Wikipedia talk:In the news/Archive 10

message: After I put :Image:House large seal.gif on the front page per Minh's suggestion, Centrx changed it to :Image:TrialSaddam.jpg.  While I recognize the value of photographs over symbols, I'm not sure that putting an image of Saddam Hussein next to the news of the U.S. election results is wise.  It could give the appearance that Wikipedia is connecting the two in some way — and given the importance of the Iraq war in the election, I think many readers may be hypersensitive to this.  I won't revert the change myself, though. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 07:59, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's also a bit out of date; Emomali Rahmonov would've been a better photograph choice. Alternatively, if you're looking for something a bit more interesting than a logo, there's this nice rainbow-colored map of the United States. – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 08:10, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

text: The map is a good option, but it is still pretty generic. Pictures of flags and seals should not be used at all. One would never find them in an article on the news topic, nor in any newspaper. They are just junk filler. I mistakenly used the older image, of Saddam. I have replaced it with the Rahmanov image. —Centrx→talk • 08:23, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What about using :Image:Nancy_Pelosi_official_portrait.jpg?  It's public domain, and as the Democratic Minority Leader in the House and probable next Speaker, she's a reasonable representative of the Democratic House win. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 08:43, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ooh. A female speaker. How many times has that happened before? Carcharoth 10:40, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've switched out the image.  Carcharoth, 0. - BanyanTree 13:11, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Much appreciated. Ms. Pelosi probably makes most people afraid to visit the home page. -Mientkiewicz5508 07:54, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Image

message: What's with this language in the article on the US elections? Is anyone doubting that the Democrats have taken over the house? (Of course they haven't taken control yet; they'll have to wait until January.) The Senate elections are a little more doubtful, but there's no question about the house. Theshibboleth 11:51, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've tweaked the language to show that the Dems have won the HoR while the Senate is still to close to speculate one way or the other. Honestly, I doubt that the VA election will be settled for a few days.  youngamerican (ahoy hoy) 12:56, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Appears to have taken control of"? 

message: Vandals can play on Main Page if the image is not protected. --64.229.176.235 19:15, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: They can indeed.  I've left a relevant note. - BanyanTree 22:42, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, BanyanTree. --64.229.178.41 12:44, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  please protect whatever picture is placed on ITN 

message: The update on this article consists of just over 1 line of text, from what I can see. Can I ask- why is it up on the main page? Badgerpatrol 20:37, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Where on WP:ITNMP do you get the impression that "update" means a certain number of lines? - BanyanTree 22:39, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If you see above, under the #Science report section, you'll see people arguing that a few lines in an article is not enough. One person was arguing that a full article on the subject is normally necessary. Resignation of Rumsfeld seems to be a redlink. My opinion is that the fisheries report was a far more important event.-gadfium 23:20, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would argue in the opposite direction.  The "more content" argument seems to me to be a case for news articles, not updated encyclopedia articles.  The only type of articles that make regular appearances on ITN and are specifically about the news event itself are elections, tropical storms and plane/train crashes, which makes for a very monotonous ITN.  For example, I would argue that a short blurb in an article Aviation in Brazil giving context and wider repercussions is more 'encyclopedic'  than the recent article Gol Transportes Aéreos Flight 1907.  There are exceptions, such as Incidents during the Hajj, which was a stub on a specific incident that people kept moving to more general titles and expanding until it was a fine encyclopedia article, but most super-specific current events articles lose their utility very quickly after they are created.  - BanyanTree 00:38, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am inclined to agree in many ways. But as the above quoted discussion (and many others - links can be provided if required) details, there is huge inconsistency in terms of enforcing the ITN guidelines. This leads to confusion and frustration. I am not doubting the importance of this event, but international notability (and this is obviously internationally notable) is only one criterion. Let me make clear however that I do support including this item on ITN, but it is somewhat galling to see ITN items refused because of "insufficient updates" and the like and then see this go straight on a few minutes after the event. It creates a massive gulf between admins (who have the opportunity to put up whatever items they want, regardless of the rules if necessary, and often do so) and editors, who do not, and who see good-faith suggestions refused on the basis that they do not meet the oft-ignored criteria. Badgerpatrol 00:51, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I perceive the same problem, but not the same solution.  The Donald Rumsfeld article presently contains a sufficient update, but I see that it certainly didn't when the entry was added.  At that point, the article contained precisely one non-proofread sentence on the subject of Rumsfeld's actual resignation: "On November 8th, 2006, Rumsfeld resigned from his postition [sic] as Defense Secretary."  This conveyed absolutely no information not included in the ITN blurb itself, thereby defeating the purpose of ITN (to direct readers to articles that have been written or substantially updated to reflect a news story).  If the article only repeats the information contained within the ITN entry, what's the point of linking to it?  Readers rightfully expect to find greater depth, and we let them down.  We should have waited until the article update reached a reasonable size (instead of rushing to report breaking news, which isn't Wikipedia's intended function).  —David Levy 15:34, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

text: The difference between these two situations is that much more can be written about Rumsfeld's resignation on his page than can be written about a Science report can on fishery. "Fishery" is a broad topic, and too much focus on the report would skew the article to a tangent. In contrast, Rumsfeld's resignation is a key part of his article and needs as much work as we can give it. It isn't about how much has been added to the article so much as how much could be added, and how directly relevant the news story is to the article to be updated. Owen 13:09, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Your position regarding the function that ITN should serve is entirely reasonable.  It does not, however, reflect the established criteria.  Perhaps you should formally propose such reform. —David Levy 19:50, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the above debate really crystallises the problem- which simply put, is that everyone has a different idea about what ITN is and what should and shouldn't go in there. The back and forth reversions as to who had or hadn't won control of the US Congress constituted another example- revisions were being made to the template based on projections of a final result that hadn't actually been announced, seemingly oblivious to the idea that ITN should detail updates made to articles. Surely it is not appropriate to update ITN and then update the linked article!? This scenario, or at least very similar, has been occurring recently. I agree with Banyan above- that idea pretty much encapsulates how I at least see ITN and what its value is- but as David correctly points out, that isn't really how the system currently works. Badgerpatrol 01:20, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I never realized that this section was once called "Behind the news". I think part of the problem is that "In the news" doesn't make it clear enough that the focus is context, not the headlines themselves. At this point, there's probably a lot of attachment to the current title, but I think something like "Behind the headlines" is more appropriate if our current events articles aren't going to be a wire service of some sort. – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 04:12, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, that issue has been discussed before, e.g. here. Badgerpatrol 04:18, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

text: David, could you tell me where you think the criteria do not support my position?  As the drafter of the most recent criterion, on deaths, I feel that I have a pretty good grasp on the parameters. - BanyanTree 14:47, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You stated that we needn't "wait until items are updated."  According to the criteria, "the article must be updated to reflect the new information."  —David Levy 16:44, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, so I did.  That was badly stated on my part.  I meant that I consider a one-line update perfectly acceptable as an "update" under the criteria, but that the sort of extensive update integrated into an article that some people seem to feel is required under the criteria normally takes days, if it happens at all. - BanyanTree 04:20, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Rumsfeld update

message: It has already been determined.  EVERY single major news source has announced that the Democratic Party has won control of the Senate.  It should be changed back to what it previously stated as somebody has edited it to introduce their personal POV.  There is no reason Wikipedia should report any differently than the AP, Reuters, CNN, Fox News, Yahoo, MSNBC, etc.  --musicpvm 09:08, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I suppose it depends on whether we're counting the Virginia race yet (which will not be decided — officially — for quite some time) and the VP tie-breaking vote. I don't really know the answer to that. Grandmasterka 09:13, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

text: AP has called it for the Democrats. We should probably at least state that it is likely that they'll control the Senate. Haukur 09:18, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Democrats have won Virginia, and thus control of the Senate. I've updated the template to reflect this. ~MDD4696 18:21, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Only AP have called it for the Democrats, CNN et. al. are reporting that AP called it, but haven't called themselves. I think saying it went to the Democrats and then later having to reverse is far worse than simply waiting for the official results. Mikker (...) 19:19, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Allen has a press conference in about 30 minutes where he is expected to concede.   It's not a long wait. - BanyanTree 19:28, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Alright, Allen has conceded. I'm happy. Mikker (...) 20:25, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Senate is not yet to be determined 

message: I don't know if this is ITN worthy...I'll let you all decide. Considering pretty much every other race is accounted for, you should know that AP has reported that Christine Jennings, the narrow loser in Florida's District 13, is pursuing a recount, amid voter machine glitches in Sarasota County, Florida. I figured it would be newsworthy since Florida has become notorious for voting machine errors. Mike H. I did "That's hot" first! 19:37, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Doubt it's of global interest. Sure, lots of national (US) attention will be focused there; but a recount in one district (out of what? four hundred and something?) is hardly important enough for ITN IMO. Mikker (...) 19:48, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

text: Given the fact that the Democrats captured control of the House of Representatives by a significant margin, the race's outcome will have no major nationwide (or international) impact.  —David Levy 19:50, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Considering it's Florida, and it was Katherine Harris's old seat, it will have national impact, but maybe not international. In any case, I put it on Portal:Current events. Mike H. I did "That's hot" first! 19:52, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The story is of some national interest, but it will have no major impact on the U.S. political landscape.  Therefore, it isn't of major international interest or importance.  —David Levy 20:04, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting, surely, but not of international importance. While the election itself and the Rumsfeld resignation made headlines around the world, I seriously doubt many other people in this hemisphere would have heard of either Jennings, Buchanan or the 13th district. Rebecca 01:37, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope, not in France anyway. If it had had the result of the whole election in the balance, it would have been different, but as it is it's of no international interest.--SidiLemine 13:27, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Another recount in Florida

message: Is putting the link to Kyrgyzstan in bold really necessary? I think just having the updated Constitution page in bold (seeing as that's the main updated article) would suffice. Also, it would be for consistency's sake, as all the other bullet points have just one bolded article.
Mientkiewicz5508 21:26, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: 'twas fixed. Thanks.
Mientkiewicz5508 21:46, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Kyrgyzstan

message: If someone could find a freely licensed image of Raviraj then we could replace the Rumsfeld picture which is getting stale. I personally think it would be appropriate and acceptable for use to use a fair use one ITN but I know this is frowned upon so it would be much better if we could find one without such issues Nil Einne 05:07, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I couldn't find a free image (and we should avoid using fair-use images). The reason photos of USAmerican politicians tend to be so easy to find is because of the fact that images produced by the U.S. federal government are released into the public domain. Unfortunately, I do not think Sri Lanka has something similar to that. However, I do agree that Donald Rumsfeld is starting to move down the ITN box. Although portraits tend to be more informative than flags, perhaps the flag of Sri Lanka could go in the ITN section. -- tariqabjotu 06:00, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I've asked the creator of this image if s/he could submit a SVG or alternatively a higher res PNG if this isn't possible. Nil Einne 07:52, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

text: The Main Page would look unbalanced without an image in ITN, since all the other sections have images. We've had some featured articles appear on the front page without an image before, and an image was quickly added, because it just looks so sad with plain text. – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 09:25, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How about this map ? If that's too large I tried to crop it more . Alternatively I could shrink it some more altho it starts to look a bit crap since the border isn't well defined. Or perhaps someone else thinks they know how to shrink it, I've uploaded the image after I'd removed all the other cities. :Image:Sri Lanka - Colombo (original size).png Nil Einne 14:13, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It looks like a non-descript blob with a dot on it that has the name of the city already mentioned in the article. I replaced the Rumsfeld image with an image of Robert Gates; everyone knows what Rumsfeld looks like, no one knows what Gates looks like, that is content. —Centrx→talk • 04:15, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It is intended to show where Colombo is in Sri Lanka. Are you telling me you think most readers would be able to show where Colombo is in Sri Lanka? I suspect not... It is an interesting question whether this actually adds much since most readers might not know what Sri Lanka looks like either. Nil Einne 07:11, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Most readers won't even know where Sri Lanka is, so it's moot. When maps like this are used in news sources, it is usually as a cut-out of a larger recognizable region, in this case the Indian subcontinent. Putting this image in as it is will look very wierd. Also, it's done only if it has some relevance to the news piece, not simply because it happened there, so these maps are used for the Taiwan Strait as the distance and properties of the geographical region are specifically relevant to a news story on China threatening the island, etc., or in this case you might have a map of the streets and building near the assassination, if it was an open-air assassination; maps like this were often shown during the invasion of Baghdad. A map just to have a map, though, is pointless; the dimensions of the island and the geographical location of the city are irrelevant to the news. —Centrx→talk • 08:17, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nadarajah Raviraj 

message: I just read on cnn.com that South Africa has legalized gay marriage in a 230-41 parliamentary vote. Does that seem notable enough for inclusion? I assume the related article would be Same-sex marriage in South Africa. RyanGerbil10(Упражнение В!) 15:36, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I personally don't think so, but you may want to suggest a headline on Wikipedia:In the news section on the Main Page/Candidates and consult with other admins who edit ITN. -- PFHLai 18:18, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The article looks like it had a big recent update (all of November section), and the rest of the article is directly related, so in that respect it might be good, and we are starving for new news; although, the article does not have Wikipedia layout, has been edited only by a few people, mostly IPs, and may not have reliable sourcing... —Centrx→talk • 18:56, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've improved the article's layout and references, and put it up as a candidate.  As an admin, I could put it up myself, but since there's some debate about whether it's notable enough I figured I'd put it out for discussion there first. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 19:59, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Now all we need is a picture of some gay people getting married in South Africa. —Centrx→talk • 20:21, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, since the point is that they haven't been able to, that might be tough. ;)  Do articles linked from the front page require images? —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 20:33, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, this was more of an obscure pseudo-joke following from the discussions about images above. —Centrx→talk • 20:35, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: South Africa

message: Wouldn't it be better to bold the link to the Congo Election page rather than the winner? I'm not sure which of the two articles is more updated/more detailed, but I would imagine the election page itself would be.
Mientkiewicz5508 01:37, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Congo Elections

message: Please add the Ohio State Michigan game to the ITN section. One of the most anticipated games of the decade, and one of the most exciting games of the year that had national title implications, it deserves to be on here.
:So is this of international significance? --Howard the Duck 08:52, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Considering how rabidly Ohio and Michigan hate each other, I would not be surprised if one seceded from the union to go to war with the other, making it an international issue. ;) --Golbez 23:16, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, as soon as the Toledo War is being re-fought we can consider this. :-) (Go Bucks!) Awolf002 23:19, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Ohio State Michigan

message: I was going to add Roger Federer winning the 2006 Tennis Masters Cup but wasn't sure if people agreed that it's notable enough. Anyone object? jaco♫plane 15:15, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I went ahead and added it in for now. jaco♫plane 15:19, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would stick to the 4 majors for tennis.  youngamerican (ahoy hoy) 15:24, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Tennis Masters Cup is not that notable in comparison to the Grand Slam tournaments. Nishkid64 00:51, 20 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  2006 Tennis Masters Cup ? 

message: Please could someone change this 'Lebanese (coat of arms pictured) Minister of Industry Pierre Amine Gemayel is assassinated in Beirut.' to this 'Lebanese  Minister of Industry Pierre Amine Gemayel is assassinated in Beirut (coat of arms pictured). as it seems better. London UK  (talk) 17:43, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: But is it Beirut's coat of arms? – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 19:09, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Change 

message: The italicized text "(pictured: leader Jan Peter Balkenende)" is a bit awkward. Why not use this instead:
:General elections in the Netherlands result in a large gain for the Socialist Party. The Christian democratic CDA led by Jan Peter Balkenende (pictured) remains the largest party, but no two parties can form a cabinet with a majority in parliament.
 – Minh Nguyễn (talk, contribs) 18:21, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Netherlands general elections 

message: The headline is wrong, it is not a suspected thallium poisoning, this has pretty much been ruled out.  Anyone who has been following the news knows that thallium was ruled out a few days ago. - Hahnchen 23:49, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Alexander Litvinenko]] death NOT [[thallium]] poisoning 

message: Why was the previous better image of Jan Peter Balkenende removed? NauticaShades 14:28, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Because he looked like a dork in it. Just kidding...I think it was removed because the newer image was on Commons, while the old one wasn't (judging from the edit summaries). Nishkid64 22:54, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, that's right. It's always good to feature the work of fellow Wikipedians and other Wikimedia contributers on MainPage. Another reason was that JPB's nostrils look too big and (IMO) ungraceful in that photo from Flickr. I wouldn't call it a "better image". --PFHLai 18:34, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Haha, so I was right. Seriously, I immediately thought hardcore Christian fundamentalist when I saw that picture. It was scary. :( Nishkid64 22:35, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture 

message: Why was the news that he had accepted full responsability as well removed from the ITN as well as his page?
Mientkiewicz5508 20:54, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I originally added that since it has international significance. Apparently, Centrx removed it because the article did not have a big updated section on the newsworthy item. Some users vandalized the page and removed loads of stuff. Nishkid64 22:34, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Augusto Pinochet

message: How long is this guys face going to stay on the main page? Nothing personal against Jan, but I am sick of seeing the same exact picture on the main page every time I log in. It seems like it has been at least 3 or 4 days. Thanks
Skeeter08865 22:34, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Jan Peter Balkenende

message: Serbia today became its member. I think this is pretty much a potential candidate for a news. --PaxEquilibrium 22:19, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: An updated article is necessary. —Centrx→talk • 22:50, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Partnership for Peace