|
March 1, 2017 (2017-03-01) (Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economics
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Science and technology
Oldest evidence of life on earth
Article: Abiogenesis (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Scientists find microfossils within rocks dated up to 4.28 billion years ago from northern Quebec, Canada, which may represent the oldest-known evidence of life on Earth. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Scientists find microfossils within rocks dated between 3.77 and 4.28 billion years ago from northern Quebec, Canada, which would make them the oldest fossils of life on Earth.
News source(s): Reuters
Credits:
Article updatedNominator's comments: Significant scientific find, oldest evidence of life on earth to date. Added as brief note to lead and appropriate section of larger article. --Natural RX 21:51, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
RD: John Hampshire
Article: John Hampshire (cricketer, born 1941) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian, BBC
Credits:
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Misplaced Pages article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD. —MBlaze Lightning 15:37, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
Ongoing: Kim Jong-nam
Strong consensus against this. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:46, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Article: Kim Jong-nam (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
News source(s):
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Kim Jong-nam's death continues to make the news (see links above) and the article's also being updated. Aside from the article title (a "Kim Jong-nam murder trial" or similar article title sounds more appropriate to me) this seems like a good candidate for ongoing. Banedon (talk) 10:41, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose they have charged individuals and therefore a (probably) lengthy case will eventually be held. We can post the results of that. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:07, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose - While a (most likely) assassination is large news, which is why we posted the blurb, I think ongoing is a little too far. It hasn't affected any major politics and North Korea doesn't really care, so it's irrelevant at this point. UNSC Luke 1021 (talk) 12:43, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
- Support - not so much because of the upcoming murder trial, but rather because of its ramifications for diplomatic relations. 81.204.120.137 (talk) 12:49, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
- Such as no-one will get along with North Korea? That can't be "ongoing", what's actually going to happen? Lot's of frowns, a missile test? Come on. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:35, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
- No, TRM. Obviously, when 81 refers to ramifications, 81 means that there will be sanctions. In this day and age, sanctions are basically the equivalent of a declaration of hot war (even if nothing ever happens). Scary stuff!--WaltCip (talk) 14:23, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose – This story is of trifling significance in the Big Scheme and has been relentlessly hyped because of its bizarre character. Sca (talk) 14:36, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose. I don't feel this meets the criteria for an Ongoing listing. I suspect the result of any trial or other resolution would be posted; possibly any breakdown in diplomatic relations as well. 331dot (talk) 20:09, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
February 28
| Portal:Current events/2017 February 28
|
|
February 28, 2017 (2017-02-28) (Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economics
- The Hershey Company announces it will cut about 15 percent of its global workforce (~2,700 jobs) to return its international businesses to profitability as quickly as possible. The layoffs will have a greater impact on the international workforce. (CNN)
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
- 2016–17 Turkish purges
- German police storm a refugee center in Hamburg after a knife-wielding man barricades himself in a room with a pregnant woman believed to be his partner. The man was injured before he was arrested. (RT)
- Hundreds of right-wing activists gather to protest the court-ordered demolition of the Israeli settlement Ofra, which was built on private Palestinian land in the West Bank. Israeli police are evacuating nine homes in the settlement, despite hunger strikes and people barricading themselves inside. (RT)
- The Royal Thai Government has fired Police General Jumpol Manmai for "extremely evil" misconduct and political interests which threatened national security. (Reuters)
Politics and elections
Leekfrith torcs
Closing this, we won't get a consensus to pull. --Tone 12:05, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Article: Leekfrith torcs (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: The Leekfrith torcs, believed to be the oldest Iron Age gold jewellery found in Britain, are revealed to the public for the first time (Post)
News source(s): http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-stoke-staffordshire-39113201
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Significant archaeological find; also visually appealing. Described as a "unique find of international importance" by the British Museum. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:00, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- "in Great Britain", ergo oppose. Nergaal (talk) 18:33, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- "of international importance", ergo support.--Pawnkingthree (talk) 18:51, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- Comment - ^Boi you got roasted^ UNSC Luke 1021 (talk) 18:59, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- Support - per above and article appears to be sufficiently cited. UNSC Luke 1021 (talk) 18:59, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- Comment - Why do we even bother having the "don't complain about single country events" rule if no one ever follows it?--WaltCip (talk) 19:04, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- Support, cool stuff. – Juliancolton | 19:06, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose We could have posted (or at least nominated) its discovery instead, which per article was in December 2016. Brandmeister 19:17, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
-
- Exactly, two blokes found a trove late last year, it wasn't until today that it really became notable. Just like when notification of a death is delayed, we deal with the real news of it (and this) when it's really in the news. And that's now. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:05, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- Support. A notable historical find; the article states this has international significance. 331dot (talk) 19:18, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- Ok, let me try to put this in perspective, since it seems to be lacking here:
All those voting support can they explain why is this item notable to ITN beyond being reported by the English-speaking news outlets from the UK? The item was discovered 2 months ago, but now it gets a publicity stunt to attract visitors, and isn't actually archeologically relevant. "of international significance", "unique find" and "truly historic" for tourism indeed. @Pawnkingthree, UNSC Luke 1021, Juliancolton, and 331dot: Nergaal (talk) 19:35, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- @Nergaal: - Just because one thing is older doesn't mean this thing is any less notable to the world. Besides, these other things have all been on display for a while. This is just coming out, and it's over 2000 years old. UNSC Luke 1021 (talk) 19:49, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- Your own opinion Nergaal is just that, your own opinion. This is being widely reported, globally, as significant. It doesn't diminish the significance of all those worldly goods you've listed, but this is ITN and this is in the news. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:06, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
-
- @Nergaal: - The blurb is not wrong. Northern Ireland is part of the UK but not the country of Britain. Also, half of the examples you have specified were uncovered and displayed before ITN or even Misplaced Pages existed. I don't see the relevancy to the discussion at hand. You can't call it discrimination to not include something if it was discovered back in 1902. UNSC Luke 1021 (talk) 22:11, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- Support unique find and truly historic. Ready to go. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:46, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- What do you mean by "truly historic"? Nergaal (talk) 19:50, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- (ec)The article has a quote stating that "This unique find is of international importance." It's starting to appear in the news elsewhere; US, India, Ireland. It's also not like we post an overabundance of treasure/archaeological finds here. 331dot (talk) 19:52, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- Indeed, what do you mean by "What do you mean by"? It's all there, in reliable sources. If you don't like it, that's a different thing altogether. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:03, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- If you had any idea about the subject of how "truly historic" this is, you would have known that the oldest bronze age (not iron age like this one) artifact found in the British isles is more than a millenium older. Read Bush Barrow. This news is just "look, a millennium later we discovered new iron, not bronze age jewelry in Britain". Nergaal (talk) 20:18, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- Support unique find indeed.BabbaQ (talk) 19:54, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- I'd like to point out that this is a blatant case of US/British centrism. Less than half a year ago, the The World’s Oldest Gold Artifact May Have Just Been Discovered from 4,600 BC and nobody jumped to create an article even though it was in the news. Nergaal (talk) 20:14, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- Why was the "ready" mark removed from this item? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:17, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- Comment Nergaal has added a quaint alt blurb which somehow tries to relate this find to Bronze age jewellery, to whit: ... and some 1,500 after the oldest Bronze age gold jewelry... (sic). I suggest we stick with the main blurb. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:23, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- Comment this is now being filibustered (or at least there's a poor attempt to do so ongoing); it's been ready to go for some time, trustworthy admin, please action the posting. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:43, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- There is no consensus. Unmarked as ready. 2600:387:9:5:0:0:0:9F (talk) 20:56, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- The blurb is actively misleading. If you say something's the oldest Iron Age jewellery found in Great Britain", it'll be read as "the oldest jewellery found in Great Britain, which happens to date to the Iron Age". —Cryptic 21:03, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- So when the BBC say "Two friends have unearthed jewellery which could be the oldest Iron Age gold discovered in Britain.", they're wrong, misleading, what? The Rambling Man (talk) 21:13, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- And actually, I think you're talking bunk, while English is rich with possibilities for many interpretations, your assertion is somewhat flamboyant and derogatory to our audience who I believe can read English as well as the BBC can write it in most cases. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:15, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- Maybe wrong, maybe misleading, maybe misled, maybe just selling clicks. I don't know and neither do you. That doesn't mean we have to use their misleading wording too. —Cryptic 21:19, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- I think I know how to read English and the blurb, and the BBC, are not misleading anyone. If someone misinterprets the blurb, or the BBC, it's their own misinterpretation. We use reliable sources here, and the BBC is one of those. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:57, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- @Cryptic: - I speak American English and I can understand it perfectly fine. I don't see what the problem with it is. UNSC Luke 1021 (talk) 22:00, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- Support - per nom. A significant find indeed. ZettaComposer (talk) 21:21, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- Requesting Post - by an uninvolved administrator. The consensus is clearly in favor of posting and the only reason it hasn't already is because of filibustering by Nergaal. UNSC Luke 1021 (talk) 21:57, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 22:12, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- Finally. UNSC Luke 1021 (talk) 22:13, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you. Can we use the image with this, which shows the actual objects, in preference to the current ITN image, which is an artist's impression? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:20, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- Yes, the image needs to be protected, and that can usually happen within fifteen minutes of getting it listed at Krinklebot's page. Admin instructions are pretty easy to follow in this regard. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:21, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- In fact, checking on Commons and Kriklebot's page, the image is already good to go. Needs a trustworthy admin to switch the image (and the (pictured), alt text etc) whenever convenient! The Rambling Man (talk) 22:23, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- In fact, this stuff just happens while I type! Done, hurrah! The Rambling Man (talk) 22:24, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- Post-posting comment I would not ask this to be pulled, but this clearly better suited as a DYK, given the opposes above and that it is really not that significant a find relative to the whole of human discoveries. It's very much clear a DYK as the oldest finds in England. --MASEM (t) 22:34, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- It's not the oldest, not even when further restricted from Great Britain to England. There's more than a dozen such listed at List of Bronze Age hoards in Great Britain, for example. —Cryptic 22:46, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- Eh, this story is far too interesting to be condemned to the esoteric, sleep-inducing no-man's land that is DYK. Consensus was overwhelmingly in favor of posting so I'm not sure why a couple opposes would mean it's not suitable for ITN. Moving on, something I hadn't noticed until just now is that "revealed for the first time" may be redundant - thoughts on just "revealed"? – Juliancolton | 23:01, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- I'm just going to point out that this was posted in 4 hours from proposing it. The ITNR on Oscars below took 3 hours. This discovery took months to be announced to the public but we can't wait hours to have an involved discussion. Nergaal (talk) 23:10, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- Comment, I tend to agree with User:Masem that this item is a little weak. But my main concern here at ITN is to try to prevent the posting of scientifically false crap. So I'm willing to let this one slide. Abductive (reasoning) 23:22, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- Post-posting oppose and pull - the fact that the blurb says "... found in Britain" (emphasis mine) is great reason to pull this. Logically, there is also oldest iron-age gold hoards in every other country in the world. I see no reason to single out Britain. Banedon (talk) 23:56, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- It's a shame that we seem to get calls to pull the blurb on everything that isn't a boring ITN/R item or a suicide bombing. Let's try to make ITN a little more engaging and not less, please. – Juliancolton | 04:32, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
