This page uses content from Wikipedia and is licensed under CC BY-SA.

Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates

This page provides a forum for editors to suggest items for inclusion in Template:In the news (ITN), a protected Main Page template, as well as the forum for discussion of candidates. This is not the page to report errors in the ITN section on the Main Page—please go to the appropriate section at WP:ERRORS.

This candidates page is integrated with the daily pages of Portal:Current events. Under each daily section header below is the transcluded Portal:Current events items for that day (with a light green header). Each day's portal page is followed by a subsection for suggestions and discussion.

Salvator Mundi, painted around 1500
Salvator Mundi

How to nominate an item

In order to suggest a candidate:

  • Update an article to be linked to from the blurb to include the recent developments, or find an article that has already been updated.
  • Find the correct section below for the date of the event (not the date nominated) in UTC.
    • Do not add sections for new dates. These are automatically generated (at midnight UTC) by a bot; creating them manually breaks this process. Remember, we use UTC dates.
  • Nominate the blurb for ITN inclusion under the "Suggestions" subheading for the date, emboldening the link in the blurb to the updated article. Use a level 4 header (====) when doing so.
    • Preferably use the template {{ITN candidate}} to nominate the article related to the event in the news. Make sure that you include a reference from a verifiable, reliable secondary source. Press releases are not acceptable. The suggested blurb should be written in simple present tense.
    • Adding an explanation why the event should be posted greatly increases the odds of posting.
  • Please consider alerting editors to the nomination by adding the template {{ITN note}} to the corresponding article's talk page.

Purge this page to update the cache

There are criteria which guide the decision on whether or not to put a particular item on In the news, based largely on the extensiveness of the updated content and the perceived significance of the recent developments. These are listed at WP:ITN.

Submissions that do not follow the guidelines at Wikipedia:In the news will not be placed onto the live template.

Headers

  • Items that have been posted or pulled from the main page are generally marked with [Posted] or [Pulled] in the item's subject so it is clear they are no longer active.
  • Items can also be marked as [Ready] when the article is both updated and there seems to be a consensus to post. The posting admin, however, should always judge the update and the consensus to post themselves. If you find an entry that you don't feel is ready to post is marked [Ready], you should remove the header.

Voicing an opinion on an item

  • Format your comment to contain "support" or "oppose", and include a rationale for your choice. In particular, address the notability of the event, the quality of the article, and whether it has been updated.
  • Some jargon: RD refers to "recent deaths", a subsection of the news box which lists only the names of the recent notable deceased. Blurb refers to the full sentences that occupy most of the news box. Most eligible deaths will be listed in the recent deaths section of the ITN template. However, some deaths may be given a full listing if there is sufficient consensus to do so.
  • The blurb of a promoted ITN item may be modified to complement the existing items on the main page.

Please do not...

  • ... add simple "support!" or "oppose!" votes without including your reasons. Similarly, curt replies such as "who?", "meh", or "duh!" are usually not helpful. Instead, explain the reasons why you think the item meets or does not meet the ITN inclusion criteria so a consensus can be reached.
  • ... 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.
  • ... accuse other editors of supporting, opposing or nominating due to a personal bias (such as ethnocentrism). Conflicts of interest are not handled at ITN.
  • ... comment on a story without first reading the relevant article(s).
  • ... oppose a WP:ITN/R item here because you disagree with current WP:ITN/R criteria (these can be discussed at the relevant Talk Page)


Suggestions

November 19

Portal:Current events/2017 November 19
Armed conflicts and attacks
  • A policeman in the French city of Sarcelles kills three people following a breakup with his girlfriend, and then kills himself. (BBC)
Disasters and accidents
  • At least 15 people are killed in a human stampede over food in the village of Sidi Boualem, Morocco. (BBC)
Politics and elections

[Closed] RD David Cassidy

We normally reserve RD nominations for people who are actually dead. Reopen if/when the organ failure is fatal. Stormy clouds (talk) 18:37, 19 November 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: David Cassidy (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
Nominator and updater: Mjroots (talk • give credit)

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Breaking news, article needs further updating and other work. Mjroots (talk) 17:58, 19 November 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.

November 18

Portal:Current events/2017 November 18
Arts and culture
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Politics and elections

RD: Azzedine Alaïa

Article: Azzedine Alaïa (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): "Azzedine Alaïa: Popular Tunisian couturier dies aged 77". BBC News. November 18, 2017. Retrieved November 19, 2017. ; Pithers, Ellie (November 18, 2017). "Fashion World Mourns The Death Of Azzedine Alaïa". Vogue. Retrieved November 19, 2017. 
Nominator: Zigzig20s (talk • give credit)

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Tunisian fashion designer. There is unreferenced content at present--let's try to fix it together! Zigzig20s (talk) 20:38, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

RD: Naim Süleymanoğlu

Article: Naim Süleymanoğlu (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): [1]
Nominator: Sa.vakilian (talk • give credit)

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: former Olympic athlete --Seyyed(t-c) 07:01, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

  • There are a couple of paragraphs and two personal records that need extra citations, otherwise a good article. --Tone 13:07, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose it's not close yet. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:18, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

RD: Youssouf Ouédraogo

Article: Youssouf Ouédraogo (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): Voa Afrique
Nominator: PootisHeavy (talk • give credit)

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Former prime minister of Burkina Faso --PootisHeavy (talk) 21:49, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

  • Oppose for now. Referencing issues and the article needs some serious copy editing. It appears that parts of his political biography are repeated verbatim in two different sections. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:23, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Support Article is now well referenced. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 21:09, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose no details of his death. Pawnkingthree (talk) 21:19, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

RD: Malcolm Young [Attention Needed]

Article: Malcolm Young (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): Rolling Stone
Nominator: Compy90 (talk • give credit)

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Co-founder and guitarist of AC/DC – Compy90 (talk) 10:05, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

  • Oppose for now. Poor referencing and two orange tags. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:59, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose per above. Will reconsider if quality improves. -A lad insane (Channel 2) 16:01, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose per the above, but no issue if the article is improved. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 19:05, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose until quality improves. Capitalistroadster (talk) 19:09, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Copy Edit much of the article has to be changed to simple past or pluperfect tenses, it's simply not ready, but an obvious shoe-in once problems are addressed. μηδείς (talk) 19:32, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment So we're clear, "Lil Peep" got this same scrutiny, but Malcolm Young is coming up short, right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.40.58.47 (talk) 04:37, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Commented Out I have commented out a huge section of text that apparently details every piece of equipment Young ever used. The section was not only unreffed by morbidly obese. This can probably be posted now after a quick review for style and tense, but is past my bedtime. μηδείς (talk) 05:41, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Check for Copy I removed a lot of the problematic stuff by outcommenting, but the article should be checked by someone familiar with the subject (I know nothing about AC/DC) for accuracy and proper tense and grammar, then mark it ready here so it can get posted ASAP. μηδείς (talk) 21:07, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

[Closed] Keystone Pipeline oil spill

Consensus against posting. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 03:58, 19 November 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: Keystone Pipeline (talk, history)
Blurb: ​A leak in the Keystone Pipeline spills 210,000 gallons of oil in South Dakota
News source(s): CBS News, Washington Post, AP
Nominator: 109.154.90.243 (talk • give credit)

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Environmental disaster in very controversial project 109.154.90.243 (talk) 09:55, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Note. This leak is in the existing pipeline and not its controversial relative, the proposed Keystone XL. 331dot (talk) 13:42, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose this doesn't appear to be getting all that much attention. Also the article gives only a few sentences to the incident. Not enough there to put this on the main page. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:04, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose – for now at least. Coverage indicates it's unlikely to have much effect on the issue. Sca (talk) 18:11, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Weak Support this popped up at the top of my news feed yesterday. The article is pretty good, but the coverage of the incident is minimal. Not much more to say than "it happened, cleaning up now" --CosmicAdventure (talk) 18:31, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Weak Oppose the article has no issues, but the coverage on major news networks in the U.S. is notably minimal. On the news sources that it does get coverage on, it is usually not the top news story. Hornetzilla78 (talk) 19:00, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose this is 795 cubic meters, less than 1/3 the volume of an olympic pool, and such small spills are an unfortunate concomitant of construction. Presumably there will be a fine and cleanup and life will go on as normal. μηδείς (talk) 19:19, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose. Compared with something like Exxon Valdez this is quite tiny - that lost 10.8 million US gallons. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:23, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose While a notable spill, its nowhere close to a major environmental disaster. --MASEM (t) 02:30, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose while 210,000 gallons is a large number in terms of gallons spilled, it is relatively small compared to other notable spills (e.g. the one mentioned above). Kirliator (talk) 03:53, 19 November 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.

November 17

Portal:Current events/2017 November 17
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Disasters and accidents
Politics and elections

San Juan submarine

Article: ARA San Juan (talk, history)
Blurb: ​Argentinian submarine ARA San Juan goes missing in the South Atlantic, with 44 crew aboard.
News source(s): ABC, BBC, Reuters
Nominator: Brandmeister (talk • give credit)

Article updated

Nominator's comments: The emergency was formally upgraded to a "search and rescue" yesterday local time, so could be the right time for this. Brandmeistertalk 09:13, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

  • Wait until they believe that something worse happened to the sub than merely a loss of communications, which is the official position at the moment. 331dot (talk) 09:22, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Tentative support - should be posted once declared a loss. Mjroots (talk) 13:34, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Wait – Per 331. Premature until fate known. Sca (talk) 13:41, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Wait per above. I spent a long time in the Navy and if a ship goes missing for this length of time it's all but certain something bad has happened. But until we know more there just isn't enough to post. -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:01, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Wait until fate is revealed, will likely support the nomination if so. Hornetzilla78 (talk) 19:02, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

[Posted] RD: Rikard Wolff

Article: Rikard Wolff (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): [2],[3], [4]
Nominator: BabbaQ (talk • give credit)

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

  • Weak Support The filmography is mostly unreferenced, but otherwise the article looks OK. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:17, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
    I have referenced the section now. Can add more sources if needed.--BabbaQ (talk) 16:29, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
  • General question: I have never seen a ref on a header before, but there's one on the discography section in this article. Shouldn't there be some other format? μηδείς (talk) 17:44, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
    You are right. I have changed the format.--BabbaQ (talk) 18:06, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Support (I still wonder if there is a more economical way to do that with a template?) μηδείς (talk) 19:21, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Support good to go. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:20, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Posted -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:13, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Tongan general election

Article: Tongan general election, 2017 (talk, history)
Blurb: ​In the Tongan general election, the Democratic Party of the Friendly Islands, led by Prime Minister ʻAkilisi Pōhiva wins a majority.
News source(s): Matangi Tonga
Nominator: EternalNomad (talk • give credit)

Nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, meaning that the recurrence of the event is generally considered important enough to post on WP:ITN subject to the quality of the article and the update to it.

Nominator's comments: Article may need expansion but is updated and well-sourced. EternalNomad (talk) 18:01, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

  • Question. Is this news anywhere other than Tonga? Even ITNR nominations must be shown to be in the news. 331dot (talk) 09:24, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
Yes.[5] [6] Neljack (talk) 09:54, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
@Neljack: Thanks for that. 331dot (talk) 09:56, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
Here.BabbaQ (talk) 14:49, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Article looks a bit short right now. Add a bit of prose and I'd support it. ~Mable (chat) 16:13, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose this was a snap election held as a political manoeuvre, not a regular election, and the party in power retained the status quo. μηδείς (talk) 17:46, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
It's still a general election, just like the last UK one, which was also held for political reasons. If you want to exempt such elections from ITNR, I await your proposal. Until then, this still merits posting. 331dot (talk) 20:39, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Support. General elections for any country should be ITN/R. As for it being a snap poll, they are quite common in countries without fixed terms. In the past year, we have had snap polls in the UK and Japan both of which have been covered. Capitalistroadster (talk) 19:12, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
@Capitalistroadster: General elections are ITNR for all sovereign states. 331dot (talk) 20:39, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
  • It's not a huge deal to me one-way or the other, but this was not a snap election chosen to gauge support for a new policy, but in effect a vote-of-no-confidence which the opposition lost. I could see posting this if it weren't a pro-forma affirmation of the status quo. μηδείς (talk) 19:25, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
The real news behind this would-be ITNR entry is a people's re-election, or affirmation, as you say, of a (Prime) Minister and other Assemblymen dismissed by the King for being a threat to the Kingship, in a recall election initiated by the same King. Bagoto (talk) 08:22, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Weak Support article is bare minimum. If the PM was trying to claim powers, then a background section ought be added. Elections are ITN/R so we don't end up in endless bickering about whose elections are important. Hurts nothing to post this. --CosmicAdventure (talk) 13:23, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

November 16

Portal:Current events/2017 November 16
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Law and crime
Politics and elections

Cambodia National Rescue Party

Articles: Cambodia National Rescue Party (talk, history) and Kem Sokha (talk, history)
Blurb: ​The Cambodia National Rescue Party led by Kem Sokha is disolved by the Cambodian Supreme Court.
News source(s): (BBC)
Nominator: Shhhhwwww!! (talk • give credit)

 Shhhhwwww!! (talk) 18:12, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

  • Oppose Article has some organization issues, WP:LEAD and WP:SS recommends that an article's lead should summarize while the body should elaborate; and this article seems to turn that upside down; most of the good information is only in the lead, and not expanded on in the body at all. Still, the information is all there, it's well referenced, and this is being covered by news sources. Secondly, referencing in the article outside of the specific recent news is spotty and not well developed, many sections have either no sources, or have an unclear relationship between the sources and the text. It would need some work to be main-page ready. It's not awful, but someone who is knowledgeable about the subject has some work to do.--Jayron32 19:25, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose, anti-democratic moves are common in undeveloped nations. Abductive (reasoning) 06:27, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Support in principle: I think this deserves in principle to be in ITN per WP:BIAS and WP:WORLDWIDE. This is a very important development for Cambodian democracy, far more important than 5 Australian Parliamentarians losing their seats because of dual nationality which we posted recently. And anti-democratic moves may be common in underdeveloped nations, but then elections are common in Western Nations and we still automatically report on most of them (subject only to quality) per ITNR. Similarly terrorist outrages are common throughout the world, but we still routinely post them at ITN. And so on. Put another way, if the main opposition party were outlawed in a Western nation we would almost certainly deem it notable enough to post, so claiming it should be ignored because it's not a Western nation seems like a classic instance of systemic bias. (And incidentally I'm not sure that there's anything particularly common about outlawing the main opposition party in 3rd world countries - I strongly suspect that it's actually a lot rarer than most of the elections and terrorist outrages that we routinely post). I'm not sure about whether the articles meet our quality standards, though they seem surprisingly good relative to most of our articles on such 3rd world topics, and I'm a bit concerned that demanding the same standards for such articles as for articles on, say, British or American politics, is itself a form of systemic bias.Tlhslobus (talk) 07:55, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose. I oppose this primarily because it doesn't seem to be a big news story, but I agree with Abductive that this is not uncommon. A western democracy outlawing a political party would indeed be posted, not due to bias, but because it is very unusual(and highly illegal). A dictator or oppressive government silencing opposition to their rule is hardly unique or unusual. Elections worldwide are able to be posted, not just those of western countries(even elections widely believed to be rigged or unfair in other countries are often nominated and posted), because the makeup of governments are often a worldwide and national concern. 331dot (talk) 10:22, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment: Anyone who's been following the news from this part of the world will recognise this as the largest political development in Cambodia of the past few years. Hun Sen's crackdown on the opposition has been ongoing for several months. The court decision was preceded by the forced closure of a major newspaper and an amendment to the party law anticipating the dissolution. All this really deserves a separate article to itself, along the lines of 2015–2017 Cambodian political crackdown. That we have only a woefully inadequate article on the party to base the ITN item upon reflects precisely on Wikipedia's systemic bias problem. --Paul_012 (talk) 12:47, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
    PS Alternatively, it could be incorporated into Cambodian general election, 2018, which already briefly covers the series of events. --Paul_012 (talk) 14:42, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose – Though I would support based on the impact of the news, I simply don't believe the article is of sufficient quality. It has no prose outside of its lead section, and consists almost entirely out of lists. If the article were improved, I would definitely change my !vote. ~Mable (chat) 13:47, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Support on notability, oppose on quality I think the dissolution of a major party in any country is ITN-worthy, even in dictatorships or repressive regimes. (The only "major" party of North Korea is the Workers Party itself, and a dissolution of the party would undoubtedly be the #1 headline worldwide.) In this case the dissolution of the party is a major development in the crackdown of opposition. EternalNomad (talk) 17:39, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Question: Is it time to close this per WP:SNOW? While I supported it 'in principle', there has been no unqualified support by anybody, due partly to inadequate quality which seems very unlikely to be fixed (and there has been no support for my tentative suggestion that we should perhaps consider lowering our standards for such 3rd world topics to avoid systemic bias). And there is also quite a lot of opposition on notability grounds too, so that even in the unlikely event of quality issues being overcome there would seemingly still be no consensus for posting. Tlhslobus (talk) 08:04, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
  • What's the Target Article? I can't even judge this as nominated, although am a possible support vote, having seen coverage of this in admittedly unintersted-in-Cambodia-in-general American press. μηδείς (talk) 19:28, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
    The two target articles are clearly and explicitly noted in the template, "Cambodia National Rescue Party" and "Kem Sokha". The Rambling Man (talk) 20:22, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
Oh, I guess that's why they are both bolded. Do you also write reading glass prescriptions? μηδείς (talk) 22:34, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
No, I just stick to reading the template. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:37, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

November 15

Portal:Current events/2017 November 15
Arts and culture
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Science and technology

[Posted] RD: Lil Peep

Article: Lil Peep (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): The Guardian
Nominator: Amakuru (talk • give credit)

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

  • Support Article quality is sufficient for main page. --Jayron32 12:03, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Support Just tried to clean-up the death section, which contained unsourced and poorly-sourced speculation. AusLondonder (talk) 13:50, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
  • The discography section needs a source somewhere, otherwise it looks ok. --Tone 18:19, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Support Article has the sourcing good enough for posting. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 18:30, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Lean support. Only quibble is the sourcing of the discography. Capitalistroadster (talk) 21:03, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment There are a couple cites needed. I've added tags. -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:05, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Copy edit needed I corrected two present-tense problems, then saw the awkward "in his time alive". The article needs clean up, but I am not the one for it. μηδείς (talk) 00:59, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Ready as of this diff, I have commented out discography not already reffed in text, as well as comment on relation with mother, checked and did very minor copy editting and removed ref tags. Is ready to go. μηδείς (talk) 21:19, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Posting. Alex Shih (talk) 21:39, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

[Posted] Sale of Salvator mundi

Proposed image
Article: Salvator Mundi (Leonardo) (talk, history)
Blurb: Salvator Mundi (pictured), attributed to Leonardo da Vinci, sells at auction for US$450.3 million, a new record for an artwork.
News source(s): The New York Times, CNN
Nominator: Daniel Case (talk • give credit)
Updater: 90.184.31.178 (talk • give credit)
Other updaters: Wim Kostrowicki (talk • give credit)

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Buyer hasn't been identified yet, but that's secondary to the importance of this Daniel Case (talk) 03:17, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
And this would get Mugabe's puss off the page ... Daniel Case (talk) 03:19, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

  • Needs expansion There are only a couple of sentences dealing with the sale. If that's the reason for putting this on the main page we need to beef that up. Otherwise I support in principal. [I hope that whoever just dropped $450M on that gets their big tax cut for Christmas. Society really needs to support billionaire art collectors.] -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:41, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Support in Pinciple, but needs expansion, been talking about this in my Art History courses lately. However the section dealing with this is somewhat lacking as the User above states, it needs some work before the ITN can be posted. Hornetzilla78 (talk) 05:02, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Support Suggest blurb should also link to List_of_most_expensive_paintings. yorkshiresky (talk) 07:49, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Support – Should indeed also link to List of most expensive paintings, as suggested. ~Mable (chat) 08:03, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Support good to go. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:09, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Posted Stephen 10:21, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
post support obviously notable record and "minority topic" for arts.Lihaas (talk) 13:36, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

[Posted - needs updating] 2017 Zimbabwean coup d'état

Article: 2017 Zimbabwean coup d'état attempt (talk, history)
Blurb: Zimbabwe National Army troops seize control of Harare amidst a military takeover of the country.
News source(s): Guardian live feed Al Jazeera, AP, DPA
Nominator and updater: Patar knight (talk • give credit)

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Military takeover of Harare, which seems successful. They do not classify their actions as a coup, but it de facto is, since they seem to be in control and have allegedly secured the president. Altblurbs are welcome. A new name might be required for the page as well. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 06:44, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

  • Leaning support, lets wait for a few hours on the news cycle to get confirmation from Western media. --MASEM (t) 06:48, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Wait, uncertainty is high. Is it a coup? Is it succeeding? Abductive (reasoning) 07:29, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
    • Even if it's an attempt, we did post 2016 Turkish coup d'état attempt anyway. Brandmeistertalk 08:18, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
      • This is a bit more unusual than Turkey, as (at the time of writing) the military are vehemently denying that this is any kind of coup or that there's been any change of government. Something noteworthy has obviously happened, but until we know what we shouldn't be posting it. ‑ Iridescent 08:25, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
        • Well the BBC are reporting whatever it is seems to be successful - so 'attempt' is probably out. It wouldn't surprise me if Grace will turn up dead within a week. Only in death does duty end (talk) 08:36, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Support big deal, and Mugabe's own party have confirmed his detainment. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:33, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Support Mugabe held sway since 1987, one of the longest presidency, this for sure is not small news, more coverage and analyses are surely underway  — Ammarpad (talk) 09:08, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Support Big breaking story, article in good shape. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 09:55, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
  • The article is fine, the story is developing but the blurb is accurate at the moment. --Tone 10:01, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
blurb change deceptive to say the country as the article does not mention beyond Harare and no idea of loyalists elsewhere will take some stand. (In principle, support though)Lihaas (talk) 10:53, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Can you propose a specific wording you'd like to see? WP:ERRORS may also be a better place to suggest changes to blurbs rather than here. But either way, you'll need to propose a specific blurb you'd like to see replace this one. --Jayron32 13:49, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
 • Zimbabwe National Army troops seize control of Harare and place President Robert Mugabe under house arrest.
Sca (talk) 15:17, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
  • I agree that Mugabe should definitely be mentioned.--Pawnkingthree (talk) 15:19, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
Not only is that proposed blurb ungrammatical, it also fails to include a bold link to the target article! Modest Genius talk 15:44, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
Dear 'Genius', it is not ungrammatical (unless you're referring to some usage peculiar to British English). Of course the blurb would include a link to the article; I was merely proposing phrasing. I agree with Only (below) that Harare shouldn't be separately linked. Sca (talk) 17:31, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
Proper grammar in any standard dialect of English would prefer the word "and" instead of the comma in your proposed blurb. Your usage is only standard in headlinese.--Jayron32 17:36, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
Fine w/me – pls see ed'd blurb above. Sca (talk) 17:44, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
That's fine, but now we're picking sides in the "He said-she said" thing; the Military has explicitly said that Mugabe is NOT under arrest, while others have said he IS under house arrest. The article itself hedges as well, or at least doesn't make it clear. It states only that Jacob Zuma has said that Mugabe is under house arrest. That is, the article never says "Mugabe was placed under house arrest". The article says "Someone else says that Mugabe was placed under house arrest" and those are NOT the same thing. The second statement of fact is insufficient to assume the first. I can say the sky is red, and that does not make it so. We would need reliable, independent sources to confirm his house arrest, and for the article to cite those sources and make an unambigious statement thereof. Without all of that, we can't force the blurb to make claims that the article, as yet, does not. --Jayron32 19:56, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── In a story datelined HARARE (filed about 20:30), AP says "Zimbabwe’s military was in control of the capital and ... was holding President Robert Mugabe and his wife under house arrest." – Sca (talk) 21:44, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

See also DPA (English): "President Robert Mugabe... was under house arrest in the capital Harare after the military took control, plunging the country into political turmoil." – Sca (talk) 21:58, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
That's all fine, but it wasn't in the article at the time I raised my objection. Now that the situation has changed, it doesn't look like a problem. --Jayron32 12:05, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
unblue Harare and link 'seize control'? "While seizing control of Harare, Zimbabwe National Army troops confine Robert Mugabe to his home." - its also unclear if he is under house arrest or protection. The ZNA has been clear its targeting people around him, not him itself. Only in death does duty end (talk) 16:12, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
Just for the record, Mugabe isn't remotely the world's longest-serving head of state; I don't know where you've got that idea from. He's not even the longest-serving current head of state in Africa; Paul Biya and Theodoro Obiang have both been in office for five years longer than Mugabe. If only there were some kind of website where you could look these things up ‑ Iridescent 16:59, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
(edit conflict, pfui!) See List of current state leaders by date of assumption of office. Newyorkbrad (talk) 17:03, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
He's not the longest serving but at 93, he is the oldest.--Pawnkingthree (talk) 17:10, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
I stand corrected. Guess I mis-remembered a phrase from AP. Sca (talk) 17:49, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
Footnote: Reports on two evening news shows seen here in the U.S. said Mugabe was under house arrest. Sca (talk) 00:35, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
Yes the BBC have updated since my comment above as well. Only in death does duty end (talk) 09:17, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Needs updating - discussion at WP:MPE please. Mjroots (talk) 14:40, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
Sounds like he's about to resign... Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 19:03, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
...or maybe not. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 19:22, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

November 14

Portal:Current events/2017 November 14
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
  • 2017 Iran–Iraq earthquake
    • Thousands of Iranians are forced to spend a second night outdoors in near-freezing temperatures after an earthquake hit the country's western border with Iraq. (BBC)
Law and crime

RD: Hou Zongbin

Article: Hou Zongbin (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): Sina News, The Paper, Phoenix News
Nominator and updater: Zanhe (talk • give credit)

Article updated

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

 Zanhe (talk) 02:27, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

  • Support Relies on foreign language sources but that is acceptable. I’m assuming that Sina is a reliable source? Pawnkingthree (talk) 15:14, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
Sina is a major Chinese news site. I've also added a few others. -Zanhe (talk) 19:08, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

November 13

Portal:Current events/2017 November 13
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Politics and elections
Sports

[Posted] RD: Bobby Doerr

Article: Bobby Doerr (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): USA Today
Nominator: Muboshgu (talk • give credit)

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Hall of Fame baseball player. Is the sourcing enough or do we need more? – Muboshgu (talk) 14:43, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

  • Comment Sourcing needed in "Early career", "Later MLB Career" and awards, but doesn't seem to be too hard based on what is discussed. --MASEM (t) 14:47, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
    • I've added a few since nominating, and will continue to. – Muboshgu (talk) 14:55, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
    • @Masem: And I've commented out a few things I can't easily source. It'd be enough to prevent the article from GA status but sourcing and article completeness should be sufficient for our standards. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:08, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Support Article in its current state is fine for the main page. Nothing contentious is lacking a direct cite. A few cn tags could be put here or there, but I see nothing that should give us pause for posting this. --Jayron32 20:37, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose such a stat-heavy article requires citations for all such microscopic claims (e.g. "His 223 home runs were then the third most by a major league second baseman, with his 1,247 RBIs ranking fifth in Red Sox history.") so until we have them all done and dusted, this is not good enough. Given the mass of baseball stats websites out there, this should be easy. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:13, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Support per Jayron32. Newyorkbrad (talk) 21:15, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
    No, such claims should be referenced Brad, and it's easy enough for you fans to do that. It would be good to see some article edits from some of our overlords, just to reassure us you all remember what you're doing. This is a good opportunity to demonstrate that, especially as we approach the next Arbcom elections. So many RD nominations here are given proper treatment, most of them are not about US citizens, but they are worked on hard and earnestly. Given the propensity of baseball sources, it should be simple to fix the outstanding unverifiable claims. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:37, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
    Not to repeat a point on which we've disagreed before (and on which you've moved me some distance toward your point of view, but not the whole way), there comes a point where a solid article contains sufficient referencing to be mainpage worthy even though not each and every statement in the whole piece has an inline cite. Consider two versions of the same article. The first contains 10 statements of fact, all fully referenced. The second contains 50 statements of fact, 48 of which are referenced and two of which are undisputed but unreferenced. I would consider the second article to be in a better state; I gather that you do not agree. The ArbCom elections are not relevant here and should not be mentioned again on this page. Newyorkbrad (talk) 21:40, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
    I'm afraid your superficial review is inadequate. It needs more work to hold water, tagged as such. No reason not to mention Arbcom elections, a necessary requirement of any Arb is an appreciation of what us content creators do, daily. Some Arbs scarcely make a mainspace edit daily. Your threatening tone is not required. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:43, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
    "In 1938 he became a regular in a powerful Red Sox lineup..." is a subjective statement that needs a citation (as noted). That's a clear definency and that's one of the one I noted originally. All the other current CN statements are contentious - maybe not BLP level type contentious but clearly language we can't use in WP voice without a source. This is a problem and not representative of WP's best work. --MASEM (t) 22:10, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
    I already edited that subjectivity out. And most of the {{cn}} tags. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:18, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
    Thanks, looks like just one (very important) fact to go. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:21, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
    @The Rambling Man: I've commented out all the things I can't find sources for. – Muboshgu (talk) 04:14, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Posted Stephen 05:27, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

[Posted] RD: Thomas J. Hudner Jr.

Article: Thomas J. Hudner Jr. (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): Boston Globe
Nominator: TDKR Chicago 101 (talk • give credit)

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Article Updated and Well Sourced (It is a Featured Article) --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 22:39, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

  • Support - good to go. --LukeSurl t c 22:51, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Posted Stephen 22:55, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

[Closed] Hypertension

No consensus to post. SpencerT♦C 14:37, 15 November 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: Hypertension (talk, history)
Blurb: ​The American Heart Association and American College of Cardiology issue new guidelines stating hypertension starts at above 130/80 mmHg, from 140/90 mmHg
News source(s): [7] [8]
Nominator: Banedon (talk • give credit)
Updater: Doc James (talk • give credit)

Article updated

Nominator's comments: A very common cause of preventable deaths, affects hundreds of millions of people. Could also use "high blood pressure" instead of hypertension in the blurb. Banedon (talk) 21:34, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose recommendations are not ITN worthy. 2600:1015:B10F:EB1B:5C86:69C0:EB37:52F4 (talk) 21:43, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose clearly more suited to DYK. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:22, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose – ditto, suitable for Current Events and DYK, but not ITN in general. Hornetzilla78 (talk) 22:49, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose as per all above. --LukeSurl t c 23:02, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Support Fairly major news.NBC newWashington PostHuff Post Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:13, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose per all of the above, recommendations are not major news despite notable coverage. Kirliator (talk) 00:27, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Support this has been floating around in the press since at least the summer, and DYK would normally be a good place, but this will have rather large repercussions and a lot of interest from our adult readers. μηδείς (talk) 03:47, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
Wouldn't WP:NOTNEWSPAPER apply here? I might be wrong but I read your !vote as something like "It's been foreshadowed a lot and adults will need to know this". -A lad insane (Channel 2) 04:37, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Strong Oppose as two of the above users put it, this is a recommendation, and NOT a requirement. This is the kind of “news” that most people would not generally pay attention to or not care about. SamaranEmerald (talk) 04:13, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
A comment to that - you typically cannot require something in a medical context. For example it might be that a natural birth is dangerous for a particular woman, but a doctor still cannot force the woman to have a Cesarean section. It is not ethical. You can see similar language in medical recommendations. "See your dentist as soon as possible about your toothache if you have a toothache that lasts longer than 1 or 2 days". That's a recommendation, and can only ever be a recommendation, because nobody can require you to see a dentist if you have a toothache that lasts longer than 1 or 2 days. As for how many people care about it, there are hundreds of millions of people with high blood pressure. I don't know how many of those are self-monitoring their own blood pressures but I'd not be surprised if it's substantial. Are you (or your female friends if you're male) for example self-monitoring for lumps in your breasts that might indicate breast cancer? That's based off a guideline too. Banedon (talk) 04:39, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
Your arguments are largely correct, but this item does not belong on ITN. Abductive (reasoning) 07:35, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Support if the blurb changes to high blood pressure, it does effect a lot of people. Seems pretty arbitrary what we consider suitable for ITN. Seraphim System (talk) 04:21, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
I prefer using “High Blood Pressure” rather than “Hypertension”, largely because the former is more common in the general public. Hornetzilla78 (talk) 05:25, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Weak Oppose high blood pressure is an issue across the world, especially in advanced economies; changing the minimum blood pressure level by a few mmHg isn’t necessarily “small” but it isn’t really “big” either. 161.6.7.1 (talk) 04:32, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
If one believes the sources, this change reclassified 30 million Americans as having hypertension. That should be pretty "big". Banedon (talk) 04:40, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
Keep in mind that what you said technically an opinion, no matter how you protest.161.6.7.1 (talk) 04:56, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
I’ll give it 24 hours, if there is still no consensus to post by then, I’ll re-close it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hornetzilla78 (talkcontribs) 05:18, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
You're being silly, 161. A medical opinion is a professional judgment, not a statement of aesthetic preferences. This will have a greater effect than current HIV or Hepatitis prophylaxis, and insurance companies will have to absorb the costs, while many lives may be saved. The rush to close this seems to be based on recentism, not years of supporting research to the contrary. μηδείς (talk) 05:58, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
...and yet what you said is also a personal opinion Medeis. Opinions ≠ Facts. 161.6.7.1 (talk) 06:20, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Although I agree with those editors that think this is important, it is not ITN material. Too diffuse in its impact, too arbitrary, and overall not an discrete event. Abductive (reasoning) 07:35, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose. A recommendation to change a threshold for medical diagnosis in one particular country is not sufficiently notable for ITN. We wouldn't post new guidelines on what counts as obesity, for example. Modest Genius talk 11:31, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose. More suited for DYK than ITN. ZettaComposer (talk) 12:55, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Doctors have been recommending lowering your blood pressure for decades. This does not really differ from medical consensus that existed prior to the adjustment.--WaltCip (talk) 13:30, 15 November 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.

November 12

Portal:Current events/2017 November 12
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Politics and elections

[Posted] RD: Edith Savage-Jennings

Article: Edith Savage-Jennings (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): NJ
Nominator: TDKR Chicago 101 (talk • give credit)

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Article Updated and Well Sourced --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 23:19, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

  • Support Short but adequately referenced.--Pawnkingthree (talk) 20:40, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Weak support Quite weak indeed. The article is very short on useful information about her notable work, it asserts rather than demonstrates, which is always a pet peeve of mine; it states she'notable for her civil rights work, then does very little to describe any such work! Shame, really. I would consider this the BAREST of minimum to be postable, as the line has to be drawn somewhere, but this brushes right up against that line. --Jayron32 20:43, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Weak support per Jayron, this is just above start class and isn't a comprehensive bio, but it meets our needs, and who knows, maybe having it on the main page will encourage others to expand it. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:11, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Posted Stephen 05:26, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

[Posted] RD: Liz Smith

Article: Liz Smith (journalist) (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): The Washington Post, Variety
Nominator: TDKR Chicago 101 (talk • give credit)

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Article Updated and Well Sourced --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 02:58, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

  • Support, watching extensive coverage of her death on New York City local TV news as I type. Daniel Case (talk) 04:57, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Support good to go. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:54, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Posting. --Tone 09:04, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

[Posted] Kermanshah earthquake

Article: 2017 Kermanshah earthquake (talk, history)
Blurb: An earthquake strikes the border between Iraq and Iran, killing at least 214 people and injuring more than 2000 others
Nominator: 158.85.76.235 (talk • give credit)

 158.85.76.235 (talk) 22:29, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

  • Wait Article needs more information (as in expanding). Await for more details to come. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 02:57, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Almost there, could use some detail, and the name is not yet stable. Abductive (reasoning) 04:42, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Support It is an important issue, however the article should be improved.--Seyyed(t-c) 05:16, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Support - No doubt. Sherenk1 (talk) 06:12, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Support Just checked the article. It is brief but not poorly written. It conveys all the necessary information. AusLondonder (talk) 08:15, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Support. Article is start class and well-referenced. Death toll is significant. Capitalistroadster (talk) 08:39, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Support good to go, I've marked as ready and updated the blurb for most recent figures. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:53, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Posting. --Tone 09:02, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

[Posted] Slovenian presidential election

Proposed image
Article: Slovenian presidential election, 2017 (talk, history)
Blurb: Borut Pahor is reelected as the President of Slovenia.
Nominator and updater: Tone (talk • give credit)

Article updated

Nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, meaning that the recurrence of the event is generally considered important enough to post on WP:ITN subject to the quality of the article and the update to it.

Nominator's comments: The results are in, almost all votes counted. The article is updated. Tone 21:46, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

  • Support - good to go. As it is ITN/R and the update is satisfactory, marking ready. Stormy clouds (talk) 16:30, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Comment: Removing ready. Just needs a prose update to go with results (with reactions, etc.) and then this will be good to go. All of the background otherwise looks fleshed out and well-referenced. SpencerT♦C 18:19, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
    • This is what the Second round section is intended for, or would you like it somewhere else? --Tone 18:21, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Posted Stephen 22:33, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

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 [http://example.com] 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: