and loss of life. Six countries have reported fatalities, with 58 Myanmar occurring in Myanmar. I would appreciate a better blurb from someone though, I'm having trouble trying to phrase the information properly. --Cyclonebiskit (talk) 16:28, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
Support why not? YE 16:34, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
Support The storm has been in global news for quite a time now, and seeing the damage it has caused within a span of six days, it deserves an ITN. Rishabh Tatiraju (talk) 16:42, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
On second thoughts, i think an alternative image can be used. The current image shows the storm when it was weakening. We can consider adding the image taken on May 13, it has a stronger look. Rishabh Tatiraju (talk) 16:45, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
I think the May 16 one would have more relevance to the situation rather than an older one, despite the weakening. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 16:50, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
Agreed. Rishabh Tatiraju (talk) 17:31, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Spot-fixing in the Indian Premier League

No consensus to post at this time. Spencer 04:23, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

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

Article: 2013 Indian Premier League (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Delhi Police arrests three cricketers playing in the 2013 Indian Premier League on the charges of spot-fixing. (Post)
News source(s): Wall Street Journal, Times of India, AFP
Credits:
Article needs updatingNominator's comments: Top news in India and Cricketing world --♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ 09:54, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

*Support. I know little of the cricket world, but I know it is very popular in India and this is likely a big story there- and I would support such a story if it was about a sport I was more familiar with (NFL football, baseball) so I see no reason to not do the same here. Seems to be getting some international coverage (WSJ). 331dot (talk) 10:02, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I think that's the right approach. HiLo48 (talk) 10:17, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
If they're found guilty... Lugnuts 18:07, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
Nope. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:17, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Sanjay Dutt surrenders to Mumbai Police

No consensus to post at this time. Spencer 04:23, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

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

Article: Sanjay Dutt (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Sanjay Dutt who was sentenced for five years' imprisonment for illegal possession of arms during 1993 Bombay bombings is going to surrender to Mumbai police today. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Sanjay Dutt who was sentenced for five years' imprisonment for illegal possession of arms during 1993 Bombay bombings has surrendered to Mumbai police.
News source(s): Indian Express, NDTV
Credits: Nominator's comments: Sanjay Dutt's mercy plea has been rejected and he is going to surrender to Mumbai Police today (most probably within next 2 hours). --Tito Dutta (contact) 09:25, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Trial, verdict, mercy plea to the Supreme Court, rejection— these have been done. He is going to surrender today for three and a half year's imprisonment. And, just for information, Sanjay Dutt is one of the most popular film actors of India, and politician too! This has created lots of stir in India.
I know who Sanjay Dutt is. I'm just concerned that this is a late act of a drama that I think we've already covered. AlexTiefling (talk) 09:42, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose. If I understand this correctly, he has simply been exercising legal avenues to appeal his case, which has stalled the start of his sentence. Maybe there is, but I currently don't see much of a difference between this and posting every move about Lindsay Lohan's legal problems. 331dot (talk) 09:51, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
It's obviously a more serious case than Lohan's, and Dutt is by far a more prominent celebrity than Lohan. I also understand that he's effectively been conducting his appeals while in hiding from an outstanding warrant. Even so, this not the pivotal part of this case - that's been and gone. This is more a denouement. AlexTiefling (talk) 09:54, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
Don't know if he is exercising legal avenues to appeal his case, but, today he is going to jail for sure. The latest update of Times of India says he has reached the jail and going to surrender within half an hour so (the news article published half an hour ago, so, don't know current status). It also shows how seriously the best newspapers of India covering the events of today. Wait 1—2 hour, you'll get another Times of India update with more updates (he has been taken to jail most probably) --Tito Dutta (contact) 10:16, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose this isn't in the news in any major outlet I read, and it's a hypothetical. Can we close this and re-start a new nom if something actually happens? It would also be useful to prefix Sanjay Dutt with "Indian actor and producer" or something to give the rest of the world some context. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:21, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

May 15

Portal:Current events/2013 May 15
May 15, 2013 (2013-05-15) (Wednesday) Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

International relations

Politics and elections

Science and technology

Sports

Game over for Kepler?

Article: Kepler (spacecraft) (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Kepler mission suffers a catastrophic equipment failure. (Post)
News source(s): CNN New York Times
Credits:
Article updatedNominator's comments: Standing by to see if the mission is officially over (Jusdafax). Jusdafax 04:00, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
  • The linked article says that it's "in trouble" and other phrases saying that the mission is not yet over. Might there be an official "mission end" date if all options run out? Spencer 01:35, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
  • I helped format this so it would be a proper ITN candidate, but am not ready to support until there is more information on the mission's possible end. That announcement could come very soon however. Jusdafax 04:00, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Seems it will still be able to do some science, but not the planet-hunting for which it has made headlines. --LukeSurl 12:15, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Wait. The fat lady is not yet singing. It's down, but not out. If and when the mission is officially terminated, then we can think about posting it. Also. the blurb is misleading: there's nothing 'catastrophic' about a reaction wheel wearing out, after longer than the designed mission lifetime. Modest Genius 12:18, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose and renominate if/when it actually happens. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:26, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Europa League

No consensus to post. Spencer 04:24, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

