[Posted] Yani Tseng

• I fixed the nomination. Not sure if this is a recurring topic, but it certainly isn't minority. This was nominated by User:SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow?. JimSukwutput 19:53, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• support Significant event, even on its own; more significant even given the winner's dominance of the sport. --Jayron32 02:52, 1 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Support as one of the Women's major golf championships. Mtking ^(edits) 04:03, 1 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Oppose. There is no update. Actually, there is an update, but it's two sentences. JimSukwutput 04:12, 1 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• What do you want? Just tell me what I need to do.SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 04:23, 1 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• More prose. Right now the article contains very little recent information beside what is said in the blurb. It would also be great if you can expand the personal life section. Right now the article is almost completely career record, which makes it pretty much only interesting to golf fans. JimSukwutput 04:26, 1 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• What do you think now?SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 05:15, 1 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's better. Changing to neutral. JimSukwutput 05:24, 1 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Support She's the hottest female golfer this year. (Removed redundancy and overlinking in blurb) --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 07:16, 1 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Support Hottest golfer of any sex really...all sorts of reasons to post this. I didn't look but I assume this is ITNR. RxS (talk) 15:33, 1 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• It is not ITNR at the present moment, which is because they are only looking at the men's majors, and I believe that it is quite sexist on ITNR's behalf and should be changed. I have done a tremendous amount of work to bring women's articles up to the level of men's, so it can be included in ITNR. I think we need to open a discussion on ITNR golf to include women's stuff.SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 15:52, 1 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• I wouldn't be so quick to accuse ITNR of sexism. The significance of a competition is largely measured by its viewership, and it is a fact that men's sports (with some exceptions) tend to have a larger audience. Blame the audience. JimSukwutput 18:41, 1 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• I might be wrong to do so, but I just see way to many inequalities on Wikipedia, when it comes to women in sports has a men's in the exact same sport. I am trying to rectify this one step at a time. I hope you join me in making wikipedia a equal place for all, not just select areas or scopes.SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 23:42, 1 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Does that mean that all men's sports with a comparable amount of coverage to the Weetabix Open get included? That seems equal to me. Kevin McE (talk) 08:29, 3 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Posted We also really need some new content. -- tariqabjotu 18:04, 1 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

[Posted] Ramadan Massacre

Nominator's comments: At least 136 people have died, with over 100 in Hama, and 19 in Deir ez-Zor. -EugεnS¡m¡on(14) ® 16:33, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Support but change name to 2011 Hama crackdown --93.137.112.209 (talk) 16:34, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Support, but article needs a good expansion. And yes, I support a change to "2011 Hama crackdown" or similar name. See WP:POVTITLE - we do not use a title that is potentially biased unless the event is most commonly referred to by that name. Right now I see references to crackdown in the media, but not "massacre". JimSukwutput 16:35, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Oppose Syrian atrocities are far too common to be newsy. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 17:34, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Support - major news.--BabbaQ (talk) 19:31, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Support - not only is is major news BabbaQ. It documents a horrid development in the Arab Spring that has become a drawn out fight for the soul of the Islamic world. This has to be one of the worst attacks in Syria, since the rebellion began, which means it merits ITN.SaysWhoWhatWhenWhereWhyHow? (talk) 02:35, 1 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Support Per BabbaQ -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 02:43, 1 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Support per BabbaQ and The Egyptian Liberal --Sherif9282 (talk) 03:20, 1 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Front page news. Marking [Ready]. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 07:03, 1 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Unmarked. The blurb has a redlink in it. Fix that and I'm able to support. Strikerforce^{Talk Review me!} 07:09, 1 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This article is ready and the kosovo serba clashes is not???Lihaas (talk) 07:56, 1 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Agreed with Lihaas here. I previously opposed the article that he had updated because it was, IMO, poorly written. But that was still in a MUCH better state than this one. I would not support this being posted at this stage. It needs at least double the size; the history section needs to be rewritten or eliminated; and the result needs to be clarified and sourced. JimSukwutput 13:25, 1 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• (edit conflict) Ideally, this should have a little more content. It's just a lead, and some reactions that aren't central to the story. Removing [Ready]. -- tariqabjotu 07:59, 1 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Support. Historic event. --bender235 (talk) 10:11, 1 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• There is clearly consensus that the topic is notable, but the article is in poor shape and has a ((POV)) tag on it. I'm not going to post if it's in that condition. NW (Talk) 13:35, 1 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Support, eventually. But the article has a really long way to go. And it has a POV tag. Last time I checked there wasn't any discussion on the talk page so it can probably be removed. RxS (talk) 15:35, 1 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Conditional support when POV is removed. Major event. ~AH1 ^(discuss!) 17:01, 1 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Issues have been fixed Article is ready now -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 19:45, 2 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Not ready I'd really like to see this go up, but the article is still in poor shape, despite not having any tags. The article is now extremely confusing, for the infobox suggests this siege began on July 31, while the article suggests it began in June. When we get down to the part about what happened in the past couple days, we have a thin-on-details Ramadan Massacre section. Perhaps the article could be improved by moving the last paragraph in the lead down to the appropriate section, but at this point, the article is very difficult to follow. -- tariqabjotu 19:57, 2 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Posted Still not an award-winning article, but it's certainly much better now. I changed up the blurb quite a bit; specifically, I omitted the mention of Ramadan, particularly because the "siege" is still ongoing. -- tariqabjotu 19:36, 3 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sticky debt crisis

Can we get a sticky on the 2011 U.S. debt ceiling crisis#Timeline? There hasn't been any one single event worthy of posting but it has been one of the top stories this week. Marcus Qwertyus 10:50, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

conditional support for a pre-determined short-term basis (a week? till aug 5 or resolution) as its globally notable despie being domestic and the talk of the town at the moment. Although id prefer a regular article than the timeline synopsis...though then gain as a stickhy timeline could work.Lihaas (talk) 13:12, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Support. This would be a minority topic, by the way. JimSukwutput 13:43, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • How? We post more politics than almost anything else. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:46, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • This is more of an economic issue, IMO.
    • By the way, I agree with Lihaas that the sticky should be on a short-term basis. Preferably until August 3. JimSukwutput 14:22, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • Actually, now that I think of it again, this probably doesn't warrant a sticky. The article only has a few lines for recent events and the whole thing will be over by tomorrow or the day after. I agree with what Crispmuncher said below. Oppose. JimSukwutput 16:45, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well, as there is no single event, we can wait until some sort of agreement is reached or we can wait until August 3, when no agreement would be an event on its own... --Tone 15:08, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Support unusual globally watched drama about the worlds sole superpower possibly headed towards default on its debt ( which for the longest time has been regarded as one of the safest investments known to mankind)--Wikireader41 (talk) 15:54, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Oppose Stickies are best used for those stories where there are multiple ongoing developments, and ITN risks becoming saturated with separate threads of the same story. So far we have had no posts on this matter, nor indeed even any nominations. A sticky therefore strikes me as far too premature. Crispmuncher (talk) 16:36, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Weak oppose - Crisp pretty much has it correct. One way or another, in three days, we can simply post a blurb about how the crisis was resolved or about the collapse of civilization. Swarm ^{u | t} 19:45, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Oppose for the same main reasons as Crispmuncher, the only ITN worthy post I foresee out of this is if the US actually defaults on its obligation to it bond holders. Mtking ^(edits) 22:45, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Oppose The principals don't even know what the deal is yet, nor has any reliable source posted its outlines. μηδείς (talk) 03:33, 1 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

[Posted] U2 360° Tour

Nominator's comments: The ending of the tour is significant not only because it set records as the highest-attended and highest-grossing tour of all time, but its 110 shows took place over a three-year period in countries all around the world. Please note this is my first nomination here, so I apologize for any procedural issues I may have overlooked. Since I've never written a blurb here, I'd be happy to rewrite it to make it more suitable. –Dream out loud (talk) 07:43, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Support, for the basic fact that its the highest grossing tour and highest attendance beating the old record by about $1.5m and 3 million attendees. YuMaNuMa (talk) 07:52, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Support seems like a notable cultural achievement. Well worthy of posting. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 07:55, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

strong support as a fisrt (we just posted harry potter) and a minority topic as music is rarely on here. (forissues not pertaining to death)Lihaas (talk) 13:13, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Comment Are we sure this is a minority topic? If so, why wasn't the Harry Potter blurb a minority topic as well? JimSukwutput 13:42, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Does it it really matter? It doesn't make much difference. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:48, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • I'm concerned that there seems to be a double standard here in terms of what exactly is culture and what isn't. But anyway, I support this. JimSukwutput 13:54, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • Well Potter was posted, but yeah it should have been a minority topic as its culture. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 14:24, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• What an AWESOME show it was! But aside from the fact that I went, I support because of its record-breaking revenue and attendance. I still cannot believe they didn't play Bad... _EricLeb⁰¹ (Page | Talk) 16:36, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Posting. --Tone 16:45, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Could someone add "in 30 countries" to the end of the blurb? I think this would be a good way to show how internationally diverse the tour was. Here's a source.[1] –Dream out loud (talk) 00:32, 1 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Military resignations and arrests in Turkey

I don't know if we have an article on it (yet), but NY Times has a very interesting article on it. NW (Talk) 02:39, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

My feeling is that we should use Sledgehammer (coup plan), per this BBC article linking the resignations to that. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 06:52, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

shouldtn we get an article and an update first? it would give better background as to whether its notable for ITN. i myself am a bit split at the moment.Lihaas (talk) 13:15, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

2011 Ukraine mine accidents

- At least 18 coal miners have died after two mine accidents in Ukraine. Many people are missing. - EugεnS¡m¡on(14) ® 16:53, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Support Large amounts of deaths and people are missing. Bacon and the Sandwich (talk) 17:14, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Oppose Mining accidents, unfortunately, are extremely common and part of the job. The article on Mining accident says this for China: "Between January 2001 and October 2004, there were 188 accidents that had a death toll of more than 10." If this were to be posted, then we would have to post one mining accident every 7.4 days, for China alone. JimSukwutput 18:24, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • To be fair, a comparison of Ukraine to China is more apples-to-oranges; China is especially notorious for lethal mine accidents. Poland is probably more comparable; the article List of mining disasters in Poland lists fewer major accidents in recent years. Spencer^T♦C 05:03, 30 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • From what I can see is that the bottom line is both countries are developing nations and accidents as such are fairly common and usually tend to go unreported. The fact that the death toll is 18 heightens the seriousness of the tragedy but it is not uncommon.YuMaNuMa (talk) 05:28, 30 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • The fact that China is more notorious for lethal mine accidents is probably because it produces 45 times the coal that Ukraine does. If you have fewer miners, you have fewer mining accidents - and that does not make them any more notable. It wouldn't be particularly notable, say, if Cyprus had a mining accident, even if it were extremely rare due to the country's size. JimSukwutput 10:37, 30 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• I'm of the opinion that relatively frequent events like mining accidents, especially in countries that don't necessarily have an impeccable safety record, should only be posted if they have some special claim to notability, like being the worst in a country for a long time. If either of these incidents develop into something like that, I could support, but I'm not sure why two completely different incidents in separate mines are covered in one article. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:49, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• If I remember correctly, we posted the story regarding the Chilean miners a while back. If this one gets popular, it may be worth posting this too based on precedence.--WaltCip (talk) 21:01, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • The Chilean miners story was popular because they were still alive and were successfully rescued. That's not the case here and, as pointed out above, that makes it just another tragic accident. _EricLeb⁰¹ (Page | Talk) 00:47, 30 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Oppose This is the sort of headline newsy news that we should be doing less of. Unless there's something more to the story than just a mining accident we should let it pass. If we look at it from our readers perspective, it's not likely that many of them will be looking for information on this topic. RxS (talk) 05:41, 30 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

[Posted] Tropical Storm Nock-ten (2011)

• Blurb: Tropical Storm Nock-ten causes 41 deaths in the Philippines and the evacuation of more than 27,000 people in China. –HTD 17:31, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Support. Major impact. Also, the Seoul-area floods are a completely separate event. ~AH1 ^(discuss!) 17:51, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Support, seems okay, article looks good.  αλεπού《FOX》 18:04, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Oppose Nothing in particular seems to distinguish this storm from the dozen of other storms that tend to sweep across the South China Sea during this season, except the slightly high death toll. The damage is very limited at the moment, at barely $26 million (compare that to Sarika, at $248 million; Aere, at $1.37 billion). JimSukwutput 18:30, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • With damages of at (now) least US$34 million, Nock-ten is now the second costliest storm in the Western Pacific this year behind Sarika; Aere had US#31.7 million in damages... or 1.37 billion Philippine pesos. The "slightly high death toll" is sure to eclipse Aere, the deadliest storm of the year in the Western Pacific. –HTD 18:50, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • You're right, I misread that part. However, given that we did not post Sarika or Aere, or any of the other storms in the season (they do not even have an article), I see no particular reason why this ought to be posted. Having a few more deaths than usual in one small category of natural disasters does not sound like particularly newsworthy. JimSukwutput 19:08, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • That's in the past now. We screwed up earlier this year... you're not suggesting to commit the same mistake again, are you? –HTD 19:12, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
        • Well, I don't think it was a mistake, and it wouldn't be our mistake anyhow, considering that those articles do not even exist. JimSukwutput 19:51, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Support Article is well-updated. Spencer^T♦C 18:17, 30 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Netural While Nocktens PAGASA name has met the pre published criteria for retirement. I do not think that Nock-ten did enough to justify a main page appearance. Esspecially when we are probbably gonna have stronger storms hitting PHP during the Autumn.Jason Rees (talk) 01:11, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Neutral per the fact that while 41 deaths is rather significant, I have to agree with Jason Rees that in the grand scheme of an entire typical hurricane/typhoon season this isn't exactly the worst. Ks0stm ^(T•C•G) 02:32, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Support - the rarity of this event and the degree of significance are probably debatable, but the article is looking good so a definite support. Swarm ^{u | t} 03:08, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Support It may not be a clear case of inclusion, the article is in good shape and we're behind...supporting to hopefully knock it off the schnide. RxS (talk) 05:03, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Posted -- tariqabjotu 06:48, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Floods in Seoul

Nominator's comments: Heaviest two-day rainfall in Seoul since 1907. ~AH1 ^(discuss!) 19:14, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Also, if someone creates/finds an article about the flooding in South Korea that is worth a separate blurb. –HTD 17:31, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Brief article created. Although last year's floods in North Korea and Vietnam killed more people, such deadly floods in South Korea are a rare occurrence. ~AH1 ^(discuss!) 19:14, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Support per above. ~AH1 ^(discuss!) 19:15, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oppose. Basically same reason as above - fairly common occurrence of natural disaster. JimSukwutput 19:48, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comment. Please state what you mean by "common". Or this could just be another case of what I call news fatigue to seemingly oft-reported stories. Just because significant floods occur every year does not imply that an individual flood of a certain magnitude is always common in a specific area. ~AH1 ^(discuss!) 19:56, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This has nothing to do with news fatigue. I simply think there are much more important stories elsewhere - be they related to humanitarian disasters (see the Somalia famine article below, of which I was the main author), or scientific discoveries, or political conflicts with long-reaching consequences. Natural disasters like this are unforeseeable and largely unavoidable events, and do not have any long-term consequences. Reading about such news does not give us any information beyond the fact that, out there, some people have it worse than us. Yes, it's important to know what's going on in the world, but when 3/4 of the stories nominated here are natural disasters, there's something fundamentally wrong with how we consume news. JimSukwutput 22:30, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

To clarify, I think (and this is purely my opinion) there are two important differences between those "disaster" stories that ought to be posted and those that ought not. First, whether it is man-made (i.e. preventable) - for example, famines, massacres, accidents caused by poor training, and so on. Second, whether there is something that can be done about it - for example, disasters caused by environmental damage that can be reversed, or disasters that require an international relief effort. If neither of these are true, then the disaster/accident is purely unavoidable and unchangeable, and it becomes simply a consumption of news. The famine below is what I think is most appropriate in this regard - it was preventable, and there is still something that people can do about it.

Not to mention the immense difference in scale - using the death rate provided by the famine article, the famine is causing nearly 3000 deaths per day. This disaster nominated here simply pales in comparison to what's happening in many countries in eastern Africa, and I would rather we post numerous developments on that than this. JimSukwutput 22:48, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Comment: Article needs a lot of expansion/improvement. Spencer^T♦C 17:02, 30 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

[Posted] Sticky: 2011 Horn of Africa famine

• Comment. This has already been on ITN twice, on the 17th and the 20th. Have there been any new developments since then? Jenks24 (talk) 20:38, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Yes. Lots of donation pledges; violent conflicts between government/aid groups and Al-Shabaab; and so on. I don't think this is the most important development, but there's definitely something that can be posted, given that this is the first official famine in nearly 30 years and have already resulted in at least twenty thousand deaths. JimSukwutput 18:32, 28 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Hmmm, good points. But if we are going to post about this once a week, would it not be better to just sticky it? Jenks24 (talk) 18:45, 28 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • I'd support that as well. This is a disaster on the scale of the Japan earthquake, and it's ongoing and getting a lot worse. So since that was made a sticky, no reason not to do this one. JimSukwutput 18:52, 28 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
        • I would prefer to see this stickied, but if that doesn't happen, then I would be fine with a blurb regarding the conflict that Jim has pointed out below. Jenks24 (talk) 19:24, 28 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Oppose, as to any majorfamine, the UN will be airlifting food to the country. An event like this was inevitable since the famine grew into a crisis so there is really no point posting the same/similar event twice. YuMaNuMa (talk) 05:46, 28 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • This is plainly wrong. This is the first famine declared by the UN since the 1984-85 Ethiopian famine, and there was no airlift during that period. JimSukwutput 14:39, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• neutral it has come under criticism for red tape delays, while at the same time the number of refugees into Ethiopia is steadily ridsing as a result of the famine/drought. might even be a weak supportLihaas (talk) 17:06, 28 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Strong Support, though not necessarily this particular blurb. I think this particular event is more important: "Africa Union peacekeepers say they have seized key territory from Islamist insurgents in Somalia's capital after they allegedly threatened aid camps." This is a major conflict, involving tens of thousands of African Union soldiers. JimSukwutput 18:32, 28 July 2011 (UTC) Reply[reply]
  • Note: I just updated the article regarding this particular conflict. JimSukwutput 19:21, 28 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I'm supporting a sticky, since there seems to be a consensus in this direction. JimSukwutput 14:31, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Support make it sticky. The crisis isn't going away anytime soon. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 01:49, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Oppose use of sticky Previously, "stickying" something was reserved for the Olympics- international events with high probability of multiple ITN postings (new world records and such), and ones that were constantly being updated well with new information. Recently, the usage has been expanded, and I think at times it has been appropriate, but for items such as this, it isn't. Stickying should be for clumping multiple items at once, not just a way to blanket cover updates to a single story. Spencer^T♦C 02:57, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Would you support posting either the nominated blurb or the one I suggested? JimSukwutput 03:43, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Support three items: in one blurb; the airlift, the refugee crisis and the insurgency. Major crisis is unfolding in Somalia. ~AH1 ^(discuss!) 17:55, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I Moved this discussion as there seems to be a consensus that the AU/Al-Shabaab conflict on 28 July should be mentioned. I also marked "[Ready]" as there is a clear consensus for posting. However, there doesn't seem to be a consensus on what particular blurb to use or whether to make it a sticky. Maybe an admin can make the choice here? JimSukwutput 18:39, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • How can this be ready? Nobody seems to know what we're posting, the discussion is fairly minimal, and where's the update? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:25, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • There is an update for each of the blurb suggested, at the ends of the second and third section respectively.
      • Six supports and one oppose seem to be a fairly decent consensus. The problem is that we have different preferences for what particular blurb to use. But I don't think we can resolve that any time soon, and I don't think it really matters. JimSukwutput 19:49, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
        • • But no one blurb has a consensus, imo. It's not like the options are minor stylistic preferences, the consensus is torn as to which parts of the story are and aren't worth posting. I think we need more discussion (and preferably not just voting). HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:59, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
            • Okay, I see the point. Any one who hasn't stated his/her preference yet, please comment on whether you prefer the first blurb (UN airlift), the second blurb (AU/Al-Shabaab conflict), or a combination of both. JimSukwutput 22:38, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Comment Please correct me if I am wrong, but I thought this was the first time food was actually being airlifted into Somalia itself. Beyond that, I think it a sad commentary that, as of today, I cannot find any evidence on the main page that millions of people are starving to death as we speak. Instead we had Amy Winehouse's death and the Tour de France winner. The suggestion to make it sticky is a good one. If this doesn't merit it, then what does? --Rhombus (talk) 12:46, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Four people here seem to have a clear preference for posting this as a sticky (Jenks24, Ohconfucius, me, and Rhombus as the nominator). I'm changing the nomination title as a result. Also adding [Ready] - there are four supports for the sticky, two additional supports with no preference indicated, and one oppose for the sticky and one additional oppose with no preference indicated. A fairly decent consensus. Article was updated for both of the events described above and is being updated constantly. JimSukwutput 14:30, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Oppose both a sticky and posting. The posting as this is no longer news the air drop was over two weeks ago. The sticky as this is just one story, not a continuing series, such as Arab Spring or News International phone hacking scandal. Mtking ^(edits) 03:59, 1 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Read the article. The airlift you're referring to was on July 13, in Kenya. The one nominated here occurred on July 27, in Somalia. As for stickying it, I certainly don't see how a hacking scandal of one company warrants one while a historical famine that affects 11 million people in 6 countries does not. This is not "one story". We have already posted two stories related to this, and there are two more stories nominated above that have gained widespread support. If this does not become a sticky, then we will have to post the article four times, and as Ohconfucius said, that number is only going to increase in the future. JimSukwutput 04:08, 1 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • I have removed the [Ready] tag, it was "added" twice by Jim Sukwutput first when he moved the text here only to be removed by an administrator (HJ Mitchell) here and then re-added here. Please only add the "[Ready]" Tag once, if someone else, especialy an administrator, removes it leave it to others to judge if it should be marked again. Mtking ^(edits) 05:51, 1 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • Marking [Ready]. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 06:21, 1 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • Mtking: HJ Mitchell removed the Ready tag because there was no consensus at that time about which particular blurb to post or whether to sticky it. Since then, two of the users have expressed their preference for stickying it, meaning that there is now a large majority in favor of that (if I can assume Eraserhead1 supports it, that makes three). And while HJ Mitchell said he prefers more discussion, 3 days have passed and there has been no response from any of the two previous oppose votes, one of which, by the way, is factually incorrect like yours. Would you also care to retract your incorrect statement, and explain why you still hold on to your position? JimSukwutput 13:19, 1 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Oppose Support either or all. Major news -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 06:59, 1 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Did you mean support? JimSukwutput 13:19, 1 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Yes, thanks for letting me know -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 14:23, 1 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Just to reemphasize the continued significance of this event and the many developments that have occurred around it - there are over 600 news articles about the Somalia famine alone during the last day. For example, torrential rain destroyed many of the refugee camps yesterday 12, leading to at least hundreds of deaths. On another note, some governments have made significant contributions to the relief effort, including Canada's $50 million and France's €30 million 3. To add onto that, the large-scale conflict between AU forces and Al-Shabaab is still going on and AU forces just launched a major offensive to seize large amounts of territories back from the insurgents 45.

This is also, by the way, stickied on the French and Spanish Wikipedias, and the German Wikipedia's article is constantly in the news section and getting more views than ours. How we can fail to post such an event in these circumstances is utterly incomprehensible to me. JimSukwutput 14:01, 1 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Posted as a sticky. NW (Talk) 15:05, 1 August 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Matter-antimatter symmetry

• Nom. --bender235 (talk) 19:52, 28 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Support, but we need a strong article to explain the background and why exactly this is significant. The Science Daily article seems like a good basis for an update. JimSukwutput 19:58, 28 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Is confirm the right word? Scientists "confirm" evolution all the time but it can never become a scientific law. Also we should definitely cut the "By determining the mass of an antiproton" part out. I'm not seeing a mainstream coverage so I am opposing for now. Marcus Qwertyus 12:37, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Your counter-example is a bit off. Matter-antimatter symmetry is a physical property (or law); evolution is a theory (or explanation), albeit one that has been tested and affirmed endless times. Confirm is definitely the right word to describe the first one. JimSukwutput 13:20, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Alright I believe you. Marcus Qwertyus 15:02, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Support. Important LHC discovery. ~AH1 ^(discuss!) 17:53, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Oppose. You have to be a physicist to understand the article and the article doesn't mention the current discovery (although I'm sure someone will fix that.) This is a minority topic and we already have an item about as asteroid. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Richard-of-Earth (talk • contribs) 18:11, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Oppose - you have to be a physicist to understand the blurb, much less the article. Swarm ^{u | t} 03:14, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

[Posted] New Prez of Peru

Moved from 27th because item can only be posted today.

Nominator's comments: Support we posted Aus.Can/Uk election for result and govt.
Also if need be we can link inaugurated to the relevant section Peruvian general election, 2011#Inauguration. Important this is to be added TOMORROW. Lihaas (talk) 15:52, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Oppose. We posted the election results in June. We very rarely post inaugurations as they are symbolic. _EricLeb⁰¹ (Page | Talk) 16:15, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • There seems to be confusion because it seems the posting administrator didn't make a note on the election article's talk page. The stats clearly show it, though. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 16:23, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"rarely " post? why the bias to anglo-countries. (although i think Ireland was posted too, coul dbe wrong)

Stats dont mean they were necessarily on ITN, it was a hot-issue at the time and it could have generated sensation. (peru market and silver prices in the news back then) STL generated views without ever being on ITN.Lihaas (talk) 16:31, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

*Oppose - as ericleb01.--BabbaQ (talk) 17:54, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

umm, did you see the response to that?

striking BabbaQ b/c its been disproved and withdrawn.Lihaas (talk) 18:01, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

*Oppose per Ericleb01. JimSukwutput 18:04, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

to reiterate, we dotn vote count here. you have to give a reason;; and that point has a counter-arguement, so you should counter that.Lihaas (talk) 19:23, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Didn't see it, and wouldn't have understood it anyhow. Anyway, switching to neutral now based on Arsonal's comment below. I don't think it makes sense to post a insignificant story just because we didn't post the main event previously, but I see the point.JimSukwutput 18:27, 28 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Support. I'm striking my previous comment because the story was never posted back in June despite its ITNR status. There was concern about the lack of a prose update. If the election article is inadequate, Humala's article is an alternate choice. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 19:31, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Changed to Support in light of this. I guess I should have checked before making that initial claim. Lucky break, Lihaas :P _EricLeb⁰¹ (Page | Talk) 16:50, 28 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

ill take that as a barnstar ;)Lihaas (talk) 17:05, 28 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Support, in that case, as above. And because the timer is red hot and all other nominations today look like duds. Nightw 19:37, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oh, but it's not until tomorrow anyway. Still... Good compromise for not posting the elections. Nightw 19:40, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

so ITNR? though election has plenty of post-result prose too nowLihaas (talk) 21:44, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No, not ITNR, and the election story is old. Nightw 22:15, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I tweaked your blurb, since the transfer of office, rather than the inauguration ceremony, is what's important. Nightw 10:44, 28 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Support Per Nightw -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 23:06, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

comment can someone makr this as ready? his swearing-in is either starting soon aor already udner way.Lihaas (talk) 17:05, 28 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ready. "Peru Swears In Humala as President" (Voice of America) I also tweaked the blurb a bit. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 17:39, 28 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Question should we bold the election article (or both?)? as the former has the current quit e git prose update of the inauguration.Lihaas (talk) 18:51, 28 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Support - no need to mention election, as a distant memory. Propose new blurb: "Ollanta Humala takes office as the new President of Peru". Short and to the point. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 01:47, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

the lengthy prose on their on the inauguration is current,Lihaas (talk) 08:11, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Where's the update in Humala's article? Only the lead mentions that he's actually the president. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:22, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Peruvian general election, 2011#Inauguration can be bold linked.

also see the 2011 election and president-elect sections on the page[User:Lihaas|Lihaas]] (talk) 13:34, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That works. Posted. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:50, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

[Posted] 2010 TK7

Nominator's comments: Support This is the first Earth trojan asteroid that has ever been discovered, astronomical firsts are generally considered noteworthy. XavierGreen (talk) 18:35, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Support. An interesting discovery indeed. The pre-print version of article for publication in Nature is here. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 19:19, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Support Nature is a top quality source for this kind of story The Resident Anthropologist (talk)•(contribs) 20:01, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Support i think this is obvious support... sharing orbit with asteroid is a rare discovery. -- Ashish-g55 21:45, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Support Per Ashishg55 and The Resident Anthropologist -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 23:07, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Article is woefully short at present.  rev《FOX》 00:03, 28 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Support Although I would have liked to see this expanded and showcased at DYK instead. But DYK or ITN, it needs some expansion. Remember how the polka-dot frog got kicked off ITN because the idea was cool but the article was too stubby. Sharktopus ^talk 00:18, 28 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Strong oppose in its current state Not only is the article too short, it is written as scientific gobbledegook. The important terminology is totally absent except for links to 'Trojan asterioid' and 'Lagrangian point'. Thus, significance of this important discovery is totally lost on the average reader, who will be left utterly perplexed by the article. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 01:49, 28 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • What terminology are you looking for? There is only so much information a scientist can gather from a point of light on a photographic plate. Virtually all the information known about the object that an average reader can understand is already listed in the article.XavierGreen (talk) 03:41, 28 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • I was referring to the use of terms like 'Trojan asterioid' and 'Lagrangian point' without any cursory explanation; there was also no explanation as to what makes the discovery significant. I see that that has now been addressed. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 09:37, 28 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Can't support in current state I want to support but the article needs work as per Ohconfucius. Mtking ^(edits) 02:53, 28 July 2011 (UTC) Support has been updated. Mtking ^(edits) 08:25, 28 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Post already This is a hugely significant one-time discovery. The article is technically ready, and will only be improved by further attention. μηδείς (talk) 04:34, 28 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Support: I think the article and the update is adequate. While I dont know enough about the subject to comment on what else needs to be included, what is already there is sufficient for a layperson like me to understand. Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 06:32, 28 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Posted. --BorgQueen (talk) 16:56, 28 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Question While this is a decent article now, why was a piss-poor stub allowed to be the top ITN story in the first place? Lugnuts (talk) 08:56, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Because a lot of readers of this section don't seem to realise that this section is to promote quality rather than be a simple news ticker.  狐《FOX》 13:35, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As I understand, the criteria are (and I quote) "the quality of the updated content and the significance of the developments described in the updated content. In many cases, qualities in one area can make up for deficiencies in another. For example, a highly significant event, such as the discovery of a cure for cancer, may have a sub-par update associated with it, but be posted anyway with the assumption that other editors will soon join in and improve the article." While I wouldnt dare compare this to the cure for cancer, thats pretty much what has happened. A sub-par (but still found to be adequate as reflected by discussion above) article attracted other editors to join in and make it better. Chocolate Horlicks (talk) 22:39, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Which is exactly what happened. _EricLeb⁰¹ (Page | Talk) 16:50, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Doku Umarov/Caucasian Mujahadeen

Nominator's comments: Support its deadly rare thate we post leadership battles of extralegal/rebel bodies (hich dont qualify at ITNR but are de facto entities), the opportunity is here for a change to ITN. Lihaas (talk) 15:52, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Weak oppose The problem with posting these underground developments is that they're notoriously unreliable. Note here that the latter of your sources (in the article) says: "The Sharia court ruled in favor of Umarov, according to a statement released by Kavkaz Center, a propaganda arm of the Caucasus Emirate." Also, this is (despite its international notoriety) a pretty minor conflict, with only one million people in the territory involved. We give far too much weight to Islamic terrorism already, and even if we are to continue that, I'd rather some high-significance places like Northern India or Western China be covered. JimSukwutput 18:19, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Oppose. This is one of those stories that nobody actually knows anything about. How many mainstream English Wikipedia readers knew that the Caucasian "emirate" was in a leadership crisis? Let alone cared. It's not exactly covered in independent journalism... Nightw 18:45, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

But thats exactly the point. to get people to know. WP out to educate as Jimbo has often said.

independent journalism? what else is the source quoted? its not mainstream media

[3][4][5][6] + article now updated further to show that he was warned of an exscalation after the unity deal, which comes as russia faces "near daily attacks" in hte region and the occasional moscow attacks.Lihaas (talk) 19:21, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Oppose. Unreliable and relies principally a source that is blacklisted by Wikipedia. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 02:07, 28 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

longwarjournal?Lihaas (talk) 07:32, 28 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

kavkazcenter.com --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 09:32, 28 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Most of the info comes from longwarjournal. though the blacklist discussion of that was quite dodgy too. I agree when its cited as historical truth, but when its cited as a source for a statement then its not off. (in this case itis used as such)Lihaas (talk) 17:08, 28 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Oppose, one finds that reports of who is nominally in charge of organizations without transparency is not reliable and generally irrelevant - much less front page news. Do we know who's in charge of each crime family? hacker group? the skull & bones folks? Carlossuarez46 (talk) 00:18, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Tomb of Philip the Apostle

Nom. --bender235 (talk) 16:52, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Comment Are there better sources? This is being attributed to remarks in the Turkish popular press by a researcher who, rather than finding something unexpected, has discovered exactly what he has been looking for for 12 years. μηδείς (talk) 17:20, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Comment Agreed with Medeis here. Either we wait until we have a better confirmation, or we say that it's a claim. I'm also not convinced about the significance of this. From the sound of the article, it doesn't look like the tomb would contain any particular cultural artifact, so right now it's simply the place where a notable person was buried. Pretty much only symbolic value for Christians and Muslims. JimSukwutput 18:09, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Wait I have some archeological training here see 4 major problems off the bat here. 1)Typically Archeologists announce these finds in papers at Major Conferences or Prestigious Journals after years of documenting their digs. The fact that 2)no paper has been received by some sort of peers. 3) they are declaring this as "Philip the Apostle" when the tomb is not even open yet. 4) I am not really seeing wide coverage of it anywhere but some of the more tabloid type of news. I am not holding my breath. The Resident Anthropologist (talk)•(contribs) 18:15, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Poking some holes into this theory Read the Foxnews article and look at what they dont say: Francesco D'Andria is never described as an archeologist and they always distinguish between the "Professor" and the "Archeologists" in the text. This implies that he is probably a Legit PhD prof somewhere. My experience tells me that that he is religious scholar with no formal scientific Archeological training. Real archeologist go with measurable hypothesis to test (how large was is this site? what does the rubbish pile contain). Treasure hunting Religious scholars say absurd objects like find the Grail! the The Ark of covenant! Noah's ark! Jesus' Tomb! Philip the Apostle's tomb! It's also odd they dont mention the university or he is affiliated with which is not the norm for the press. There is always the distinct possibility that he is total fraud and just wants to make it a tourist spot. The Resident Anthropologist (talk)•(contribs) 18:42, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Death of Joe Arroyo

Nominator's comments: Support Far more hits, over many more years, that other recently featured singers. One of his hits "may well be Colombia's most important song": others say "When you talk about Colombian music, your reference point is Joe Arroyo". Had a soap orpera made of his life story. Kevin McE (talk) 15:26, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Whoops, the death was expected; might as well withdraw the nom, Kevin, because we all know it sure as hell won't go through. *rolls eyes* For the record, I support this as I supported Facundo Cabral's murder, because South American culture is extremely under-represented here (aside from the Copa América) and this would be a nice place to start. Arroyo was supposed to receive the Lifetime Acheivement Award from the Latin Recording Academy in November. _EricLeb⁰¹ (Page | Talk) 15:42, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

this is not an ITNR event. no deaths are, usually (always?) require consensus.

nbut about to nom a Latam article for tomorrow..or should i do it now?  DoneLihaas (talk) 15:44, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Comment The article is in a poor state. There are only two sources and the early life and health issues and drug abuse sections are completely unsourced. Truthsort (talk) 16:14, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Comment Besides the poor sourcing, the article does not tell us why this singer is notable (besides having a lot of albums), which is always a bad sign. JimSukwutput 18:24, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Comment As I suspected, being outstanding in one's field, despite being mentioned in the death criteria, is far less likely to get a death raised to ITN than being a regular in gossip columns and scandal sheets. Kevin McE (talk) 09:23, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

UK expels all Libyan Embassy staff

• The UK has expelled all Libyan Embassy staff of the regime from the country and formally recognise the rebel-led National Transitional Council (NTC) as the country's governing authority. --BabbaQ (talk) 13:38, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Source for Story, Source for story.--BabbaQ (talk) 13:38, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Support - as nom.--BabbaQ (talk) 13:38, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

oppose nothign new, just undue notice to one action. the Arab Spging sticky is already there. if something notable happens on the field then its worth an indiv. posting. (believe france has already don e so)Lihaas (talk) 14:34, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oppose as well. This is not the first country to do so; especially when we talk about recognising the NTC, as it has been done with 31 countries so far. _EricLeb⁰¹ (Page | Talk) 15:30, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Oppose Not even close to being the most notable thing to happen about the Libya conflict in the last few days. For example, there was a development about whether Qadaffi could stay in Libya under the rebels' demands.JimSukwutput 18:22, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Oppose. Expelling diplomats is symbolic, but no big deal; recognition of the rebels is much more significant, but since the US and several other Western countries have already recognised them as the legitimate government, it was almost certainly going to happen sooner or later. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:47, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ghulam Haidar Hameedi killed in suicide bombing

• Oppose Was only a local-level politician. Spencer^T♦C 12:45, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

support as pertinent to the stability of Afghanistan (the big conflict in the world at the moment that NATO is on the verge of losing) in general and Kandahar in particular. TWO high-level assassinations recently (both of which were posted (or was it just the one?)). mayor of the most precarious city in Afghanistan is notable by itself. three high-level this month aloneLihaas (talk) 16:08, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Oppose - local level politician.--BabbaQ (talk) 17:56, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

so is Karzai's bro (whos technically even lower)..posted that when elationships dont necessitate notabilityLihaas (talk) 18:00, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Support, if article is updated. Mayor of a major city assassinated is a yes from me. Connormah (talk) 20:33, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

[Ready] Border clashes in Kosovo-Serbia

• Kosovo bid to retake two border crossings held by Serbs ends in one police officer being killed.--93.137.108.54 (talk) 08:00, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Source for story. --93.137.108.54 (talk) 08:00, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Support - if turned into major news story.--BabbaQ (talk) 10:06, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Found more coverage here.--BabbaQ (talk) 10:12, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Started a stub for the event, 2011 Kosovo-Serbia border clashes.--BabbaQ (talk) 10:24, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Article now at 2011 Kosovo–Serbia border clashes. Jenks24 (talk) 12:17, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Support - The Serbia-Kosovo conflict is important and should be covered.Olegwiki (talk) 10:42, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

strong oppose as an isolated incident, if it grows then post it. there are lots of "important conflicts" we cant post any incident in themLihaas (talk) 14:36, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Support - This is a big deal. Kosovo is the site of the largest EU international intervention now or ever before. Story also involves NATO and has serious geopolitical implications. --85.124.37.18 (talk) 20:59, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

like...? 1 dead kosovar means..? if a couple of terrorist mean anything than see aboveLihaas (talk) 22:54, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The situation has escalated even further now. See here, and here.--BabbaQ (talk) 13:57, 28 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

support per my comment above about if the situation escalates, it has and there are intl concerns. Ive done a big update to the page and marked ready. re-worded the blurb slightly tooLihaas (talk) 17:12, 28 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

yes definitly ready.--BabbaQ (talk) 12:16, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• I disagree that it's ready. There's not much in the article, and much of it is padding (like the almost-entirely unsourced reactions section, which, even if sourced, would be of little encyclopaedic value). HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:16, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

umm, no its all sourced i did it myself. there are no intermediate refs so no need to add every para ref. the next following ref has all the info, you can check if you want. if you feel the need to repeat refs (which i didnt see) then youre welcome to add them. consensus seems to suggests its ready, though. (remarking)

theres also a massive 3 para prose on the current events as well as the even bigger reactions that pertain to its current "crisis" level. weve posted numerous articles with far less prose.Lihaas (talk) 15:24, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

HJ Mitchell is correct here. The article is poorly sourced. In particular, this source was used for half of the response section (by Lihaas' reasoning), but doesn't seem to contain any pertinent information. The article also needs some strong copyediting. Removing [Ready] once again. JimSukwutput 20:01, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

And what wrong with BBC, which incidentally is NOT the whole of the response section? Is that not RS enough? The incidents section (which is the crux of the issue) is not dubiously sourced. What copyediting do you suggest? (could do so if there was a prob) we still have three vs. 2 poeple suggesting its ready

Pretty much debunked Mitchell's statesments (and without acrimony at that)

Just saw the page and see no attempt at copy editing or anything in talk. (ready) per 3 vs. 2 conensus

Conversely, if one explains the problem it can be solved, but how is another editor to know what needs updating otherwise. Mitchell's concerns on sources were answered. but i dont see what JS' concerns are. sorry, if im blind ;) (but au contraire, not a single thing here is unsourced, excect possibly for background which is sourced on the requisite pages)

What then are the reasons for your (JS) claims that its poorly sourced? (asking in AGF so sa to correct it)Lihaas (talk) 20:29, 29 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I agree with Lihaas.--BabbaQ (talk) 16:22, 30 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I seriously can't understand what you're saying. And ITN is not a majority-vote - 3-2 is not a consensus, especially since you have done nothing to address HJ Mitchell's issue with the article. Go work on the article if you want to get it posted, rather than starting an incomprehensible tirade against me. JimSukwutput 16:34, 30 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

To help you out, here are a few examples of obvious grammatical mistakes that need to be corrected:

• "Serbia has also stationed troops in the northern region and moved to enforced a boycott of goods" - 1st section
• "...was killed during a grenade blast near the border and one more policeman with at least one currently being treated in hospital for severe wounds and five more have sustained injuries during the operation to take control of the border posts[3] and the consequent clashes with local residents from the North Kosovo" - 2nd section (run-on sentence)
• "Serbian protesters came back returned in the evening and attacked the post" - 2nd section
• "The mob reportedly included "dozens of masked men, armed with crowbars, clubs, axes, Molotov cocktails and handheld flares,"[2] as well as rocks and other debris" - 2nd section. The problem here is that the mob does not include rocks and other debris; it's rather that they're armed with rocks and other debris. The wording here makes that ambiguous.
• "however the United States and the United Kingdom were opposed the move" - 3rd section

...and a bunch of others. I suggest you seek help from other users if you don't feel that you can't copyedit the article correctly. Unfortunately, I will not be able to help, as I am quite busy at this moment. JimSukwutput 16:39, 30 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What tirade? i didnt once attack you, unlike the NPA above.

Virtually every single article on ITN is not grammar-proof, picking out bits to bite at after the original arguement was debunked seems more like vengeance mongering here. The phrase about the mob also follows "armed with..." see what precludes the dodgy bit. otherwise  DoneLihaas (talk) 13:00, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The "original arguement" wasn't debunked; I did not talk further about it because you seem to have no intention on correcting the problem. I'll let another admin see if he thinks having half a section unsourced is fine - quite clearly, the admin above does not.

Obvious grammatical errors are not trivial problems. The article was poorly written to the extent that many non-native speakers would not be able to comprehend it. This was not "vengeance mongering" - I mentioned the problem in my first comment above. Since you did not seem to recognize the problem, I gave you some examples to help you with that. Your lack of appreciation is noted.

There are still significant problems with the grammar of the article, making some parts of it virtually incomprehensible. Here's another example: "He also added that though co-operation with the "international community...the constitution and the sovereignty of my country are sacred for myself and for my countrymen and go beyond any partnership or loyalty."" I strongly suggest you to ask another user for help in copyediting the article. Otherwise I remain strongly opposed to posting this. JimSukwutput 13:51, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is starting to look more like a power-struggle than actual prose problems if you ask me. How can anyone strongly oppose this article, I find that to be very strange...--BabbaQ (talk) 15:34, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Power struggle? I have no problem with User:Lihaas. In fact he is probably the user here that I agree with most frequently. This article, however, is simply not up to standard. JimSukwutput 16:34, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well, I strongly disagrees.--BabbaQ (talk) 19:32, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Colombian Constitutional Court rules on same-sex unions

Nominator's comments: This is probably quite a major decision as it may lead to Colombia becoming the second country in South America (alongside Argentina), the fourth outside Europe, and the eleventh country overall (unless another country, possibly Australia or a Western European country, moves faster) to have same-sex marriage nationwide. --~Knowzilla ^(Talk) 11:15, 28 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

strong oppose we can post every country in the world doing so and its not even a regional first. Furthermore it seems they legalised unionjs not marriage. Akin to Mexico City (although whats the status of that? as the largest Spanish -speakign country it would be more notable when its national)Lihaas (talk) 17:14, 28 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Actually the Colombian Congress may decide that it will be same-sex marriage. This is a significant news item; it doesn't matter that such news items are becoming increasingly common, the story is still a notable one. Also, this is a region which is fairly underrepresented on ITN. Additionally, the ruling of the Brazilian Supreme Federal Court on same-sex unions was posted on ITN. --~Knowzilla ^(Talk) 17:58, 28 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I dont think we should have posted that. But we got 1 ready Latam article, another that was rejected yest and the copa america wone below. the underrepresented tag is being overused;)Lihaas (talk) 18:55, 28 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

2011 Moroccan Royal Armed Forces Lockheed C-130 Hercules crash

78 people have died after a plane crashed in south of Morocco. Support as the nominator. That's the deadliest accident in 2011. - [14] EugεnS¡m¡on(14) ® 13:27, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Article. wackywace 13:30, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

1 line, 1 source. not a chance in hell thats going up even if its notableLihaas (talk) 14:04, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Eugen, for the love of all that is holy, start making longer articles before expecting them to be showcased on the Main Page. This sort of thing is part of why this section is despised and ridiculed by so many.  ƒox  14:25, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • The reason people despise ITN is because it's not updated often enough. And that's because we don't get enough nominations per day. How are you not encouraging the fact that he nominates one nearly every other day? _EricLeb⁰¹ (Page | Talk) 15:43, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Agreed with fox. There's no point putting it up there if the article has no content. People can just read headline news instead. JimSukwutput 14:37, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Tentative support pending additional information. There isn't much detail on the actual story yet. All sources are referring back to the Moroccan army release. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 15:08, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Guys, I think you're forgetting the entire point of Wikipedia. An article very rarely goes from nothing to B-Class in a flash. Eugen made the article (Eugen didn't even make the article, so these personal attacks aren't even warrented!), but he's not obligated to expand it to ITN standards. It seldom ever does in most nominations. That's why we have a community to back his efforts up. See also: WP:BUSY. _EricLeb⁰¹ (Page | Talk) 15:31, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • That might be valid criticism, and it's possible that you might get some support for it at WT:ITN. However, the blurb for this, if or when it goes up, will be to the effect of "plane crashes, X dead". Common sense suggests that, if we're linking to an article, that article should contain more information than the blurb. This one doesn't, at the time of writing, but it is possible to write a reasonable article on a current event. thoughof course, you need sufficient sources and time. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:10, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • I'm not trying to gather support for anything I've said. I'm just saying that articles on this encyclopaedia take time to develop and don't rely on single editors for expansion. You can see what I mean by checking the most recent version of the article. _EricLeb⁰¹ (Page | Talk) 02:05, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Support when updated. hopefully the article will be expanded in a timely fashion.--Wikireader41 (talk) 16:02, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Support but I don't think any additional information can be added as airplane crashes take months maybe even years to determine the cause of the crash and as you all will know, Wikipedia doesn't run on speculations. YuMaNuMa (talk) 06:00, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• The "Royal Moroccan Air Force" does not exist. * The very term is emblematic of Wikipedia's attempt's to classify everything in terms that the English speaking world can understand. I see a whole sequence of articles under the same terms all rubbish. — Preceding unsigned comment added by The left nostril of the real prof (talk • contribs) 06:56, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Well, instead of just whining here, why didn't tell us what it should say, and try fixing the blurb and the article, as I am about to do? HiLo48 (talk) 07:59, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • The left nostril has made no other edits. I smell a sock! Mjroots (talk) 10:02, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Support iff the article is expanded a bit more, and given some structure. I'm busy elsewhere atm, but it is covered by ASN and Flight. The relevant thread on Pprune, whilst not a RS in itself, does contain links to RSs that would be suitable to expand the article with. Mjroots (talk) 10:02, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

[Posted] Truong Tan Sang becomes the new President of Vietnam

• New head of state of a country of almost 100 million people. DHN (talk) 04:48, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support new head of state in country of 90 million people is clearly notable. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 06:48, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Support. Clearly ITN worthy. Not sure if the article is updated enough to meet the requirements, though? Also, I know this is a bit of a hot topic at the moment, but if the article title doesn't use diacritics, why should the blurb use diacritics? Jenks24 (talk) 07:36, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• This is an ITNR item, and doesn't require further support. This should be posted as soon as the update is made. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 08:37, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Comment: Article needs major updates; it has some, but it could use more expansion. Spencer^T♦C 13:00, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Keep in mind that Vietnamese is not generally an accessible language to English Wikipedia users, so substantial expansion may be unrealistic using available English media. It's almost twice the DYK prose requirement, which, in my opinion, is enough for posting. Increased readership usually brings about more improvements. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 13:17, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • The article had been expanded by User:Kauffner. DHN (talk) 17:57, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• We can't expect too much more than that. Posted.  ліса 《FOX》  18:29, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Yikes I don't mind the topic, it's a decent subject. But the article is in pretty sad shape for the main page. RxS (talk) 20:36, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Based on the modest amount of English sources on this issue the article's actually looking pretty good.  여우 《FOX》  23:41, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Disagree, article quality isn't a sliding scale depending on the availability of sources. The number of sources doesn't affect quality of prose for example. Not asking for this to be pulled, but it should never have been posted. RxS (talk) 01:02, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Since Dũng had already been confirmed for a second term, I think the blurb should be changed to reflect that. DHN (talk) 00:09, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Comment The blurb as proposed was fine. However, by the time this reached the template, President of Vietnam had morphed into President of Vietnam. Other than the old bad habit of making two links when one will do fine, I can't see why? Vietnam is already at the second degree of separation from the subject, and those at the first degree have all been linked. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 02:45, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Agree with Ohconfucius. Possibly worth making a request at WP:ERRORS. Jenks24 (talk) 13:59, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Comment Everything about the lives of Vietnamese leaders is treated as a state secret. Until January, Sang was a guy on a list with a name and a position, end of story. The article represents pretty much every scrape of information available about the man that I could cull off the Internet. This basically consists of his résumé and the Wikileaks cable on Vietnam. There is no political campaigning and no one I've talked even voted in the election, although the government claims 90 percent turnout. Kauffner (talk) 19:21, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The NFL Lockout is resolved

• Support as nom meshach (talk) 19:22, 25 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• No games lost so dunno how this will fly here...HTD 19:26, 25 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• The Hall of Fame games was canceled and the drafted players terms were changed. But the big news is the collective sigh of relief from fans that I feel makes this newsworthy. Also the start of the lockout was featured in ITN FWIW. meshach (talk) 19:37, 25 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Has it (Start of the lockout was posted)? Anyway... oh good. Now let's wait for the barrage of opposes screaming "U.S. biaz!!!!!!1111" Don't tell me I didn't warn you... –HTD 19:39, 25 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Support this was the longest labor action in the history of the most popular sport in the United States of America. I presuppose that certain people will object solely because it is popular in America, but this was a huge story, and historical in its importance for the NFL. --Jayron32 19:38, 25 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Could you explain, for the benefit of a rather confused Englishman, what on Earth this means? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:42, 25 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Yes, as much as I would like to understand this as news, those of us on the western bit of the big pond just cannot grasp how this is "news". It's just....a bit of sport, not even a notable bit of sport, isn't it? doktorb _words^deeds 19:43, 25 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Sure. Imagine, if you will, if all of the owners of all of the teams in the English Premier League locked all of the players out and refused to allow the teams to conduct any business for 5 months in an attempt to renegotiate the terms of the player's contracts. Now, imagine the day that ends. Same situation, except with the NFL. --Jayron32 19:48, 25 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • Obliged :doffs cap: doktorb _words^deeds 20:05, 25 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Question: Should that be "July 27" rather than "June 27"? Newyorkbrad (talk) 19:40, 25 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I'm going to assume so, considering we don't have a time machine handy. Feel free to revert me if I'm wrong. ;-) Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 19:43, 25 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • That was my mistake. Thanks for catching and correcting it! meshach (talk) 20:09, 25 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Woo-hooo!!!!!!!!! man cant live without football at all!!

buit the NBA lockout actually resulted in a change to the season so this is not that big.Lihaas (talk) 20:06, 25 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Oppose so this is something that didn't really happen? Nope. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:09, 25 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Support seems highly notable. Would clearly be posted if it involved football, and something did happen - the hall of fame games were cancelled. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 21:53, 25 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Conditional Support Has received a lot of press coverage, but I think that the NFL lockout section should be split into a separate article. A few of the agencies reporting from outside the US: Eurosport Yahoo (UK/Ireland), Toronto Sun, BBC; currently top "sport" news on the homepage, Sydney Morning Herald, Xinhua, Al Jazeera, just to name a few. Nonetheless, 2011_NFL_lockout#End_of_lockout needs substantial updates, which should also summarize some of the results of the negotiations. Spencer^T♦C 01:26, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Oppose until the article has been sufficiently updated. Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 01:30, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Support in principle. This is a major sport, and a major sports story in the U.S.. Nothing about "bias" here, if this were the UEFA Champions League we'd be clamouring to post it. However, the article needs work and I side with Titoxd in opposing until updated. Strange Passerby (talk • cont) 02:30, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Support agree with the above, if this were the Premier League it'd fly through ITNC. Also, this is much more notable than Yao Ming's retirement, which we posted last week. Hot Stop talk-contribs 03:57, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• 'Support per StrangePasserby.--Johnsemlak (talk) 06:20, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Oppose. Per TRM who noted that nothing actually happened. For anyone who's interested, I would also oppose this if it was the EPL, Champions League or my favourite sports league, the AFL. Jenks24 (talk) 07:38, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm still trying to come to grips with this. I'm getting the impression that this all happened in the off-season, so no actual competition was impacted. No team fan missed a game. Is that right? If it's right, Oppose. Claims of the form "If this were XYZ League it would be posted" are meaningless. It isn't, and it wasn't. Hypotheticals are not strong arguments. HiLo48 (talk) 08:38, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• No fan missed a game. Is that right? No, that's incorrect. The Hall of Fame game between Chicago and St. Louis was canceled. Spencer^T♦C 12:52, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• It would be incorrect because they're your words, not mine. You misquoted me. If you feel the need to be dishonest in your arguments, you probably don't have a case. A little bit of ethics here please. No trickery. HiLo48 (talk) 20:00, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• My bad HiLo, it was an honest mistake. I will do better in the future. Spencer^T♦C 00:59, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Considering you said "no team (sic) fan missed a game" and he said "no fan missed a game" how exactly is that a misquote? Hot Stop talk-contribs 20:14, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• What an idiotic question. It's a misquote because it's not what I wrote. HiLo48 (talk) 20:42, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

roflmfao BRILLIANT! funniest mo. on WP yet. ;)Lihaas (talk) 16:50, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• So is someone else using your account? Because HiLo48 wrote "No team fan missed a game. Is that right? If it's right, Oppose". Hot Stop talk-contribs 20:51, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• It's a misquote because it's not what I wrote. HiLo48 (talk) 22:21, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Both of you need to stop trying to have the last word, move on, and stop this pointless argument. No one's honor is being impugned because they were or were not misquoted in an argument over an ITN article. (of all the things to bicker about on Wikipedia, this is probably the second most worthless, behind Wikiproject scopes) --Golbez (talk) 22:26, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• • So, in total, one pre-season match was missed? Jenks24 (talk) 15:44, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Oppose per HiLo48. I haven't seen a support vote yet that is not based on an opposition to imaginary "anti-American" bias. Please, drop the bullshit. Something that essentially did not happen would not have been posted, be it about American football, soccer, cricket or whatever else. We don't report news on hypothetical events unless they are almost certainly expected to happen. That is not the case here. JimSukwutput 10:15, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• I can't give an opinion on this as I don't know exactly what has taken place (not in America, haven't looked into it, don't understand most of what goes on in the big bad world of NFL). I would however request - if this is posted - that we indicate that it is related to American football, and not the other football.  ƒox  11:18, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Surely you mean the other footballS. HiLo48 (talk) 20:29, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

comment ditto per Jim Sukwutput, this would not fly if it was a mere threat in europe or the ipl or any nonsense, if it happened then yes there is more notability. Should we post all industrial lockouts that hurt production (Maruti recently had one, and possibly still ongoing, lockout that signigicantly cut output). Furthermore, WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS is not valid.

per Eraserhead's support "and something did happen" but somethign did NOT happen,,Lihaas (talk) 11:45, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Oppose, per Syutfu ...or Sukwutput. Also, the national football league of where? Is a setting going to be included into this blurb? Nightw 17:33, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Oppose Yes, the NFL is the most popular sports league in the United States and yes it is the longest labor dispute in NFL history. However, what exactly of importance was missed? The Pro Football Hall of Fame Game is the only game that will be missed but even then it is just an exhibition game. As some have already pointed out, this is something that in a sense did not really happen. Truthsort (talk) 17:54, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Oppose. Nothing happened. This is a no-story. Put aside all preconceptions of bias for a minute and just let that sink in.--WaltCip (talk) 18:51, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • That isn't true, the hall of fame match was cancelled, and its been going on for months, it hardly sounds like a non-event by any means. -- Eraserhead1<talk> 19:04, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • The Hall of fame game is just an exhibition game in which the starters will just play one series and then all the reserves play and every day of this lockout has occurred in the offseason. Truthsort (talk) 06:08, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Oppose - a sport only interesting for the US. US interests are not world interests.--BabbaQ (talk) 21:11, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

See the instructions for why that's an invalid argument. "Do not complain about an event only relating to a single country. This applies to a high percentage of the content we post and is unproductive." Hot Stop talk-contribs 21:17, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• oppose since a lockout happened and got solved all out of season. And anti-Americanism can not be used as counter argument to get items in... more than half the supports here seem to be using future strikes of other sports as argument. Only past examples can be used for such reasoning not future... -- Ashish-g55 01:52, 27 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Death of Nguyen Cao Ky

• Oppose Military leader of a country for less than 2 years, nearly half a century ago; and died a natural death. This is interesting to me as someone who enjoys studying history, but I can't see how this is newsworthy at all, in terms of having any impact in the rest of the world. JimSukwutput 00:11, 25 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Oppose As per above. Probably would be suitable for the recent deaths section I suppose. YuMaNuMa (talk) 05:53, 25 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Stupid that twas posted, but i guess former head of sate/government so support reluctantly.Lihaas (talk) 20:09, 25 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Support Vietnam's leader during a very important time for all countries involved in the war there. (I hope the lack of interest isn't a sign of trying to pretend it didn't happen.) HiLo48 (talk) 20:33, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

[Posted] 2011 housing protests in Israel

• A (so far) week long protest in tent villages across Israel increeased last night, with tens of thousands of Israelis gathered in Tel Aviv to protest against the soaring housing prices in the Jewish state.--BabbaQ (talk) 13:19, 24 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

what the hekc blurb is that "in the jewish state" we dont pov-push here. discussions of the states religous nature dont belofeng here.Lihaas (talk) 20:10, 25 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Source for story.--BabbaQ (talk) 13:19, 24 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Support - as nom.--BabbaQ (talk) 13:19, 24 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Weak oppose. Seems like this is rare for Israel, but there have been far larger protests around the world this year. Hundreds of thousands in Indonesia, Malaysia, India, the Philippines, China, and of course the Arab Spring. JimSukwutput 13:53, 24 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Again, a switch to support, after reviewing more sources. I wish nominators would spend more time conveying the significance of the events they are nominating. Note that the protest is not limited to housing anymore 1. The PM has also made a pledge for reform, although I'm not sure about the credibility of this. 2. Also, the use of "Jewish state" to describe Israel is politically contentious. There are some who would argue that it essentially disenfranchises the more than 20% Arab-Israelis, most of whom are Christians and Muslims. If that is the intended blurb, I suggest the last part should be deleted. JimSukwutput 18:35, 24 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • The article looks updated, and given someone switched sides to support marking [Ready]. I don't have the time to look at this and have an opinion of my own. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 21:12, 24 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Comment Article updated only through 20 July. Either this isn't news anymore or it needs to be updated further. Makeemlighter (talk) 21:17, 24 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Very true. Removing [Ready]. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 21:21, 24 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Plenty of content now, marking [Ready]. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 06:48, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• A blurb would be nice. Or, if someone doesn't get around to writing one and posting one, I'll take care of this about half an hour. -- tariqabjotu 11:24, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oops, only saw this after posting, but feel free to adjust my wording. :)  ƒox  11:34, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • For convenience, the blurb I have posted is:

      Protests against rising house prices in Israel continue, with thousands gathering in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem.

       ƒox  11:44, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

much better, and for the record post-posting supportLihaas (talk) 11:50, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Perhaps a ITN mention in the article talk page would be good.--BabbaQ (talk) 12:12, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

[Posted] Egyptian Anti-SCAF protest

Support: As the nominator. I am going to update the page right away and I will post a blurb; Also trying to get an image to illustrate the protest -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 12:02, 24 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Support: The July 28th is significant due to it's context and scale. It was the largest mobilization of Anti-SCAF protesters to the Min. of Defense. Along with June 28 and April 8, it is among the most violent days of the post-revolution. In addition, it comes the day following SCAF Edicts 69 and 70, which target the April 6th movement and those who use social media to organize anti-SCAF events, and represents the beginning of a more aggressive policy against these groups. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.6.20.77 (talk) 16:07, 24 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Oppose. From the look of that article, this doesn't seem any more notable than the numerous incidents that have occurred in Egypt alone for the past two weeks. We already have Arab Spring stickied, and I don't think this warrants a stand-alone post. JimSukwutput
  • Support, now that more information is coming out about the incident(s). However, the article needs expansion; currently it provides too little context. JimSukwutput 18:31, 24 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Comment These nominations on blurbs concerning Egypt have been way too numerous to the point that some of them are no longer reported in the mainstream media befitting a sticky. Our stickies -- the World Cup, Olympics, Arab Spring this spring (it's already summer lol), the Japanese tsunami and nuclear disaster -- all had wall-to-wall coverage when they were ongoing. This one, Arab Spring in the summer, no longer has that level of coverage. Hence it's high time to take down the sticky as the updates aren't coming in daily or probably be pointed to a better article (such as an timeline article, if that exists). (Also, the News International has to go if there are no significant developments until next Tuesday). –HTD 15:46, 24 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Support This is an important development, and certainly warrants inclusion in the front page. This is the first time SCAF has openly resorted to police tactics (the excessive force, the use of thugs, etc...) in dispersing a protest, and it's all the more notable since SCAF has also entered into near-open hostility with prominent activist groups like April 6 and Kefaya, making various accusations against them. --Sherif9282 (talk) 17:28, 24 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
• Oppose It's already stickied. But HTD makes a valid point. It's probably time for the sticky to come down. I'll reevaluate if that happens. Swarm 17:52, 24 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]