Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates/header: Difference between revisions

Glossary

• Blurbs are one-sentence summaries of the news story.
  • Altblurbs, labelled alt1, alt2, etc., are alternative suggestions to cover the same story.
  • A target article, bolded in text, is the focus of the story. Each blurb must have at least one such article, but you may also link non-target articles.
• Articles in the Ongoing line describe events getting continuous coverage.
• The Recent deaths (RD) line includes any living thing whose death was recently announced. Consensus may decide to create a blurb for a recent death.

All articles linked in the ITN template must pass our standards of review. They should be up-to-date, demonstrate relevance via good sourcing and have at least an acceptable quality.

Nomination steps

• Make sure the item you want to nominate has an article that meets our minimum requirements and contains reliable coverage of a current event you want to create a blurb about. We will not post about events described in an article that fails our quality standards.
• Find the correct section below for the date of the event (not the date nominated). Do not add sections for new dates manually – a bot does that for us each day at midnight (UTC).
• Create a level 4 header with the article name (==== Your article here ====). Add (RD) or (Ongoing) if appropriate.

Then paste the {{ITN candidate}} template with its parameters and fill them in. The news source should be reliable, support your nomination and be in the article. Write your blurb in simple present tense. Below the template, briefly explain why we should post that event. After that, save your edit. Your nomination is ready!

• You may add {{ITN note}} to the target article’s talk page to let editors know about your nomination.

The better your article’s quality, the better it covers the event and the wider its perceived significance (see WP:ITNSIGNIF for details), the better your chances of getting the blurb posted.

Purge this page to update the cache

• When the article is ready, updated and there is consensus to post, you can mark the item as (Ready). Remove that wording if you feel the article fails any of these necessary criteria.
• Admins should always separately verify whether these criteria are met before posting blurbs marked (Ready). For more guidance, check WP:ITN/A.
  • If satisfied, change the header to (Posted).
  • Where there is no consensus, or the article’s quality remains poor, change the header to (Closed) or (Not posted).
  • Sometimes, editors ask to retract an already-posted nomination because of a fundamental error or because consensus changed. If you feel the community supports this, remove the item and mark the item as (Pulled).

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.

Please do…

1. Pick an older item to review near the bottom of this page, before the eligibility runs out and the item scrolls off the page and gets abandoned in the archive, unused and forgotten.
2. Review an item even if it has already been reviewed by another user. You may be the first to spot a problem, or the first to confirm that an identified problem was fixed. Piling on the list of “support!” votes will help administrators see what is ready to be posted on the Main Page.
3. Tell about problems in articles if you see them. Be bold and fix them yourself if you know how, or tell others if it’s not possible.

Please do not…

1. Add simple “support!” or “oppose!” votes without including your reasons. Similarly, curt replies such as “who?”, “meh”, or “duh!” are not helpful. A vote without reasoning means little for us, please elaborate yourself.
2. Oppose an item just because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. We post a lot of such content, so these comments are generally unproductive.
3. Accuse other editors of supporting, opposing or nominating due to a personal bias (such as ethnocentrism). We at ITN do not handle conflicts of interest.
4. Comment on a story without first reading the relevant article(s).
5. Oppose a recurring item here because you disagree with the recurring items criteria. Discuss them here.
6. Use ITN as a forum for your own political or personal beliefs. Such comments are irrelevant to the outcome and are potentially disruptive.

Suggesting updates

There are two places where you can request corrections to posted items:

• Anything that does not change the intent of the blurb (spelling, grammar, markup issues, updating death tolls etc.) should be discussed at WP:Errors.
• Discuss major changes in the blurb’s intent or very complex updates as part of the current ITNC nomination.