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

Articles: 2013 UEFA Europa League Final (talk · history · tag) and 2012–13 UEFA Europa League (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In association football, Chelsea wins the UEFA Europa League after beating Benfica 2–1. (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:
Both articles updatedNominator's comments: Second highest football trophy in Europe. 
  – HonorTheKing (talk) 20:49, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
Point taken(though the Calder Cup involves Canadian and US teams); though my point was that those are second-tier tournaments. 331dot (talk) 09:25, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
Is Europe even "international" anymore? I'm having a harder and harder time sewing the "international importance" patch on to European stories. --IP98 (talk) 10:21, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
Yes, Europe is a continent that consists of more than 50 countries, which demonstrates a very good example of something international. Unfortunately, many people from the United States define Europe same as the United States, which is completely false, and equalise a whole continent with a single country on another continent. Given all the relevant information related to the UEFA Europa League, I'd say that its importance and popularity are equal or slightly greater than the NCAA in North America.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:46, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
No comparison to the USA here, or the NCAA. With unified currency, trade, border security, (somewhat) judicial, agricultural and environmental policies (to name a few); and with ITN posting numerous EU actions (ban on pesticides for example), personally I refuse to acknowledge the UEFA as "international". I'm technically wrong. Fine. I don't care. This type of tight multi-national cooperation does not exist anywhere else in the world. --IP98 (talk) 18:05, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
No, you're wrong. I live in a European country with borders, trade barriers, different currency, and separate institutions compared to the other European countries. Please don't confuse Europe with the European Union. The UEFA Europa League is a competition for clubs from Europe, not particularly from the European Union. Thus it's an "international" competition.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:56, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
It's clear the Chinese are not the only people IP98 has a dislike for. Also oppose - not notable enough in the sporting world.--82.8.226.105 (talk) 19:05, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
I dislike the Chinese government. No problem w/Europe. --IP98 (talk) 20:22, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
Can you explain how that's relevant to this discussion? If not, please remove it entirely and don't do it again. You are entitled to your personal opinions about China, but this is not the correct forum for you to express it. And I'm certain that not all Chinese people are "facist baby butchers". If you want to continue contributing to Misplaced Pages, please exercise some self-control. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:31, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
Is the 82.8's comment relevant? Clearly it is not and its personal for no reason. Perhaps all parties, not just IP98, should do a better job exercising self-control. Personally, I am sick of all the off-topic banter that seems to enter every thread these days. --ThaddeusB (talk) 21:00, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose as per the 2nd-tier arguments above. --LukeSurl 09:57, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose as not the pinnacle of the game in Europe, but note to some editors above, Europe is "international" as it has vast swaths of different cultures, languages, currencies, political and religious affiliations. Attempting to assert otherwise is absurd. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:26, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
Someone should tell Daniel Hannan  :) (and yes I recognize there is a difference between the EU member states and Europe the continent). --IP98 (talk) 20:22, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
And now please explain what relevance that has to this nomination for ITN of the Europa League final? The Rambling Man (talk) 20:32, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

May 14

Portal:Current events/2013 May 14
May 14, 2013 (2013-05-14) (Tuesday) Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Business and economy
  • Greek civil servants hold a 24-hour strike after the government proposes to use emergency powers to stop striking teachers from disrupting university exams. (AP via ABC)

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

Same-sex marriage in Brazil

Consensus not to post. --LukeSurl 18:08, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

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

Article: Same-sex marriage in Brazil (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A ruling by the Brazillian National Justice Council declares same-sex marriage legal in the country. (Post)
News source(s): AFP
Credits: Nominator's comments: Not posting the equivalent story for France has been considered by some as being a poor decision in retrospect. Brazil is bigger than France anyhow, --LukeSurl 10:26, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Oppose From the article, it was not only never illegal, but had been performed over the last two years. This decision forces all notaries to perform same sex marriage, but thay have been able to for a while. Secondly, the order must be appealed by the Supreme Court, so surely the point where the appeal is dismissed would be the time to post in any case. MChesterMC (talk) 11:02, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

  • Weak oppose. This is different than the France situation; this is not a ban being overturned, merely an interpretation of existing law. 331dot (talk) 11:19, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose As far as I can tell, this Brazil-related story is getting far more coverage. – Muboshgu (talk) 14:38, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Support Seems to be getting quite widespread international coverage, and obviously a very large country. Neljack (talk) 21:35, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose These stories have ceased to present any meaningful threshold. It is a minor, and no longer novel, change in internal legislation that is gradually rolling out across the world. There is no merit in spotlighting every step in the journey. Kevin McE (talk) 22:29, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
It's so minor that groups on each side around the world engage in massive protests(on some occasions violent) and spend large sums of money to persuade people to support them. The pro side is still a minority view. I oppose posting this story as it does not overturn a ban, but this isn't minor or novel. 331dot (talk) 00:24, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose - Perhaps I am in the minority, but I couldn't be less interested in a different gay marriage story every other week. I realize that this is the hip and trendy cause du jour at the moment, but as Kevin McE says, the novelty has largely worn off. --Bongwarrior (talk) 22:44, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose Not a final court decision (this can be appealed), and unless there are extensive violent protests, this really isn't that notable. Spencer 01:37, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

