• edit
• history
• watch

• Syrian Civil War:
  • Mortar fire kills two people near the Damascus Opera House. (AP via Yahoo! News)
• 2014 pro-Russian protests in Ukraine:
  • Pro-Russian demonstrators seize an administrative headquarters in the eastern Ukrainian city of Donetsk. (BBC News)
• 2014 Aswan tribal clashes:
  • Two more people are killed in Egypt's Aswan in a third day of clashes. Death toll rises to 25. (Reuters) (Bloomberg)

• The world's two largest cement manufacturers, LaFarge of France and Holcim of Switzerland, agree to a merger that would create a firm with a market value of $55 billion. (Reuters)
• Nigeria's economy passes South Africa's to become the largest in Africa. (BBC News

• The Ambassador of Italy to Turkmenistan is charged for alleged child abuse while on holiday in the Philippines. (Reuters)

• Costa Rican general election, 2014:
  • Voters in Costa Rica go to the polls for a general election. Luis Guillermo Solís is the only presidential candidate left in the race following the withdrawal of Johnny Araya. (BBC News)
• Hungarian parliamentary election, 2014:
  • Voters in Hungary go to the polls, and Prime Minister Viktor Orbán's Fidesz and their allies the Christian Democrats win re-election easily, with 45% of the vote. (BBC News)
• Russian municipal elections
  • Communist Party of the Russian Federation candidate Anatoly Lokot was elected mayor of the third-largest city of Novosibirsk, defeating ruling United Russia party candidate. (The Moscow Times)

• In cricket, Australia win the women's ICC World Twenty20 tournament and Sri Lanka win the men's tournament. (BBC Sport)
• In athletics, Kenenisa Bekele of Ethiopia wins the Paris Marathon. (France 24)
• In rowing, Oxford beats Cambridge in the 160th edition of The Boat Race. (BBC Sport)
• In women's road cycling, Ellen van Dijk wins the Tour of Flanders World Cup race. (BBC Sport)

Chuck Stone

• Nominated by Jinkinson (talk · give credit)

• Oppose article quality is very poor, not seeing how this person was top of their field, no awards noted in the article. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:16, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
• Question. Which of the Recent Deaths criteria does this person meet? 331dot (talk) 17:13, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Answer Criterion 2--being "widely regarded as a very important figure in his or her field." The obituary I linked to above says that "His reputation grew after he was hired as the first black columnist for the Philadelphia Daily News, where he worked as a columnist and editor from 1972 to 1991. He was known for being outspoken on discrimination, police brutality and racism." Jinkinson talk to me 21:34, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

I didn't say so before but a blurb is out of the question; should be considered just an RD nomination. I respectfully disagree with the assessment given; if the field is journalism, I don't think being the first black columnist for a single newspaper makes him that notable(if he was the first for any newspaper, maybe). It doesn't mention any awards won for his work (two nominations are) or other critical acclaim, or if others in his field were influenced by him. 331dot (talk) 02:40, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Wrestlemania XXX

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.

• Updated and nominated by Grapple X (talk · give credit)

• Oppose You could ask the scriptwriters whether we will ever see the like of this again, or not. This is like reporting the contents of the latest episode of any TV sit-com or drama as news. HiLo48 (talk) 03:34, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

  I'll go grab a crystal ball and get on that; you're right that it's scripted but this is the culmination of something that started in 1991--even if they started trying to replicate it right now we'd still not see it again until 2037. GRAPPLE X 03:40, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

If Alf Stewart was outed as a paedophile tonight we wouldn't post it here. HiLo48 (talk) 05:09, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

• Support - its not sports news, but it is entertainment news. WWE is followed by a large number of people and like Grapple says this record will likely never be broken (even though script writers could in theory do so). --ThaddeusB (talk) 03:53, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose impossible to bring myself to argue against the nomination of scripted pablum as if it had anything to do with reality. μηδείς (talk) 03:55, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
• Support - Record in the field, even if it is scripted. Also, this might be an interesting read; there is considerable staying power and fitness required for pro wrestling, even if it is scripted.  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:11, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

It's simply NOT a record. It's a fictional story about a fictional record. Or perhaps more like a fictional play about a fictional record that's been performed by some actors. HiLo48 (talk) 10:21, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

• A record in its field, which would be "scripted professional wrestling". Is it a scripted record? Yes. Does that mean it is not a record in its field? No. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:16, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

If I write a story about a longer record, will that be posted here? HiLo48 (talk) 02:29, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

• Weak support but oppose current blurb. This might be some sort of entertainment news, but we shouldn't post the proposed blurb since it is scripted(if they had wanted that person to win again they could have done it). I would support a more general blurb that Wrestlemania XXX occurred. 331dot (talk) 10:15, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

• Support - Matters to people who care about the sport/entertainment and it's participants, therefore worthy of mention — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.178.108.226 (talk)
  • Everything matters to someone; the question is if this has the notability and news coverage to be posted. 331dot (talk) 11:33, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose blurb. Event is worldwide and draws huge interest but the blurb is not encyclopedic for the myriad reasons given above regarding scripts, acting etc. If the blurb had said something like "Wrestlemania XXX draws the largest television crowd for any professional wrestling event in history", it might draw a mild support. However, even then it'd be better suited for DYK, just as this factoid-based blurb is too. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:09, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose Do we post about major plot developments in soap operas and the like? No. So why post this fictional plot development? Fgf10 (talk) 16:08, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose Regardless of the fact it's scripted, I don't actually see that it's massively notable. Black Kite (talk) 17:09, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose I'd be happy to support is this "sport" wasn't scripted and in fact, do we ever see WWF results in the back page of the news, no not unless it is scripted. Donnie Park (talk) 18:13, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
• Strong oppose Pro "wrestling" is not a sporting competition but a scripted theatrical performance. I find comparisons to plot developments of soap operas quite fair. We would not post any stuff – however unusual – from the The Bold and the Beautiful as news, would we? --hydrox (talk) 02:47, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Hungarian election/ Viktor Orban

Article: Hungarian parliamentary election, 2014 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Fidesz win a majority in the Hungarian parliamentary election (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Viktor Orban is re-elected Prime Minister of Hungary.

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

Nominator's comments: ITNR, results should be out shortly as voting has concluded. --Lihaas (talk) 18:33, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

• Are parliamentary elections really ITNR? Also, the winners here are well known in advance. Nergaal (talk) 18:58, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Indeed they are. Neljack (talk) 20:49, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

• support with Altblurb II μηδείς (talk) 22:24, 6 April 2014 (UTC)(actual support)
• Support; maybe add something about the various parties? -- Ypnypn (talk) 22:40, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
• Support and agree that something on party standings should be included. Medeis, keep the ad hominem stuff to yourself, please. AlexTiefling (talk) 23:19, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Calm down, Alex. The nominator originally said It meets at least two of the de facto criteria here: it doesn't have to do with the US, and it's about the leader of a major country. Of course, I expect everyone to pooh-pooh the significance of this event just like they do with all my other nominations and I pretended to oppose on his own grounds. μηδείς (talk) 06:19, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

I have re-opened this given it was closed by a competing editor who neither signed the closure nor notified the voting editors nor copied their votes to an unsupported and technically separate nomination below. μηδείς (talk) 04:02, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

ITN is not a competition. It is unproductive to have two nominations for same thing. If either Lihaas or Jinkinson want to pat themselves on the back for nominating this, they can feel free to do so. I will combine the nominations now. --ThaddeusB (talk) 04:08, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

I think the blurbs should be merged: With Fidesz winning a plurality in the Hungarian parliamentary election, Viktor Orban is re-elected Prime Minister of Hungary. μηδείς (talk) 05:56, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Thank you ThaddeusBb, I have no intention to compete, it was just open and ITNR below so no reason to rediscuss. Completely stupid comment above you.

Let me add that by precedent we don't mention the latter party. So @"Fidesz win a plurality was the proper one"Lihaas (talk) 09:37, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

• According to the projections Fidesz will win a majority (quite possibly a two-thirds one, allowing them to unilaterally make constitutional changes), not a plurality - see the Reuters article. I have therefore changed "plurality" to "majority" in the blurbs. Neljack (talk) 09:45, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
• Support — Though an expected result, it's significant (perhaps ominous?). Re "majority" cited by Neljack, suggest caution — Reuters also says, "...but only by one seat. Final results could still push Fidesz back below the threshold." Sca (talk) 13:45, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

True, only projections...changed blurb (and swapped them)Lihaas (talk) 17:48, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

• Not updated - neither article has been updated at this time. Orban's article would need some trimming of existing material in addition to an update to warrant posting. --ThaddeusB (talk) 14:01, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Now updated wih proseLihaas (talk) 15:45, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Cement merger

• Nominated by ThaddeusB (talk · give credit)

weak support its good per the Fyffes precedent. But im not sure how its structured. Will one own more than the other? Or is it a merger of equals? Someone must have paid more in stock, or was it a cash merger? Also if there is regulatory doubt then id waitLihaas (talk) 22:02, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Holcim is technically the acquiring party, but in reality it is a merger of equals. --ThaddeusB (talk) 23:30, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

should we structure it like Fyffes then?Lihaas (talk) 01:06, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

I think either (or both ) articles could receive the update if that is the question. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:03, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

What's the Fyffes precedent? (for those of us uneducated :) ) CaptRik (talk) 19:35, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Lihaas is referring to this blurb: "Chiquita and Fyffes agree to a merger that would create the world's largest banana producer." which was posted last month. A suppose the precendent he refers to (even though we don't work of precendents) is something like "create industry's largest company = post worthy" --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:06, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. I'm going to sit on the fence on this nom, i'm pondering where the granularity should be for articles like this (for example, cement manufacturer vs industrial material manufacturer, or banana producer vs fruit producer). CaptRik (talk) 11:48, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose neither article appear to even mention this (both listing each other as a competitor) and the Holcim article is barely stub quality. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:40, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

  Yep, hence why I said the articles would require significant work. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:03, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

  Then dare I be bold enough to suggest that in your pursuit of more business coverage on ITN, you fix up the articles yourself before nominating them, thus removing one of the two major stumbling blocks, i.e. article quality (the other being ITN-worthiness). Unless you or someone else can be bothered to fix these up, this nomination will fail dismally. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:02, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

  I do intend to work on this tonight. (I hope you know I would never want anything of poor quality posted.) As to nomination timing, it is kind of a lose-lose situation. If I fix it and then nominate it is too late to get enough comments (because it takes a while to fix an article of poor quality). If I nominate first I get opposes on quality grounds. --ThaddeusB (talk) 16:20, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

That's ifine what oyou are doing. TRM enjoys bitching around here instead of being helpful. Cest la vie and all of that. Keep up the good work though ;)Lihaas (talk) 17:54, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Very helpful Lihaas, very helpful. Keep up your great work here, whatever "ifine what oyou" means... Of course, if you could spare a moment, you could tell me what part of my constructive oppose here constitutes a "bitching"? You could also point me to the nomination which you made that I support. You could do more... but I'm guessing you won't. If not, I suggest you wind your neck in and do something useful for a change. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:35, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Boat Race