- I beg to differ. If we did not have significance controls then every nomination that meets the quality standards would be postable (see the RD reform), and that is something we have agreed we don't want . I am in favour of pulling this blurb not because it isn't a boring ITN/R item or a suicide bombing, but because it is at best only nationally significant, and there are 196 countries in the world. If you want to promote more non-ITNR non-suicide bombing items onto ITN, there are a few nominations in the threads below this one. Banedon (talk) 04:59, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
- Just because something happens in one place doesn't mean it's only notable in that place. A history curator at the British Museum (which is to say, someone who actually knows what they're talking about) called the discovery important on an international scale. The story is being reported by the Archaeological Institute of America who use the "international importance" quote in their headline, which suggests that wasn't just an offhand remark by an overzealous British patriot. Even if it's not of superlative significance, it's still significant - lots of items we post aren't about the absolute oldest or deadliest or biggest. – Juliancolton | 05:44, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
- The curator of the British Museum is of course going to hype his own artifacts. You'll note that the archeology.org site puts "international importance" in inverted commas, implying they are using that as a direct quote and do not necessarily stand by it. The idea of "international importance" is also context-dependent, e.g. if a new archeological find changes the history of Ireland as we know it in the 15th century, and is of interest only to Irish people and historians, one could still claim it to be of "international importance" since Northern Ireland is not part of Ireland currently (but it was in the 15th century). The grand total of countries affected would be two, but that's still international by definition. Banedon (talk) 05:59, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
- If you disagree with the expert at the British Museum, or question their motives, feel free not to include this story in your newspaper or website- or take it up with the reliable sources that have included this. If we refused to post things that were only relevant to one nation(assuming we disagree with the expert at the British Museum) very little would be posted here.(which is why we warn against single-country based objections) Part of our mission is to inform and educate readers. I learned something I wasn't aware of before and found it interesting. I don't see the big deal here. 331dot (talk) 08:21, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
- I had to re-read what you wrote to be sure of what I'm seeing. You wrote "If you disagree with the expert at the British Museum, or question their motives, feel free ... to take it up with the reliable sources that have included this", which is incredible because it's as though you've never worked with WP:RS before. Here's a comparable example: George Foreman says Floyd Mayweather is better than Muhammad Ali - do you seriously think that means an edit to Floyd Mayweather to say that he's better than Muhammad Ali (citing George Foreman) is justified, and that if you disagree with it, "feel free to take it up with reliable sources"?? All the sources on this topic I've seen cite precisely one expert who calls the discovery of "international significance", when other articles on big discoveries quote many more experts. See e.g. the Trappist-1 discovery, to which news articles quote from involved and uninvolved scientists. If there's anything I learned from this nomination, it's that the bias on ITN is very real. Banedon (talk) 08:52, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
- So you believe that the "Please do not oppose an item because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one" should have "unless it's from the UK" added? 331dot (talk) 09:04, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
- No. If anything, you should be the one supporting that line, since I am opposing this nomination. I know you'll say something like "but I'm not from the UK". It doesn't matter. Collectively on ITN, we are showing pro-UK bias. Banedon (talk) 09:09, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
- I await your nomination of a similar event in another country with similar coverage and importance, I would be happy to support it. The way to address bias is to work in underrepresented areas, not suppress stories from represented areas. 331dot (talk) 09:12, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
Your waiting is over then, since a couple of the nominations in the threads below this are mine ... and I note that you have not commented on them, even though they've been around for a while. Too late since Stephen closed them already. Oh well. Banedon (talk) 09:36, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
- Post-posting support happy to see "in the news" posting things that are actually in the news. My thinking aligns with Juliancolton. Ed 05:53, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
February 27
| Portal:Current events/2017 February 27
|
|
February 27, 2017 (2017-02-27) (Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
International relations
Politics and elections
Science and technology
- SpaceX announces that it will take two space tourists on an orbit of the Moon in 2018. (CNBC)
RD: Alex Young
Article: Alex Young (footballer, born 1937) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian, BBC
Credits:
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Misplaced Pages article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD. —MBlaze Lightning 19:08, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose Article could do with some expansion, and what is there is woefully under-referenced. For someone who played 13+years of top-flight football, that such a career could be summed up in about 12 lines of text seems very inadequate. And there are direct quotes and events from his biography (what little there is) that we have no idea where they come from. The quality is inadequate for the main page. --Jayron32 19:15, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
- Agreed, the fact it has a template and an entry in the infobox claiming he was manager of Glentoran yet no coverage at all in the article is symptomatic of the gaps in the article. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:39, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
- Support I (and another editor) have sourced everything in the article, including the Glentoran managership. Yes, it could do with expansion, but that's irrelevant to ITN because the article adequately summarises his life. Black Kite (talk) 19:51, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
- Still not changing my vote, because it does not adequately summarise his life. If you expand it to an adequate summary, I would do so. The article is too poor a quality to post on the main page because large amounts of information about his life and career is missing. Gaps in coverage are a quality issue. --Jayron32 12:53, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- What "gaps in coverage" would you like to be filled? It summarises his career and the highlights of it. Anything else would be simply a list of appearances and goals per season, which is hardly encyclopedic. Black Kite (talk) 20:52, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
February 26
| Portal:Current events/2017 February 26
|
|
February 26, 2017 (2017-02-26) (Sunday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Disasters and accidents
- Millions of residents in the Chilean capital Santiago are left without access to running water after the Maipo River is contaminated by flooding and landslides. At least four people have died in the floods. (BBC)
- 16 people dead in northern India after a truck carrying villagers to church overturned on a mountain road. (DW)
Politics and elections
Sport
89th Academy Awards
Article: 89th Academy Awards (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Moonlight wins Best Picture at the Academy Awards. (Post)
Alternative blurb: After some initial confusion, Moonlight wins Best Picture at the Academy Awards
News source(s): NYTimes
Credits:
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.Nominator's comments: All but a few awards left. Will adjust blurb depending on which wins best picture MASEM (t) 05:03, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
- Needs some prose on the whole Warren Beatty thing. – Muboshgu (talk) 05:25, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
- Comment — Worth mentioning the mix-up or no? Aria1561 (talk) 05:31, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
- Comment: I f we are going to mention the "Oscar Mix-Up", make sure not to put the blame on Mr. Beatty because it was a mix-up behind the scenes involving the individual giving the wrong envelope to Beatty. Worth mentioning the mix-up though. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 05:49, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
- Comment Now that I've had a chance to look, the article on Moonlight is not in bad shape (eg : no glaring sourcing issues, reasonably complete, updated with win), so I would suggest we could bold this as the second article. --MASEM (t) 05:59, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
- Comment In principle I'm relaxed about whether the mix-up is mentioned in the blurb, though I think a blurb that actually mentioned La La Land would distract from the two articles which should be wikilinked. I therefore don't see how we could do it. StillWaitingForConnection (talk) 06:11, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
- Comment Blurb could mention that this is the first time in the history of the Academy Awards that a mistake has been made in announcing any award (Just like the first time someone with no prior government experience has been elected president, the first time a Super Bowl went into overtime ... there is clearly a pattern here, but a pattern of what? Daniel Case (talk) 06:16, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
- Of unbelievable news stories. Which is just as well, because not believing the news is coincidentally becoming somewhat of a trend for people of all political persuasions (though they differ on which news they don't believe). StillWaitingForConnection (talk) 06:38, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
- Whereas the Super Bowl going into overtime does have a significant effect on the result of ongoing game and thus the first time it happened was reasonable to include since it would naturally flow, trying to fit this mix-up would be very awkward (particularly since La La Land would have to be mentioned). It is better to serve as a DYK than ITN for that part. --MASEM (t) 06:47, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
RD: Gerald Kaufman
Article: Gerald Kaufman (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Sky News
Credits:
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Misplaced Pages article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD. Rcsprinter123 (notify) 00:04, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
- @The Rambling Man: there's a {{cn}} in the main body - not any more, there isn't :-P Ritchie333 10:15, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- Just those publications then? The Rambling Man (talk) 10:16, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- Aha, they've disappeared too... The Rambling Man (talk) 10:17, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- Yes, because they were unsourced and the main ones are covered in the prose (with sources) now Ritchie333 10:18, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
RD: Joseph Wapner
Article: Joseph Wapner (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Huffington Post, CNN, USA Today
Credits:
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Misplaced Pages article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.Nominator's comments: Judge Wapner, part of my region's history as well as TV history Challenger l (talk) 01:59, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
- Support: Article in good shape and well sourced. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 02:02, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
Weak oppose I do not believe sufficient time has passed during which efforts should be made to claim that there's fair use of that non-free image, uploaded seemingly minutes after this individual died. The Rambling Man (talk) 05:37, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
- I would lean to agree on this, but I would note that as a publicly recognized figure, a non-free of when he looked as he mostly appeared to the public would be reasonably appropriate after time has passed. --MASEM (t) 06:40, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
- Yes, quite, and as a publicly recognised figure, it should be possible to obtain a free image. Where is the evidence of attempts to do so? The Rambling Man (talk) 10:36, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
- I've been doing what I can to find a decent replacement image - but have been finding "free" images that are covered with watermarks, or unwatermarked images with unclear sources, thus far. I may simply reach out to the People's Court through their website, or their network's website, and all else failing, contacting his alma mater for that matter. Challenger l (talk) 23:20, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- Ready assuming the image issue is all that's holding this up, as it has been removed. μηδείς (talk) 23:56, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
- Agreed, article tweaked, oppose struck. Good to go. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:46, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 10:39, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
2017 Daytona 500
No consensus. Stephen 10:37, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Articles: 2017 Daytona 500 (talk · history · tag) and Kurt Busch (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Kurt Busch wins the 2017 Daytona 500 in the Monster Energy NASCAR Cup Series. (Post)
Alternative blurb: In motorsport, Kurt Busch wins the Daytona 500.
News source(s): MRN USA Today
Credits:
Article updatedNominator's comments: The biggest and most prestigious event in the Monster Energy NASCAR Cup Series. Dough4872 01:39, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
- Motorsport is already overrepresented in ITNR with seven events per year, more than any other sport and matched only by film awards. That's a very high bar to including additional non-ITNR ones, and there was nothing special about this race this year to overcome it. Oppose. —Cryptic 01:55, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose I'm finding it hard to disagree with Cryptic here. GoldenRing (talk) 12:40, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose per above.--WaltCip (talk) 12:46, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose posting this; we don't post Major League Baseball's Opening Day, or the NFL's Kickoff game. This has been brought up before; the end of the season is what is posted, as the result of the whole contest(the Cup) is more notable than its first game from an encyclopedic standpoint. 331dot (talk) 12:48, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
- Only to comment (this is not a !vote) - we have posted Daytona in 2013, 2015, and 2016, and did not post in other years since ~2011 (though it was nominated). --MASEM (t) 15:13, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
RD: Bill Paxton
Article: Bill Paxton (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC News, People
Credits:
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Misplaced Pages article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD. JuneGloom07 Talk 16:03, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
- Support I actually was filling this out myself, but then I saw this. Notable actor, but I feel like there could be more citations. -A lad insane (Channel 2) 16:07, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
- I resolved the only {{cite}} tag in the article. — xaosflux 17:25, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
- Support It's not perfect, but it's fully cited. Miyagawa (talk) 17:35, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
- Comment The TV appearances and the Awards need sourcing. (Fortunately we have his filmography via TCM and avoids the IMDB issue). --MASEM (t) 18:03, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
- Support, notable actor. --AmaryllisGardener 18:54, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
Oppose television appearances (some of which aren't even blue-linked) and awards absolutely require inline references. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:48, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
- Television is done plus the awards that I could find not using IMDB. --Jnorton7558 (talk) 21:49, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
- IMDB is not a reliable source, so every use of that will need to be replaced. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:51, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
- Hence why I did not use them as a source and the other places it is used there are other sources already in the article for that information. --Jnorton7558 (talk) 21:56, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
- Then it can removed altogether, something we should be focused on doing for such BLPs. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:05, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
- Support We can be sure that thousands of people are already reading this article. Andrew D. (talk) 21:10, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
- How that means the article complies with BLP is beyond me. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:13, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose. Over half this article is a tabled filmography and one whole section is orange-tagged - needs work. Challenger l (talk) 22:23, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
- Support Article looks to be currently of sufficient quality for the main page. Seems to have been improved (sourcing no longer IMDB, no sections missing sources, etc.) since many of the above objections. --Jayron32 22:54, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
- Support: Article has been improved, updated and sourced for good enough shape for posting. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 02:04, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
- Comment good to go, excellent work on the referencing. The Rambling Man (talk) 05:39, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
- Posted --MASEM (t) 06:43, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
- Comment I noticed that NYT was curiously careful in its report of the death. Looking into the details, it seems that all the media has to go on is the statement from the family and a TMZ exclusive. This is significant for the date of the death, which seems to rest upon TMZ's unattributed statement that they were told he died on Saturday. From discussion on the article's talk page, TMZ is not normally considered reliable here. Does it become reliable when the rest of the media repeat it? Andrew D. (talk) 08:49, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
- Broadly speaking, yes, sort of. When reliable sources repeat material from less-than-reliable sources, there is an implied judgment by the reliable source that the details that they are repeating are reasonably well-established even if the original source might not generally be reliable. In most cases, information widely reported by reliable sources will merit inclusion even if the details originated somewhere sleazy. However, in specific cases, the merits of including any particular piece of information is ultimately a matter for talk page discussions and consensus. Dragons flight (talk) 10:46, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
- To add to Dragons Flight's comment, TMZ is trashy on gossip about celebs and the like, but when it comes to obits, they usually take it with every ounce of seriousness - they try to confirm before posting. In any other situation, avoid TMZ like the plague, but its generally okay on obits. It is far better than nearly all major RSes reiterate the TMZ bit themselves so that it leaves no question. (However, it is it rarely the case that TMZ is the only entity reporting on the death of a celeb, so we rarely have to worry about relying on TMZ 100% for such things). --MASEM (t) 19:50, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
Ongoing: Operation Radd-ul-Fasaad
No consensus. Stephen 10:36, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Article: Operation Radd-ul-Fasaad (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: No blurb specified (Post)
News source(s): Express Tribune, Dawn
Credits:
mfarazbaig 17:15, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose As there is no statement of when this operation would "end" with a broad mission statement, this is not really suitable for ongoing. Perhaps the announcement of the initiative as an ITN would be fine but that would then have to be considered on the 22nd. --MASEM (t) 18:01, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose - All of the news sources covering this operation are Pakistan-based. It seems to be a domestic thing in Pakistan that doesn't really affect the rest of the world. I don't feel this is of interest of English-speaking readers, but I could be wrong. UNSC Luke 1021 (talk) 18:30, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
- "Please do not ... oppose an item because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. This applies to a high percentage of the content we post and is unproductive." Banedon (talk) 02:59, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
- " Less than 8% of the Pakistani population speak English" (Pakistani English) - That being said, I don't feel it is of interest to the large majority of our English speaking audience. UNSC Luke 1021 (talk) 13:08, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
- While "domestic thing in Pakistan" is not a valid argument, it is valid to state that this is not widely covered outside of Pakistan. I am skeptical of "not of interest to English speakers" as an argument due to systemic bias issues. 331dot (talk) 13:12, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
- Weak oppose - per Masem, and I'll support a blurb based on the events of 22 Feb. Banedon (talk) 02:59, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
- Nominated it . Banedon (talk) 03:05, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
- Weak oppose for now. For an ongoing article, there's really not much here. I see two events since the launch of the operation. Also, article suffers from generally poor writing (WP:PROSELINE issues). If this were expanded and a more natural narrative written, and if it were to continue to have regular (approximately) daily updates with additional information, I'd switch to support. --Jayron32 14:08, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
February 25
| Portal:Current events/2017 February 25
|
|
February 25, 2017 (2017-02-25) (Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
RD: Elli Norkett
Article: Elli Norkett (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC News, The Independent
Credits:
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Misplaced Pages article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.Nominator's comments: Young Welsh women's international rugby union player, killed yesterday in a car crash in South Wales. Article created today as a result of her death; I'd previously created articles for several of her teammates, but had been leaving those with only a handful of caps till a later date when there might have been more sourcing available. Sadly her death means that there is no sufficient sourcing. Miyagawa (talk) 21:31, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
RD: Neil Fingleton
Article: Neil Fingleton (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ,
Credits:
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Misplaced Pages article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD. Rhodesisland (talk) 01:42, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
February 24
| Portal:Current events/2017 February 24
|
|
February 24, 2017 (2017-02-24) (Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
- Retail chain JC Penney announces plans to close between 130 and 140 stores, as well as 2 distribution centers, amid sagging store sales. (CNBC)
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
- Philippine vice president Leni Robredo defends her fellow Liberal party-mate Leila de Lima who was arrested for alleged drug trafficking. Robredo calls de Lima's arrest political harassment. (PDI)
- Presidency of Donald Trump
- The Trump White House bars The New York Times, CNN, the Los Angeles Times, the New York Daily News, The Hill, the Daily Mail, BBC, Politico, and BuzzFeed from a Friday press "gaggle." Generally conservative, mostly new, outlets were permitted entry, such as Breitbart News, One America News Network, and The Washington Times. Also allowed in were ABC News, CBS News, NBC News, The Wall Street Journal, Bloomberg News, and Fox News. Time magazine and the Associated Press could have attended but chose not to in protest. The White House Correspondents’ Association, which represents the press corps, quickly rebuked the White House’s actions. (AP) (Reuters) (NBC News) (The New York Times) (The Hill via MSN.Com)
Cloudbleed
No consensus. Stephen
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Article: Cloudbleed (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Cloud-computing service Cloudflare reports a buffer overflow software bug has leaked private information that may be cached on search engines. (Post)
News source(s): NYTimes, BBC
Credits:
Article updatedNominator's comments: Right now, the amount of potential damage is unknown, as it requires actually having the sites that operate cloudflare spend time and effort to see what got cached. It does not seem to have too many security experts freaked out, but they are issuing warnings for password changes, among other steps. This could be nothing, it could be something, and while WP should not be worried about PSAs or the like, treating this as ITN makes s a lot of sense. MASEM (t) 01:26, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
- Weak support; less widespread than Heartbleed (i.e., as provider of CDN/DNS services only), which was also posted to ITN. Mélencron (talk) 01:29, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose per the nomination. This is nothing. Until it stop being nothing and then the story can be updated accordingly. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:01, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose seems extremely minor. I saw barely any coverage outside of one-off items. Banedon (talk) 01:06, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
- Comment – This is a fairly major incident, in that it affects a large variation of services (among which OKCupid, an online dating website that should have a large amount of personal data, and Patreon, which is effectively a banking app). It's still unclear how impactful the actual leak may have been, though. More importantly, the Misplaced Pages article still seems of fairly low quality, creating more questions than answers. I can imagine the article being expanded in the next two days to the point where it gives an appropriate amount of information on the issue, but until then I would agree with the opposition. ~Mable (chat) 15:03, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Al-Bab captured by Free Syrian Army
Articles: Al-Bab (talk · history · tag) and Battle of al-Bab (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Battle of al-Bab is over, Turkish backed FSA captures the city from ISIL. (Post)
Alternative blurb: The Turkish-backed Free Syrian Army captures Al-Bab from ISIL.
News source(s):
Credits:
Article needs updatingNominator's comments: Al Bab is an important city in Northern Syria. It was recently captured by Turkish backed Free Syrian Army. Now, ISIL has lost a major stronghold in Syria. Kavas (talk) 06:03, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
- Support, the article is extensive and cited. --Tone 09:12, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
- Comment is it just me or is the infobox longer than the article? Banedon (talk) 09:23, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
- Possibly, but the prose in the article is long enough. --Jayron32 12:09, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
- Support Article quality is sufficient. Per WP:LEAD that could (and should) be expanded a bit to give a bit more of a synopsis of the article. But the body is solid, well referenced, and extensive. --Jayron32 12:09, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
- Support Added a more grammatical altblurb. GoldenRing (talk) 12:53, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
- Support article is of very good quality, no issues here. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:27, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
- Posting. --Tone 13:28, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
Leila de Lima arrested
No consensus. Stephen 10:31, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Article: Leila de Lima (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Philippine government critic Leila de Lima is arrested on drug trafficking charges (Post)
News source(s):
Credits:
Article updatedNominator's comments: Leila de Lima is the most prominent government critic of Duterte's drug war. On the one hand, this is "just" an arrest - not a conviction. On the other, this is a powerful sign coming from the government that dissent re the drug war is not tolerated, and if she proceeds to mysteriously disappear, there would never be a more natural time to post this. As with most of my nominations I'm floating the idea to see if ITN prefers to wait for a more blurb-worthy event happening soon, or posting now and then amending the blurb as the inevitable nation-wide drama unfolds (or neither; the article is heavily tagged as of time of nomination). Banedon (talk) 06:03, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose It would be one thing if this was a well-established leader of a drug cartel, and they finally captured and arrested them. This is certainly not the case here, and as per BLPCRIME, the arrest is definitely not sufficient for ITN. --MASEM (t) 06:20, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
- A comment on that: I think for most people this story is less about Leila de Lima, but rather about the Philippine government. Leila herself for example is likely to prefer more, not less, publicity for her arrest. Banedon (talk) 06:26, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose not significant at all. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:55, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
- Neither a support or an oppose, but the Philippine government has jailed political opponents before. De Lima herself had previously pursued cases against then senators Juan Ponce Enrile, Jinggoy Estrada and Bong Revilla, and former president Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, among others, and had them jailed. Estrada and Revilla are still incarcerated, and if the plans are to be followed, De Lima's cell is to be adjacent to those two's. –HTD 08:27, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
- Update: Duterte fans, foes in mass Manila rallies Banedon (talk) 15:45, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose per Masem. --AmaryllisGardener 16:05, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
February 23
| Portal:Current events/2017 February 23
|
|
February 23, 2017 (2017-02-23) (Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Sports
RD: Alan Colmes
Article: Alan Colmes (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): "Fox News Channel's Alan Colmes Dies at Age 66". 23 Feb 2017. Retrieved 23 Feb 2017.
Credits:
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Misplaced Pages article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD. Brianga (talk) 14:37, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
Oppose for now. Much of the "career" section does not make it clear from which reliable sources the information on his various jobs has come from. If that were fixed, this could be posted. --Jayron32 15:22, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
- Change to support per recent improvements. Thanks to @Fuzheado: for doing the bulk of the referencing work. --Jayron32 12:11, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose. The saner half of Hannity & Colmes. As per Jayron, however, it needs to be brought up to par.--WaltCip (talk) 16:07, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
- Support Article is well referenced and good enough for a nice posting. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 05:19, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
- Support, one or two outstanding unsourced statements but they're not particularly contentious claims. Good enough to post I think. – Juliancolton | 16:18, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
- Support good to go. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:11, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
- Posted -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:56, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
Eating 800 grams of fruits and vegetables a day keeps the undertaker away
no consensus to post --Jayron32 15:21, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Articles: Vegetable (talk · history · tag) and Fruit (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Eating 800 grams of fruits and vegetables a day keeps the undertaker away (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:
Both articles need updating Count Iblis (talk) 06:39, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose assume this is a joke nomination. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:03, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
- Weak oppose - this is well known. If posted anyway, it should give the exact numbers ("eating 800 grams of fruits and vegetables a day increases life expectancy by ______ years"). Banedon (talk) 07:45, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
- Support, Forever Young - EugεnS¡m¡on 08:02, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
- Which updates to which articles are you in support of? The Rambling Man (talk) 08:12, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose As total nonsense. The expression 'An apple a day keeps the doctor away,' and variants thereof, goes back to the Siege of Harfleur, or thereabouts. O Fortuna! 08:24, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
- Support This is literally vital information and it's in the news. The story complies well with WP:MEDRS as the main source is a review of nearly 100 studies. We should link to 5 A Day as the main point is to double that number. Myself, my score is currently 1 as I just got up and have started with an orange. Andrew D. (talk) 08:26, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
- Another article with no update or relationship to this news story. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:28, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
- I have just updated the 5 A Day article and will continue to do more today. Andrew D. (talk) 08:45, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
- Then you'll need a new (and encyclopaedic) blurb to target that article. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:57, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
- Comment – I very much appreciate the humorous style of the blurb, but it simply has to give more information than this. This headline looks like downright nonsense, and would probably work well for a newspaper, but not for the style of news blurbs Misplaced Pages is known for. That, and I have a hard time imagining dietary news like this being blurb-worthy. ~Mable (chat) 09:12, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
- It's a report on common sense. The more fruit and veg you eat, the healthier you are likely to be. It's been known for millennia. This report simply confirms common sense but has the other side effects of increasing the stress on those families who can't afford to buy ten portions of fruit/veg a day. The report is a bit like saying "if you don't run across roads without looking, you will reduce your chances of being hit by a car". Common sense. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:16, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
- I don't entirely agree. I haven't read the sources, but I could definitely imagine that this kind of research could pressure governments and such things. Regardless, it's definitely not big news that this is the case. The news would be that such a report came out, and I can't really call that big news at all. ~Mable (chat) 09:32, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
- What don't you agree with? The Rambling Man (talk) 09:35, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose and WP:SNOW this joke nomination. --LukeSurl 09:18, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
- Comment Only managed 799 grams today. Guess that's the end of ol' Lugnuts. RIP. Lugnuts 11:24, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
- @Lugnuts: Yeah I raided your fruitbowl :p Rest In Peaches! ;) O Fortuna! 11:39, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
- Support Important news in the medical field, backed up by BBC article. Gfcvoice (talk) 11:25, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose Not sure whether this was seriously meant but health recommendations are generally only news in the country they are made, or possibly closely related countries. I don't know how much attention this is getting in the UK but we don't want a story every time a country repeats known advice or puts a new spin on it. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:11, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
- Support. Okay, I'll humor this. This is covered widely and is notable, and we don't get much of a chance to post health news on Misplaced Pages. WaltCip (talk) 12:47, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose We do not use popular press to support medical claims. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 13:24, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose - I'm happy to support especially important stories even if boring and especially entertaining stories even if trivial. This story is neither newsworthy nor particularly engaging. I'm not well-versed in the medical literature, and I recognize that the findings of this study may have some sort of significance that I'm not fully able to appreciate, but even if that's the case then it's not of broad enough interest to post IMO. Telling people that "if you eat healthy, you're more likely to be healthy" is likely to elicit this sort of response from most of our readers. – Juliancolton | 14:26, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
- Strong oppose It may be "news" but it is clearly not the type of news that ITN handles. If there was a case where, say, some newly chemical in an apple was found through recent published studies to be of great medical benefit, that might be something, but this is just yet a variation on how important fruits and vegatables are to a proper diet which has been known for decades. --MASEM (t) 15:14, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
February 22
| Portal:Current events/2017 February 22
|
|
February 22, 2017 (2017-02-22) (Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Science and technology
Sports
Operation Radd-ul-Fasaad
No consensus. Stephen 10:27, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Article: Operation Radd-ul-Fasaad (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: After a series of attacks by the terrorist group Jamaat-ul-Ahrar, the Pakistani Army launches Operation Radd-ul-Fasaad (Post)
News source(s): See article, e.g.
Credits:
Article updated Banedon (talk) 03:05, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose article too weak, looks like this should really be "ongoing" if its truly notable in any case. The Rambling Man (talk) 05:35, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
- Actually, I suggested that ongoing would be inappropriate because of the broad and vague goals of this operation that doesn't have a clear end or timeline to the end. Announcing the start of this operation as a regular ITNC would have seemed more appropriate to me. --MASEM (t) 14:58, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
RD: Ion Croitoru
Article: Ion Croitoru (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s):
Credits:
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Misplaced Pages article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.Nominator's comments: Professional wrestler for multiple organizations, including WWF, and notorious for multiple arrests for serious crimes GaryColemanFan (talk) 01:35, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
Earth-sized planets found orbiting nearby star
Article: TRAPPIST-1 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Astronomers announce the discovery of seven Earth-sized planets near TRAPPIST-1 that may harbor alien life. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Astronomers announce that the star TRAPPIST-1 hosts seven exoplanets, some orbiting in its habitable zone
News source(s): NYT Time Atlantic Quartz Guardian, more
Credits:
Ed 18:28, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
- Comment: three planets in this system were already known, and there's no indication whatsoever of life, so the blurb is misleading. I've added an alternative. Modest Genius 18:32, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
- Support news is kinda slow, and 7 Earth-sized planets, 3 of which in the habitable zone is a bit ridiculous. Solar System has only 4 and 3. Nergaal (talk) 18:56, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
- Support such a high number of earth-sized planets orbiting around the same star is extremely unusual.XavierGreen (talk) 19:57, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
- Support contingent on the fact that it's "ultra-cool". It's all over my news feeds, and it's of genuine interest to our readers. Article isn't great, but it'll do. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:23, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
Article: Executive Order 13769 (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item removal (Post) Smurrayinchester 08:27, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
The order is suspended, has been for two weeks, and courts refused to lift the suspension. The government is drafting a new order, but that hasn't arrived yet. There are no developments and this story is now stale. Smurrayinchester 08:27, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks for putting up the template - I didn't realize there was a "remove" option. Smurrayinchester 08:41, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
RD: Kenneth Arrow
Older than oldest RD on main page. --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:06, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Article: Kenneth Arrow (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NY Times
Credits:
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Misplaced Pages article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.Nominator's comments: Unfortunately I can't find any news sources yet covering this, but news of his passing is percolating among economists. Mélencron (talk) 01:31, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
- Please name, I'll try to fix. Ken Arrow was one of the most influential social scientists of the 20th century. It would be a shame if he's not on RD. --bender235 (talk) 15:35, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
- Take the "Endogenous-growth theory" section for example. Not one ref. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:17, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
- Added some. --bender235 (talk) 02:17, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
- It's often a problem that when people say 'for example' only that specific case gets fixed. Have a look at the sentences and paragraphs throughout the article that make claims and yet lack a citation. That's what needs fixing. Stephen 02:39, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
References
Nominators often include links to external websites and other references in discussions on this page. It is usually best to provide such links using the inline URL syntax rather than using <ref></ref> tags, because that keeps all the relevant information in the same place as the nomination without having to jump to this section, and facilitates the archiving process.
For the times when <ref></ref> tags are being used, here are their contents:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In the news toolbox
David Lynch