RD: Asghar Ali Engineer

Article: Asghar Ali Engineer (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Times of India Times of India 2
Credits:
Article needs updating
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Misplaced Pages article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.Nominator's comments: Saw this on Deaths in 2013. Can't say I've heard of him before, but from a read of the article it looks like he may have been as a significant a figure in his culture as persons we have posted before have been in Western culture. This might be a good exercise for us in assessing the notability of such a person. --LukeSurl 20:17, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. From reading the article, this man seems to be recognized and a leader in his field, and has recognition internationally. 331dot (talk) 20:20, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Comment not updated at all, but as Luke suggests, a good test. Please note there's a discussion ongoing about the recent deaths nominations at the talk page. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:28, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
  • The beliefs on women's rights section is terribly written and should probably be scrapped in its entirety. However should be a very good source for constructing a section on Engineer's theology. LukeSurl 20:48, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Support - I also had not heard of this man, but appears to be significant and internationally noted. Agree that article could use more work, but it appears to fairly acceptable. Jusdafax 23:46, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Withholding support pending update and cleanup. Seems like something that would be of interest to our readers, a notable person, however as yet the article has no information on his death, not even a single sentence saying that he died, or how or where he died, there's simply a death date in the first sentence. Also, there's an orange tag that needs cleaning up. Otherwise, I would not object to a suitably updated and cleaned up article appearing in the RD section. --Jayron32 00:10, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Comment I'm finding it difficult to determine how much impact he had: was he so much out of the Islamic mainstream that he had relatively little influence, or did he have a significant impact among the wider Muslim community as a progressive voice? Without knowing that, it's hard to know whether he was widely regarded as a very important figure in his field (presumably Islamic theology?). Neljack (talk) 01:56, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose, doesn't seem to have notability outside of India, plus can't support an article in that condition. Wizardman 16:40, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
The condition of the article may well be a serious issue; but I think the proposal is on the basis of the subject's notability inside the world's second-most-populous country. AlexTiefling (talk) 17:02, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
India might be the worlds second-most-populous country, but with only 10% of that population online and 12% of that population speaking English, I don't think the English Misplaced Pages needs to heap support on every cricket/building/bus crash/death story from the region just yet. --IP98 (talk) 10:27, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
Stop me if you've heard this before, but this is Misplaced Pages in English, not Misplaced Pages of the Anglosphere. Whether or not the people affected by an event speak English should have as little effect as possible on what we report. We're already hampered by the lack of English sources for many things; let's not prejudice matters further. AlexTiefling (talk) 00:36, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose if ITN/DC #2 still stands. Unfortunately the Progressive Dawoodi Bohra movement doesn't appear big enough for it's founder to get a pass on that category. It's too bad, the orange tag not withstanding the article is ok, the subject seems to have been a prolific writer, and the subject might have interested WP readers. --IP98 (talk) 10:29, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

May 13

Portal:Current events/2013 May 13
May 13, 2013 (2013-05-13) (Monday) Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Business and economy
  • Kevyn Orr, a state-appointed emergency manager of the finances of the city of Detroit, Michigan, issues a report describing the city as "clearly insolvent on a cash flow basis." (BBC)

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Sport

Nohmul destruction

Article: No article specified
Blurb: ​ The Mayan site Nohmul in Belize is largely destroyed during construction works. (Post)
News source(s): Huffington Post, Fox News
Credits:
Article updatedNominator's comments: Solid monument, that stood at least 2,300 years. --Brandmeister 08:39, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

RD Joyce Brothers

I'm closing this as no consensus to post. Although there was a lot of drama with this nomination, I still want to point out that the article was improved quite much over the time that it was nominated. It is not for reasons with issues to the article that have not been resolved that I'm closing the nomination. That said, there is not clear consensus for this item to be posted, as there are still important notability concerns that were raised. While she may have been at the top of her field, it was not clear that being the head of a smaller field such as "pop psychology" is notable enough for RD. As a sidenote, Brothers is not mentioned in the article about the field she was said to have founded, popular psychology. Spencer 04:37, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

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

Article: Joyce Brothers (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  Columnist Joyce Brothers dies at age 85. (Post)
News source(s):
Credits:
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Misplaced Pages article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.Nominator's comments: Popular and well known columnist. Got a tribute on ABC news. --IP98 (talk) 22:45, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Support for RD She certainly had her impact, and her death is being widely reported on. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:52, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
    I don't think so. There is no single medium reporting about her death in my country and in the neighbouring countries.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:32, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Support Household name in the US, pioneer of the quack-pop-psy trend. μηδείς (talk) 23:47, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Support per the above comments. 331dot (talk) 23:57, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Not Updated Under no circumstances does two sentences saying the exact same thing, she's dead, count as an update. If marking this updated was a simple fomat error someone should be more careful. μηδείς (talk) 00:11, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Support for RD if some information on her legacy\the impact of her death (such as mentioned tribute) is added or the article is significantly expanded in general. I am surprised by how short the article is at current. --ThaddeusB (talk) 00:13, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose I really don't see how she qualifies as a very important figure in her field, unless you define her field rather narrowly to be "advice column writing" or "television psychology" - which seems overly narrow. Considering broader fields, I have not seen any evidence that she was "widely regarded as a very important figure" in psychology, television, print media or the media generally. So I don't see that, using any suitable general field, that she qualifies. Neljack (talk) 02:06, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
    • Pop psychology covers both columnist and talking head, and she created the field--you will not be able to name someone like her that preceded her, but there are plenty who have followed. She was also the only woman to win the $64,000 question, was more famous than the beatles when she interviewed them in 1964, had three dozen movie credits and over 130 cameos.... μηδείς (talk) 02:34, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
      • Where was she more famous than the Beatles? In the UK? In Australia? No way. Not explicitly opposing this (I've never heard of her, so I have no thoughts on her importance in the USA), but it's bothered me a bit that it's a purely US topic, and too many editors are writing as if it's a global one. HiLo48 (talk) 02:50, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
      • I think it would be unfair to describe what she did as "pop psychology". She was a qualified psychologist (with a doctorate, indeed); what she was doing was real psychology, just using the media, rather than the superficial and often unsound stuff that pop psychology connotes. Neljack (talk) 03:18, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose; I agree with Neljack and HiLo48 here. If the article were very high quality, I might reconsider, but right now I don't see sufficient reason to put her up on RD. NW (Talk) 02:54, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
Yes, Hilo, the sources say she was the first to interview the Beatles in the US, where she was indeed more well known, and yes, Neljack, The Mail describes her as a popular psychologist in its headline. Can we go by sources rather than personal impressions? μηδείς (talk) 03:27, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for the confirmation. So she was more famous than the Beatles IN THE USA. I've wondered from the start of this discussion what the chances would be of getting the death at a ripe old age of an Australian columnist and TV personality. Don't worry. I know the answer. I tried with someone more important that that, and it was rejected for "not globally important enough". Yes, we do have a systemic bias, and a lot of those who are part of it never ever even think about it. HiLo48 (talk) 05:57, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
If there is a bias, then please work to counteract it by nominating stories from Australia and convincing us of notability. Furthermore, the simple fact is that there are 300 million Americans and 23 million Australians; there are bound to be more US stories simply due to that. 331dot (talk) 09:34, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
  • The article's now updated, although the lead could use expansion. Suggestions as to what would make this a very high quality article would be appreciated on its talk page. μηδείς (talk) 03:23, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Support Joyce Brothers was one of those people whom it is hard to capture her cultural impact by her job title. For 3 decades (most of the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s) she was a ubiquitous media personality. --Jayron32 04:55, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
...in the USA. HiLo48 (talk) 05:57, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
"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." --Jayron32 06:13, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
Missed the point. Do read what I post more carefully. What if I wrote, about an Australian personality unknown in the USA, "a ubiquitous media personality", without saying where? It would be silly. Similarly for "more famous than the Beatles", a statement made without qualification, but nonsense outside the USA. You will note that only a small part of my concern was about the lack of chances of an Australian equivalent. The rest was examples of the reason for that. Too many US editors behave as if they ARE the whole world. I aim for quality discussion here. A lot of this thread isn't. HiLo48 (talk) 06:20, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
Perhaps you should look in the mirror to find the primary reason why it isn't. --Jayron32 06:25, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
Please find (possible) fault with my words, rather than with me. HiLo48 (talk) 06:28, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Question where is the evidence that she is considered top in her field? What international (or even national) awards did she win? We rejected an unexpected death of a young Olympic gold medallist, but this nomination seems to be for a journalist, noted in the US only, who died "of old age". In other news, the lead is a single sentence (not really adequate) and there are many unreferenced claims in the article, these should be addressed before we consider posting this to the main page. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:32, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Strong oppose Sorry, but if the main reason for her notability is that she was an advise columnist and the first person to interview The Beatles in the US, then there is no way she should be considered for inclusion even only in RD. Please provide what was her impact as a columnist, what are the things that were changed as result of her work, and what is the reception of her overall activities. I agree that she was an ubiquitous media personality for three decades, but the last of these was some 25 years ago. There are plenty of other columnists and journalists writing and interviewing people about more important topics, such like politics, globalisation, economy, financial markets etc.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:24, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
She invented her field. No one did what she did before her. We generally don't post retirements(the recent Ferguson nom nonwithstanding), so naturally it will sometimes be a long period of time from the end of a working career to death. If that disqualified people from RD, it should be renamed to "Tragic RD". 331dot (talk) 09:38, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
She invented her field, eh? Are you sure there wasn't someone in Europe (they were pretty into psychology), or somewhere else, who did it first? HiLo48 (talk) 09:59, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
Well, I'll put it another way; she thought she did(according to her article). If you know of a European psychologist who had a TV show before August of 1958, I'll stand corrected. She clearly was one of the first, if not the first, and she inspired others to do the same thing (Phil McGraw). 331dot (talk) 10:18, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
I think she declared herself the inventor of that field. Not sure that really counts. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:20, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
I think we call that a WP:PRIMARYSOURCE, and pay it little heed. HiLo48 (talk) 10:23, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
How else would you suggest we determine if she was the first or not? She was clearly one of the first. 331dot (talk) 10:27, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
Saying "one of the first" is not same as "invented her field". To be honest, there are many people that are "one of the first" in many fields with the same importance.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:31, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
Brothers is the one by named by the sources as a pioneer and having inspired the field. She doesn't need to compete against some other imaginary candidate who's not being named as her predecessor. μηδείς (talk) 16:55, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
No, the idea is that the fallacious claim of "inventing" her field is problematic. No-one said she had to "compete" with "imaginary" people, part of the gravitas of this nomination was that this person claimed to be the first ever "television psychologist", which has no substantiation in fact. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:49, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
How exactly can that be factually proven? Show me a psychologist with a TV show before August of 1958. 331dot (talk) 21:37, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
The onus is not on me to disprove an unreferenced claim, it's up to you (or whoever) to prove it. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:53, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
The claim is not unreferenced; Medeis posted many sources calling her the first below, and that's if you don't believe her self-made claim of being so. The onus is on you if you are asserting that such a claim is false. 331dot (talk) 20:59, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, which of the various sources used in the article said she "invented her field" please? Do elucidate. Feel free to ensure the article is up to scratch and includes such information and resolves all the "citation needed" issues which have been glossed over by all the supporters, and I'll support, without hesitation. (By the way, "self-made claim"s are not WP:RS!) The Rambling Man (talk) 21:02, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
The very first line of the AP article reads "Joyce Brothers, the pop psychologist who pioneered the television advice show in the 1950s and enjoyed a long and prolific career as a syndicated columnist, author, and television and film personality, has died." Pioneered is a synonym for invented and AP is certainly reliable. No comment on the s at this time since I haven't had a chance to check them. --ThaddeusB (talk) 21:12, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
Yes, it's an interesting case since she proclaimed herself to be the mother of television psychology and ever since it's been propagated and Chinese-whispered and now it's reliably sourced by AP. Many US sources are glowing in their reviews of her impact, and I do find it interesting that the article is entirely hagiographical with not an ounce of criticism, almost worth tagging since I'm certain TV psychologists would have faced criticism at some point in there career, even the self-proclaimed pioneers. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:17, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
  • oppose Previously there has enforced very high standards for which deaths can be brought here, and she certainly does not meet them, nor is there anything about her that justifies inclusion as an underrepresented topic. A run-of-the-mill American media personality.·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 15:36, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Readyarticle is updated and consensus is to post. μηδείς (talk) 16:55, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
    Not ready. I cannot figure out how this one is ready when even the people supporting it are not familiar with the arguments of her importance. First, it was said that she "invented the field" with no reliable source to confirm it. Next, some of the supporters settled only for being "one of the first". One of the supports uses the argument that her death is reported widely on, which is not correct and unsupported with sources as well, while another one explains her significance in 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s, with completely nothing in the 1990s, 2000s, and 2010s. I agree that it's not necessary for the person to be significant at the time of the death, but the work that brought her some significance is simply not comparable to many other people who were not posted when they died only because there was no significance at the time of the death. Clearly, there is a vote count to say this is ready, which still appears to be not sufficient for consensus of any sort with 5 supports, 4 opposes and many unanswered questions.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 17:17, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
    It's irrelevant to your point, but its actually 6-4 (the nomination counts as a support). --ThaddeusB (talk) 18:07, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
    If it's irrelevant, why bring it up? And no, it's not 6-4. And funny how all those who oppose this have been berated, while the support votes have been taken as read, e.g. "support" as a household name in the US. Fail. This is English Misplaced Pages, not US Misplaced Pages. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:12, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
    I invite you to suggest non-US deceased persons for posting, if you feel there are too many US persons posted. A good number of users here are from the US. 331dot (talk) 20:18, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
    Tried that. Doesn't work. Mainly because a good number of users here are from the US. HiLo48 (talk) 00:42, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
    Nonsense. The vast majority of non-US proposals since the start of RD have either been posted or failed because of article/update quality. Only a few failed due to opposition. --ThaddeusB (talk) 01:02, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
    Well, HiLo, you have zero chance of getting your suggestions posted if you don't make them in the first place. If you make suggestions it's up to you to convince others of their notability, perhaps by suggesting comparisons to people who have been posted. A deceased Indian man above seems to be getting some support. 331dot (talk) 01:31, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
    No "berating" here. I just wanted Kril to be aware that the nomination counts as a supporter for future reference. I actually agree completely with his assessment of the item's status. --ThaddeusB (talk) 18:17, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
    I wasn't suggesting you were the "berater"(!). However, you have already supported this for RD, despite the fact you say the item isn't ready to be posted (and you counted your own vote as a current support despite the lame article condition).... I'm confused. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:22, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
    "Support" and "not ready" are not mutually exclusive opinions in my book. My support is based on perceived merit, but is qualified with "if..." For clarity, I would not post the article in its current condition. --ThaddeusB (talk) 18:39, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
    Okay, just checking because if some errant admin counted votes, currently your vote would be support despite the fact you mean oppose at this point in time. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:02, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
    No, the article is naff (it has plenty of citation needed all over it) and there is no consensus to post, that'll be up to an admin to decide, not someone who has already supported the article. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:18, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose since no answers forthcoming to my above questions. I worked on the article but found it to be in a dismal state. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:30, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose. The article doesn't really emphasise what is notable about her. Media psychology? It's a bit of a fringe subject. Her acting and broadcasting career? Not particularly notable. Her column? Maybe, but again, the article doesn't go into much detail. I can't find notable reaction outside of the US media at all. EricLeb (Page | Talk) 18:26, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
If pioneering a field isn't notable, what is? 331dot (talk) 20:18, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
Anyone can pioneer a field. That doesn't make you or the field notable somehow. Television psychology is a fringe field that only sees some popularity in Canada + US, and even then it has become so over-the-top... is it really worth noting? EricLeb (Page | Talk) 20:34, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
Pioneering a field is being highly influential in it, ipso facto. The claim anyone can pioneer a field is simply.... μηδείς (talk)
Perhaps you should reread my comment, which clearly addressed the notability of the field. I could pioneer the field of "tulip genetic modification" tomorrow, or perhaps even "Dong Son naturopathic healing", but none of them somehow become (or make me become) inherently notable. As for your latter comment: "pioneer /pʌɪəˈnɪə/: develop or be the first to use or apply (a new method, area of knowledge, or activity)" EricLeb (Page | Talk) 21:11, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
Here's a massively radical idea, why don't you actually edit the article to prove these claims rather than just chat about it like this is some kind of Facebook/Twitter substitute? The Rambling Man (talk) 20:47, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Comment The opposes above all still rest on either "I have not heard of her", "she's not important in the UK", "she's not covered internationally", or "The article is being marked with tags as quickly as they are being removed." The first two "reasons" are forbidden by the guidelines and policy, the third is absolutely false (see below), and the fourth is just irrelevant. As for her death not being covered internationally, see the hindustan times, the mail "advice show pioneer Joyce Brothers", international business times, reuters UK, Voz de America, japan times, global news canada, not to mention the Wall Street Journal, NPR, and the Cornell University student paper. μηδείς (talk) 20:40, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
    • Not at all, they rest on the idea that she's not "top of her field", she hasn't won any awards, she's a "self-declared" expert. Whatever, there is little evidence her passing is notable, it's slipped off every major news outlet (including most of those noted above) in the past 24 hours. And it's bad form for Medies to suggest this is ready. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:44, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
          • You can cut the return to personal comments about "bad form" with your tagging and deleting material from the article, while I suggested it was ready when there was 60 to 40% support and the article was well updated. It is again, with notable and reliable sources from the Mail to the WSJ, NYT, Washington and New York posts all calling her a pioneer and running full page obits on her. Stick to the sources, please. μηδείς (talk) 22:02, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
            • I can see why you're reluctant to edit actual articles; the number of sources you've misused, all now tagged (or retagged after you mistakenly untagged them), is astonishing. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:58, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
      • There likely wouldn't be a field if not for her, whether she was actually first or not; she paved the way and set the format for those that followed. Even if the narrower field of TV/media psychology isn't broad enough for your taste, she was clearly notable in psychology in general by pioneering a new medium to deliver it to the public. There is no requirement that a death be prominent news for a lengthy period of time to be listed. It was national (and even international) news. This is "in the news". 331dot (talk) 21:44, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Support - To be brief, I despised the woman and her whole approach, which I would call "reductionist," but I am aware that her impact was, nevertheless, significant. As the LA Times headline reads on her front page obituary today, "TV analyst put psychology into the mainstream" and that means she is worthy of a ITN RD mention. I too see the opposers as not citing significant reasoning in their statements, and call for posting by an admin who sees through the "I don't like it" pontificating, which is unconvincing, to say the least. Jusdafax 23:39, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

  • The article now meets minimum standards for update and overall quality, so it has my full support. --ThaddeusB (talk) 00:54, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Comment Look, sure she's a very important figure in television psychology, but is that really a sufficiently broadly defined field? It seems to me to be a genre of television, and are we really going to say that anyone who is very important in their genre of TV can get posted? She doesn't seem to qualify as a very important figure in television, print media or psychology, which would be sufficiently general fields. Neljack (talk) 04:14, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Marking ready again. Majority in favor of posting, and opposes either based on false premises (not covered, no primary sources call her pioneer) or dpereceated rationales: not big in various countries unknown to various editors. μηδείς (talk) 02:59, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
Wow, a championship bid in misleading and misrepresentation there. We don't count votes. We look at quality and content. Nobody said "not big in various countries unknown to various editors". Several said something to the effect of "pretty much unknown outside the USA". In fact, I said that, and also said it might not matter if the supporters stopped making claims written in a global tone, and just concentrated on her achievements in the US being important enough. They didn't. They kept writing claims without qualification. Gee, if I wrote a nomination about an Australian media personality, but wrote in an unqualified way, as if all that person's achievement's were globally significant, I'd be laughed out of the place. I was swinging on this, but the over-the-top hype from the supporters, and that last post, have been pushing me away. And how about "There likely wouldn't be a field if not for her"? What nonsense. There's 300,000,000 people in the USA (and 7 billion in the world). Someone else would have done whatever she did. HiLo48 (talk) 03:24, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
I don't know what a "dpereceated" rationale is, but I don't see it here. There's no clear case for her being "the top in her field", she won no awards, she was a self-proclaimed "pioneer", we could all do that. And an article which just heaps praise on her? Where's the balance? The Rambling Man (talk) 06:46, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
There's an incredible amount of bad faith here. The article was tagged by Rambling Man for almost every single sentence, often multiple times, for information readily available in almost every major source given. Additions of sources have been reverted with hostile edit summaries "buggered" "buggered" "mess" "mess" "mess" "mess" "tag" "tag" "tag" "tag" "be careful" "be careful" "you wrecked the article, please be more careful and add citations with a suitable template (and without all the text and SHOUTING" (I left an extra space) that make absolutely no sense outside a very well documented personal animosity of Rambling Man towards myself. Now we are to assume the good faith of an "unbalanced" tag for the article by an editor who has made 65 deletions or critical edits to an article whose nomination he opposes here? No evidence of unbalanced edits has been given, the editor who has placed the tag is free to add criticism--the fact that no one else has is not a reason to tag the article or delay the nomination. μηδείς (talk) 19:03, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, Medeis has supported this, and relentlessly attempted to make it "ready", I think she should know by now that she should allow someone else to assess the quality of the article and determine whether it's ready for main page inclusion. As she has decided to copy and paste this comment to the talk page (and I've responded there), I won't bother repeating myself, but swiftly, this article was wrecked by numerous poor edits by Medeis which I fixed. It also lacks any kind of criticism section or even a sniff of anything beyond pure love and hagiography (as I've mentioned numerous times above, which no-one seemed to be interested in dealing with). I've done a lot of work on this poor article, I've asked for the same quality of referencing as I'd expect from something which features on the main page, and a lot of subversive illegitimate "sourcing" has gone on just to get this page onto ITN. It's sort of embarrassing to have to deal with incorrect and inadequate referencing, and worse to have to explain why we shouldn't be presenting sub-standard articles on the main page of Misplaced Pages. Finally I don't think Medeis understands what the {{balance}} template is for. Perhaps she can read up about it. It means this article isn't balanced. Not that "unbalanced edits have been given". The Rambling Man (talk) 20:20, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Ready again, this article is ready to post. Claims that it has been "wrecked" are incoherent--although if one looks at the edit history one can see that as soon as I started addressing Rambling Mans' pointy tags today he started edict conflicting me and adding yet another several dozen tags to the article, while deleting my references. Any inspection shows that Rambling Man has done everything he can to keep the article tagged (sources, not a big enough lead, now "balance"); I call, yet again, on an impartial admin to look at this article and post it. μηδείς (talk) 21:00, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
    • No incoherence at all. You wrecked the article numerous times (I guess I now see why you're reluctant to edit in the mainspace), you fouled most of it up, you've now got a half decent article (courtesy of my corrections) but one without any kind of neutral perspective. I fixed your many erroneous edits. How about letting someone else assess the article? You and I are clearly too involved, so we should stop the "ready/not ready" situation. As an aside, if you like, I'll give you some tutorials on how to edit/reference an article. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:04, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

2013 Mother's Day Parade shooting

Clearly not going to attain consensus to post. NW (Talk) 19:56, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

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

Article: 2013 Mother's Day Parade shooting (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ At least 19 people injured in shooting at Mother's Day Parade in New Orleans. (Post)
News source(s): The Australian
Credits:
Article needs updatingNominator's comments: current event, article needs update. --Gfosankar (talk) 08:25, 13 May 2013 (UTC) The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

May 12

Portal:Current events/2013 May 12
May 12, 2013 (2013-05-12) (Sunday) Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Religion

Science and technology

Sport

Utricularia gibba

Article: Utricularia gibba (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Genetic sequencing of the floating bladderwort reveals its genome contains just 3% non-coding DNA, casting doubt that so-called "junk DNA" is essential to complex life. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Genetic sequencing of the floating bladderwort reveals that its genome contains just 3% noncoding DNA.
News source(s): Nat Geo, LA Times, French Tribune
Credits:
Article updatedNominator's comments: This is my latest attempt to get more science topics, which are likely to be of interest to our readers even if not "front page" news, on to our mainpage.

The bladderwort was recently found to have an exceptionally short genome. Researchers decided to sequence it, expect to find the plant had few genes. Instead, they found it had almost no non-coding DNA, which was a major surprise. Nothing on this scale of "deletionism" (couldn't resist) has ever been found before. The discovery was surprising enough to get published in Nature. The conclusion - that junk DNA serves little purpose - should not be controversial since it is the opposite claim that generate skepticism. This new evidence "completes" the argument in a way - before we knew of very massive codes that didn't correspond to the organism's complexity. Now we know of a code "too short" to contain to so many genes. ThaddeusB (talk) 05:48, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Pope Francis' first canonisations