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

Do we normally post the Army-Navy Game? μηδείς (talk) 21:17, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

We have not posted much sports of cultural significance. I would like that to change. --ThaddeusB (talk) 21:35, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

If someone suggested posting the Harvard-Yale Game I would assume it was either a joke or a real sign of that dreaded institutional bias. I don't think there's any chance at all Britain is underrepresented here culturally--although it was very weird we didn't post the Bafta's. μηδείς (talk) 22:19, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

The four most culturally significant sporting events in the United States are (in no particular order) the Super Bowl, the World Series, March Madness, and the Kentucky Derby. Three of these of posted, while the exclusion is one of the greatest injustices on ITN in my opinion. Like March Madness (and the Army-Navy game), the significance of The Boat Race goes well beyond the "level of play". While I don't know what the most significant sports are in every country of the world, I am certainly open to listening to testimony of my fellow Wikipedians. When such nominations hopefully occur in the future, they will have my support 100%. --ThaddeusB (talk) 23:39, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Well, on a quick count, so far this year there have been six ITN items related to the United Kingdom, the majority RD. Compare that to 20 for the USA and I think you've found where the systemic bias is here. In particular, the number of American "entertainers" listed for RD is excessive, IMO. GoldenRing (talk) 10:06, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Excluding RD there have been 3 US related blurbs since January 1: Janet Yellen as Fed Chair, posted Jan 7, the Super Bowl posted Feb 3, and the Washington Mud Slide, posted March 25. --Jayron32 12:28, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

I did kind of point to entertainment-related RDs as the main culprit. I guess you're right, then, three blurbs is reasonable - so long as you don't count "The United States announces that it will relinquish control of the DNS root zone," or the Oscars, or the Grammys, or the Polar Vortex, or the genetic sequencing of ancient native Americans. So that'd be eight blurbs, not three. And before you complain that the genetic sequencing of ancient Americans is not US-related as it predates the union, realise that I also counted the discovery of the oldest known footprints outside of Africa (in Edinburgh) towards the UK tally. GoldenRing (talk) 13:10, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

The UK is a smaller country, so you would expect it to have less stories than the US even if no bias existed. Regardless, the proper way to correct bias is to nominate and improve more non-US stories, not to oppose notable US stories. --ThaddeusB (talk) 13:58, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Er, yeah. And this is a UK story that someone was opposing (or at least commenting against) on the grounds that UK stories are over-represented here. GoldenRing (talk) 14:02, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Um, in fact it's your nomination of a UK story. What's the problem again? GoldenRing (talk) 14:04, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

I don't have a problem. I am happy to have this story posted (obviously). But, if someone is going to make accusations of pro-US bias on ITN, I am going to respond. Of all the areas on Misplaced Pages, ITN is the least biased. --ThaddeusB (talk) 14:12, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Actually, WP:TFP is pretty unbiased. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:03, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

OK, I will concede on that point and revise to "ITN is among the least biased". --ThaddeusB (talk) 16:25, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Support: Agree with nominator's rationale. 62.249.160.48 (talk) 22:05, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Support Tradition is important. HiLo48 (talk) 22:56, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

• Support per the rationale given. 331dot (talk) 01:40, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
• Support although the wrong result. Have adjusted blurb for BritEng (see BBC for example). The Rambling Man (talk) 08:18, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
• Support Per nom. Also viewed by approximately 130 million people so clearly important enough globally. CaptRik (talk) 11:45, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Indeed, not to mention the seven million plus viewers in Britain alone (i.e. about 11% of the population). The Rambling Man (talk) 11:51, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
• Support The event has huge cultural and traditional value in the United Kingdom. One only needs to look at the popularity shown by the public, most of whom having never attended either of the universities. Given the consensus here, perhaps a more experienced user might like to nominate it for WP:ITN/R. 86.170.98.9 (talk) 12:19, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
• Marked ready --ThaddeusB (talk) 13:49, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
• 'Support Overdue for posting. Major tradition and much media attention both in the UK and worldwide. Obvious post. Fgf10 (talk) 16:10, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
• Posted. I voted, but it's a clear consensus. So sue me. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:38, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Post-posting apology, it appears that another admin has taken it upon himself to adjust the blurb to something akin to a tabloid headline with no context or meaning to non-experts. The fact that both teams race in variations of blue is entirely irrelevant to this blurb and unhelpful in understanding the news story. I have asked for this to be removed and reverted to something akin to the blurb that was agreed here with a community consensus. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:45, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Indeed, you rushed to my talk page to complain about my "disgraceful" insertion of team nicknames appearing in countless reliable sources and our article about the event. —David Levy 19:58, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
      • Indeed, and I look forward to you restoring the blurb as agreed by consensus here, not your own personal preference. The sooner the better. Why would you feel the need to suddenly inject nicknames and your own preferences in a blurb that has achieved significant community consensus? The Rambling Man (talk) 20:04, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
        • Administrators frequently edit posted ITN blurbs' wording (addressing all sorts of style and linking issues — most of which aren't even considered at ITN/C — in the process). I do so on a regular basis. I've received very few complaints over the years, with yours being the first in which my edit was labeled "disgraceful".
          One common reason to modify the blurbs is to sidestep the "defeat"/"defeats" issue that invariably causes some readers to mistakenly believe that we've goofed (and even has led well-meaning admins to "correct" the wording by switching to an inappropriate English variety). I saw team nicknames in the bold-linked article and confirmed their use in multiple reliable sources' coverage of the event (including those in the UK). This, in my view, was an opportunity for commonality. You're entitled to disagree, but I'd like to think that my efforts (here and in general) are better than "disgraceful". —David Levy 21:43, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
      • Fixed now, thankfully. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:24, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
        • You could have mentioned that I self-reverted. —David Levy 21:43, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
          • Indeed, perhaps you should participate in the ITN process rather than wholesale re-write the blurb after there's been a consensus on what to post. Particularly when you "Americanised" it to such an extent it became alien to most of the interested audience. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:19, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
            • I "Americanised" the blurb by incorporating information reported by numerous British media outlets (including The Oxford Times, the Cambridge News and the BBC)? —David Levy 07:09, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
              • Yep. You made a twee headline using nicknames and "editions" etc. Never mind, it's fixed now, perhaps you could participate in the ITN process rather than wholesale re-write blurbs in future after a consensus has been found. Or perhaps we shouldn't write blurbs at all and allow you to do that on our behalf? The Rambling Man (talk) 09:23, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
                • Yep. You made a twee headline using nicknames
                  Again, the teams' nicknames appear in our article and in news reports (including headlines) from countless reliable sources (British and otherwise).
                  and "editions" etc.
                  Now you're referring to language that I copied from our article's lead verbatim (thereby correcting the erroneous treatment of "The 160th Boat Race" as a proper name). Apparently, I was mistaken in my assumption that the article's introductory sentence was worded appropriately when you posted the item.
                  Never mind, it's fixed now, perhaps you could participate in the ITN process rather than wholesale re-write blurbs in future after a consensus has been found.
                  I'm no stranger to this page, but I participate in the ITN process mainly by improving blurbs after they go live. Some of them (generally not posted by you, I'll note) slip through with major flaws (such as factual inaccuracies, links to incorrect articles, and especially style errors/inconsistencies). This reflects the simple fact that these discussions rarely focus significant attention on the blurbs' precise wording. Some administrators proofread them before posting, while others (who shall remain nameless) simply copy and paste whatever happens to have been written. So the concept that these blurbs typically are the products of inviolable consensus formulated here simply doesn't reflect reality. Multiple administrators routinely perform substantial revisions to posted blurbs, and our role in the ITN process is no less valid than anyone else's. Like all who take part, there's no "disgrace" in our inability to be infallible. —David Levy 10:55, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
                  • I'm not sure of the point in us discussing a specific blurb here at ITN/C, one, in fact, that was corrected for BritEng, just for you to completely 100% re-write it after I had posted it. That is genuinely problematic, particularly when the original blurb was 100% factually and grammatically accurate, not to mention succinct and in-line with community consensus. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:57, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Nigerian economy

• Nominated by ThaddeusB (talk · give credit)

• Good news for Nigeria that its economy is growing, but this is certainly a matter of estimates, certainly doesn't reflect any black-market economy, and reminds me of another story we posted three times, Voyager leaving the Solar System. μηδείς (talk) 21:20, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

When was it posted 3 times? I remember it being struck down 3 times. Nergaal (talk) 21:43, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

I find searching the archives here impossible, but I remember arguing in favor once, and it being posted, then against, and it being posted, and someone saying it was the third time. In any case what we've got here is a declaration by some statistician, not any real hard fact. μηδείς (talk) 23:18, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

• Weak support I learned in school that SAf has the only developed economy in Af, and if Nigeria surpassed it is definitely notable. Nergaal (talk) 21:43, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

• Nergaal, South Africa certainly isn't a developed economy. The majority of the population live in poverty and it is actually poorer than several other African countries (e.g. Botswana, Libya, Seychelles, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Mauritius). Neljack (talk) 10:30, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Libya is close to splitting and none of the other countries have a wordwide impact. Nergaal (talk) 11:58, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

comment im leaning oppose here as its a regional thing, and also moastly just the raw numbers of population. What are on-the-grounds changes here? Highest market cap in its stock exchange?Lihaas (talk) 22:04, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Support. Suggest change to something like "After rebasing their GDP, Nigeria surpasses South Africa to become Africa's biggest economy." That is the significance of the change. --LT910001 (talk) 22:28, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

See this article: and many others. Have created article on Yemi Kale, the head of Nigerian national bureau of statistics who coordinated this rebase. --LT910001 (talk) 22:30, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

• Support Becoming Africa's largest economy is pretty significant news. I'd also like to echo the fact that the change, however, occurred as result of the rebasing that was implemented in calculating the GDP.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 22:36, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
• Strong oppose This had nothing to do with changes in the Nigerian or indeed South African economies. What has happened is that the way GDP is calculated has been altered to include a whole raft of sectors that were formerly excluded. If you include more businesses it stands to reason the calculated figure is going to increase. The real story here is that a national government has changed the way it arrives at an official statistic. Is that really ITN worthy? 87.112.110.28 (talk) 02:30, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
• that's what ive been reading to that the barometers changed. strong oppose we can only compare apples with apples (and not even red with green)Lihaas (talk) 02:33, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Yes, but nominally this is still very important, as this more accurately reflects the actual GDP of the country. If even by a metric China surpassed the US as the world's leading economy, that would be notable; surely this would be the case here, too? This has the potential to alter the spread of aid money, investment by foreign and domestic companies, and may ultimately change the way Nigerians and others perceive the country. --LT910001 (talk) 02:55, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Nnope, it has to be the same barometer.Lihaas (talk) 09:40, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose Should be based on a common measure of GDP, same penalties and boosts for both. --MASEM (t) 03:02, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose In all probability, if the latest methodology is correct, it overtook South Africa some time ago. They've just changed their calculations and caught up on the change now. And of course we don't know the soundness of the change in measurement - after all, the Nigerian government presumably has an interest in portraying the country's economy as large. Neljack (talk) 10:23, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Captain America

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.

• Nominated by ThaddeusB (talk · give credit)

• Oppose I'm not a big fan of "highly anticipated product makes a lot of money" nominations, and since this one isn't an absolute record I don't think it's a very big deal. Taylor Trescott - + _{my edits} 20:38, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
• Strong oppose This is exactly the kind of news we should never post. It's a trivial record in a non-sense category that many have surely never heard of and typical example of a tabloid story. I wonder what will be the next thing for posting from the film industry if we really regress on posting such things. Maybe the highest-grossing film in a single country or the film with the highest box-office earnings to total film length ratio?--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 20:53, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
  • A "typical example of a tabloid story" would be celeb X is dating celeb Y. The Wall Street Journal' does not cover tabloid stories. --ThaddeusB (talk) 21:02, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
• I tend to agree with Taylor. Are we now going to post the record for each month? Unless there's some reason why the April record is particularly important, I will oppose. Neljack (talk) 20:56, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
  • April is used as a barometer for the all-important summer movie season. --ThaddeusB (talk) 21:02, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
• Oppose even if this is record seats filled, as opposed to ticket revenues, which simply follows from ticket-price inflation, it's less important in the long run than the Nigeria vs SA story. We can revisit this in three months if it surpasses Nemo and Titanic. μηδείς (talk) 21:23, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

oppose if it needs all the cavats like april then it ought not to be herLihaas (talk) 22:06, 6 April 2014 (UTC) e

• Oppose posting the record for a specific month. 331dot (talk) 01:34, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

RD: Peter Matthiessen

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.

• Nominated by The Rambling Man (talk · give credit)

• Not sure the awards amount to much, no Pulitzer, no Nobel. One interesting tidbit that is woefully unexplained is the claim that he was working for the CIA. This is entirely unexplained. The article is very short of citations on things like his '58 divorce.

oppose per above and per TRM's criteria of being top of his feild, those awards are not the top.Lihaas (talk) 18:35, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Yet you support a journalist who wasn't "top of feild"? Perhaps it's time to start disregarding your opinions. (P.S. it's "field"). The Rambling Man (talk) 18:52, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Just as soon as we invalidate yours.Lihaas (talk) 19:46, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Cyclone Ita

• Updated and nominated by Cyclonebiskit (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Jason Rees (talk · give credit)

• Support - significant natural disaster, article quality is adequate already (but by all means continue to improve it if you can.) --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:53, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
• Support; notable disaster with wide effects. 331dot (talk) 16:00, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
• Support decent article, worth bringing it to ITN. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:33, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
• Support and marking ready. Impact is local but significant and encyclopedic, will affect Solomon Islands for years to come. μηδείς (talk) 18:34, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
• Support This has been leading the news here in New Zealand. Sadly the death toll is likely to rise, with dozens of people missing. Neljack (talk) 20:44, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
• Posted Stephen 23:00, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Luis Guillermo Solís

• Nominated by mvblair (talk · give credit)

• Support ITN/R although I don't care for the blurbs. I did have to look to the fourth paragraph to see that the runnoff only happened yesterday, when I opened the article I was wondering why it would be ITN if the election was in February. The election should be linked and bolded in the blurb however, not the president. --kelapstick 21:55, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

April 5

Portal:Current events/2014 April 5

April 5, 2014 (2014-04-05) (Saturday) edit history watch Armed conflicts and attacks 2014 Aswan tribal clashes: Twenty-three people are killed in a gunfight between feuding tribes near the Egyptian city of Aswan. (Al-Ahram) (The Hindu) Two Italian priests and a Canadian nun have been kidnapped by gunmen in Cameroon. (AFP via Yahoo! News) Business and economy Tyson Foods recalls 75,000 pounds of frozen chicken nuggets due to complaints that pieces of plastic were found in its products. (KTVU) (USDA) Disasters and accidents At least three are killed and seven injured when a passenger train derails in the Tasikmalaya District, in Indonesia's West Java Island after hitting mounds of mud following a downpour of rain. (MSN) Politics and elections Afghan presidential election, 2014: Amidst violence, voters in Afghanistan elect a new President in what is the country's first democratic transfer of power. (BBC News) (HuffPost) Australian Senate special election in Western Australia, 2014: Voters in the Australian state of Western Australia go to the polls for a Federal Senate election. (AAP via News Limited) Sinn Féin’s Martin McGuinness, the Deputy First Minister of Northern Ireland accepts an invitation to attend several events during the forthcoming State visit of Irish President Michael D. Higgins to the United Kingdom, including a banquet to be held by Elizabeth II at Windsor Castle. (RTÉ News) Religion Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Atlanta archbishop Wilton Gregory announces he will sell his recently-acquired $2.2 million mansion amid criticism amongst parishioners. (KATC) Sports In horse racing, Pineau De Re, trained by Dr. Richard Newland and ridden by 37-year-old Leighton Aspell, who returned to racing after coming out of retirement, wins the 2014 Grand National at Aintree racecourse with the odds of 25/1. (BBC Sport) MH370 Ping Detected Article: Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 (talk · history · tag) Blurb: ​ A Chinese Navy ship searching for Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 detects a "ping" of the same frequency as that emitted by the plane's flight recorders. (Post) News source(s): Reuters Credits: Nominated by Jinkinson (talk · give credit) Nominator's comments: We've featured two events about this plane on ITN before. --Jinkinson talk to me 18:45, 6 April 2014 (UTC) Oppose everything I have read says they hear something but don't know if it is MH370, and that all recorders (including those that are on ships) also use the same frequency. Unless it is verified to actually be MH370, it shouldn't be posted. Even the blurb posted doesn't say that they actually found it, just that it is on the same frequency. --kelapstick 18:50, 6 April 2014 (UTC) Oppose the only news story to report on this from a couple of weeks back is the discovery of the wreckage/black box. Absolutely no point in posting speculation. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:54, 6 April 2014 (UTC) What the hell is wrong with all of you? Why are your standards so unreasonably strict for ITN inclusion--except when it comes to cricket tournaments and horse races? Is the entire month of APril Opposite day or something? Because otherwise, barring an extended and unfunny April Fool's Joke, there is no possible explanation for your idiotic oppose votes. (Sorry for my rudeness, but I've been having some trouble with my real life.) Jinkinson talk to me 19:07, 6 April 2014 (UTC) We don't even know if this black box discovery is a black box, let alone that of MH0370. If and when it is proven to be so, we nominate and post the discovery of the remains of the aircraft. By the way, if you're having a bad time in real life, this probably isn't the most relaxing and inspirational forum for you. Good luck. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:11, 6 April 2014 (UTC) (edit conflict) My opposition is because there is no story, they hear a ping, they don't know what it is. Until they find the black box, which they haven't, there is nothing to post. Until they have something confirmed this is no different than the dozens of unrelated floating things that they have found over the last few weeks.--kelapstick 19:13, 6 April 2014 (UTC) I agree with the Cricket comment, but the major, encyclopedic issue is the loss of the plane itself, not posting every follow-up. If we posted this, would we also post when the first wreckage was retrieved? Then when the search for bodies was called off? ITN is not a newspaper or a 24 hour news network. It's a place to post encyclopedically significant articles. And cricket. μηδείς (talk) 19:17, 6 April 2014 (UTC) Oppose for now - iff wreckage is found, then we should seriously consider posting for a third time. Yes, a third posting is probably unprecedented, but it would be a clear case of WP:IAR applying. Mjroots (talk) 19:49, 6 April 2014 (UTC) Oppose until it is determined that this is indeed from the plane, which is not certain yet. We don't need to post every milestone in the search. 331dot (talk) 01:37, 7 April 2014 (UTC) ICC World Twenty20 Articles: 2014 ICC World Twenty20 (talk · history · tag) and 2014 ICC Women's World Twenty20 (talk · history · tag) Blurb: ​ In cricket, Australia win the women's ICC World Twenty20 tournament and Sri Lanka win the men's tournament (Post) News source(s): BBC Credits: Nominated by Lugnuts (talk · give credit) Updated by Aircorn (talk · give credit) Both articles updated 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: Awaiting the mens' tournament result, approx 1 billion people will be watching this Lugnuts 12:32, 6 April 2014 (UTC) Support once the other item is updated. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:36, 6 April 2014 (UTC) Oppose until there is more text, preferably including a description of the final game (probably best done at 2014 ICC World Twenty20 Finals for men). --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:51, 6 April 2014 (UTC) WP:SOFIXIT. Lugnuts 15:53, 6 April 2014 (UTC) Not everyone is knowledgeable about the subject of articles that might need fixing, or has a free moment to do so. 331dot (talk) 15:58, 6 April 2014 (UTC) If you've got time to complain it hasn't got enough text, you've got enough time to fix it. Lugnuts 18:07, 6 April 2014 (UTC) C'mon Nugluts, you know as well as I do, there are many folks who just comment on Misplaced Pages. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:15, 6 April 2014 (UTC) That is an incredibly inaccurate comment. It takes all of 30 seconds to comment here - fixing an article takes far more time than that. --ThaddeusB (talk) 18:18, 6 April 2014 (UTC) 35 seconds? Seems that common sense prevailed. Lugnuts 16:57, 7 April 2014 (UTC) I may do so, but I am certainly not obligated to do so in order to oppose. --ThaddeusB (talk) 17:29, 6 April 2014 (UTC) But the Finals article isn't in the blurb so isn't part of this nomination....? And the "blurbed" articles have plenty of text according to the ITN criteria... The Rambling Man (talk) 17:26, 6 April 2014 (UTC) The text should be added either way. (As you like to point out, there are no official requirements so I am certainly allowed to judge an article as inadequately updated IMO.) I was merely suggesting the best place to do so, which would of course then be used in the blurb instead of the other article. --ThaddeusB (talk) 17:29, 6 April 2014 (UTC) So you oppose the blurb then, the articles linked therein? The Rambling Man (talk) 17:30, 6 April 2014 (UTC) Sorry for the confusion. I am opposed to the currently nominated articles based on lack of text. that can be fixed by improving either the nominated articles or the final game article. I am not opposed to posting the tournament article if it is improved first. --ThaddeusB (talk) 18:18, 6 April 2014 (UTC) strong oppose this is not the top tournament in cricket. We have the proper WC and we could probably post the leading annual test team (which is the top of cricket)Lihaas (talk) 18:28, 6 April 2014 (UTC) This is the top tournament in one of only three formats of the world game (and on ITN/R). We definitely should not be posting the leading "annual test team" (whatever that means) as it changes based on Test results and there's no such concept. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:55, 6 April 2014 (UTC) Question how many cricket stories do we have every year? By comparison, I know baseball has one each year. Nergaal (talk) 19:00, 6 April 2014 (UTC) Per ITNR, approximately three, depending on the calendar. Which is fine considering the general population who watch cricket vs those who watch baseball. And this isn't an ITNR suggestion, it's ITNC, so it's really irrelevant how many others we may have posted. And yes, this is an ITNR already. If you wish to discuss the number of cricket articles listed at ITNR, I suggest you do it at ITNR's talk page. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:16, 6 April 2014 (UTC) Comment Added some text to the Womans page. Don't have time to do anymore right now, but if no one beats me to it I will do the same to the Mens in about five hours time. AIRcorn (talk) 19:50, 6 April 2014 (UTC) Thank you - that is the kind of update I am looking for. Update the lead (it is still future tense and has nothing about teh tournament itself) and likewise update the men's article and you'll have my support. --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:45, 6 April 2014 (UTC) Done. Got to run again, but it should be ready enough to post now. AIRcorn (talk) 02:06, 7 April 2014 (UTC) Thank you Aircorn. I can now support the articles on qaulity grounds (notability is pre-established by ITNR). --ThaddeusB (talk) 04:01, 7 April 2014 (UTC) Support. It is certainly the highest level of 20/20 cricket, which is certainly a big deal in South Asia and is probably a bigger deal in the English speaking cricket countries than a lot of cricket traditionalists care to admit.--Johnsemlak (talk) 13:11, 7 April 2014 (UTC) Posted. Bencherlite 14:04, 7 April 2014 (UTC) Grand National 2014 Article: 2014 Grand National (talk · history · tag) Blurb: ​ In horse racing, Pineau de Re wins the Grand National. (Post) News source(s): BBC Credits: Nominated by LukeSurl (talk · give credit) Article updated The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.Nominator's comments: ITN/R and updated. --LukeSurl 10:52, 6 April 2014 (UTC) Weak support article in reasonable condition but bare URLs in the refs need to be fixed and the SPs seem to be missing from the first table. Also, not sure where the silks are referenced. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:12, 6 April 2014 (UTC) I've run reflinks and added a source for the colours. --LukeSurl 11:31, 6 April 2014 (UTC) Starting prices added and referenced. --LukeSurl 12:09, 6 April 2014 (UTC) Support - article is in acceptable condition, update is of good quality. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:48, 6 April 2014 (UTC) Perhaps 'In horse racing, Richard Newland's Pineau de Re, ridden by Leighton Aspell, wins the Grand National '? Thanks, Matty.007 13:31, 7 April 2014 (UTC) RD: Kumba Ialá Article: Kumba Ialá (talk · history · tag) Recent deaths nomination (Post) Credits: Updated and nominated by Lihaas (talk · give credit) Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Misplaced Pages article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.Nominator's comments: Former head of state is "top of his field". Also the instability there and its drug links to europe make it notable despite its size. --Lihaas (talk) 18:52, 5 April 2014 (UTC) Support former head of state. Article is in a reasonable state too which makes a lovely change. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:24, 5 April 2014 (UTC) Support Certainly had a significant impact on his country, given the instability of his tenure - culminating in his overthrow by a military coup. However, there are some negative statements in the article that need to be either cited or removed - for instance, the bits on financial mismanagement and imprisoning opposition activists. Neljack (talk) 23:26, 5 April 2014 (UTC) Could you tag the offending statements to facilitate them being fixed? --ThaddeusB (talk) 02:55, 6 April 2014 (UTC) Done. Neljack (talk) 06:47, 6 April 2014 (UTC) And I've found sources for them, so this can be ignored now. Neljack (talk) 11:13, 6 April 2014 (UTC) Support as a former head of state, but the lead states that he converted to Islam and changed his name to Mohamed Ialá Embaló; should the listing be that? 331dot (talk) 02:28, 6 April 2014 (UTC) Oppose not-quite one-term president, not prime minister, of a rather small state with nothing besides his being deposed of any notability. μηδείς (talk) 02:56, 6 April 2014 (UTC) Comment - although this has been marked ready by Lihaas, the lead still sucks, which is why I have refrained from supporting. --ThaddeusB (talk) 19:12, 6 April 2014 (UTC) (edit conflict)What changes do you seek? Im nore sure what it needs.Lihaas (talk) 19:49, 6 April 2014 (UTC) Per the big yellow maintenance tag, "This article's lead section may not adequately summarize key points of its contents." The Rambling Man (talk) 19:52, 6 April 2014 (UTC) User:ThaddeusB, ]better?Lihaas (talk) 22:11, 6 April 2014 (UTC) I am not explicitly opposing, but I would expect a subject of this level of importance to have a lead roughly twice as long as it is at current. --ThaddeusB (talk) 23:27, 6 April 2014 (UTC) I really don't know what to add for the sae of it, but it has more than the requisite update ethat most/many posted ones do lately. Feel free to add itLihaas (talk) 02:23, 7 April 2014 (UTC) The lead should summarize the entire article. There is current zero on his early life, zero on his pre-presidential political career, and basically zero on what he did as president. --ThaddeusB (talk) 04:04, 7 April 2014 (UTC) tHE CONTROVERSY around it is there...don't understand why one article is penalized on his technicalities when the section is updated. (ad his presiendeitla period IS sumarisedLihaas (talk) 09:40, 7 April 2014 (UTC) Considering I am not opposing, I don't see how you can say I am penalizing it. I certainly I am not obligated to support something. (I am currently neutral and gave a way I would move to support.) --ThaddeusB (talk) 13:53, 7 April 2014 (UTC) Not accusing you personally ;)Lihaas (talk) 17:50, 7 April 2014 (UTC) Afghan presidential election 2014 Closing this as, according to what i just added to the page, the result will be affirmed by mid-May (not to mention the 2nd round)Lihaas (talk) 18:09, 5 April 2014 (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: Afghan presidential election, 2014 (talk · history · tag) Blurb: ​ Amidst violence and heavy security, Afghanistan elects <NAME> as President in the country's first democratic transferral of power. (Post) News source(s): Credits: Nominated by Iamstupido (talk · give credit) 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: A national election plus the added significance of being the first democratic transferral of power. --Iamstupido (talk) 07:09, 5 April 2014 (UTC) Comment This will very likely go to a runoff, to be held in May. So I think this nomination is rather premature. Neljack (talk) 10:03, 5 April 2014 (UTC) Also, even if there is a winner on the first round, it will be several days before we have results. Neljack (talk) 10:06, 5 April 2014 (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. April 4 Portal:Current events/2014 April 4 April 4, 2014 (2014-04-04) (Friday) edit history watch Armed conflicts and attacks South Korea test-fires a new ballistic missile with a range of 500 kilometres and hopes to extend its range to 800 kilometres so that it can reach anywhere in North Korea. (Reuters) War in Afghanistan (2001–2021): Two members of the Associated Press are shot by an Afghan wearing a police uniform in Khost. One of them, Pulitzer Prize winner and photojournalist Anja Niedringhaus, is killed. The other is seriously injured. (BBC) Al-Qaeda insurgency in Yemen: Suspected Al-Qaeda militants attack an army post in Hadramawt province killing at least eight soldiers and injuring eleven. (AFP via Global Post) Iraqi insurgency (post-U.S. withdrawal): Attacks in Baghdad and predominantly Sunni Arab areas of northern and western Iraq kill nine people. (AFP via the Cairo Post) Business and economy The two largest cement manufacturers in the world, Lafarge and Holcim, announce plans for a merger. (Reuters) Mazda announces the recall of 42,000 units of its Mazda6 model built from 2010 to 2012, citing fuel tank issues. The recall specifically refers to those with 2.5 liter engines. (KRON) 2014 Crimean Crisis: McDonald's suspends work at all restaurant locations in Crimea. (KNTV) Disasters and accidents Heavy rainfall from a tropical low causes flooding at Honiara, Solomon Islands, leading to at least 16 deaths and thousands of people being evacuated. (AAP via SBS) (ABC News Australia) A Mongolian-flagged cargo ship sinks off the coast of South Korea, with most of the 16 North Korean crew members reported missing. (Reuters) The Tungurahua volcano in Ecuador explodes twice. (Daily Mirror) Health 2014 West Africa Ebola outbreak: The first possible case is reported in Mali, with the death toll rising in Guinea and Liberia to 90. (Reuters via Yahoo! News) A meningitis outbreak has been reported in the greater Los Angeles area, with incidents related to sexual intercourse. (MSN) Law and crime A Manhattan court stenographer is discovered to have written nonsense instead of actual court transcripts, potentially jeopardizing thirty court cases. (KNTV) Enceladus Article: Enceladus (talk · history · tag) Blurb: ​ Scientists discover that one of Saturn's moons, Enceladus, has an ocean of liquid water beneath its frozen surface. (Post) News source(s): Scientific American, BBC, The Guardian, New Scientist Credits: Nominated by Jinkinson (talk · give credit) Updated by ThaddeusB (talk · give credit), Reedman72 (talk · give credit) and Drbogdan (talk · give credit) Article updatedNominator's comments: Seems to be a significant scientific discovery. --Jinkinson talk to me 19:05, 4 April 2014 (UTC) I would be willing to support this if more mainstream news sources were shown to demonstrate that this is widely in the news. 331dot (talk) 19:17, 4 April 2014 (UTC) You want it? You got it. Jinkinson talk to me 19:24, 4 April 2014 (UTC) Thanks, I do support as this seems a significant scientific discovery, with wide coverage. 331dot (talk) 20:30, 4 April 2014 (UTC) Weak support because I'm just waiting for some "clever" Wikipedian(s) to yell at us all "DON'T BELIEVE THE HYPE" despite publication in what we normally call reliable sources. (Having said that, there's a maintenance template smack bang at the top of the target article, although it may be a colour that's amenable to some posting admins, I think it would be nice to resolve it). The Rambling Man (talk) 19:29, 4 April 2014 (UTC) Rambling on a bit, are we? Abductive (reasoning) 00:17, 5 April 2014 (UTC) HYPE, HYPE, HYPE!! The Rambling Man (talk) 07:41, 5 April 2014 (UTC) Strong support I think this is the first time there is a clear report of liquid extraterrestrial water. Nergaal (talk) 19:30, 4 April 2014 (UTC) Support - finding liquid water outside of Earth is certainly notable. Article is in good shape, excluding the lead, but the update could use some expansion. Hopefully both can be addressed before posting. --ThaddeusB (talk) 19:30, 4 April 2014 (UTC) Now fixed. --ThaddeusB (talk) 23:54, 4 April 2014 (UTC) Support Good stuff this is. Received wide coverage in the scientific community of its type. --Somchai Sun (talk) 19:51, 4 April 2014 (UTC) Support Appear to be peer-reviewered confirmation. --MASEM (t) 20:35, 4 April 2014 (UTC) Support. The debate over the existence of liquid water on Enceladus has finally been resolved, it seems. The existence of the water was first hypothesized in the 1980s (if I recall correctly), so this result is not completely unexpected. In fact, there are enough preceding discoveries (plumes and so on) that this is almost stale. Abductive (reasoning) 00:17, 5 April 2014 (UTC) Posted. Espresso Addict (talk) 01:02, 5 April 2014 (UTC) RD: Anja Niedringhaus Article: Anja Niedringhaus (talk · history · tag) Recent deaths nomination (Post) News source(s): Credits: Nominated by Jinkinson (talk · give credit) 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: She is clearly notable, and since she has won some notable awards I think this makes her at least as well-known (and therefore deserving of a main page RD) as Frankie Knuckles --Jinkinson talk to me 16:00, 4 April 2014 (UTC) Explantions as to why you feel an event is notable enough to post are almost always helpful. Like all of Misplaced Pages, ITN is not a vote. --ThaddeusB (talk) 16:47, 4 April 2014 (UTC) Oppose blurb, barely even notable enough for RD in my opinion as part of a Pulitzer Prize-winning team. (P.S. Knuckles invented a genre of music, this lady was a journalist who did a good job but was by no means recognised as top of her field, unless you can provide RS to state otherwise).... The Rambling Man (talk) 17:13, 4 April 2014 (UTC) Oppose The recent death equivalent of missing-white woman syndrome. Lugnuts 17:54, 4 April 2014 (UTC) Oppose. RD is for deaths of notable people, which I'm not sure this individual is. A blurb would be for persons at the tip-top of their field or of worldwide significance, which isn't applicable here. 331dot (talk) 19:13, 4 April 2014 (UTC) Comment - full blurbs are also used for cases where the death itself is a big story. Whether this story is big or not is debatable, but it certainly is a case where the death is the primary story (as oppose to the person's career). --ThaddeusB (talk) 19:27, 4 April 2014 (UTC) Support She is fairly notable as is her death by itself. Not enough for a blurb, but enough for RD. Iamstupido (talk) 07:59, 5 April 2014 (UTC) Support — Although Niedringhaus has not been a household name, the assassination of a veteran and courageous female photojournalist, of European and American repute, has received extensive global coverage and merits mention in RD. Sca (talk) 13:59, 5 April 2014 (UTC) PS: She's on German Wiki's version of Recent Deaths, Kürzlich Verstorbene. Sca (talk) 14:13, 5 April 2014 (UTC) PPS: so what? The Rambling Man (talk) 16:03, 5 April 2014 (UTC) Yeah, why consider anyone else's opinion? Sca (talk) 16:15, 5 April 2014 (UTC) No, it's entirely irrelevant to this Misplaced Pages, that's my point. She was German so presumably the German language Misplaced Pages feels a greater affiliation toward her. She still fails to meet the RD criteria, wholesale. Period. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:18, 5 April 2014 (UTC) Yes, Niedringhaus was German, but she worked for the U.S. wire service Associated Press for 12 years and was shot in company with Canadian-born AP reporter Kathy Gannon. She is thus not "irrelevant" to English Wiki. Further, if you Google Anje Niedringhaus and you'll find scores of tributes to her work and life from people in the profession. Her murder is a commentary on the Afghanistan debacle, and a world event. Sca (talk) 16:46, 5 April 2014 (UTC) And she was neither top of her field nor will her death in any way have any effect. Hence she doesn't qualify for RD under this Misplaced Pages's RD criteria. (And checking your link, it appears that Niedringhaus is most certainly not in that section of the German Misplaced Pages homepage... Oops.) The Rambling Man (talk) 20:10, 5 April 2014 (UTC) Well, just like on en.wikipedia, that's a changing page. (Actually a recent change appears to have made it more fleeting there, see here). In any event, she was in that section: Hauptseite/Archiv/4. April 2014. Not saying that German WP's featuring her death is either here or there, but your parenthetical remark certainly is neither nor. ---Sluzzelin talk 01:58, 6 April 2014 (UTC) Clearly indicates that the German ticker-tape approach necessitates a much lower standard for inclusion on the main page. Cheers! The Rambling Man (talk) 08:34, 6 April 2014 (UTC) Oppose per The Rambling Man. Taylor Trescott - + my edits 14:30, 5 April 2014 (UTC) Support for RD since we've got the space, and posting would not be bumping anyone, I think she's just notable enough, and there's just enough interest, that we can afford to list her. μηδείς (talk) 16:15, 5 April 2014 (UTC) Oppose Sad story, but she's not sufficiently notable to be listed. Jehochman 16:55, 5 April 2014 (UTC) support shes certainly in the news.Lihaas (talk) 18:10, 5 April 2014 (UTC) And doesn't meet any of the RD criteria, so what's your point? The Rambling Man (talk) 19:22, 5 April 2014 (UTC) Whats the name of this section? ITN = ??? At any rate, you have reasons and I have mine. You cannot pick and choose what is acceptable/.Lihaas (talk) 21:57, 5 April 2014 (UTC) Neither can you; please review the RD criteria and state how it is applicable to this person. Just being "in the news" has never been enough to post something here, something which you should be aware of by now. 331dot (talk) 02:30, 6 April 2014 (UTC) Again, for a death there are two possible reasons to post: existing notability (as defined by RD criteria), or the death being a major news story for some reason. Arguing the death is a major news story is certainly a valid opinion. --ThaddeusB (talk) 03:00, 6 April 2014 (UTC) It is, but it's not entirely clear that's what Lihaas did, they just said it is "in the news". 331dot (talk) 10:16, 6 April 2014 (UTC) Actually, the criteria are a little more specific than that, the story needs to have "a major international impact that affects current events", which it didn't at all. It was just the tragic death of a white European female reporter in Afghanistan, who joins Category:Journalists killed while covering the War in Afghanistan (2001–present). The Rambling Man (talk) 08:37, 6 April 2014 (UTC) April 3 Portal:Current events/2014 April 3 April 3, 2014 (2014-04-03) (Thursday) edit history watch Armed conflicts and attacks Former President of Pakistan Pervez Musharraf survives an assassination attempt in Islamabad, Pakistan. There are no reports of injuries. (Times of India) Syrian Civil War: Mortar fire kills at least six people in a Damascus suburb. (AP via ABC News) Arts and culture Comedian David Letterman, host of CBS's Late Show with David Letterman, announces his planned retirement in 2015. (CBS) Colombian Nobel laurete novelist Gabriel García Márquez, 87, is hospitalized in Mexico City. His condition and illness remains unknown. (Fox News) Disasters and accidents Oso, Washington mudslide: The death toll from the mudslide reaches 30 as rescuers struggle to identify survivors. (BBC News) Law and crime 2014 Garda phone recordings controversy: Recordings of 133 conversations between gardaí, witnesses and journalists relating to the 1996 murder of Sophie Toscan du Plantier emerge. (RTÉ News) Politics and elections Malta elected a new President of the Republic of Malta Marie Louise Coleiro Preca, the second female President after 27 years. The event carried out in Luqa, Siggiewi, Qormi, Valletta, Floriana, Malta and Attard. (gov.mt) Science and technology Scientists from NASA and the European Space Agency estimate that Enceladus, a moon of Saturn, has an ocean of liquid water under its surface. (BBC News) ZunZuneo Article: ZunZuneo (talk · history · tag) Blurb: ​ The Associated Press reports that the US Government organized a service similar to Twitter in Cuba in order to foment protests against Cuba's government. (Post) News source(s): Credits: Nominated by Jinkinson (talk · give credit)  --Jinkinson talk to me 16:24, 4 April 2014 (UTC) Oppose no real noteworthiness and certainly not ITN-worthy, but may squeeze a DYK out of it. If you're quick. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:45, 4 April 2014 (UTC) Oppose. It's no surprise that the US government is trying to influence Cuban society or politics. Not really a top headline story, either. 331dot (talk) 19:14, 4 April 2014 (UTC) DYK – Muboshgu (talk) 19:41, 4 April 2014 (UTC) Brendan Eich resignation Article: Brendan Eich (talk · history · tag) Blurb: ​ The CEO of Mozilla Corporation, Brendan Eich, resigns only a month after being appointed the company's CEO. (Post) News source(s): Credits: Nominated by Jinkinson (talk · give credit)  --Jinkinson talk to me 21:12, 3 April 2014 (UTC) What does this have to do with British Smog? Has Eich left to form a company with that name? μηδείς (talk) 22:13, 3 April 2014 (UTC) um, cars look like they're covered in rust? Martinevans123 (talk) 22:31, 3 April 2014 (UTC) Oppose CEO of company that is losing market share resigns - not exactly a great shock. And it's hardly one of the biggest or most important companies around. Neljack (talk) 23:47, 3 April 2014 (UTC) Oppose. I haven't seen wide news coverage of this; as Neljack said this isn't one of the biggest or most important companies, either(to warrant noting changes in their leadership). 331dot (talk) 02:55, 4 April 2014 (UTC) It's because he gave money to impede gay rights, and Mozilla foolishly hired him. Then a social media firestorm rose up. I'm not saying it needs to be posted, but the blurb would need to explain why this worthless POS needed to be fired. Abductive (reasoning) 03:41, 4 April 2014 (UTC) Oppose minor business figure who cocked up. Not ITN-worthy. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:20, 4 April 2014 (UTC) Support the guy that built Javascript (used on more webpages than flash) is, uh, "retired" over a political row. Impact is the millions of people that use Mozilla products, encyclopedic content is the technical accomplishments of the man (JVscipt, renowned programming talent) as well as the political row that fueled his opponents (Proposition_8), and notability is attested to by international sources. I'd understand if people didn't want this posted for personal or political reasons, but this checks all the boxes for ITN.128.214.198.4 (talk) 12:01, 4 April 2014 (UTC) Not quite sure how it impacts us who use Firefox, I haven't seen any changes. The EV should really relate to the story itself, not about what the man has done in a previous life. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:14, 4 April 2014 (UTC) The guy resigns - we get a new header font! Must be some kinda conspiracy here? Martinevans123 (talk) 12:33, 4 April 2014 (UTC) 2014 British smog Winds from Africa bring Sahara Desert sand to Britain, this mixes with pollution causing a smog, people with breathing problems are urged to stay indoors. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lerdthenerd (talk • contribs) Lerdthenerd Is there an article you are nominating? You didn't think to one. --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:17, 3 April 2014 (UTC) Even if there was an article, I'd oppose. So we've had a bit of crappy mist for a few days, and a few more people have whinged about it. Now move on. It's nothing compared to China, to the pea-soupers of yesteryear. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:22, 3 April 2014 (UTC) Oppose Saharan dust seems to go everywhere. Having it turn up in unusual places is a surprisingly common event. Here in Texas, over twice the distance from north Africa when compared to Britain, we see it on a semi-regular basis.( ) --Allen3  21:59, 3 April 2014 (UTC) Cough, cough "Fog everywhere. Fog up the river, where it flows among green aits and meadows; fog down the river, where it rolls defiled among the tiers of shipping and the waterside pollutions of a great (and dirty) city." Only 160 years too late, alas. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:10, 3 April 2014 (UTC) Err.. usually I expect to see an article somewhere here.. --hydrox (talk) 01:34, 4 April 2014 (UTC) Oppose Well they would have that in that there London, wouldn't they. Slow news day fodder. Lugnuts 08:26, 4 April 2014 (UTC) April 2 Portal:Current events/2014 April 2 April 2, 2014 (2014-04-02) (Wednesday) edit history watch Armed conflicts and attacks Post-coup unrest in Egypt (2013–2014) A bomb detonates near Cairo University, killing a police chief and injuring five others. (BBC News) A suicide bomber wearing a military uniform strikes a voter registration office in Kabul, Afghanistan killing 6 police officers. (AP via CTV) 2014 Fort Hood shootings A shooting is reported at the Fort Hood Army Base near the US town of Killeen, Texas with reports of at least four deaths, including the gunman, and 14 injuries. (Washington Post) Business and economy Chrysler recalls nearly 870,000 SUVs from its Jeep and Dodge brands, citing brake issues. (KNTV) Disasters and accidents 2014 Iquique earthquake The President of Chile Michelle Bachelet declares the northern part of Chile to be a disaster zone including the regions of Arica y Parinacota, and Tarapacá. (ABC News Australia) A 7.8 aftershock follows in the same area causing more damage. (USGS) Law and crime The High Court of Australia recognises a neutral third gender that is neither male nor female. (AFP via Yahoo! News Australia) The Supreme Court of the United States, in McCutcheon v. FEC, votes 5–4 to overturn limits on the amount of money that an individual can donate to politicians' campaigns over a two-year cycle. (Washington Post) More than 100 mostly elderly residents of San Francisco's Chinatown are reported as victims of fraud from a travel agency. (KGO) California State Senator Leland Yee's attorney Paul DeMeester is replaced by former San Francisco assistant district attorney Jim Lassart. (San Jose Mercury News) Politics and elections Garda phone recordings scandal: Government sources claim white powder in an envelope and possibly a swastika have been sent to the home of the Irish Minister for Justice and Equality Alan Shatter, who is embroiled in multiple political controversies. An army bomb disposal unit has moved in on Shatter's estate in Ballinteer, Dublin. (Independent) A motion of no confidence brought by the opposition against Minister of Justice Alan Shatter is defeated 95–51 in the Dáil following a two-day debate. (RTÉ News) Copernicus Programme ESA's Sentinel 1 from this Earth observation program is scheduled to be launched April 3rd. Nergaal (talk) 14:41, 3 April 2014 (UTC) Oppose. Why aren't we using the templates? Where are the references, the update status, the blurb, the nominator/updater names? C'mon. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:21, 3 April 2014 (UTC) 2014 Fort Hood shooting Article: 2014 Fort Hood shooting (talk · history · tag) Blurb: ​ A gunman, Ivan Lopez, kills three people and injures sixteen at Fort Hood before killing himself. (Post) News source(s): Credits: Nominated by Jinkinson (talk · give credit)  --Jinkinson talk to me 13:21, 3 April 2014 (UTC) Oppose Relatively high profile (as most of these seem to be) but ultimately nothing will change and this is just another day, another shooting incident. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:56, 3 April 2014 (UTC) Weak oppose. Mass shootings on military bases aren't a common occurrence, but I do agree with TRM's comment. 331dot (talk) 14:05, 3 April 2014 (UTC) Oppose - sadly events like these are quite usual in the US now and it has only recieved relative coverage.--BabbaQ (talk) 14:08, 3 April 2014 (UTC) (edit conflict)Weak support The apathy of the two above editors makes me sad. I know my support comes slightly from my desire to use Misplaced Pages to right great wrongs (after all, we can with SOPA protests) even though it seems we are doomed to being a nation of gun violence. It doesn't really fit as tendentious editing, though, since this is a verifiable act, which verifiably happened. The fact that this was a military base, and the site of a previous massive shooting, has made news coverage of it significant enough (I think) to warrant my weak support. As to BabbaQ's comments, I don't understand what is meant by "relative coverage". It's being covered across the pond, and they're investigating the shooter, not just covering the shooting itself. – Muboshgu (talk) 14:11, 3 April 2014 (UTC) Off-topicLihaas (talk) 18:13, 5 April 2014 (UTC) None of us know all the facts but allowing a man suffering from depression access to weapons seems to be plain absurd. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:28, 3 April 2014 (UTC) Tell that to Wayne LaPierre and the craven politicians he has cowed. – Muboshgu (talk) 14:48, 3 April 2014 (UTC) Well you'd need to tell the American voters to do that, not me. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:55, 3 April 2014 (UTC) I haz a sad :( – Muboshgu (talk) 15:14, 3 April 2014 (UTC) Oppose — Agree with first and third comments. Sca (talk) 14:24, 3 April 2014 (UTC) Oppose - It is a tragic situation but have to agree that in the larger scheme of things, this is not as significant as other past shooting events in the US which involve civilian losses. To note to BabbaQ what this represents should not be considered usual for the US (compared with events like suicide bombings and attacks in Middle Eastern countries), but the unfortunately frequency of recent years means that not every gun-related attack on the US should be included as ITN. --MASEM (t) 14:45, 3 April 2014 (UTC) Oppose, perhaps if the US can go without a mass shooting for a month then ITN should post that. Abductive (reasoning) 15:32, 3 April 2014 (UTC) Oppose Triple murders aren't that uncommon and they don't tend to be nominated when they happen in other countries. Neljack (talk) 22:32, 3 April 2014 (UTC) Alright, fine. You guys want something unusual about a shooting that kills four people, then I think I have an observation that will meet even your ridiculously stringent standards--the fact that this happened in the same place as another shooting in 2009. This is clearly not something that happens very often, even in the US. Also, I might note that the absurdity of the whole "other stuff happened before" argument becomes clear if you imagine people saying it when Hitler invaded Russia--"Oppose. Napoleon invaded Russia too, so this must not be a big deal." Jinkinson talk to me 22:59, 3 April 2014 (UTC) Did you have to go Godwin so quickly? – Muboshgu (talk) 23:19, 3 April 2014 (UTC) That it has happened before isn't a reason not to post it if it is significant enough, but nor is it a reason to post it. To take your rather odd analogy, nobody would think that the significance of Hitler's invasion of Russia lay in the fact that Napoleon had done it before - it would have been no less significant if Napoleon had never invaded Russia. So I'm mystified as to the relevance of there having been a shooting at this place before. Neljack (talk) 23:44, 3 April 2014 (UTC) Sorry, the Hitler-Napoleon analogy was a poor choice on my part. All I was trying to say was that there are many events that have happened throughout history that are significant, but not unprecedented. I was also trying to explain that I thought a similar event taking place in the same place within five years was a somewhat unusual occurrence, to say the least, which further highlights that it was confusing of me to cite this analogy. To try to clarify: I think that other similar things happening before doesn't render something unremarkable enough to exclude from ITN, and I also think that two such events happening in the same location using guns bought from the same store renders an event more noteworthy than it would otherwise be. Jinkinson talk to me 05:08, 4 April 2014 (UTC) Can someone please explain why Misplaced Pages's ITN page has some bizarre sort of affirmative action policy such that earthquakes in the middle of the Pacific Ocean and changes in Japan's whaling laws get featured, but when a murderer kills three people and then himself, it's dismissed as routine because it's in the US? Is the idea that so much American stuff gets featured we have to feature mostly non-American stuff to make up for treating the US so preferentially? Or is there a "Who can be the biggest anti-American douchebag" contest underway on Misplaced Pages of which I am unaware? Also, I stand by my (admittedly unclear) point that simply because more significant shootings have happened in the past doesn't strip this one of all of its notability. Jinkinson talk to me 23:20, 5 April 2014 (UTC) Jinkinson, I don't see it as affirmative action - I wouldn't regard a shooting that kills 3 people as ordinarily being news of international significance worthy of featuring on ITN, wherever it occurred. I think the stories you mentioned are more significant. The Chilean earthquake: killed more people than this shooting, and then you've got all the damage, a tsunami warning and mass evacuation of 900,000 people, an escape of more than 300 prisoners, and the fact it was a very large earthquake (8.2 on the Richter scale). The whaling case was a binding judgment from the International Court of Justice on a highly controversial international dispute in which there has been considerable public interest and publicity in many countries. I don't see a shooting that kills three people as being of comparable international significance to those stories, however much publicity they may (quite understandably) get in the country where they occur. Neljack (talk) 23:50, 5 April 2014 (UTC) Remember the 2009 shooting in Finland? People were wildly supporting it at the time when there were only four confirmed dead. It ended up having 6 people dead. –HTD 23:58, 5 April 2014 (UTC) I'm American and I don't think this is significant enough to be posted. Shootings with several casualties happen frequently, often in the same location. We can't post them all; this is not a murder ticker. If you can demonstrate that this was a top headline story around the world, you might get somewhere, but I haven't seen that. Neljack gave a good explanation of the rationale behind the posting of the stories you mentioned; that's the kind of things we are looking for, in addition to news coverage. 331dot (talk) 15:16, 6 April 2014 (UTC) I'd agree with you, except for "Shootings with several casualties happen frequently, often in the same location." Unless we're talking about war zones. Heck even petty thievery that involves "Shootings with several casualties" don't happen at the exact same place. True, this wasn't a "top headline", nor is the cricket tournament above, but CNN International and BBC World News devoted a lot of time to this breaking news event, preempting some shows, on the day of the shooting. –HTD 19:54, 6 April 2014 (UTC) McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission Article: McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission (talk · history · tag) Blurb: ​ The Supreme Court of the United States rules, by a 5-4 vote, to overturn limits on total political campaign donations. (Post) News source(s): CNN Times of India BBC Credits: Nominated by Jinkinson (talk · give credit)  --Jinkinson talk to me 21:29, 2 April 2014 (UTC) Weak oppose. I am seeing some worldwide coverage of this(though generally not as a/the top story) but IMO this boils down to essentially a local story; a US court interpreting US law. I don't think we would post similar rulings from other nations. 331dot (talk) 22:05, 2 April 2014 (UTC) Oppose Same reason as 331dot - I know in terms of politics within the US this is huge, but that's a very minor segment overall. --MASEM (t) 22:07, 2 April 2014 (UTC) Oppose I agree with 331dot. Electoral finance is an issue in many nations, but I doubt we would post developments relating to it in any other nation. The ruling is interesting but hardly surprising, in light of Citizens United. Neljack (talk) 03:52, 3 April 2014 (UTC) Oppose - national news.--BabbaQ (talk) 08:26, 3 April 2014 (UTC) Oppose This is an event only relating to a single country. 128.227.249.115 (talk) 12:34, 3 April 2014 (UTC) As TRM states below, that is not a valid reason to oppose this; many stories here relate to only one nation. 331dot (talk) 13:35, 3 April 2014 (UTC) Comment in Jayron32's current absence, I feel duty bound to remind those voting above that the instructions say 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." That is all. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:53, 3 April 2014 (UTC) To clarify, I don't oppose this because it relates to one nation or a particular nation, I oppose it because I don't think this is a story of wide importance outside of the US. 331dot (talk) 13:30, 3 April 2014 (UTC) Right. So you do oppose it because you don't see it as important outside of a single country. Just as the instructions remind people not to. --Jayron32 20:47, 3 April 2014 (UTC) Jayron32, there is a distinction between opposing a nomination because it only relates to one country and opposing it because it lacks international significance or interest. If we didn't apply a threshold of international significance/interest it's not clear to me how we would choose between all the stories of national significance/interest that are happening in the nearly 200 countries in the world. Neljack (talk) 22:40, 3 April 2014 (UTC) Jayron32, that isn't why I opposed; I did not say "this only deals with the US so I oppose", I said "this does not have notability worldwide so I oppose". There is a difference. 331dot (talk) 02:47, 4 April 2014 (UTC) Oppose Getting some press, but overall a relatively minor event. --Jayron32 20:48, 3 April 2014 (UTC) Weak Oppose this is on the borderline of what should and should not be posted. But given the total biennial contribution limit of $117,000 for all political donations to parties and candidates has been thrown out, and political contributors like George Soros and the Koch brothers, for example, can now easily donate $100 Million or more to one candidate if they like, I think calling this a minor event is inaccurate. I suspect the billion dollars spent in the last cycle will probably more than double in the next. But we are not a crystal ball, and the ruling comports with the trend over the last two decades, and doesn't contradict the first amendment, so I weakly oppose. μηδείς (talk) 02:04, 4 April 2014 (UTC) The limits for individual candidates and parties have not been struck down (though Thomas in his concurrence said he would); you can't give $100 million to one candidate's campaign. 331dot (talk) 02:47, 4 April 2014 (UTC) Chile earthquake Article: 2014 Iquique earthquake (talk · history · tag) Blurb: ​ A magnitude 8.2 earthquake in northern Chile causes five deaths, and prompts a tsunami warning in South America (Post) News source(s): Credits: Nominated by El Pichilemino (talk · give credit) Updated by Abductive (talk · give credit) Article updated --El Pichilemino (talk) 04:53, 2 April 2014 (UTC) Support Significant, large, regionally notable, geologically notable. doktorb words 05:03, 2 April 2014 (UTC) Weak oppose I know quakes of large magnitude often get posted, but given with quick preparedness much of the threatened coastlines were evacuated and some damage on land, this really isn't that strong a quake to consider. But that said, I see the tsunami warnings are still up for some coasts, and in the night hours we might see more reports of death/damage, so this may get worse. But if all that remains is the 5 deaths, after the warnings are taken down, then I don't think this is really significant. --MASEM (t) 05:12, 2 April 2014 (UTC) Wait. I've been working on this article, and I tend to agree with User:Masem; unless the damage turns out to be much higher, I would rather not see this posted. Abductive (reasoning) 06:10, 2 April 2014 (UTC) Support there are 1 or 2 earthquakes of 8+ magnitude per year. Nergaal (talk) 08:25, 2 April 2014 (UTC) Support BBC News are reporting that Chile declares disaster in quake-hit regions. Lugnuts 09:10, 2 April 2014 (UTC) Per that article, "The government said the declaration of a disaster in the regions of Tarapaca, Arica and Parinacota was aimed at "avoiding instances of looting and disorder"." - eg preventative, not for immediate emergency response. I would still argue this really wasn't much on the larger scale. --MASEM (t) 15:57, 2 April 2014 (UTC) Oppose for now. Total death toll is six, and it hit 100 km offshore of a relatively uninhabited region. Unless this turns out to have a bigger impact then is currently apparent, I don't think that reaches the significance threshold. Yes it's a big earthquake, but if it didn't do much then the encyclopaedic value is low. I'm willing to reassess if more facts become available. Modest Genius 11:34, 2 April 2014 (UTC) Suppport an 8.2 earthquake with a 7-foot tsunami and at least half a dozen dead would be a shoe in anywhere else. I am reminded of the sign on the newsroom wall reported by John Maxwell Hamilton in Hold the Press: "One Englishman is a story. Ten Frenchmen is a story. One hundred Germans is a story. One thousand Indians is a story. Nothing ever happens in Chile." μηδείς (talk) 16:31, 2 April 2014 (UTC) This is not singling out Chile, only the fact that while it was a 8.2 mag quake, it happened offshore and thanks to rapid response by the various regions it would have affected, most of the danger to human life was averted. Per this CNN, even three of the deaths were from just heart attacks, not directly from damage from the quake, and most of the human-structure damage were to 2500 low quality homes. That's not really a huge loss of human life or financial damage. All tsunami warnings are now cancelled and while they did see 6 and 7-foot waves on some shores, these were mostly evacuated or not populated to begin with. If the same quake happened, say, near California but the same preparedness occurred to minimal life and damage, I still wouldn't recommend it for posting. --MASEM (t) 16:41, 2 April 2014 (UTC) Comment - I would expect a better update. At present the article is very stubby (lots of sections, but 1-2 sentences in each.) --ThaddeusB (talk) 16:38, 2 April 2014 (UTC) Support While the death toll is low, the earthquake itself was huge. This has also gotten plenty of media coverage. --Somchai Sun (talk) 19:59, 2 April 2014 (UTC) Posted - article is now improved. --ThaddeusB (talk) 20:45, 2 April 2014 (UTC) Comment A 7.x quake just occurred in the same area. Might need to adjust the blurb to mention this aftershock. --MASEM (t) 03:10, 3 April 2014 (UTC) Chilean authorities have declared a tsunami warning for the whole country, because of this 7.8 aftershock. El Pichilemino (talk) 03:21, 3 April 2014 (UTC) Comment Hope somebody gets to see this. I think it would be good if the main picture could be changed to File:Gobernación Provincial de Iquique ayuda a familias damnificadas por terremotos.jpg, which pictures the governor of Iquique visiting victims of the quake and is, up to the moment, the best picture available for free to illustrate the article IMO. Küñall (talk) 16:56, 5 April 2014 (UTC) April 1 Portal:Current events/2014 April 1 April 1, 2014 (2014-04-01) (Tuesday) edit history watch Arts and culture American internet cartoon series Homestar Runner makes its first update to its webpage after three years on hiatus. (Time) Disasters and accidents An 8.2 magnitude earthquake occurs in the Pacific Ocean near Chile causing landslides and killing at least five people. A tsunami warning is issued. (USGS) (AP via The Australian) (Fox News) Health 2014 Guinea Ebola outbreak: The death toll in Guinea rises to 80 with two people dead in neighbouring Liberia. (Sky News Australia) International relations 2014 Crimean crisis: NATO suspends "all practical civilian and military cooperation" with Russia as a result of the annexation of Crimea, and no sign that Russian troops have withdrawn from the Ukrainian border. (CNN) Law and crime 2014 Garda phone recordings controversy: Taoiseach Enda Kenny tells the Dáil the Prison Service recorded conversations between inmates and their solicitors. (RTÉ News) Mr Justice Nial Fennelly will be appointed to chair the Commission of Investigation into the Garda controversy. (RTÉ News) The Irish Government will establish a Cabinet committee to examine proposals for an independent police authority and other justice reforms, which will be chaired by the Taoiseach. (RTÉ News) The Department of Justice releases a letter sent on 10 March from then Garda Commissioner Martin Callinan in which he warns them of the recording of phone calls at Garda stations. (RTÉ News) Science and technology RIKEN concludes that research suggesting stem cells could be produced through STAP techniques was falsified. (The Japan Times) ICD-10 delayed again Article: ICD-10 (talk · history · tag) Blurb: ​ President Obama signs into law HR 4302, a bill which again delays the implementation of the ICD-10 medical coding system. (Post) News source(s): http://journal.ahima.org/2014/04/01/president-signs-sgr-patch-bill-icd-10-officially-delayed/ Credits: Nominated by Brainy J (talk · give credit) Updated by Alegh (talk · give credit) Article updatedNominator's comments: ICD-10 is used in most developed countries and this is, like, the third or fourth time it has been delayed in the US. May seem like "niche news" but ICD-10 would have effects on pretty much the whole of health care industry. -- Brainy J ~✿~ (talk) 17:36, 3 April 2014 (UTC) Oppose Sure it's used by lots of countries, but this is just a decision by one of those countries to defer implementing it. Doesn't change anything for the other countries or the WHO, who produce it. Neljack (talk) 22:44, 3 April 2014 (UTC) Also the blurb should say that it is deferred in the United States - this obviously doesn't defer it in other countries; it should also refer to "United States President Barack Obama", rather than just "President Obama" Neljack (talk) 23:26, 3 April 2014 (UTC) Oppose. No coverage of this in mainstream news. The only source given is by the group promoting this change. 331dot (talk) 11:50, 4 April 2014 (UTC) Possible STAP fraud Article: Stimulus-triggered acquisition of pluripotency cell (talk · history · tag) Blurb: ​ RIKEN concludes that research suggesting stem cells could be produced through STAP techniques was falsified. (Post) News source(s): Japan Times, The Guardian Credits: Updated and nominated by ThaddeusB (talk · give credit) Article updatedNominator's comments: This is an update to a story we published in January. STAP cells are back in the news, but this time because it seems the "groundbreaking" results may have been faked. The possible fraud is not *that* huge of a story, but is certainly making some headlines. Since we published the original headline, one could argue that we have a duty to publish the update as well. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:16, 2 April 2014 (UTC) Support From what I see in the sources the evidence is there, so it would be fair to post (shit happens). Brandmeister 15:50, 2 April 2014 (UTC) Weak Oppose less opposed now than I was to posting the original stories--not the kind of retraction big enough for a front page. Maybe just go back and revdel the whole thing? Support, since it was given prominence on Misplaced Pages's front page, this of course should be given the same prominence. And let this be a lesson for all of you; don't believe the hype. Abductive (reasoning) 05:56, 3 April 2014 (UTC) Since that was published in Nature, it was reasonable to believe. Even after we posted the notorious faster-than-light neutrino anomaly. Brandmeister 08:07, 3 April 2014 (UTC) It looked fishy to me at the time. Basically any startling result (arsenic life, remember that one? is guaranteed to be scientific fraud or just plain incompetence. Abductive (reasoning) 00:34, 4 April 2014 (UTC) With all due respect, you are not smarter than Nature on average. Sometimes science does make astonishing leaps forward, and sometimes mistakes/fraud occur - there is no way to reliable say which is which. If we refrain from posting anything that might be disputed, we would never post anything at all. --ThaddeusB (talk) 14:29, 4 April 2014 (UTC) That is why I did not actually oppose the first nomination. I had no evidence. I have opposed other things where I had the knowledge and some sources. Abductive (reasoning) 16:08, 4 April 2014 (UTC) Oppose I think there are several points that are important to note here: (1) the findings are subject to appeal, which Dr Obokata apparently intends to pursue; (2) there is another investigation underway, by the editors of Nature, to determine whether the paper should be retracted; (3) only some of the charges were upheld and it only relates to some of the research; (4) the committee did not find that the falsification was intentional; (5) the committee did not make any inquiry or finding on whether the STAP cells were in fact created; (6) another researcher has just claimed to have replicated her results. See this Guardian article and the report itself. All in all, I am not convinced that things are sufficiently clear at this point to post. In particular, I am concerned that it is premature to post this before the appeal or the other investigation has been completed and that the blurb might give a misleading impression of what has (and has not) been concluded, since a sufficiently nuanced treatment would be impossible in the concise sentence required. These misgivings are heightened by the BLP implications, given the serious nature of such findings for the professional reputation and career of the scientist. Neljack (talk) 08:14, 3 April 2014 (UTC) I say it's 100% fraud. Anybody have the guts to sue me? Abductive (reasoning) 00:35, 4 April 2014 (UTC) Abductive, you really shouldn't be saying that given that you are talking about a BLP subject. Neljack (talk) 05:26, 5 April 2014 (UTC) 2014 General Motors recall Article: 2014 General Motors recall (talk · history · tag) Blurb: ​ General Motors announces it is recalling 1.5 million additional vehicles due to a faulty ignition switch, bringing the total number of recalled cars over 6 million. (Post) News source(s): http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/31/us-gm-recall-electric-power-steering-idUSBREA2U1ND20140331 Credits: Nominated by Jinkinson (talk · give credit) Nominator's comments: It's happening now, I created the article an hour or two ago, the recall doesn't seem to be the kind that happens very often, and it's getting a lot of media attention. --Jinkinson talk to me 18:41, 1 April 2014 (UTC) Oppose mass recalls are commonplace, Toyota did it en-mass a while ago. Not newsworthy, and not sure why the blurb targets Barra? The Rambling Man (talk) 18:48, 1 April 2014 (UTC) Oppose much better for DYK, a matter of personal inconvenience rather than historical importance. μηδείς (talk) 18:51, 1 April 2014 (UTC) Oppose unless Barra ends up in a jail or GM is somehow sanctioned. Brandmeister 18:53, 1 April 2014 (UTC) Alright, I've reworded the blurb to exclude mention of Barra. I hope the new one is more to your (i.e. everyone reading this) liking. Jinkinson talk to me 19:11, 1 April 2014 (UTC) Ok, I've just checked, there was an even larger recall, by Ford in 2009, when about 14 million vehicles were recalled (reportedly, the largest recall in automotive history). Brandmeister 19:15, 1 April 2014 (UTC) (Begin sarcasm) Exactly right, The Rambling Man, mass recalls happen all the time, which is why, when Toyota recalled 6.67 million of its vehicles, as you alluded to above, we didn't create an article on it. Or even if we did, we certainly didn't feature that article on ITN. Because if we did, we would see a template on the article's talk page saying, "A news item involving 2009–11 Toyota vehicle recalls was featured on Misplaced Pages's main page in the In the news section on 30 January 2010." So obviously, just because another major car manufacturer recalls 6.26 million cars doesn't mean that's newsworthy. (End sarcasm) Jinkinson talk to me 20:39, 1 April 2014 (UTC) I think you placed this indented comment in the incorrect location. Either way, I still don't think it's ITN worthy, nor do the two other editors you've omitted from your mini-rant. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:45, 1 April 2014 (UTC) Support - this is a highly notable business story that has been among the top business stories for months. True, it is a slow moving story and so no single point jumps out as "let's post now", but the story is quite clearly important. This is probably the best chance yet to post it, so, considering the total impact of the story not just this part, I think it is a clear case to "support". --ThaddeusB (talk) 21:26, 1 April 2014 (UTC) Oppose Until I see how this compares with the biggest recalls in India and China. HiLo48 (talk) 21:31, 1 April 2014 (UTC) Oppose This is off the back of a previous, much bigger recall, which (unless I'm mistaken) we didn't post and was far more significant as it involved actual casualties. Black Kite (talk) 21:33, 1 April 2014 (UTC) Comment I think that Thaddeus has a very good reasoning on this one, but it's still not clear when this story will end and what will be its ultimate effects. I'd say that the problem here is when to cut the line and post it on the main page. Maybe it's better to see first if the number of 6 million cars along with the other effects for now mean something compared to other cases in the industry. We had a similar nomination relating Toyota few years ago, but I don't remember if we posted it then.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 15:10, 2 April 2014 (UTC) Comment There's now a new recall for ~870,000 various Chrysler SUVs, and while I can't give a link as I'm only seeing the story on twitter feeds, the US DOT is going to be auditing the NHTSA over these recalls (specifically the GM one as the instigator). There might be a singlular larger ITN/C story here. --MASEM (t) 16:53, 2 April 2014 (UTC) The Fermi paradox has been solved April Fool's joke. It's no longer 1 April, so there's no reason for this to hang around. Also, jokes are only supposed to be played until midday! (this was posted at 14:24 UTC) Modest Genius 23:09, 1 April 2014 (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: Fermi paradox (talk · history · tag) Blurb: ​ The Fermi paradox suggests that life in the universe is vulnerable to being infected by diseases causing zombie-ism that spread from planet to planet. (Post) News source(s): Preprint submitted to the Cosmological Journal Credits: Nominated by Count Iblis (talk · give credit) Article needs updatingNominator's comments: Count Iblis (talk) 14:24, 1 April 2014 (UTC) Brains - We need to confirm the paper's authors have not had their brains consumed by Zombies before we can publish. --ThaddeusB (talk) 14:37, 1 April 2014 (UTC) Pants - are you sure that's not the Femmy Paradox? This encyclopedia is pants. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:42, 1 April 2014 (UTC) Wait until the Zombie apocalypse actually starts. – Muboshgu (talk) 14:55, 1 April 2014 (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. Methanosarcina Article: Methanosarcina (talk · history · tag) Blurb: ​ A new theory suggests a gassy microbe may have been responsible for the largest extinction in the Earth's history. (Post) Alternative blurb: ​ According to a new thoery, Methanosarcina may have been responsible for the Permian–Triassic extinction event. News source(s): Reuters, The Independent Credits: Nominated by ThaddeusB (talk · give credit) Article updatedNominator's comments: In past years, there has been some support for posting quirky blurbs on April Fool's Day in the rare instance where the story itself is significant. I believe that is what we have here. This is an interesting new theory about the Permian–Triassic extinction event, which killed 90% of life on Earth. It was published in a prestigious journal (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences) and is legitimately "in the news", but also allows for a quirky blurb. I also offered a serious blurb for use after April 1. --ThaddeusB (talk) 00:09, 1 April 2014 (UTC) support as in hthe news and punny for April fools.Lihaas (talk) 00:20, 1 April 2014 (UTC) What does "gasy" mean? Is it supposed to be "gassy"? Neljack (talk) 00:59, 1 April 2014 (UTC) Or is it a pun I've failed to pick up on? Neljack (talk) 01:05, 1 April 2014 (UTC) Just a typo. --ThaddeusB (talk) 01:20, 1 April 2014 (UTC) Weak oppose To me it makes us look like click-baiting sites that take research findings and turn them into provocative headlines. Sorry. (The journal article in question is here, for anyone else looking for it.) wctaiwan (talk) 01:58, 1 April 2014 (UTC) Do you oppose the story or just the April 1 blurb? --ThaddeusB (talk) 02:13, 1 April 2014 (UTC) I think the story would be below the usual standards for significance were it not for the April Fools potential, but I'm not an ITN/C regular, so I'm not sure if my assessment is accurate. wctaiwan (talk) 02:21, 1 April 2014 (UTC) Oppose Weak oppose to neutral, not because of April 1st, but it appears rather speculative. --Marianian 03:20, 1 April 2014 (UTC) Like all research, it is backed by facts (now explained in the article). Of course it is only a proposed theory at this point - whether it is widely accepted will not be known for a while (like all research). --ThaddeusB (talk) 03:26, 1 April 2014 (UTC) If it has something going for it, I would accept the alternative "regular" blurb. Looking back at the heated discussion in 2011, WP:AFMP never worked well with the WP:ITN bit. --Marianian 03:30, 1 April 2014 (UTC) Oppose Even if it's not speculative. There have been many theories on the event that caused Permian–Triassic extinction event. It is one of the many theories floating around. The theory needs to be more credible and should have gained more acceptance from the research and the scientific community than others. Having one more theory and "In the News" candidate doesn't make it ITN worthy. I would suggest posting it only when it becomes more credible than others. However, the article is definitely making the news around the world.Regards, theTigerKing  19:30, 1 April 2014 (UTC) Just to be clear, this nom was based on merits not joke qualities, so I'm striking teh April 1 blurb and leaving it open. --ThaddeusB (talk) 00:07, 2 April 2014 (UTC) Support firstly because it is an interesting story about an overlooked important stage in Earth's history, and secondly, because such hypothetical scenarios can never be confirmed without a time-machine (i.e. any other alternative will not be any less of a speculative hypothesis). Nergaal (talk) 08:32, 2 April 2014 (UTC) Rings of Chariklo No interest as a April Fools' item. Stale as a regular nomination --ThaddeusB (talk) 00:08, 2 April 2014 (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. Note: item is technically 1 day stale, but I am bringing it to the top for possible 1-day-only usage. --ThaddeusB (talk) 01:24, 1 April 2014 (UTC) Article: Rings of Chariklo (talk · history · tag) Blurb: ​ Scientists announce the discovery of a ring system surrounding 10199 Chariklo, marking the first time a minor planet has been observed with rings. (Post) News source(s): Discover Magazine, CNET Credits: Nominated by ThaddeusB (talk · give credit) Updated by Kwamikagami (talk · give credit) and Apogalacticon (talk · give credit) Nominator's comments: A remarkable find - a "famous first" one might say; Paper is published Nature. --ThaddeusB (talk) 21:20, 27 March 2014 (UTC) It was first added and expanded by @Modest Genius:. — kwami (talk) 21:41, 27 March 2014 (UTC) Weak support the article isn't the greatest I've ever read, and relies on some "insider knowledge" to get the best from it, but it's adequate and the subject is reasonably notable, although not that much in the news. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:51, 27 March 2014 (UTC) Support as totally cool an unexpected scientific first. μηδείς (talk) 01:57, 28 March 2014 (UTC) Weak support A unexpected result as I read the sources but can be important. --MASEM (t) 15:16, 31 March 2014 (UTC) Oh, too bad, I've just seen this one. Great story but it just became stale. --Tone 19:18, 31 March 2014 (UTC) DYK, as a backup scenario, should work. --Tone 19:19, 31 March 2014 (UTC) Perhaps replace one of the slightly newer items w\this quirky story in the spirit of April Fools? Something along the lines of "An asteroid is found to have rings."--ThaddeusB (talk) 23:41, 31 March 2014 (UTC) Comment: what would be the post-April 1st blurb? --Marianian 02:21, 1 April 2014 (UTC) It presumably would be removed after April 1 as "stale" (it is 1 day older than current oldest story). That said, the template blurb was not suggested for April 1 purposes.--ThaddeusB (talk) 02:58, 1 April 2014 (UTC) If that is the case, I can't personally see it as being marked as a April Fool's item if the template blurb looks normal. --Marianian 03:17, 1 April 2014 (UTC) See conversation above - it was supported but a tiny bit late to be posted. I decided to "revive" it as an April 1 nom, possibly with a punchier blurb ("An asteroid is found to have rings." was suggested). It is a pretty "unbelievable" (but true) story either way, which traditionally has been the point of April Fools mainpage items. --ThaddeusB (talk) 03:29, 1 April 2014 (UTC) It might just be me, but it doesn't look April Fools' like, and if it indeed doesn't it may fail the freshness criteria. --Marianian 03:32, 1 April 2014 (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. 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: