Wikipedia talk:In the news/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

→

Archive 10

Sellafield leak

It should be noted on the news template that the leak was contained within the facility and it poses no danger. Just saying that a large amount of material has been leaked makes Wikipedia seem more like tabloid style scaremongering :P Darksun 11:13, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

Oxyrhynchus

Ok, ed_g2s, complain here instead of reverting. --brian0918™ 13:28, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

"reign name" should be "regnal name"

Please fix this. --Jpbrenna 04:57, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Done. -- PFHLai 08:39, 2005 Apr 20 (UTC)

That is wrong and should be changed back.Regnal name will not be understood by 95% of wikipedia readers. Reign name is self explanatory and equally correct. Reign name is also used in many eastern monarchies where regnal name never is. There is no justification for using an obscure version of a word only used in western monarchies which most people won't understand when one can use a word with a clearer meaning, that is just as correct, but which will be understood the world over. (And which is used all over wikipedia.) Please undo this mistake. FearÉIREANN 20:19, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Please add this to the Regnal name page, FearÉIREANN, so that the 95% of us ignorant people can learn more after CLICKing on the unfamiliar word shown on the Front Page. Thanks. By the way, as reign name and regnal name are the same thing, like lifts and elevators, pants and trousers ... different people using different words for the same things, it's not a mistake.

Ecuador president removed

Ecuador president removed from power: SEE Template:In the news/Candidate FOR THE BLURB TO PUT ON THE TEMPLATE. —Cantus…☎ 19:08, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)

The Prime Minister of Italy, Silvio Berlusconi, has resigned, too !

The 1.35 Billion Dollar Man!

Medtronic, Inc. paid US$ 1.35 billion to settle a patent lawsuit and also to acquire disputed spine surgery-related patents from surgeon turned inventor Gary K. Michelson. [1]

It's nice to be an inventor! -- Toytoy 17:25, Apr 23, 2005 (UTC)

CIA

CIA releases classified Vietnam War docs Estimative Products on Vietnam: 1948-1975 Should require some research.[2] -SV|t 21:56, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Blank space

There's a huge blank space at the bottom of DYK that could be filled with deleted news from ITN. —Cantus…☎ 02:01, May 3, 2005 (UTC)

removal of updates in a featured news item

I removed the item on V-E Day commemorations from ITN because the updates have been removed from the wikipage. Instead, there is a link to Wikinews. I don't think an external link is good enough as an update for any page to be featured on ITN. But, do we have a policy on keeping the updated information on the wikipage when the wikipage is being featured on the MainPage ? -- PFHLai 15:17, 2005 May 9 (UTC)

Rephrase an entry?

I know it's picky, but the phrasing of...

John Conyers and 88 members of U.S. Congress write an open letter to George W. Bush about the new documents leaked which apparently reveals the secret agreement between the United States and the United Kingdom to attack Iraq in 2002.

gives the impression that the documents appear to reveal a secret agreement which was already known to exist, and it's a little clumsy. It might work better as:

John Conyers and 88 other members of the U.S. Congress write an open letter to George W. Bush about newly leaked documents which apparently reveal a secret agreement between the United States and the United Kingdom to attack Iraq in 2002.

I hope that makes sense to anyone who's not me... Shimgray 02:25, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

Content

Can we try and keep "In the news" front page news, not stories which you are personally attached to, or have an interest in. Check major English language outlets (BBC News, CNN, Google news etc.) before listing stories. ed g2s • talk 18:25, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

Is there a specific entry that caused this gripe? The M3 road? Or something else? [unsigned]

He wants to keep the page biased towards American and British news stories. Yet more Anglo-American dominance. Today for example, there are stories about NASA (US), Sellafield (UK) and Congress (US). What he means is how dare a story not known about in the UK and the US be put on the front page! FearÉIREANN^(talk) 19:52, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

This is nothing to do with Anglo-American dominance, in fact I can't think of many US/UK stories that are front-page worthy at the moment. I also do not appreciate the agressive tone of your post, you do seem to be having a problem with being civil. Talk pages are for discussing issues, not personalities. ed g2s • talk 02:24, 13 May 2005 (UTC)

I agree that we should look for stories from beyond the US and UK, but there's also a need to keep the section changing, preferably with at least one new story each day. I added the Sellafield story thinking more "science" than "UK" as the topic. Sellafield was front page of the NZ Herald the day after I added it.-gadfium 00:37, 13 May 2005 (UTC)

Hmmmm. "Anglo-American dominance"? Why is it that the inclusion of the US Super Bowl listing on this page causes debate and discussion, while the UEFA Cup listing has been here for two days without drawing any comments? Does the UEFA Cup really get more worldwide media coverage than the Super Bowl? - Jpo 21:56, May 21, 2005 (UTC)

Because it's a slow news day. --Golbez 22:27, May 21, 2005 (UTC)

N3 road/M3 motorway

Note that according to the linked article N3 road, it is the M3 motorway that's planned to run by the Hill of Tara. So the proper link is [[N3 road|M3 motorway]]--the "M3" is not a mistake. Demi ^T/_C 05:34, 2005 May 13 (UTC)

Encyclopedic?

I am sorry that I have to do this, but I can't be the only that sees this discrepancy... that is, why has N3 road been on the FRONT PAGE for so long [3]. Is this really THE story we pride ourselves as encyclopedic? Is this an even we need to run around and update our history books... I know we're different, but is Britannica sweating that their not covering the M3? Why aren't we talking about unrest in Uzbekistan, that's a history changer, or the Beatification of Pope John Paul II, or even Malcolm Glazer and the Manchester United event -- it'll be huge if this team becomes 'American owned'. Either way, we need to update our stories each day (or 30hrs), All Current Event articles should have a fair share on the homepage time split. Hope you understand, lets work together ~ RoboAction 00:47, 14 May 2005 (UTC)

The proper place to make these recomendations is Wikipedia:In the news section on the Main Page/Candidates. BrokenSegue 02:09, 14 May 2005 (UTC)

BRAC

The Ellsworth and Hanscom Air Bases are no more inherently valuable than any of the other installations in the BRAC round (they're all on the chopping block, after all). The BRAC round also includes scores of smaller emplacements. --Alexwcovington (talk) 00:10, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

Yes, but most people will focus on the major installations. More important is that the entry is in error. Hanscom is not closing. Major installations people are focusing on: Ellsworth AFB, Fort Monmouth, and Portsmouth Naval Shipyard. --Penta 00:23, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

Guantánamo Bay Qur'an desecration allegations

• Guantánamo Bay Qur'an desecration allegations

We shall run this article. -- Toytoy 02:58, May 18, 2005 (UTC)

House of Commons image

Canadian House of Commons

Instead of having the Canadian flag here, which seems a bit generic and non-descriptive, how about using Image:Parliament2.jpg? – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs, blog) 02:26, 21 May 2005 (UTC)

I hope you don't feel ignored, Minh Nguyễn. Just wanna mentioned that your suggested photo was the original image used. It was taken out after being on the MainPage all night. The flag was not expected to stay there for so long ..... -- PFHLai 20:29, 2005 May 23 (UTC)

Eurovision song contest?

I do not consider the Eurovision song contest news of international importance. Same for Super Bowl, Academy Awards, American Idol, etc. Being a North American, what is the Eurovision song contest? This does not need to be on the front page. I think this should be replaced with more important news. Andrew pmk 01:16, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

It's a really slow news day. --Golbez 02:05, May 22, 2005 (UTC)

We could put up a picture of Saddam in his undies instead. But in all seriousness, how is this more important than American Idol? --tomf688^(talk) 02:29, May 22, 2005 (UTC)

As I understand it, much of its newsworthiness has to do with its not being American. I don't doubt that a news item on the winner of American Idol would cause an eruption of Righteous Rage and be swiftly removed. — Dan | Talk 03:09, May 22, 2005 (UTC)

It's definetly notable. It's important to all of Europe. Some countries go to the point of idiocy over it. The Super Bowl is American only, American Idol is national, and the Academy Awards doesn't have a certain major award. Hedley 13:44, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

"News of international importance" is very subjective. If we just limit ourselves to international politics, government, law and natural disasters it is very bland news indeed. Considering most news items don't stay on the Main Page for long, I'm weakly in favour of allowing news items like Eurovision on the Main Page, so long as it can be bumped off if any more significant news comes along. - Mark 14:00, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

To be fair I find it more interesting than the rain in Honduras. violet/riga (t) 14:09, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

Yes, but it's not more important than the rain. If we leave it up, the next time we want post some trivial American event let the Europeans remember this. BrokenSegue 14:17, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

It's not a trivial event considering that there are ~50 countries involved and it's a first-time winner for Greece. I'm not saying that I totally agree on it being there but it'll do for now. violet/riga (t) 14:22, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

Its a song contest. --tomf688^(talk) 14:59, May 22, 2005 (UTC)

This song contest is an international cultural event with a high profile and a long history. -- PFHLai 06:21, 2005 May 23 (UTC)

There is a weather event on there at the moment. And the Olympics are a sports event, but I'd expect to see the overall winner appear on there. I have no problem with it being taken down if there are decent stories to replace it (and would like to see that happen), but for now there isn't anything worthy of going up there. violet/riga (t) 15:06, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

It's not a trivial event when 39 countries actively participate in something, and many more watch. That's why it counts as "news of international importance", to some degree on a quiet news day, rather than one-country only sports events like the Super Bowl. Otherwise we could have put the FA Cup final up today... -- Arwel 15:56, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

The FA Cup, widely reported in newspapers around the world, is now posted on ITN. -- PFHLai 05:51, 2005 May 23 (UTC)

Nobody cares about Eurovision outside Europe. We should instead have items on Afghanistan, North Korea and Iraq. It's not a slow news day. --Just my 2 cents -- Hemanshu 16:06, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

Care to elaborate? What happened in Afghanistan, Korea and Iraq in the last 2 days that's worthy of ITN, apart from perhaps the fertilizer shipment from South to North Korea? Don't forget that ITN requires an article update to companion the entry. --Golbez 22:34, May 22, 2005 (UTC)

Instead of complaining, the best way to deal with this is to update an article with news materials, update Current events and post it on ITN (or the Candidate page for non-Admins) to displace an old item, and eventually the item you don't think deserve to be there. A line on the young Chilean soldiers frozen to death would be appropriate, but I don't know what page should get the update. The last United Nations peacekeepers leaving East Timor would be good, too, but United Nations Mission of Support to East Timor is a red link. Etoumbi is too stubby to feature for the Ebola outbreak there. Any new developments regarding land reform in Brazil after the 17-day march of the Landless Workers' Movement ? Too old ? ... I give up. ... Perhaps the local elections in North Rhine-Westphalia, which prompted the German national elections to take place a year early, should be considered. Could someone familiar with politics in Germany take a look at this, please ? -- PFHLai 06:21, 2005 May 23 (UTC)

We now have 2 new items on ITN. Yeah ! -- PFHLai 08:08, 2005 May 23 (UTC)

The eurovision song contest was a nice piece of interesting news. The viewing figures for the final were nearly 80 million and this excludes Australians (which, btw Golbez, is outside of Europe) who watched it 12 hours later. If you have never heard of the contest Andrew pmk, then you should have clicked on the link and read about it. What's the point in having an encyclopaedia if you're uninteresting in things you don't already know about? Dmn / Դմն 09:22, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

European hegemony

THREE items on ITN are about Europe. Clearly, there is an anti-American bias at work. *snigger* --Golbez 14:02, May 23, 2005 (UTC)

Has the Newsweek scandal been on ITN yet? That's certainly international, and more interesting than a song contest. ;) --tomf688^(talk) 14:24, May 23, 2005 (UTC)

Oh, great, three European items and then an anti-American item. Truly, the anti-US bias on ITN is mindboggling! --Golbez 15:46, May 23, 2005 (UTC)

European hegemony ? Mongolia is rather far away from Europe, eh ! ^_^ .... Last week's Newsweek scandal was suggested at the Candidates' page. At the time, I declined to post it on the MainPage while the Guantánamo Bay Qur'an desecration allegations page carries a {{cleanup}} tag. If I had known that the tag was removed soon after, I would have waited and posted it on ITN. Now, it's old news..... The last few departed items were about Canada, Central America and Angola. It must be very peaceful / boring in the US of A these days ..... -- PFHLai 20:17, 2005 May 23 (UTC)

"Soccer"

Do we have to call it soccer? I say this because very few people in Liverpool would call it "soccer". It is football. Smoddy (Rabbit and pork) 08:38, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

I think since we're talking about UK/Euro football, it's reasonable to change it. Done. Mark¹ 09:13, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

I like your edit summary, Mark. ;-) -- 64.229.206.213 14:42, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

Someone please add this

• A coalition of citizen groups will ask Congress to file a formal "Resolution of Inquiry", the first necessary legal step to determine whether U.S. President Bush has committed impeachable offenses. The request, written by Boston constitutional attorney John C. Bonifaz, cites the Downing Street memo and issues surrounding the planning and execution of the Iraq war.

Kevin Baas^{talk: new} 22:25, 2005 May 26 (UTC)

People ask Congress to do stuff all the time. Ask again if Congress actually does something about the request. -- Cyrius|✎ 02:39, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

(via edit conflict) Is this newsworthy? Which prominent American or world publications have covered it? Also, which Wikipedia article has been updated with the news? (Further guidelines are at Wikipedia:In the news section on the Main Page; also, submissions are normally made at Wikipedia:In the news section on the Main Page/Candidates.) — Dan | Talk 02:41, May 27, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. Wikipedia articles that have been updated:

1. Tony Blair
2. War on terrorism
3. Iraq disarmament crisis
4. American government position on invasion of Iraq
5. Governments' pre-war positions on invasion of Iraq
6. Coalition of the willing
7. 2003 invasion of Iraq
8. John Conyers
9. Paul Craig Roberts
10. George W. Bush
11. Current events (ofcourse)

The news is very recent and so far has only been picked up by 4 news sources. Kevin Baas^{talk: new} 03:01, 2005 May 27 (UTC)

How about mentioning this news item on the page of the author of the written request ? John C. Bonifaz is no longer a red link. -- 199.71.174.100 20:42, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

Attn: Sysops ---- Please update Template:In the news.

This edit summary at Wikipedia:In the news section on the Main Page/Candidates is disconcerting .... -- 199.71.174.100 05:34, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

62%

Update Dutch referendum to 62%. —Cantus…☎ 03:09, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)

Proxmire

IMHO William Proxmire's death is notable enough to belong in in the news. [4] John Kenney 00:14, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

IMHO he's not. I'd think that only major presidents and politicians and such would count; a three-term Wisconsin senator doesn't seem to cut it. For example, I don't think I'd even support mentioning ol' Jesse Helms on here. Strom Thurmond, maybe. --Golbez 03:41, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)

Srebrenica Massacre

I think perhaps there should be some mention of the recent controversy related to the Srebrenica Massacre. For those of you who don't know, a video showing the execution of 6 civilians from Srebrenica in 1995 by a unit under the command of the Serbian govt was revealed during Hague testimony and has since been shown throughout the balkans. Asim Led 05:13, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

They couldn't give a shit about anything unless it's american, so don't bother. No there is a spelling bee on there in place of important news about Srebrenica

In fact it's possible this story has not even been mentioned on some american tv news, so we can't really blame Wikipedia for not knowing about it, but they should make an effort, maybe check international news websites sometimes

If you want it on here, mention it on the Candidates page. The chap who wanted the spelling bee item did, and look where it got him! Buck up, chaps. --Golbez 20:19, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)

Can someone tell me what the controversy is actually about? Are people disputing the accuracy of the videotapes? Or do they think it is inappropiate? --Fangz 15:58, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Walter Mondale

See recent deaths and [5]. The death of a former vice president definately belongs in the in the news box. John Kenney 23:37, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Sorry but I've got to disagree with that one. violet/riga (t) 23:44, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

You are aware that he was the Democratic nominee for president in 1984 against Ronald Reagan, right? Not including his death in "in the news" would make as little sense as not including the story, if (say) Al Gore died. John Kenney 23:47, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

This probably should go on the front page. However, I can't find anywhere confirming his death. If I see it, I'll add it. Dmn / Դմն 23:56, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

"Walter Mondale dies" and "Walter Mondale died" get a total of three google hits, none of which actually state that he did recently. One says 'I'd like to be there when Mondale dies' (paraphrased), one refers to the death of Mondale's brother, and one states 'raise your hand if you thought Walter Mondale died ten years ago'. →Iñgōlemo← ^talk 00:03, 2005 Jun 5 (UTC)

The user who recommended this addition is not User:John Kenney, but User:JohnKenney, an impersonator (check his contributions). →Iñgōlemo← ^talk 00:04, 2005 Jun 5 (UTC)

Did this user 'fake the death' of someone called William Proxmire earlier? Dmn / Դմն 00:11, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, this appears to be a hoax. — Dan | Talk 00:12, Jun 5, 2005 (UTC)

I've blocked User:JohnKenney. Dmn / Դմն 00:16, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Interestingly, an IP from Cambridge University vandalized my userpage with a redirect to yours shortly thereafter. We seem to get a lot of hoaxes from the people at Cambridge. — Dan | Talk 00:24, Jun 5, 2005 (UTC)

Gitmo Qu'ran desecration (June 4)

IMHO, the link to "The Pentagon" should be piped to "United States Department of Defense", like this:

• [[United States Department of Defense|The Pentagon]]

Reason: The article at "The Pentagon" is about the building. The phrase "The Pentagon" is commonly used as a metonym for the USDOD, much like "The White House" is commonly used to refer to the (U.S.) Presidency. The Pentagon (the building) obviously can't confirm or deny anything, but USDOD certainly can. I'm an admin, so I could do it myself, but I want to see what others think of this idea. Dale Arnett 05:40, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Agreed. Maybe we shall start to use USDOD instead of The Pentagon the next time we talk about the Department. It shall become an official policy because we are writing for all readers, not just U.S. readers or native English speakers. By the way, the page is now renamed to Desecration of the Qur'an at Guantánamo Bay. -- My true identity: The Depth-Challenged Throat 11:02, Jun 5, 2005 (UTC)

It's normally called "the Pentagon" even by people outside the US. (Besides, "the US Department of Defense" is too long and no one outside the US would know what "USDOD" or "US DOD" meant.) Proteus (Talk) 11:52, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

If length is not an issue, [[United States Department of Defense|Department of Defense]] or [[United States Department of Defense|Dept of Defense]] will be more explicit. -- My true identity: The Depth-Challenged Throat 18:07, Jun 5, 2005 (UTC)

I don't think we need to be more explicit than to say [[United States Department of Defense|The Pentagon]]. I think that is sufficiently clear and concise to everyone, not just Americans. That is certainly how it is referred to in the UK. smoddy 19:16, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

When we talk about the daily "sodium intake", we do not mean to take a bite of sodium the metal. It always means sodium chloride. However, I think the separation of the USDOD and its main building is a good practice. It pays to be precise. At least to me, I cannot be sure if 1000 mg of "sodium" means 1000 mg of Na⁺ ion or 1000 mg of NaCl. (You may intake sodium ion from other sources such as MSG.) -- My true identity: The Depth-Challenged Throat 20:11, Jun 5, 2005 (UTC)

Look at candidates

Can you people take a look at Wikipedia:In the news section on the Main Page/Candidates and update at least the tennis item?? Protecting this template was a really lousy idea. —Cantus…☎ 18:31, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)

I've seen the suggestions and I dislike both, but I'll update the tennis. Dmn / Դմն 18:53, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for that comment. Now I'm going to ask Jimbo to unprotect this page. This is too much. —Cantus…☎ 21:19, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, goatse is always preferable to stale news. — Dan | Talk 22:10, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)

This template is way too large for the Main Page. Some items need to be purged. —Cantus…☎ 21:15, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)

Wrong info on Hungarian Presidential elections

Wikipedia headlines say that László Sólyom is the leader of the opposition. This is not true however, he was only the candidate of the opposition, as he is not a member of any party. Hope you'll correct it. --Sicboy 23:34, 2005 Jun 7 (UTC)

Also, if he's the guy pictured, shouldn't the entry say (pictured at right)? Bloodshedder 20:24, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Demonstrations wording in Ethiopian item

The item about the killings in Ethiopia says "..killed at demonstrations in Addis Ababa between police and students..." This would be better worded as: "...killed in clashes between the police and students following demonstrations in Addis Ababa..." Currently it makes it sound like the police were also demonstrating somehow, which I'd guess they weren't... — pmcm 17:01, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Changed it, but the wording is quite tricky when you try to reconcile the government account. Their version is that the protesters injured themselves, though <sarcasm> I haven't heard their explanation of how the protestors managed to get bullets from police guns in their bodies without the police shooting them. Those tricky demonstrators! </sarcasm> - BanyanTree 17:44, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Much better, thanks! — pmcm 23:07, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Change the image if you change the top story

Could whomever changes the top story, also remember to change or remove the image as well? I've seen non-matching images several times recently (900 year old European constitution?, Mugabe presedent of Hungary?) and I never know if the image actually corresponds to the top story unless I either look at the alt-text or click on it.

Darrien 08:43, 2005 Jun 9 (UTC)

Bolivia

No mention about what's happening in Bolivia? Google News puts Bolivia on top, with 1024 articles off the main article...here it's not even mentioned. Ruy Lopez 03:04, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Bolivia just fell off ITN because nobody had offered an update. Feel free to do so. - BanyanTree 06:20, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Protecting images from Commons

Is there a policy regarding protecting images that are from Commons, as the current picture of the Bolivian president is? I can't seem to find any discussion on the ITN pages. - BanyanTree 15:47, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I agree – they do need protecting. Do you have a commons account? I get the impression that pretty much any respected contributor from all wikimedia projects can get adminship at the commons, if they have an account there. Do you? I think it is desirable to have such a system. At the moment, it suggests requesting it on IRC. I don't think that is long-term practical, though. smoddy 17:27, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I guess I'd better go create an account... - BanyanTree 18:24, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

That's not true. There is a strong dislike against people just saying "I'm an admin on so and so project, so give me admin status here". One recent candidate for adminship over there did something along those lines and was voted down, despite being an admin on en, I think. That said, the requirements are fairly loose. It does help if you have established yourself elsewhere, but they expect you to have done some work on commons as well. Although my experience probably isn't like others, I made commons admin after about 3 months, ~150 edits to images, Commons: space, and vandalism fighting, but I imagine it did help to have admin status and 6000 edits (at that time) on en. CryptoDerk 18:50, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)

Given the lack of a efficient mechanism for protection in these cases, I suppose the obvious solution is to not use images from commons, which sort of defeats its purpose. Or at least it's a solution for those en admins who aren't admins on commons...- BanyanTree 19:29, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Try uploading the same image onto English Wikipedia from the Commons, then it can be protected. The same file name can be re-used.

BTW, the current image on ITN, Image:Asafa powell.jpg, needs to be verified for its copyright status and protected. Thanks. -- 11:34, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Taken care of. Fawcett5 12:55, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. -- 13:10, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

MJ Trial

Simply out of curiosity - wasn't the result posted here at wikipedia even before it was out!! Is it not unfair that even though the last verdict was being read someone had already posted not guilty on the main page.

Opinion Poll

The TMS/MRBI poll on the EU constitution is newsworthy for a number of reasons:

• It proves that the votes in France and the Netherlands were not isolated incidents but part of a wider attitude sweeping Europe;
• Until the poll, the presumption both in the Irish Government and in the EU headquarters was that Ireland was a dead cert to vote yes. The poll changed overnight that perspective. It added further pressure to abandon the constitution entirely;
• TMS/MRBI Irish Times polls are regarded within Ireland as the most reliable and trustworthy polls done. A bad result in one of their polls is universally seen as the 'kiss of death'. Politicians and pollsters alive swear by them. Whatever other polls say, you don't really believe you are winning (or losing) until an MRBI poll says so. They are universally regarded as gospel. One writer (in a rival paper) joked that "if an MRBI poll says you are dead, you'd better go out and buy the coffin."

So this is not a case of simply reporting any old poll, but a notoriously reliable poll that reveals that the European Constitution is in even more trouble than expected, with even the dead cert supposedly pro-yes Irish actually being a dead cert 'no'. With the French and Dutch voting 'no', the Danish about to vote 'no', and now the Irish in an MRBI poll polling 'no', the constitution is not merely in critical condition but stone dead. FearÉIREANN^(talk) 19:12, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

But no bolded article, ergo no place in ITN. smoddy 19:25, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

(Edit conflicted): :I'm not arguing its newsworthiness. It simply does not meet the Wikipedia:In the news section on the Main Page criteria, in particular there was no bolded link to the article with the updated information. European Constitution states "In June 2005 an unsourced opinion poll in Ireland predicted that the European Constitution would be defeated in a referendum, if one was to take place in the immediate future", which is must less specific than the info in the ITN blurb and hardly helps the reader who wants to know more about the most recent event. That's why I simply didn't bold European Constitution. Knowing quite little about this topic, it seems the most logical place to put the updated information you have described above is Irish referendum on the European Constitution. Cheers, BanyanTree 19:28, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The wording is the responsibility of a notorious troll who has been vandalising everything I write of late. The individual concerned is currently the subject of an investigation by the Arbitration Committee. He has previously added in fiction and misinformation on other articles. I will correct that page to read what I had been trying to add in when I got caught up in an edit conflict with the individual. (Though going by his past behaviour he will no doubt doctor that too and appear here delivering more personal abuse. His behaviour is currently being monitored by senior wikipedians and action is likely against him.) FearÉIREANN^(talk) 19:40, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

It requires far too much context to try to put a case for the newsworthiness of this poll. Therefore it does not belong on the front page.

• Who said Ireland was a dead cert to vote yes? It's already voted no in a previous referendum!
• Czech Republic and UK are also expected to vote no. Five no's or six is hardly a big deal.
• The EU summit tomorrow is expected to put the whole ratification process on hold, rendering the opinion poll insignificant and providing a more significant story happening in the more immediate future.
• Suggesting "30% would vote Yes" is a gross misreading of the poll figures. The context is: 30% Yes, 35% No, 35% not sure/no opinion. That's 46% Yes. Joestynes 09:51, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Punctuation mark missing

The current top item on ITN, the one about whaling, could use a full stop. Thanks. -- 65.95.104.93 16:21, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Done. Thanks, smoddy 16:23, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Typo

In the Supreme Court headline, it should be "primarily commerical" rather than "primary commercial". Ddye 17:16, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Fixed. Thanks for the note. I also slimmed it down as it was twice as long as some of the others. - Banyan[[User

talk:BanyanTree|Tree]] 17:52, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Ahmadinezhad -> Ahmadinejad

The later transcription seems to be more usual im English (by a factor of 100.) --Wikimol 16:27, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Done. –Hajor 16:40, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Urgent minor improvements

Copied pasted from there:

Adding a dot at the end of the sentence would be better. Too bad I can't do it myself. Cheers. (...) Also the image is labelled as "Flag of Bulgaria"!

--Edcolins June 28, 2005 12:48 (UTC)

"US-specific" argument

Nichalp has reverted the Sandra Day O'Connor item off ITN with the comment "Please keep this free of US-specific articles". This is blanket statement a bit disingenuous, as the lead item is now a Germany-specific article. There is certainly a tendency to put the front page item on US newspapers on ITN that should be resisted, but O'Connor's retirement is a huge event, unlike, for example, the oh-so-international Eurovision. The recent battle over judges in Washington, DC was a dry run for the expected Supreme Court vacancy. The executive and legislative branches of the most powerful country in the world will be at political war for months to determine the nature of the judicial branch. If we want no country-specific items, fine. We can leave the one "multinational" item on ITN and take off the rest. But don't try a "no US-specific articles" line. - BanyanTree 1 July 2005 15:20 (UTC)

The topic is too US-centric. Why should a USSC judge be featured on the main page? As you put it, it is matter of interest in the US alone. Please tell me why it is a matter of international interest that the USSC judge retires? It contradicts pt 3. that the topics should be of international interest. This is a poor advertisement for an international website if it goes on to feature retirement of USSC judges. I'll revert once again to maintain a less county-specific balance, but am logging out as its my dinner time. =Nichalp «Talk»= July 1, 2005 15:30 (UTC)

I think Sandra Day qualifies for inclusion. It also gets us one closer to pushing "dead multimillionaire" off of the front page. But how about listing her below Schröder, leaving Schröder at the top and with a photo, giving him top billing? Useful compromise? –Hajor 1 July 2005 15:37 (UTC)

No, it doesn't affect Mr Walmart's ranking because it's replacing the Iran story. OK. –Hajor

(after edit conflict) An important country's political leader (indeed, one of the eight most important people on the planet) is clearly far, far more significant internationally than that of a judge. If I were to judge this, I would say that items should only appear if they would be headline news in more than the local country. The German Chancellor would; same-sex marriage in Spain certainly would; the Walmart heir probably wouldn't; a USSC judge certainly wouldn't. The idea is not including solely international issues, but including internationally-significant issues. smoddy 1 July 2005 15:45 (UTC)

"Certainly wouldn't" - care to explain why O'Connor is the headline story on the BBC News website as I write this? --Michael Snow 1 July 2005 15:48 (UTC)

There are lots of other stories from around the world on the BBC. =Nichalp «Talk»= July 1, 2005 18:42 (UTC)

Hmm. That's interesting. Nevertheless, a quick visit to the 24-hour news channels shows little mention of the judge. I can't find it on French or German Google news. I don't believe it internationally significant. smoddy 1 July 2005 16:05 (UTC)

The BBC is traditionally one the fastest services to break stories, a lot of the time beating FOX and CNN, even w/r/t US news. The (non-Anglophone) Europeans are hampered by additionally having to translate wires, but the story is now on Yahoo France. Let's not get too holier-than-thou over the SCOTUS, not in a month that's featured Sam Walmart's boy and Michael bleeding Jackson. –Hajor 1 July 2005 16:15 (UTC)

This is British 24-hour news channels, i.e. Sky and BBC News 24. Sky didn't mention it; BBC had it third. smoddy 1 July 2005 16:21 (UTC)

My mistake. I assumed Murdoch marketed himself as FOX globally. Will be more careful with my labels in the future. Peace, –Hajor 1 July 2005 16:43 (UTC)

If one is trying to implement a strict interpretation of point three, why wouldn't you remove both the Walton death and German election items, which are not multinational? I would say most of the articles on ITN are "country specific" and not international in scope, but they are international in interest, if you get the distinction. The state of the current US Supreme Court, which has made a number of recent decisions of international interest but not scope, such as the Bush v Gore decision and treatment of "enemy combatants", certainly seems to fall within this range. As for importance, the article states that she is considered one of the top ten most powerful women in the world. The woman is of international interest, the institution she is retiring from is of international interest, the effect of the retirement is of international interest, and I am sincerely confused by the argument that her retirement from the institution is not of international interest. It's going back up, though I'll take Hajor's suggestion to put it under Schröder in the interests of peacemaking. - BanyanTree 1 July 2005 16:00 (UTC)

Ah, I was beaten to it. - BanyanTree 1 July 2005 16:03 (UTC)

And why should her retirement be of international interest? She just decided to call it a day. A normal process in the life of anyone ,she wasn't kicked out or anything so dramatic. Is it so important? I watched the BBC news on TV at 9:30 PM IST (4pm GMT, half an hour after I logged out), and Shroder was amonng the top three news items on TV. The judge did not get a mention. The German election is news, Spain legislation is big news, Wal Mart death was news as the world's 11th richest person he died under sudden circumstances. Everything that makes US headlines is not of *international* interest, I'll have to clearly add. I don't think you'll be too happy if tomorrow a resignation of the Chief Justice of a small African country is put up here? =Nichalp «Talk»= July 1, 2005 18:42 (UTC)

Yes it is important and of international interest. Look at the comments around you showing evidence that it is. A story does not have to dominate the airwaves to be eligible for inclusion here. O'Connor's retirement has legal and social implications that are potentially as great as the Spanish legislation you cite, but they're difficult to state concisely for a headline. --Michael Snow 1 July 2005 19:35 (UTC)

The comments happen to come from US residents. =Nichalp «Talk»= July 2, 2005 09:39 (UTC)

The point is that the comments have pointed to multiple instances of this event receiving significant coverage in non-US media. --Michael Snow 2 July 2005 23:15 (UTC)

I thought this was interesting, and perhaps an indicator of how we're doing. The world news page on El Universal (one of the better Mexican dailies, and probably the one with the most decent dynamic news coverage) currently has five lead stories: four of those are gay marriages in Spain, dissolution of parliament in Germany, resignation of Sandra Day O'Connor, and accusations about Iranian president-elect back in '79. (The one story we haven't covered, and El Universal's main lead, is the ongoing Pinochet investigations in Chile.) WP:ITN is clearly reflecting an excessively Mexican-centric view of world news. –Hajor 1 July 2005 17:13 (UTC)

Lots of things happen in the world. Let's limit our coverage to stuff of international significance. — Chameleon 1 July 2005 19:51 (UTC)

News that could potentially change the way 300 million people live is what I would call significant. Considering the impact of some news events, exceptions to this "international significance" silliness should be made. --tomf688^(talk) July 1, 2005 21:22 (UTC)

I agree with this point. While it isn't a good idea to show news only specific to ANY country, the fact of the matter is that the U.S. has a large population so such news affects a LOT of people (Wikipedians). I'm Canadian so the majority of front page Canadian news doesn't deserve to be on the front page of Wikipedia (a maximum of 30 million people will care). U.S. only news has just as much a right to be there as China only, India only, Britain only, France only, or Germany only news. --Will2k July 2, 2005 05:46 (UTC)

For news specific to a country there are ITN portals. =Nichalp «Talk»= July 2, 2005 14:51 (UTC)

Its clearly country-specific. If I were to put the following: "The Indian Supreme Court allows Indian citizens to fly the flag on all days of the year. This is of immense interest in India, but hardly of any around the world. =Nichalp «Talk»= July 2, 2005 14:51 (UTC)

It seems silly to discount people's interests just because they live in a populous country. Other things being equal, an item of interest to a billion people should be equally important whether they live in one country or ten. — Pekinensis 02:17, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

Punctuation - men's

Can an administrator please correct the punctuation - it is men's, not mens. --RobertG ♬ talk 3 July 2005 20:30 (UTC)

comet image no longer pictured

since the photo has been replaced with that of the Olympic Games 2012, wouldn't it make sense to remove the "(pictured)" part of that section? -- Natalinasmpf 6 July 2005 12:32 (UTC)

appropriation

Rather unfortunate and all, about having the Underground incident after the contrasting jovial statement of London hosting the games, but having an Olympics "London 2012" image at the same time while there's the incident in the London Underground is rather inappropriate IMO. I mean, the second news link about London clinching the role for 2012 is one thing, but subconsciously, a "London 2012" image will be appropriated to the first link, especially since it's the only image there. -- Natalinasmpf 7 July 2005 10:50 (UTC)

Oh, bold the "2012 Summer Olympics" link - they are two different news items, just grouped under the same category. -- Natalinasmpf 7 July 2005 10:52 (UTC)

First Hurricane?

Isn't Dennis this season's fourth hurricane?--User:Jenmoa 9 July 2005 03:09 (UTC)

fourth tropical storm, first hurricane This link is Broken 9 July 2005 03:43 (UTC)

Mprotection

The current pic on ITN, Image:SouthernSudanMap.png, needs Mprotection. -- 199.71.174.100 23:55, 9 July 2005 (UTC)

Done. James F. (talk) 00:00, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. -- 199.71.174.100 00:49, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

Maybe I am getting paranoid ... I just realized that the image is only protected in the Commons and not yet in Category:Protected main page images in English Wikipedia. Does this mean vandals can use the same file name and upload whatever they like onto English Wikipedia and still vandalise our FrontPage ? -- 199.71.174.100 03:03, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

The current pic on ITN, Image:Map of Scotland within the United Kingdom.png, needs Mprotection. Thanks. -- 64.229.220.38 14:35, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, Golbez. -- 64.229.227.66 04:32, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

We should put Image:Flag of Kyrgyzstan.png on Mprotection before we put it up for the election there. Thanks.--Pharos 04:34, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

Good call. How about Mprotecting it at the Commons, too ? Just realised ITN is now updated with this Flag as the new image.... Thanks. -- 64.229.227.66 05:34, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

That's what I meant, actually. Protecting it here isn't gonna help much.--Pharos 05:40, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

We need Mprotection at both ends. The alternative would be to upload the same image to English Wikipedia, then just Mprotect in English Wikipedia. Right now, the Flag of Kyrgyzstan.png is indeed protected in the Commons, just not tagged with the "M" there. It's alright. -- 64.229.5.159 13:24, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

There is a template for commons images protected for this purpose - Commons:Template:En main page. — Dan | Talk 13:40, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

Non-admins can't tag the image with this template while the image is protected. As long as it's protected, it's alright. Applying this tag/template doesn't protect the image from overwriting, anyway. -- 64.229.5.159 14:31, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

moving the US$ to somewhere more suitable

The "...US$ 50 billion..." in the first headline looks quite goofy. I suggest "50 billion USD" instead, and I've already changed on the draft. --Tedpennings 12:55, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

Wording

If he won the election, is he really the acting president? — Ilγαηερ (Tαlκ) 03:11, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

He was the interim leader of the government before, during and after the election. How's that ? Has he sworn in as the new Prez yet ? Nope. "Acting-Prez" is fine. -- 199.71.174.100 04:41, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Okay, good point. — Ilγαηερ (Tαlκ) 04:43, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Half-Blood Prince

Why on earth was the image for this changed from the cover of the book to a picture of the outside of a bookstore? The cover looked much neater than this other picture does. =| --User:Jenmoa 07:36, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

Good question. non-freer image perhaps? =Nichalp «Talk»= 09:13, July 16, 2005 (UTC)

Half-Blood Not Midnight

"The English language edition of Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince is released around the world with a delayed launch at midnight in every time zone." Not every time zone. Not the few billion in South Africa, Philippines, China, Singapore, Australia, New Zealand, Jordan, India and Brazil, according to the Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince article. Simple error that might be avoided in the future by checking the very article the story links to. Nothing serious. We muggles make mistakes after all. ;) i c u r i t e

London bombings

The entry on the London bombings contradict with the information in the article. See the section "Possible suicide bombings" in the article. --Knut Arne Vedaa 18:43, July 17, 2005 (UTC)

The headline reads: A second series of terrorist attacks hits London. This seems inaccurate to me, they were atempted terrorist attacks, but they failed the bombs didn't go off just the detornators (at least thats what seems to have happened), no body died. The 21 July 2005 London explosions artcle refers to "a series of four small explosions" rather then terrorist attacks. I prepose the headline be A Second terrorist attack on London fails or something like that.--JK the unwise 09:03, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

If I throw a knife at you then I've attacked you, even if I miss. "Hits London" seems to be a fair description of events which caused a lot of fear and consternation, if not spilt blood. Mark¹ 09:09, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

I don't want to get in to an argument about language, but I would say if you missed me then you failed to attack be. If some one asked you "Did you attack JK this morning" you could rightly say "I tryed to but failed as my aim is poor", prehaps you disagree English isn't perfectly unambigiuos. The more important point is the impression the headline gives, "Second terrorist actack hits London" conjers up more dead Londoners and big explosions, where as "Failed terrorist actacks" conjers up a botched job which is what it seems to be.--JK the unwise 09:24, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

At very least can you add in that they failed to denonate their bombs.

"[Y]esterday's attempted bombing attempts" doesn't sound right. Simply "yesterday's bombing attempts" would be sufficient, I believe. - Prizm 17:07, 7-22-05 (CDT)

John Roberts, Appeals Court

The link is to the correct page, but the text should read DC Circuit Court of Appeals, if not the full name, because the DC Court of Appeals is a different court. Ddye 20:51, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

Knowing absolutely nothing about this topic, according to United States Court of Appeals, "circuit court" is identical. - BanyanTree 21:05, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

Ah, but United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit states the difference in its lead. Changed. Thanks! - BanyanTree 21:50, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

China goes to wrong place !!!!

link to China should be changed to People's Republic of China! --Apples and Oranges

This seems to have been fixed (not by me). Thue | talk 18:38, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

Number correction

At least 75 people are killed in a series of bomb explosions in the Egyptian resort of Sharm el-Sheikh. The new figure is 83, not 75 anymore. Someone change that... --Dungo (talk) 11:59, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

typo on the item about London

Can someone with sysop powers change "indentify" to "identify", please ? A link to the Metropolitan Police Service page would be nice, too. Thanks. -- 199.71.174.100 00:25, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing it so quickly, Raul654. -- 199.71.174.100 00:34, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

New Zealand Election

User:Talrias understandably has interest in NZ politics, mere announcements regarding elections dont make front page news. -SV|t 21:11, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

not first spaceflight since Columbia

[i've copied this here from the subpage i'd orginally put it, i'm not sure which place is better]

the first spaceflight since the Columbia disaster in 2003

This is wrong and should be removed ASAP. There have been several other spaceflights since then (e.g. Soyuz TMA-5 in October 2004). Ben Arnold 16:36, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

I've found a whole bunch of other spaceflights since Columbia:

• 26 April 2003 Soyuz TMA-2
• 15 October 2003 Shenzhou 5
• 18 October 2003 Soyuz TMA-3
• 19 April 2004 Soyuz TMA-4
• 14 October 2004 Soyuz TMA-5
• 15 April 2005 Soyuz TMA-6

It's frustrating that false information has been put in the News section and the page is protected. Ben Arnold 16:51, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Please don't be so frustrated. It would be far more frustrating to have a large penis there instead. --Golbez 17:02, July 26, 2005 (UTC)

OK, I admit, I laughed out loud. →Raul654 17:31, July 26, 2005 (UTC)

Can we have "... the first U.S. spaceflight since ..." changed to "... the first NASA spaceflight since ...", please ? -- 64.229.206.3 18:00, 26 July 2005 (UTC) And I don't think we need a hyphen in "lifts-off". -- 64.229.32.127 18:52, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

The blurb on STS-114 reads funny ....

• Mission STS-114 of the NASA Space Shuttle Discovery successfully lifts off from JFK Space Center, beginning the first NASA human spaceflight since the Columbia disaster of February 2003.

This reads funny. Does the shuttle lift off or the mission ? Do people really call it the JFK Space Center. Their website calls it 'Kennedy Space Center'. I suggest changing the blurb on the Main Page to:

• Mission STS-114, the first NASA human spaceflight since the Columbia disaster of February 2003, begins as Space Shuttle Discovery successfully lifts off from Kennedy Space Center.

or

• Space Shuttle Discovery successfully lifts off from Kennedy Space Center, beginning Mission STS-114, the first NASA human spaceflight since the Columbia disaster of February 2003.

Thanks. -- 199.71.174.100 23:28, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, Hajor. The colon works fine, too. -- 199.71.174.100 23:51, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the thanks. I wasn't sure about the colon but nonetheless decided to be bold and all that. –Hajor 00:34, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

Slain

I highly object to the word slain on this page with regard to the shooting of Jean de Menezes. Is there really any need for it? Jooler 07:54, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

bombings section

"Four men have been arrested after the police mistakenly shot Jean de Menezes" The arrested bombing suspects have nothing to do with Jean de Menezes. Can we split this into two sentences/stories, please? --161.73.58.135 14:22, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

Flood toll too low

Mumbai floods toll at 430 BBC

Ice found on Mars

Nothing on the discovery of ice on the surface of Mars? [6] Grutness...wha?

You could add it yourself, since you're an admin, or you could add it to Template:In_the_news/Candidate for review before being added.-gadfium 20:31, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

I could, but it's not an area I've ever dealt with before. I'll list it on "candidates". And sorry i forgot to sign last time! :) Grutness...wha? 03:16, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

It's a beautiful photo, but as far as I can tell this isn't really groundbreaking scientific news. Astronomers have long known about water ice on the Martian surface; there's even a water icecap at the Martian north pole.--Pharos 03:20, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

New minor planets

It's probably worth throwing in 2005 FY₉ alongside the other two currently listed as being found yesterday, as it's brighter than 2003 EL₆₁. -The Tom 20:29, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

I added this a couple of minutes ago, though I didn't see your notice till just now. (I should check here more often.)--Pharos 23:43, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

Age of King Fahd

It is widely reported that he was 84 years old, not 82. - Calmypal (T) 13:00, August 1, 2005 (UTC)

And he was 83 on the ITN Candidate's page ! The age is now removed from the MainPage. Someone more certain about the number can put it back on ITN, and more importantly, clarify this on King Fahd's page. Thanks. -- PFHLai 16:15, 2005 August 1 (UTC)

Rafael Palmeiro

Rafael Palmeiro has just become by far the highest-profile player in Major League Baseball to be suspended for violating MLB's new steroid policy. It's especially notable for two reasons:

• "Raffy" is ninth on the all-time list for career home runs, and is one of only four players to have 500 homers and 3,000 hits in his career.
• On March 17, 2005, Palmeiro had categorically told a U.S. House committee that he had never used steroids.

Newslink: (AP/Yahoo!)

I'm an admin, but I didn't want to put it on the template without comments.—Dale Arnett 18:17, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

Update: I had a brainfart! I should have noticed the "Candidate" link! I'll put this story up there, if it isn't already.—Dale Arnett 18:36, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

pictured right

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is no longer pictured on the right as the template indicates. The flag is.--Will2k 13:41, August 3, 2005 (UTC)

Russian Sub Event

Almost all the content in AS-28 is present in Priz class. The AS-28 article should probably be merged into Priz class to prevent duplication and the articles getting out of sync. There are less than 5 of these small (3-6 man) vessels so even if they all were involved in notable events they could be covered in the Priz class article. Doing the required redirect and merge would result in two links to the same article on the main page.

Makes sense to me. Be sure to drop a note back if you merge so an admin knows to change it. - BanyanTree 19:56, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

Nevermind, I changed it. - BanyanTree 20:06, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

The solution decided on Talk:AS-28 was to remove the duplicate content on the incident from Priz class, and retain both articles.

For the record, there was no such decision. Dan100 (Talk) 10:15, August 7, 2005 (UTC)

Template needs updating now vessel resurfaced and all crew alive. Suggest: A Priz class mini-submarine of the Russian Navy, the AS-28, which had been disabled and sunk in an accident near Kamchatka has resurfaced following assistance from the British Royal Navy, the seven-man crew are all alive.

• I've updated it.--Pharos 04:15, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

There is a spelling error - should be "international". =Travisyoung= 04:15, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

Jewish Israeli terrorist killing 4 Arab-Israeli citizens, including two girls

An Israeli terrorist in Israeli army uniform, wearing the Jewish skull-cap shot 4 Arab-Israeli citizens to death. Of the four victims two were sisters (muslim) and two were Christian Arabs. Thousands of mourners attended the funerals. Can someone please include this in the "In The News" section since it seems only people with special privileges can update that page. Thanks. -- here is one of numerous links in the news.

Needs to have an article associated with it first. --Golbez 05:24, August 6, 2005 (UTC)

If you just want to write news articles, go to Wikinews. Dan100 (Talk) 10:10, August 7, 2005 (UTC)

Too long?

The ITN section is getting a little long, maybe we could drop Michaëlle Jean? Ddye 23:03, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

Obituaries

... that's quite a few deaths on the front page! Pretty lethal template we have here... - Ta bu shi da yu 07:26, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Should we go back to the old "No Obituary" rule ? -- PFHLai 13:07, 2005 August 8 (UTC)

I'm afraid I may have helped start the most recent influx by putting John Garang up as it had direct impact upon a major conflict/peace agreement and I felt it was worth bending the rules for. But (however much I may associate 9-11 with Jennings' steadying presence), deaths of people who used to have a lot of influence really shouldn't go on ITN.

I would like to have a rule that only deaths that are of sufficient importance to merit their own article (Reagan and Pope John Paul II) or deaths that cause notable events (Garang) should go on ITN, but the latter criteria looks like it could be confusing - not allowing deaths of notable people while allowing notable deaths of notable people. If people want, we can go back to the stricter "no deaths that don't merit their own article" rule. - BanyanTree 21:11, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Just wanna say that Garang's death was a good entry on ITN. Chaos ensued in Sudan. If BanyanTree had not posted it, I would have done it myself. However, the death of Cook and then Jennings were probably weak cases. Besides the media attention and a funeral, their death leads to nothing really noteworthy. I'd only post such "obituaries" on ITN on slow news days. -- PFHLai 10:31, 2005 August 10 (UTC)

I see you just removed the mention of David Lange's death. I've got to say that from a Kiwi's point of view it is a pretty noteworthy death. He was undoubtedly our most charismatic and influential leader in living memory, and under his tenure NZ made enormous world-changing reforms. He was suffering from terminal diseases (amyloidosis, diabetes, renal failure) and had suffered heroically for years. If there is a "no notable deaths" rule, that is fine, but in that case let's make the criteria really clear and be consistent about it. (Right now there are no rules concerning obituaries on the Wikipedia ITN guidelines) -- FP ^{<talk><edits>} 01:22, August 14, 2005 (UTC)

I understand that the rule for deaths on ITN is that it has to be someone who's currently in a major position of power or notability, not someone who once was such. Thus if Helen Clark dropped dead, that would be appropriate on ITN. Lange's death is on the deaths section of Current events and Current events in Australia and New Zealand, and its on the New Zealand portal page. Someone does need to write something about his life and death for Wikinews-gadfium 02:04, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

Can we get consensus on this? Otherwise, it's going to be an edit war everytime somebody puts up the death of a figure who was a "former" something. I would like to suggest a seventh line to the guidelines, along the lines of:

A death should only be placed on ITN if it meets one of two criteria: (1) the funeral ceremony merits its own article or (2) the death has a major impact on current events. The modification or creation of multiple articles to take into account the ramifications of a death is a sign that it meets Criteria 2.

This an attempt to make the general case that if somebody hasn't bothered to write something like Death and state funeral of Ronald Reagan or Funeral of Pope John Paul II, or if the best description that can be given is "S/he once did great things", then it shouldn't go on ITN. Without detracting from their achievements, there are any number of people who die every day who have done notable things. The "multiple articles" bit comes from an observation of mine that non-notable deaths of notable people tend to be summed up in a blurb at the bottom of the article, while the notable deaths result in modifications to articles on political processes and structures, other political figures whose relative power has shifted, etc. Thoughts? - BanyanTree 15:37, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

The problem with the criterion that "the funeral ceremony merits its own article" is that any such article might not be created until several days after the actual death, whereas ITN reports might go up within minutes of the death. Also, this criterion might actually encourage people to create a separate article where one isn't really warranted. I'm not sure whether these concerns are that important though. In general terms, I support BanyanTree's proposal to make things clearer. -- FP ^{<talk><edits>} 20:49, August 14, 2005 (UTC)

I had moved the proposal into the criteria and immediately had to refer to it after Mo Mowlam's death was put up on ITN. - BanyanTree 21:06, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

I can see no harm having a simple short sentence when someone of former importance dies. These criteria sould be though of as suggestive rather than as rules, wikipedia has far too many at all. If you disagree with something, do what we've always done remove it and/or discuss it here, case by case. When Baroness Thatcher dies, I for one will be adding it to Itn. Dmn € Դմն 22:00, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

Taken broadly, every person who has a bio page here is of some importance, and it would be obviously impractical to list all their deaths. Taken more narrowly, simply listing the deaths of former heads of states and ministers worldwide would result in an ITN that is mostly obituaries. Some might argue that only those from major industrialized countries should be included, to which I would reply that those users are guilty of the worst sort of cultural and nationalistic myopia.

That said, there is obviously leeway inherent in the guidelines. For a while, there was a general understanding among regular ITN contributors that obituaries should be rare and this norm was used in arguments about the value of new obituaries. However, the lack of any written guideline has recently resulted in a steady increase in the number of deaths reported on ITN, normally following the placement of a death such as the recent ones affecting the Sudanese and Sri Lankan conflicts. Those of us who tried using the "no obituaries norm" ended up being shot down by those who stated that they were not aware of any such norm and pointing out the lack of written criteria on the subject. Ergo, this proposal. I agree with you that a friendly understanding is far better than a written guideline, but here we are. - BanyanTree 23:05, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

I find myself basically in agreement with Banyantree here. We should generally not have deaths that do not significantly impact current events. I realize many people want to honor the memories of politicians they respect, but ITN, which generally can only have 4 or 5 items on at a time, is not really the place for that.--Pharos 23:43, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

I think that Mo Mowlam is probably too parochial - but it was the major news story in the UK. However having every major news story for every country on ITN is clearly not workable. Secretlondon 14:02, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

Abramoff

Jack Abramoff, a key figure in the ethics investigations into...

Is he an investigator or a suspect in the investigations? It isn't clear. --Dtcdthingy 22:51, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

• He's a suspect. "Target" or "subject" would be a better technical term, though. Khanartist 23:00, 2005 August 11 (UTC)

These charges are not directly relalted to DeLay. I really don't think this story has the international significance to be on here. Ddye 03:46, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

And shouldn't there be mention that all this relates to the States? Whenever an article comes up about any other country, the country is mentioned, but here there is no mention of the United States at all.--Madison Gray 20:32, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

Why is Abramoff even major news? This reeks of POV. 24.1.97.187 00:31, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

Airline

What's with the Lufthansa plane? --Merovingian (t) (c) 20:00, August 14, 2005 (UTC)

I suppose we could use the image from the banner in http://www.flyhelios.com/ (although it would be fair use, which some feel isn't appropriate for the main page). -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 20:10, August 14, 2005 (UTC)

The Lufthansa plane is a 737-300, just like the downed Helios plane, so it's illustrative. I don't think we should be using fair use images on the main page.--Pharos 20:20, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

File:Front Page Airplane.jpg

Since the image is PD, I edited out the lufthansa writing and symbols. Does anyone thing this image would be better? Dmn € Դմն 20:24, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

I don't know... nice effort, but it might be a little misleading to pretend that it's not a Lufthansa plane, and to give the impression that it might be the Helios plane.--Pharos 20:30, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

Disengagement blurb should be updated

The following section on the disengagement is no longer accurate:

Israel begins its unilateral disengagement from the Gaza Strip.

Israel began the disengagement on the 15th, this is already the beginning of Day 4 of the disengagement see the headline at [www.haaretz.com]

A better sentence might be "The Israeli military continues forcibly evacuating Jewish settlers from the Gaza Strip as part of the disengagement plan.

GabrielF 00:52, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

Yes, Gabriel, that would be an appropriate change for you to make. Pedant 02:35, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Image use on ITN

Just wanna point out that "(right)" next to Sergei K. Krikalev no longer applies, and needs to be removed. And also, the wrong image file was Mprotected. Image:Flag of Western Sahara.png is on ITN right now, not the protected Image:800px-Flag of Western Sahara.png. Please fix. Thanks. -- 199.71.174.100 07:12, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

Done. Evil Monkey∴Hello 07:18, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

Great. I would hate to see another dirty picture sneaking in onto the Main Page. Thanks ! -- 199.71.174.100 07:23, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

Sergi Krikalev

It might be best to alter this to "broke the record for the most days spent in space", as: a) if this stays up longer, the number will be wrong, since he's broken his previous record by another day; and b) per Jim Oberg here, it seems that technically he doesn't "set" a new record (as opposed to simply beating the old one) until the old one's exceeded by 10% (which seems a bit picky to me, but there you go). Shimgray 18:58, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

Lance Armstrong

The Armstrong story doesn't belong here, he has been accused of doping many times before. This story isn't ITN material at all until something more concrete is discovered. Ddye 15:58, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

I'm guessing you haven't read any of the coverage. This is not an accusation, he's been tested positively. Dan100 (Talk) 16:01, August 24, 2005 (UTC)

I have read it. The accuracy of the tests is disputed, and more importantly they're 6 years old, so clearly the race officials who received them didn't consider the results significant. Until something is shown to have changed since then, all this is is L'Equipe digging up some old lab records. Ddye 17:27, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

Error in Lance Armstrong text !

L'Equipe is a 'sports newspaper, not a cycling paper. They cover all sorts of sports, including cycling. Please change this. --Zantastik talk 16:04, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Interwiki links

I've added interwiki links to all 10K Wikipedias with an analogue to ITN. The interwiki is only visible when looking directly at the template, thanks to the new <noinclude> tag (see Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Interlanguage links in templates).--Pharos 18:08, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Pat Robertson

Seems like there's an ITN edit war over "U.S. televangelist Pat Robertson calls for the assassination of Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez." I strongly feel that this doesn't belong on ITN. Pat Robertson is a TV show host. Sure, he's run for president a few times but that doesn't make him a politician. Basically he's a celebrity, and celebs say stupid things all the time. It's not newsworthy, so I removed it again. Know what though? If someone replaces the Pat Robertson thing, I'll leave it there - but I'll wait for the next stupid thing Bill Maher or Al Franken says, and I expect that I'll be allowed to post it on ITN. Rhobite 00:58, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

I agree with this. If Chavez or the Venezuelan govt does anything interesting in response beyond the bad-mouthing they've been doing for months, or the U.S. government does something silly, then that would be newsworthy. Robertson has a long history of saying ridiculous things that make you slap your forehead in dismay and disbelief and this really isn't exceptional in the universe of Pat. - BanyanTree 01:17, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Huh? The Pat Robertson call for Chavez's assassination has been the top cable and internet news story for the last two days, it's obviously noteworthy. zen master T 01:26, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Love the double standards, Zen. If we're in the business of reporting the "top cable news" stories, let's just give Natalee Holloway her main page permalink right now. Deal? Rhobite 01:50, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

The two standards you are comparing are not equal. I am not advocating the censorship of the Natalie Halloway story but you are actively supporting the censorship of the Pat Robertson public call for assassination. zen master T 06:31, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Censorship? What a childish thing to say. Do you see me removing the incident from Pat Robertson? Rhobite 06:38, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

Reducing the number of people that are exposed to an issue is a form of censorship. Also, the argument that Pat Robertson is a celebrity and celebs say stupid things all the time as an argument against including the Pat Robertson story in ITN does not make sense, it seems like rationalization in support of censorship. Pat Robertson did not say any random crazy thing, he publically called for the assassination of the democratically elected leader of a foreign country. zen master T 06:46, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Yeah put it back. It was one of the main headlines on the BBC news earlier. Jooler

What's on U.S. cable news is not a good indicator of newsworthiness. They always make a big to-do whenever Robertson makes one of these types of statements. For the BBC, I think this is more a "Isn't that guy wacky?" story than anything else. It's not ITN-worthy.--Pharos 01:33, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Pat Robertson's statement is the most noteworthy international story of the last 2 days and it is still continuing. Also note this template is protected from editing so only admins can edit it ("protected from editing" should in fact be renamed to "only admins can edit it" to be clear). zen master T 01:39, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

It's not an international story, it's a "ha ha look at what this jackass said" story. It's also two day old news. Rhobite 01:50, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

It also will have no histroical impact and he has since retracted and apollogized his call for assasination, a fact not explained in the part originally put in ITN. (via edit conflict) This link is Broken 01:53, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Being the top cable story doesn't matter. Have we had Cindy Sheehan or Natalie Holloway on there? --Golbez 01:52, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

Robertson saying stupid things -- about Al Franken or abortion or homosexuality for example -- ok, that wouldn't be news. The fact that he's picked on Chávez this time round: that does tip the balance somewhat. It's not a Robertson story; it's a Robertson/Chávez story, international news with a diplomatic dimension. It's not pushing any other major story off ITN; slow news day; I'd say leave it. –Hajor 01:58, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Unless Chavez has done anything in response, I wouldn't call this an international news yet. -- PFHLai 02:21, 2005 August 25 (UTC)

Chavez did comment. He basically said "who the hell is Pat Robertson? I've never heard of him." - Nunh-huh 02:23, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Haha ! In Spanish, eh ? :-) -- PFHLai 02:34, 2005 August 25 (UTC)

This isnt just stupid -- this is a major figure in conservative American politics and a "reverend" representative of its claimed "moral tradition" who's publicly called for the murder of a democratically-elected foreign leader. Stupid is just a nice way of putting it. -St|eve 02:17, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

So you feel that it should be included in ITN because it presents Robertson in a particularly bad light? And this is worth revert warring over, on the main page? Rhobite 04:30, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

I'd revert now if I didn't try follow 1RR. This link is Broken 02:20, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Oh, it's up there already ? Can we not have it by the Peruvian Flag, please ? I don't know what image would be free and appropriate, though.-- PFHLai 02:23, 2005 August 25 (UTC)

Never mind. Katrina is here to the rescue ... -- PFHLai 02:24, 2005 August 25 (UTC)

It was newsworthy, probably more newsworthy than this, when Lech Wałęsa recently publicly supported a color revolution in Belarus, but controversial statements from public figures not in political power aren't newsworthy enough for ITN. The item should be removed.--Pharos 02:26, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

I am amazed that there is even a dispute about this. Someone who sought the presidential nomination in one of the major US political parties and who ran himself for the presidency, who is one of the most prominent televangelists in the US and an international name, calls for the assassination of another country's head of state — how exactly is that not news? It featured in every UK broadsheet paper I looked at today, German newspapers, the two French newspapers I read and in all the Irish newspapers. By any definition it is a major story. Even by the pathetic standards of that asshole, this was an astonishing and disgraceful comment. FearÉIREANN\^(caint) 17:53, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

The tropical storm item has been removed, making this story the top one, yet the image is still of Florida, which has AFAIK no relation to Pat Robertson's story. – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs, blog) 21:04, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Why was Katrina the Storm removed ? Has Hugo done anything to make her disappear ? 23:45, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Add restore add restore add restore...

Could we please stop acting like children? If someone has added an item, respect his/her judgment and wait until it falls off the bottom of the page rather than removing it. (FWIW I think both the Chavez and Tibet stories are reasonable additions, but it's not worth edit-warring about). Mark¹ 03:31, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Hurricane Katrina

Katrina now has its own article Hurricane Katrina (2005). If it really threatens to be something much worse, it may get the main article. CrazyC83 16:37, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Which it has. It is now Hurricane Katrina. The (2005) addition is a redirect now. CrazyC83 18:14, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

Please update the ITN blurb for Katrina to reflect the new casualty count. --Titoxd 05:29, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

Brogden

I don't think the resignation of John Brogden as New South Wales Opposition Leader is note-worthy enough for the Main Page. Bob Carr resigned last month and wasn't mentioned here, and he was Premier! Sure, it's a controversy, but one that is confined to New South Wales, or at best, Australia. It's not of international significance.--Cyberjunkie | Talk 08:31, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

And by raising my concerns, I meant for the story to be removed... It shouldn't be there.--Cyberjunkie | Talk 09:23, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

What crap. This is a media story that has been reported all over the world, and it is a national news story that is still ongoing. Yet I see a Pat Robertson story still on the main page. - Ta bu shi da yu 02:25, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

And nobody is discussing this before reverting. Wonderful. So much for talk pages. - Ta bu shi da yu 03:32, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

What about Atiku Abubakar? At least he's a Vice President (of a very large country).--Pharos 03:36, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

I have no issues with having him on the main page. I do have an issue of an event of equal significance (globally and politically) from another part of the world other than the U.S. being removed - without any discussion might I point out. - Ta bu shi da yu 03:45, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

I agree the Pat Robertson story should stay, it definitely passes the muster. Let's avoid terms like crap though shall we?

And yes, the Atiku Abubakar thing should be listed here too, though I'd be more comfortable with it if the article were cleaned up a little first. --fvw* 03:47, August 30, 2005 (UTC)

You miss the point. The Brogden article was removed without any discussion. When I did discuss the change, it got reverted anyway. And I might point out that Brogden resigning was a huge issue. I used the word crap - OK, not the best way of approaching things, but I get annoyed sometimes. Especially when I see that I've followed the guidelines on what is notable for adding to the article and get reverted. Hardly a pleasant experience. Reverting basically says that the news story wasn't notable, something that is demonstrably NOT the case. - Ta bu shi da yu 03:52, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

Noone thinks Brogden should be on the main page, Ta bu shi da yu is using this template to violate WP:POINT.--nixie 03:49, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

Yeah? And you:

1. aren't bothering to follow Wikipedia:Assume good faith
2. are accusing me of breaking WP:POINT - how? How am I being disruptive to prove a point?! I've already explained why I'm adding the material.
3. those who copyedited the entry (see the history) disagree with you.

How lovely of you to make a personal attack. - Ta bu shi da yu 03:52, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

Just so that people know what I'm having to put up with here, please review this edit:

"The only reason you have given for the worthinness of that piece of news if that -Pat Robertson- was on ITN (which many Wikipedians also agreed with). The top international new items today seem to be the hurricane, the Iraqi constitution, the Japanese election and the threat of resumption of conflict in the Congo. Some minor Australia politican being a racist is not suitable for the main page and your actions did seem to violate WP:POINT"

So that we are clear: John Brogden was not a minor Australian politician (rather the NSW state opposition leader) and his actions are extremely notable. For the record, I have told nixie to read Wikipedia:No personal attacks and Wikipedia:Assume good faith - I most certainly did not add this entry to cause disruption or prove a point. I added it on its merits alone, and don't appreciate being told otherwise when it is clearly not the case. Haven't people learned yet? Every single damn edit I make on this site has a purpose and I try very bloody hard not to violate policies. To be blunt: being accused of these things seriously gives me the shits. - Ta bu shi da yu 04:09, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

Whatever... please keep details in the article. Only headlines on ITN, please. Please see the Candidates page for a suggested shortened version. -- 199.71.174.100 04:13, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

You know what annoys me? People getting agitated over relatively minor incidents. Ta bu shi da yu, it was discussed prior - I raised it here, and Violetriga concurred in his edit summary and so later did nixie. (And please, try and be more polite - keep the wikilove). As to the notability of the story, I dispute it. Yes, it was carried by all major news organisations, as one expect it to be. But no organisation (at least, none of those I checked) outside Australia featured it prominently. Rather, it was relegated to "World", and sometimes even a sub-division thereof. The Pat Robertson story, by contrast, was internationally significant - a prominent person (a religious one no less, with "followers" world-wide) advocating the assassination of a world leader. How is that not notable? However, I concede there does tend to be US-centrism in the stories selected, and far many more internationally significant events have occurred since the Robertson saga. It's just, Brogden wasn't one. I still think it should be replaced.--Cyberjunkie | Talk 05:27, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

Should we keep the stuff about the reasons for his attempted suicide? I don't mind if we keep the story, but it seems that speculation why he tried to kill himself might fall under WP:NOT a crystal ball. Bratsche^{talk 5 pillars} 01:59, August 31, 2005 (UTC)

From what I've read in the media here (I'm in Aus), all that's been said is that he was found in a drunken stupor, the media seems to have inferred the suicide part.--nixie 02:01, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

From what I've heard (I caught it last night on late night TV, but Internet was down - damn storms!), he was intoxicated, unconscious and slightly (non-significantly) injured, with a knife (of some sort) nearby. Apparently his secretary discovered him slumped over in a backroom of his electorate office and called the police (and other services). I'm still not confident it should be displayed here (and nobody has tried to convince me otherwise).--Cyberjunkie | Talk 02:54, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

I tried to check on the BBC site, but they don't mention the story at all [7]. Which may be relevant in itself. Mark¹ 04:25, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

Just think about it logically and rationally. Brogden's comments and suicide attempt are nothing compared with the other events of global magnitude. I'd say get rid of it from ITN... Enochlau 14:18, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

That would seem the general consensus. But things are rather slow 'bout these parts...--Cyberjunkie | Talk 15:03, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

Definitely slow. It's still there. Enochlau 03:27, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

I'd probably prefer it stayed, but with the other more serious events of the last couple of days, I wouldn't be surprised if it went, either. Ambi 19:54, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

• I am surprised the Brogden story is still featuring. While it is a discussion topic in the Saturday newspapers here in Australia, I am very surprised there is not something else that might have happened more newsworthy somewhere in the world to take his place (for example, 45 die in a typhoon in China or the Taliban claim killing of a kidnapped election candidate?). I don't disagree it that it should have been included , but it should be moved on now.--AYArktos 10:45, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

Yes, it should be retired and replaced. The story fell as quickly as it rose. Although I became less concerned after the suicide attempt (or "episode of self-harm"), I still don't think it should have ever found its way on to ITN. As far as I can tell, only two people have been in favour of it being here, and all others (here, and at AWNB and Talk:Main Page) have voiced concern. Anyways, I think the point to be made is that, yes, there needs to be a greater international focus (instead of what would seem to be a tendency towards US news), and also a higher turnover.

My suggested replacements include: the anniversary of the Besland tragedy [8]; Category 5 Typhoon Nabi approaching Okinawa [9]; the Nepalese Maoists declaring a ceasefire (however temporary) [10]; Zimbabwe's bid/bribe to remain in the IMF (and in so doing, further destroying a formerly great country) [11]; and the completion of an IAEA investigation into Iran [12].--Cyberjunkie | Talk 11:54, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

Map of the bridge

The current map is pretty useless as it is. Nobody can make out any detail. It just looks like some mixture of blue, orange, and black lines. Can we get the picture enlarged, replaced with another one, or done away with entirely.--Will2k 19:55, August 31, 2005 (UTC)

• As the person who uploaded that image, I agree. BTW, you can read it easily at full scale in the article.--Pharos 19:58, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

Baghdad bridge stampede

The correct wiki link is: Baghdad bridge stampede. --ThomasK 07:29, September 1, 2005 (UTC)

More newsworthy??

1,000 people die in a bridge collapse yesterday, and all the news talks about is this damn hurricane, as if it was unexpected. Who knew there'd be hurricanes in hurricane season??? Why is this more newsworthy than the 1000 dead (and countless injured) in the bridge collapse? Are you telling me "efforts" are not still underway to help the the injured in Baghdad? — BRIAN0918 • 2005-09-1 21:19

• Several thousands have died in the hurricane. You must not have been following events there very closely.--Pharos 21:25, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
  • It'll be weeks before we have a rough estimate. Do you have a special insider who's gone around counting the confirmed deaths, or are you just listening to the Fox News hype? — BRIAN0918 • 2005-09-2 17:32
    • Please don't tell me my news source is Fox News, because it isn't. The estimate of "thousands" is from the Governor of Louisiana, Kathleen Blanco.--Pharos 21:50, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
• I'm utterly speechless, Brian. --Golbez 21:49, September 1, 2005 (UTC)
  • I'm not talking about the victims, but about those who cover the news. They are acting as if this is sudden and unexpected, when it has happened around 6 times a year every year for the last ~100 million years. — BRIAN0918 • 2005-09-2 17:32
    • Six times a year a major American city has been wiped out, a million people displaced inside a first world country, and the world economy affected? Christ, I must have been sleeping the past couple of decades, I didn't notice it. You're not helping your case any here. Do we stop covering plane crashes because we know that aircraft occasionally have mechanical failures? Shimgray 22:03, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
• The entire city is wrecked and won't be open for buisness for months. Thousands may be dead from this disaster. That is more relevant than a stampede. Death counts don't decide importance. You ought to read up on the news before you comment on it or you will sound very ignorant. This link is Broken 22:46, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
• Thousands probably are dead; death tolls are pretty much up in the air just now. 15% of the US import/export capacity is stalled; in terms of economic damage and human effects, this is probably more costly than September 11. A thousand dead is a major tragedy; at least a thousand dead plus the world's fifth largest port, a major city, and 5% of the world's oil production being flattened is hardly somehow less newsworthy just because we knew hurricanes come along sometimes. Shimgray 23:25, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
  • I think I'm just getting sick of this 24/7 dramatized news coverage, as if the news channels give a damn about the victims; they're just means to an end. — BRIAN0918 • 2005-09-2 02:44
    • And what does this have to do with WP:ITN, Brian? --Golbez 04:13, September 2, 2005 (UTC)
      • Well, the hurricane has been at the top of ITN for quite some time now, then this bridge event came along, but was quickly dropped down a notch because we've chosen to focus on the continuing efforts to aid the hurricane's victims. The entire thing sounds regionally biased to me. — BRIAN0918 • 2005-09-2 05:19
        • I agree, the bridge should have been on top for a while. But it's counterproductive to both put it up there now, and to whine about it, with italics and three question marks and everything. Also, we don't have an article on the efforts in Baghdad, but we do on Katrina, and this is not a news page, it's ITN, which is supposed to focus on encyclopaedic stuffs, like new notable articles on efforts and disasters and stuff like that. --Golbez 05:45, September 2, 2005 (UTC)
          • This is exactly the bias I'm talking about. We are choosing to focus more on Katrina rather than the events in Baghdad because the hurricane is more immediate to Americans, and using the subsequent lack of coverage of the latter as justification for Katrina being more appropriate for ITN. — BRIAN0918 • 2005-09-2 17:28
            • (sarcasm) well, I suppose the two events could be merged into a single item, since the money for improving the dams all went into messing with Iraq. dab (ᛏ) 18:27, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

In fact golbs, there is an article on the bridge collapse. I was under the impression, however, that the "biggest" event went first, and while 1,000 dead is certainly tragic, there could easily be that many dead in New Orleans plus all the bad stuff mentioned above.

• I didn't say there wasn't an article on the collapse; I said there wasn't an in-depth article on the effects, like we have with Katrina. And actually, it's usually chronological, not in terms of bigness. --Golbez 00:07, September 3, 2005 (UTC)

And don't think of this as something that was "expected". Sure we get hurricanes every year, but this event has most likely dwarfed every major natural disaster in the history of the United States. Don't treat it lightly. --tomf688^<TALK> 21:28, September 2, 2005 (UTC)

The Galveston Hurricane of 1900 killed around 8,000 people and completely destroyed one of the U.S.'s major port cities. Katrina may give it a run for its money, but it certainly doesn't "dwarf" it. --Delirium 03:36, September 4, 2005 (UTC)

All lies! The world began in the 1980s. — BRIAN0918 • 2005-09-4 23:41

So far, all we have to go on is some claims that there may be thousands dead. So far the confirmed death toll (possibly in just New Orleans?) is at 59. Anyone can claim any number they want, and the larger the number, the more it will be repeated on the news networks. — BRIAN0918 • 2005-09-4 23:38

As expected, the number of dead was inflated by a few orders of magnitude in order to bring in the $$$ and ratings. — BRIAN0918 • 2005-09-15 22:19

Are you kidding? There were nearly 1,000 deaths (and it might reach that soon enough). Most local/state/fed officials were the ones estimating hundreds or perhaps thousands of deaths from the beginning (quote in the Katrina article by Ray Nagin), NOT the media.

You seem to remain ignorant to the magnitude of this event, as above. --tomf688^<TALK> 00:00, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

Rehnquist death

It doesn't matter now, since the death of Rehnquist has trumped both stories. Or does this just add to the American bias? Bratsche^{talk | Esperanza} 03:53, September 4, 2005 (UTC)

I don't know; his death is probably (at least by my standard) around the limit of notability for an obituary. He did, though, probably hold the most powerful judicial position in the world.--Pharos 04:04, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

Considering his position as head of the Judicial branch of the government (like Bush is the head of the Executive branch), I'd say his death is at least ITN-worthy for a day or so. --tomf688^<TALK> 04:21, September 4, 2005 (UTC)

It's currently a scrolling breaking-news alert at the top of news.bbc.co.uk, with a promise of "More soon". So at least in the UK it's made the top of the news. --Delirium 05:12, September 4, 2005 (UTC)

As an avid supporter of internationalisation (or non-US bias) of Wikipedia, I think his death is ITN-worthy as well. -- Chuq 05:24, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

As do I. He held not not necessarily the most powerful judicial position in the world, but certainly the most significant in terms of spin-off effects. (As an aside, the US should give its judges the boot when they hit 70, like we do here in Australia ;-). Then we wouldn't have to sit around and wait for the inevitable.)--Cyberjunkie | Talk 13:41, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

I have to agree with you there, Cyber. Damn Constitution. ;) --tomf688^<TALK> 15:04, September 4, 2005 (UTC)

Order of precedence

I think the Mandala airlines flight disaster in Indonesia should be displayed above the Rehnquist replacement. It is an ongoing event with over 150 dead, and seems of higher notability than Roberts' nomination. --Cyberjunkie | Talk 03:48, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

ITN items go in chronological order, not order of significance. — Dan | Talk 03:50, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

They happened on the same day.--nixie 03:52, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

If that were so, then why was Huricane Katrina listed above the bridge stampede (not that I don't think it shouldn't have been)?--Cyberjunkie | Talk 04:15, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Well, I initially put the bridge stampede below Katrina because the hurricane was just about to make landfall and had not hit yet. I support putting the Mandala crash above Roberts, and will do so now if there is no objection.--Pharos 04:25, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Done.--Pharos 04:43, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Katrina's front-page listing

Hurricane Katrina is now the bottom-listed article on ITN (of, unusually, a six-item listing) and thus on the brink of removal. But I wonder whether anyone is going to be brave enough to follow SOP and bump it off when the time comes and, in any case, whether that would be the right move. Perhaps we should (exceptionally, and at the risk of setting a precedent) bump off the second-lowest story -- currently, Typhoon Talim? –Hajor 17:13, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Is it still in the news? Yes. Therefore it should be on "In the news". Remove a story that's no longer in the news. [[smoddy]] 17:19, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Yulia Tymoshenko

Yulia Tymoshenko is a woman, so it was her cabinet, not his! – Kpalion (talk) 09:07, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

I just noticed that too. Can we please have this corrected. 194.66.226.95 10:31, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

No, see Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine. The Cabinet is responsible to the President, and the Prime Minister is considered a member of the Cabinet.--Pharos 12:38, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps change it to "Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko dismisses most of his cabinet, including Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko, amid accusations of corruption."? That way it's clear the "his cabinet" refers to him - as it is, it does look like it could be her cabinet and we messed up the pronouns, if your're not previously aware of the structure. Shimgray 13:18, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Good idea; I've changed it to your wording.--Pharos 13:26, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Mismanagement

The link in to "mismanagement" (in Hurricane Katrina) leads to "Bush administration". Is this entirely NPOV? Thincat 10:57, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

• There certainly are accusations of mismanagement by the Bush administration, but directly linking "mismanagement" to "Bush administration" is really overdoing it.--Pharos 12:45, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
  • No, it's blatently POV and embarrassing. "government mismanagement" with "government" linking to Bush administration might be acceptable. I certainly think that this is not.--Sully 12:52, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Japan election

Can we change "Japan general election: Junichiro Koizumi's Liberal Democratic Party wins 296 of 480 seats in the House of Representatives." to "Japan general election: Junichiro Koizumi's ruling bloc wins a landslide victory in the lower house of the Diet of Japan"? A word landslide is, I think, gives a more accurate clear picture. -- Taku 00:23, September 12, 2005 (UTC)

• I don't think so. Saying "296 of 480 seats" is much more precise and informative than the rather vague "landslide".--Pharos 00:36, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

Numbers make little sense without context. What is significant is the LDP made a huge gain and saying it won 296 of 480 seats doesn't make this point. -- Taku 09:30, September 12, 2005 (UTC)

I agree with both of you. How about: "Japan general election: Junichiro Koizumi's Liberal Democratic Party wins a landslide 68 percent (296 of 480) victory in the lower house of the Diet of Japan". ? Pedant 02:31, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Election in Norway

It's only 87 seats, not 88. http://odin.dep.no/krd/html/valgresultat2005/frameset.html AP:61 + SV:15 + SP:11 = 87 demo 07:59, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Done. Evil Monkey∴Hello 08:03, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Style of entries

I wonder if we might want to encourage a style where the primary, bolded article is generally placed at the start of an entry. I think this approach might make ITN a bit easier to scan at a glance. Here's a comparison of the different approaches:

• In Norway, the Red-Green Coalition wins the 2005 parliamentary election, taking 87 of 169 seats in the Storting.
• Around 3000 petrol stations in the UK run dry after panic-buying caused by fuel protests.
• Israel completes its disengagement from the Gaza Strip.
• FEMA director Michael D. Brown resigns amid criticism of his handling of the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in the United States. He is replaced by R. David Paulison.

• Norgwegian parliamentary election: the Red-Green Coalition wins, taking 87 of 169 seats in the Storting.
• UK fuel protests fuel panic-buying, causing 3000 petrol stations to run dry.
• Israeli disengagement from the Gaza Strip is complete.
• Michael D. Brown, director of FEMA, resigns amid criticism of his handling of the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in the United States. He is replaced by R. David Paulison.

Of course, this shouldn't be a foolish rule when it could create an awkward wording, but simply a style guidline. What's the general thought on this?--Pharos 23:07, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

I think it looks pretty ugly. Its only 4 lines of text - and the most relevant link is bolded, its not hard to miss.--nixie 23:11, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

It would look quite different displayed on the Main Page, as there will almost always be at least one line of text vertically separating the starts of entries, even on large monitors. Cut-and-paste and preview on the Main Page to see what I mean; do you still see the same aesthetic problem? I think it looks more organized without appearing blocklike as it does displayed above. Of course, it is not rare to have double the number of entries up as we have currently.--Pharos 23:37, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

I know what it looks like from messing around with DYK, and I do prefer them to be distributed through the text. Also what would happen in the case of two bolded terms like the current Katrina item?--nixie 23:42, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

I think it makes sense for DYK to have a more conversational style (I mean it is, "Did you know..."), but with ITN I think it might make sense for a little more regularity. What we have here I think is an extreme iceberg situation. Wikipedia is a 100 story skyscaper full of people, and there's just a handful on the roof running the elevators. Considering the page view statistics, we're surpassing almost every news website, but it's clear only a tiny percentage of readers ever edit at all or understand anything about Wikipedia. When so very many people are coming here to read "headlines", I think ITN should just be as clear and simple at a glance as possible. As for the situation of two bolded items, I would just recommend putting the more important first.--Pharos 00:12, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

I'm dubious -- wary of the encroaching Powerpontification of written discourse as a general rule, and I'd be particularly ill disposed towards using fragments instead of full grammatical sentences (see Israel, above), but what the heck. Why don't we go live with it for 24 hours, see if our readers respond massively either in favour or against, revert to the old format tomorrow at this time and meet back here for further discussion? –Hajor 00:48, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Petrol blockades

Can I suggest that we remove the UK petrol panic item, since filling stations are back to normal and the rolling roadblocks are not even a major story in the UK any more, let alone internationally? If no one objects, I'll remove it myself. --Heron 18:44, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

I took it out, to balance the MainPage, as the right side appeared longer than the left. -- PFHLai 22:54, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

german elections

why are the german liberals (more votes than the greens or the left party) not mentioned? NOTE german liberal = NOT american liberal. Aleichem 23:05, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

If anything this item needs to be shortened, it is far too long and unbalancing the main page.--nixie 00:04, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

this is a better solution, but CDU gets 3 seats more than SPD. Aleichem 07:17, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

The item should be updated. Preliminary official results are a lot more than "early ballot counts". In fact, this result is as final as it will get for the next two weeks. --Qualle (talk) 16:01, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

I've updated it on the ambiguous current situation.--Pharos 17:12, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

Simon Wiesenthal

I don't know if I'll revert this just yet, but the death of Simon Wiesenthal does not meet our obituary criteria. Certainly his life's mission was very notable, but his death in itself is not a major event.--Pharos 17:48, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

Deaths have been featured on "in the news" before and I think this one is major enough. I've restored it but left Rita as the main news item. Gamaliel 18:48, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

Please see above Template talk:In the news#Obituaries section. -- PFHLai 16:51, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

how do I remove the Iraq War link?

How do I remove the Iraq War link on the front page? The story about the two british soldiers has been removed from that article. It doesn't fit there, since it is far too soon to assume it is an important encyclopedic event in the war. Is there some current events page that should be linked to instead?--Silverback 10:32, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

It's removed. -- PFHLai 17:31, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Tom Delay should be Tom DeLay

DeLay's name is incorrectly capitalized at the present moment. NatusRoma 18:09, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

Done. --fvw* 18:15, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

New Zealand General Election

"New Zealand general election: Helen Clark of the Labour Party returns for a third term as Prime Minister."

The new Government still hasn't been formed, so she hasn't officially returned for a third term as Prime Minister yet. The statement above is for news that has is probable, if not certain, but which has not yet occured.

According to Current events "she is set to form a third-term government after the National's lose a seat" and according to Current events in Australia and New Zealand she "must now confirm minor party support to form the new government". i c u r i t e 01:18, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

2005 Bali bombings

Could the image of the gorilla (as fascinating as it is) be replaced by either Image:2005 Bali bombings SCTV screenshot.jpg or Image:Bali blast 2005.jpg, or even Image:Indonesia flag large.png? There's a pretty decent article on the incident going now, and it should feature as our leading event, picture and all.--Cyberjunkie | Talk 04:38, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

Nobel Prizes 2005

Can we get some info up now? — Sverdrup 18:26, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and Mohamed ElBaradei are awarded the 2005 Nobel Peace Prize. —Cantus…☎ 09:11, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

2005 Kashmir earthquake

2005 South Asia earthquake was moved to 2005 Kashmir earthquake, so please change the template to reflect the move and remove the redirect. Titoxd^(?!?) 07:19, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Done. Evil Monkey∴Hello 07:39, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

I hope I haven't exceeded my authority in changing the News template, but it looks bad to have the headline disagreeing with the full article. Also, for the sake of our own credibility, I think we should stick to the confirmed death toll and not display the most pessimistic estimate available. --Heron 11:41, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

The current casualty count listed in the article's "Confirmed Casualties" section is: "At least 40,000 people had been killed and 42,397 people had been hurt", Pakistani Interior Minister Aftab Sherpao said. Since this is only in Pakistan, You all may want to raise the headline to 40,000. Ahseaton 05:32, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

Pakistani officials have sharply raised their estimate of the death toll to more than 54,000. [13] - Ahseaton 07:41, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

German coalition

Angela Merkel will not lead a "jamaika coalition" (part of that coalition are the "black" party CDU, the green party and the liberal "yellow" party FDP; the article is in the point of the coalitions parts correct). The coalition of CDU and SPD called "great coalition", because CDU/CSU and SPD are the traditionel strongest parties in Germany.

In English, a CDU/SPD coalition as in the 1960s is usually described as a "Grand Coalition". -- Arwel 16:32, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Shenzhou 6

The statement is unclear in that it seems to indicate that four days have already passed, when it is possible that they will not be in orbit for four days.

Shenzhou 6 has landed and the astronauts are reported in good health. - Ahseaton 22:02, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

Content Backwards

Is it just me, or is the news content backwards, with the most recent on the bottom? I need a sysop to please fix this, or tell me this is a false alarm (I'm pretty darn sure it's not though). We should also discuss how to prevent this from happening again. HereToHelp 22:11, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

References?

I'm sure this has been dealt with, but I was wondering if someone could explain why there are no references to news sources (e.g. BBC, CNN, whatever) in the ITN section. One has to go to the "More current events..." section for these details. Is it not appropriate to reference them in the ITN template also, or at least indicate that further information (not just "More") can be found on the "More current events..." page? Cheers, Ben Cairns 12:32, 19 October 2005 (UTC).

Because we'd rather advertise our own articles than those on other sites. The ones on current events are there both for further reading and as a reference. violet/riga (t) 19:30, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Understandable, but aren't articles about current events typically based on other news reports? Anyway, it occurs to me that these are just headlines and there's no need for attribution on headlines. Thanks for the response! Ben Cairns 09:00, 20 October 2005 (UTC).

ITN

Hey guys, can we find some other way to describe this page than ITN? ITN here may mean In The News but elsewhere, particularly in the media, it is the name of an internationally known broadcasting organisation Independent Television News that broadcasts ITV News and Channel 4 News in the UK (Five, I think also) and is used all around the world. I know some people in the broadcasting world are slightly miffed (understatement) that we are using a registered broadcaster's acronym.

Some people here thought that when they see ITN here it means that we are using their wire service. Others in the real ITN have had people blame them for errors we've had (or not so much errors as badly worded information). Right now it is just a few people I've come across who are miffed, but if we get something seriously wrong and it shows up in google searches with the acronym ITN it could be made an issue of. When a page has CNN, BBC, ABC, RTÉ etc on it, it is rather inadvisable to use ITN on the same page. In that context who can blame people for thinking it is Independent Television News and not merely our own inhouse acronym for our own page. FearÉIREANN\^(caint) 00:49, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

How about we use Template:News instead? It doesn't seem useful in its current form. (btw Five News is now produced by BSkyB. Not that you can tell any difference in quality). Dmn € Դմն 14:21, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

That is a good idea. Another option might be News this Week. But ITN is probably something that should be avoided. Obviously though I am lucky in Ireland to miss the "delights" of Five and its news bulletins! I heard that they are pretty bad alright! They make the Sun seem like the Guardian in comparison. Apparently ITN may lose the Channel 4 News franchise too! Man, how far ITN has dropped since it started dumbing down when ITV bought into it in the 1990s. I blame Thatcher and her stupid vindictive liberalisation of broadcasting. Now it is money and tabloid standard, not quality and broadsheet, that matters. (That's my hobbyhorse for the day done!) FearÉIREANN\^(caint) 15:49, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

needs to be updated

The template needs to be updated. the top story right now is Wilma's effect on Mexico and the impending impact on Florida. Another thing that needs to be included is UN report on Syria and US's opinion on it. Even the Saddam trial item needs to be updated to mention the security aspects, the abduction and killing of Saddam's lawyer. Another story that could be mentioned is the burning of bodies of Taliban fighters by US troops and its impact. --Just my 2 cents -- Hemanshu 10:33, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Are stories only allowed if they're about people dying? Is that why we can't mention the record-breaking hurricane season? — BRIAN0918 • 2005-10-24 04:18

• We have no obituaries up; I think we've gotten to the point where these are quite generally reverted. I just thought the addition of Tropical Storm Alpha is a little too close to trivia, as it's not a significant storm in itself. We probably have enough hurricane news with Wilma.--Pharos 04:26, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

Wilma needs update

The blurb about Hurricane Wilma needs to be changed from "approach" to "made landfall"--GraemeMcRae^talk 15:39, 24 October 2005 (UTC)