Article: Pope Francis#Early issues (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Pope Francis canonises the first 815 saints of his papacy, including the first Colombian Laura of Saint Catherine of Siena. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Less than two months into his papacy, Pope Francis sets a record for the number of Saints canonized at once.
News source(s):
Credits:
Article updated Lihaas (talk) 13:49, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
  • I think the Martyrs of Otranto, who make up 813 of those canonised, would be the better primary article here. --LukeSurl 20:22, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Strong oppose. Religious leader makes religious announcement is not anywhere near significant enough for ITN. This has no meaningful consequences whatsoever. Modest Genius 20:28, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Comment. Generally I'd oppose this as it stands but I could support a nomination of Laura of Saint Catherine of Siena as the first Colombian saint (didn't we post Kateri Tekakwitha as the first indigenous saint in North America?), but speaking as an Irish catholic, saints in general aren't exactly in short supply. GRAPPLE X 20:41, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose Canonisations are not that rare, though this is certainly a large one. I don't see that being the first of this papacy or the first from a country makes it sufficiently important either. Neljack (talk) 20:46, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose This would be like posting when executives sign laws. It's what they do. μηδείς (talk) 22:12, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Support All that really matters is that the story is getting coverage. With over 1 billion Catholic church members world wide, Francis canonizations are easily as "important" as a 71 year old football manager retiring. Post Ferguson we really have to re-evaluate what we consider to be "important". It can't be stressed just how far the "importance" bar was lowered by that posting. note: I opposed posting, but support the admin in determining that there was consensus to post. --IP98 (talk) 22:25, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
What? By counting votes? Breached a basic rule here. HiLo48 (talk) 22:38, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
Can we please keep the discussion in this section to the story under consideration? Ferguson has nothing to do with the Pope creating lots of saints. Modest Genius 23:14, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
Sorry. Most popular religion in the world, large number of canonizations, highly notable. --IP98 (talk) 23:26, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
According to Manchester United themselves, they have 659 million supporters. The claim is rather suspect tho :P --LukeSurl 23:38, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
That figure's only when they're winning, though. GRAPPLE X 23:45, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Support on the basis that this is apparently the largest canonization ever and that it a (potentially) significant impact on Catholic-Muslim relations. See --ThaddeusB (talk) 00:45, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
That article is slightly misleading, though. He didn't "name" 800 new saints, because nobody knows what they were called, except for one of them, apparently. A bit confusing, since shouldn't they all have miracles attributable to them individually? Can't be bothered to research the loophole they found in that, but neutral on the nomination. Formerip (talk) 00:52, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
You can be canonised as a martyr without supporting miracles. Some were calling for the immediate canonisation of John Paul II on that basis, given he was shot and it likely shortened his life. μηδείς (talk) 02:35, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Martyrs are not required to have attributed miracles. --ThaddeusB (talk) 02:36, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
I think speculation about the effect on Catholic-Muslim relations is just crystal ball-gazing. I'm yet to see any reason to suppose that it's likely to have a significant effect on them or any evidence that Muslim leaders have reacted negatively to it since it was announced several months ago. Neljack (talk) 01:10, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
As already noted, includes first Colombian saint. Also moves Francis to the pope who has canonised most saints in one fell swoop. But other than those who have a local devotion to those canonised yesterday, this makes no real difference to the faith of most Catholics. If posted, section of pope's article headed by a piece of pointless posturing by small number of UK politicians is not an appropriate target. Kevin McE (talk) 06:08, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose - This is routine business for the Vatican. (Aside: I don't think the Pope has turned anyone into a cannon; also, how long until we get someone with a name like Saint Bob of Saint Laura of Saint Catherine of Siena?) AlexTiefling (talk) 08:59, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Support - This is definitely not routine business. Canonisation only happens when new saints are recognized, which is irregular. Shii (tock) 13:30, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
We posted Pope Benedict creating two new Doctors of the Church; that's genuinely unusual. Canonisations, although irregular, are still a moderately frequent occurrence. This is especially true since John Paul II canonised so many. AlexTiefling (talk) 13:50, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
Regardless of whether they are regular or irregular, the point is that canonisations are routine. Modest Genius 2·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 14:46, 14 May 2013 (UTC)1:09, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
You mean unlike sports championships or elections. --Jayron32 21:58, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
  • oppose Routine business.
  • Comment Jayron32 makes an interesting point, which we really ought to think about and not simply dismiss. Every single oppose here has been on the basis of "routine" -- and yet a good 80% of ITN's contents are equally routine. They could equally well have been on the grounds of "special interest" -- and yet sports, some science, and (let's be honest) most posted elections are equally "special interest". What it really comes down to is personal preference -- and the dominant personal preference on Misplaced Pages is that major religious announcements of the same frequency as elections are not relevant enough for ITN. Let's be clear that it *is* personal preference and not some objective "notability" ... and that our choices really say more about who we are than what the story is about. For what it is worth, my own personal preference is also that this particular story is not ITN, but I also happen to think that about all sports (and other entertainment stories) and nearly all elections. (Governments come, governments go, and daily life is rarely significantly affected.) Equally, my personal preference was in favour of posting the (scientific) Adam genetic story a few months back -- but I will be the first to say that the story has no effect on daily life. As far as the vast majority of the world was concerned, it was extremely non-notable. - Tenebris 04:06, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Ok, the problem with the lead is that it was rather mundane humdrum. I'm a Catholic and my first reaction was, BFD it's routine. But this was not a routine Canonization. This was a record setting event as the Catholic Church has never canonized this many people at once time. **Note, because I don't have an account, I can't update the article, but the fact that this is a record number of canonizations is indeed meaningful.01:30, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
Not to someone who isn't a Catholic. Churches are surely not in the business of gaining kudos for setting purely internal and artificial records. HiLo48 (talk) 01:51, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Bulgarian election

Article: Bulgarian parliamentary election, 2013 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Citizens for European Development of Bulgaria win a plurality in the Bulgarian parliamentary election (Post)
News source(s): BBC BBC - results
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. Lihaas (talk) 13:49, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Oppose and request closure due to early nomination. The only requirement for an ITNR is article/update quality, which cannot be judged until the results are out and the work has been done on the article. —WFC— FL wishlist 15:36, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

  • It's not a problem to keep an eye on these things in a few hours in advance. There's probably a bit of improving the article we can do before results come in as well. LukeSurl 16:01, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
The nominator here consistently posts these elections days before results are known. Hot Stop 02:45, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Support. To be honest there's not much in English-news reporting about this (clearly just a few wire reports). Numbers are in the article tho. I've done what I can and made what may be a bare-minimum prose update to the article. --LukeSurl 20:17, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Considerably updated and well presentable. Thanks to the updaters. Ready for posting. --RJFF (talk) 21:22, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Support - Article is presentable and interesting. Not a big event in the news, but ITN-worthy for all of that. I also thank the updaters. Jusdafax 03:46, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Posting. Adding party leader, we could use the photo since there's none on the ITN at the moment. --Tone 08:28, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

References

Nominators often include links to external websites and other references in discussions on this page. It is usually best to provide such links using the inline URL syntax rather than using <ref></ref> tags, because that keeps all the relevant information in the same place as the nomination without having to jump to this section, and facilitates the archiving process.

For the times when <ref></ref> tags are being used, here are their contents:

Category: