1800:). One of the things we looked into was whether the most popular articles showed signs of stable popularity, or whether they were breaking news events that had short-term significant changes in popularity. We found that 46% of the most popular articles (over the course of a month) showed signs of spikes in popularity, and suggested that Knowledge (XXG) could benefit from a "rapid response team" that could work on those articles. I expect that this to some extent already happens, but having a central place for discussion and coordination seems to me to be a good idea. Cheers,
1074:
and just not worth having things tangled. Second, there really should be a 48-hour waiting period... this would obviously run contrary to NOTNEWS, BREAKING, CRYSTAL, CAFETERIA, etcetera, and less obviously it would run against DUE and NPOV. Functionally, it simply takes a while for the WEIGHT of something to develop, and for responses and further info to emerge. Plugging in that mornings feed simply is poor practice as the daily viral usually seems to not last and too often turns out to die due to falsehood. I have seen it repeatedly at the
215:
critical decisions or issues may leave problem(s) with an article for a while, as this issue may not merit a discussion on a more general purpose noticeboard. Having a centralised noticeboard for problems relating to current events which don't merit more general noticeboard discussions seems like a good idea. However, my support is based on the presumption that this noticeboard will be well trafficked and checked by editors experienced in the area of current events.
1393:. Both of these discussions are unrelated to one another. At issue for both is a needed understanding on the current importance of this event and what details are needed for this encyclopedia. What would be most helpful for these articles is if they were discussed in a centralized location where editors who understand the context behind these events can contribute. At the least, a central noticeboard could have been used to notify users of both discussions.
565:. I think that this is definitely worth a try. Although we have noticeboards for NPOV and RS and BLP, Knowledge (XXG) clearly has a hard time dealing with current events (where historical perspective is lacking). And there is something to be said for a noticeboard that comes before the dispute has to go to ANI. I've been concerned for a long time about how we are dealing (or not dealing) with current events, and this strikes me as a very worthwhile idea. --
1264:
inform their edits. How can a noticeboard help with that problem, or will it exacerbate it? How can a noticeboard help good editors with good intentions, who aren't accustomed to editing in an environment of freedom of press limitations, better participate? I am wanting to be convinced one way or another, but my overall experience with noticeboards is that they become a gathering place for abusive and uninformed tribalism.
684:- I like the idea of a trial period for this. It's a little hard to predict what shape its content will take, but it's true this occupies a great deal of space on other noticeboards. Whether we want to admit it, it concerns something that is (a) important, (b) procedurally controversial, and (c) subject to a wide range of problematic editing, such that it may be useful to centralize the discussions. —
42:
927:. I am however aware that current events since at least June 2016 have been not only highly unusual but also influenced, obscured, obfuscated, deflected, and utterly misrepresented in a concerted effort by multiple international groups, individuals, and publications, and therefore such a noticeboard might have some use. However, as Andy says, that's what article talkpages are for, and what
1601:: What about ongoing or failed nominations for ITN, or articles that have not been nominated but there is a dispute about something that is in the news nonetheless? This noticeboard would cover them too? Have in mind that, at any given time, there are hundreds of articles that are "in the news" in some capacity, but only a selected handful are featured at the ITN section of the main page.
56:
concerns of some of the opposing editors, in my opinion, as they would have an opportunity of seeing how the noticeboard is working in real-time and formulate their opinion accordingly. Reading everyone's opinions, I am inclined to agree that a current events noticeboard will probably be net positive. Hence, we will run the formulation of the
Current events noticeboard for a
492:: We need this: a centralized place to handle urgent issues with high-impact events, for the same reason we need a BLP/N. I share some of the concerns raised by other editors but kudos to the nom for having this well thought-out as reflected in the answers and examples given. I think we're ready to give this a go. The big question is, should it be CE/N or CUR/N?
1079:
mornings NYT lead is going to be a major historical item and the only way we can reliably know is in retrospect of at least a few days to see if it grows or dies. It’s also just not worth the loss in quality and reliability to be going on with the latest half-baked emerging info. Quality lies at least partly in restraint. Cheers
1146:
the controversial current events discussions are already sufficiently prominent that we do not really need to advertise them further. The net effect of this would be to add another layer to the disputes on those subjects, which is the last thing we need. I originally supported, but I now think this
302:
only covers a handful of articles linked from the Main Page, and there are many other articles that would benefit from this noticeboard. Current events attract a lot of traffic. Affected articles become volatile, and the list of affected articles is constantly changing. With this noticeboard, editors
1171:
While I don't see anything bad with the proposal or idea, I am neutral because the proposal and extra info does not really explain if there is a need for such a noticeboard. I understand that if it exists, editors and readers will find it and so it will be used, but have there been cases relating to
1199:
do good jobs regarding articles for the ITN section of the main page. For more general discussion of article content, I'd expect that subject-specific noticeboeards/wikiproject pages would be more useful as editors there will be more familiar with events of the type that has happened, where to look
1623:
as well as articles that have not been nominated would be covered by this notice board but only if there is some sort of issue relating to content. I suspect that ITN articles on the main page would be frequent flyers for this board, however as they are more traffic'd. Thank you for your question!
1560:
way we go about things related to current events kind of have leaves people with less of a voice in the matter if they have trouble navigating the system. As for why one can't reach out to the WikiProjects, I don't feel like that would go away with this noticeboard. In fact, when that does happen,
1521:
what's wrong with reaching out to the various wikiprojects for input when an article in their area of interest is also a current event? As a "regular" at ITN/C, my concern with your proposal is a narrow cabal of informal arbiters determining the "significance" of article content in a wide range of
1073:
so this would seem setting up a competing location fighting against that, and also functionally having two locations of discussion would make it harder to identify where an edit was discussed or even have two differing consensus. It would need additional guidance and work to have things untangled,
897:
than to create yet another noticeboard. We don't need a central place so that random editors can bring a dispute to a wiki-expert; we need a mobile team of editors who are willing to go directly to the affected articles (and to other noticeboards, e.g., to BLPN for a dispute about a current event
751:
There are a lot of unresolved questions regarding the coverage of content related to current/recent events. Several of the current practices are questionable and there is a need for further discussion in this area to establish firm, clear and convincing consensuses on inclusion policies. A central
214:
and the talk page of the article. The idea about WikiProjects talk pages being the place for these discussions may not always be possible, as the activity level of a WikiProject is variable and dependent on many factors (inc. time of the year). Having to rely on their activity for potentially time
1263:
My other concern is that informing even good, neutral, experienced
Wikipedians about context and history re Venezuelan events so they can make helpful edits takes considerable time; in the absence of a free press or independent judiciary, even helpful Wikipedians need a lot of background to help
55:
process and secondly, feasibilty and usefulness of the new noticeboard in actually being a net positive for the project. Editors in favour of establishment for such a noticeboard have also highlighted that this idea deserves an exploratory trial at the very least — this would also alleviate the
1646:: Have in mind that topics in the news may usually involve stub or faulty articles, or even with no written articles yet (either because it's a new topic, or because the topic was overlooked until now). You should add links to the pages about creation and improvement of articles (and also when
1078:
page, most recently the
Buzzfeed flap, that posting this morning feed wastes tons of editor time on OR assertions and speculation. Posting each story du jour also simply winds up a poor narrative quality in a disjointed diary collection of mostly unremarkable tidbits. Ultimately, not EVERY
1555:
does not have sort of the same issues as the ones you described. I'm not saying they do a bad job, but theoretically that could be the case. This might not happen there because a noticeboard is supposed to bring more attention to an issue (not less) by leaving things more transparent. The
1219:
I'm neutral here - I've nominated pages at ITNC that clearly weren't ready simply because they were about high-profile current events and needed more editors. It's technically against the rules, but IAR is a rule too. If this makes it easier to find editors for articles such as
1204:
is a guideline that needs interpretation (not an absolute prohibition on covering news events) and that long lists of formulaic tweets from random celebrities are not encyclopaedic (if they belong anywhere it's on
Wikiquote) I'm not sure what value a new noticeboard will bring.
217:
It could end up that editors post there and a few days later someone comes along to help out; this time could have been spent dealing with the problem if it was taken to AN. Therefore, because my argument for support is based on a presumption, I will leave it as a weak
1005:
I cannot for the life of me figure out why violating NOTNEWS would be considered a good thing. Is too much emphasis on not violating NPOV next? And anyway, the existence of a noticeboard does not mean that only a single kind of opinion would be tolerated there.
953:
I'm aware of this RfC but haven't commented because it is pretty hard to judge whether this noticeboard would be helpful or not until it is actually created and used - simply because it depends on who (if any) shows up and what sort of issues are brought there.
1390:
821:, and I was wondering, 'would this deserve an article?', 'did someone already create an article for this?', and 'what existing articles can this news item add to?' Such a noticeboard might be a good place to get prompt answers to such questions. --
1429:
is that the facts are not always clear. It is also more difficult to manage since generally people may make edits on less well trafficked articles related to the event. Determining consensus in those events is much more difficult. For example,
1288:
I have moved to support, because what else can we do, but my prediction is that the tenditious editors who show up on every current event will just use the board as a gathering place for coordinating their POV launches. Let's hope I'm wrong.
175:(just to name a few). Generally, items in the news see a spike in activity, and I feel it might be valuable to have a single place to go for editors to discuss issues, content, and consensus. What I am proposing specifically is something like
1100:. We see some polarisation there – sports vs science; UK vs US; good news vs bad news – and the results are not very edifying or productive. It's not clear what value the proposed noticeboard would add to this. Items in the news such as
1561:
members of the project will be able to have a place to alert more people of the issue. The job of this noticeboard would be to make those decisions that they already have to make more timely. Did I answer your question because I hope so? ―
389:
Not to worry-- I just wanted to take my time to think about it. When an article I edit was hit with tendentious editing, I decided those folks would show up, with or without a noticeboard, so may as well have the board! Best regards,
817:) so it'd be nice if there were a centralized place to discuss such things prior to creating such an article. So as an example of a possible use case for such a proposed current events noticeboard: Just today, there was that
1741:
My advice would be to keep it open longer. It hasn't really been open that long, in that RfCs typically stay open for a month unless the responses are pretty much unanimous, and this one is important enough to be listed at
1698:
1765:
157:
Noticeboards on
Knowledge (XXG) are administration pages where editors can ask questions and request assistance from people who are familiar with the policies and guidelines covered by each individual board.
2014:
2019:
367:
Please do not feel pressure to !vote support if you still have reservations. I would rather the proposal fail than see it succeed with reluctant supporters. It will be of no offense to me personally.
814:
432:
Knowledge (XXG) has become an important news source for millions. We need a few more mechanisms to help support our efforts in this area and IMO a notice board is more likely to help than hinder.
1797:
1872:
1495:
to learn a bit about who he is or for a refresher). Getting the wrong information in those cases can do serious damage to not only our credibility but for the health and wellbeing of others.
702:
It seems the most practical way of attracting a wider variety of editors to these discussions,and keepingtogether discussions which can on occassion overload some of the other noticeboards.
2074:
1386:
1200:
for good sources and what (parts of) news reports written by non-specialists are useful and which (bits) are just nonsense or trivia. Beyond enough clueful people to repeatedly say that
159:
As far as I am aware, there is no central place where users can go to ask questions specific to News and
Knowledge (XXG). For policies, guidelines, essays, etc. on the site we have:
2108:
906:
and wait for someone to bring me a question. Noticeboards work better when the problems are small and portable. The disputes being described here are neither small nor portable.
176:
1719:
I'm too involved to close the discussion, but I may create the page later today (with the caveat that it will be G6/G7 deleted if there is a consensus here not to have the page).
2139:
2009:
1483:. I feel like we should have similar standards to BLP for Current Events. Why? During a current event, Knowledge (XXG) is one of the immediate search results to come up despite
723:
that single-article talk page discussions are kept to article talk. This will certainly be a useful noticeboard, e.g. for posting notifications about other discussions (except
1228:
and suffering for a lack of contributors (there are about 4 good editors there who are overwhelmed by the IPs and news updates), so I'm not sure a noticeboard will help.
179:
as I feel
Current Events lie somewhere in the intersection of many different discussion boards. I consider it best for us to attempt at higher standards with articles in
60:
trial period of 9 months extending upto 1 year, after which should editors object to the functioning of the noticeboard, they should raise the issue through an AN RfC. --
1551:
Forums, but you are probably right that it is exacerbated by a board having a narrower subject matter. Not to diminish your concern, but I am sort of failing to see how
345:
see my comments below in neutral, hope the good outweighs the harm, need a centralized place to deal with tendentious editors who find their way to current events.
1476:
working so diligently to make sure it was accurate, it would be a completely different article. We can't rely on editors like them for every single article, though.
1172:
current events where such a noticeboard would have helped? I think if such a need is shown, so that the noticeboard would then be useful, I would move to support.
303:
who are familiar with handling these types of situations would be able to easily see and contribute to all of the articles of this nature that need attention. —
1258:, etc. A good deal of time is spent dealing with socks, NOTAFORUM, and POV pushers, and just generally trying to understand what IPs are asking for on talk.
781:, etc.) are worsening all the time, mainly due to lack of "concentration", as it were, of community consensus results against such non-encyclopedic claptrap.
477:
1855:
1668:
there seems to be consensus to at least try this out. Can we perhaps get an early close? We don't need too much bureaucracy here. In the meantime, the
1479:
As for why a wikiproject would not be sufficient, it could be, but I don't know how appropriate it would be. My concern with current events is similar to
1434:. Obviously, the talk page could simply handle this for the most part, but a noticeboard would be a nice alternative to bring attention to these issues.
2145:
1850:
1425:
Example Three, it is also decently well known that articles and links on the front page are more heavily vandalized. The difficulty with articles
1860:
894:
818:
206:
the nominator has been able to address my concern on whether the noticeboard would be useful. I think that it would be useful when issues and
1835:
1042:
Seriously though, They are entitled to their concerns. I am not in the position of validating them or whatnot. I just try to address them. ―
1104:
already attract attention and discussion on their talk pages. Another noticeboard would tend to generate forum shopping and canvassing.
1221:
858:
283:
1196:
610:
at least as a trial. Too many current events cross BLP and NPOV and RS issues to make those noticeboards necessarily the best place. --
1779:
1730:
1683:
1239:
1129:
the place. If there are behavioral, RS or BLP issues there, the noticeboards already exist. I can't see much of a purpose for this. --
549:
51:
the establishment of a
Current events noticeboard. However, there are also reservations for the purposes of redundancy with existing
1917:
792:
1069:
OPPOSE - as running contrary to multiple WP, and functional issues. First, the talk pages are the place to talk about content per
17:
870:, I can't even begin to tell you how much I appreciate your dissenting opinion on this matter. Thank you for your participation! ―
471:
296:. I expect the proposed noticeboard to be heavily used, as there is no central venue for discussing articles on current events.
1260:
Will a noticeboard provide that, or will it become just another noticeboard for power-hungry bullies to congregate (eg COIN)?
445:
2029:
1669:
1845:
1672:(scheduled for today GMT) appear to be postponed; current events editors may want to watch that page over the next 10 days.
727:). I don't see much room for a systemic basis of POV pushing since everyone agrees that a current event is a current event.
32:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
2231:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
2215:
2191:
2165:
2129:
2099:
2058:
1994:
1950:
1921:
1891:
1809:
1785:
1755:
1736:
1714:
1689:
1659:
1637:
1610:
1588:
1574:
1531:
1511:
1356:
1335:
1303:
1278:
1245:
1214:
1182:
1158:
1138:
1113:
1088:
1055:
1036:
1015:
1000:
963:
948:
915:
883:
862:
830:
797:
761:
743:
713:
693:
676:
659:
639:
622:
602:
593:
574:
555:
530:
501:
484:
453:
424:
404:
384:
359:
337:
320:
288:
264:
244:
196:
146:
119:
81:
1192:
328:
this is a common problem and a good idea that's worth a trial. Run well, this would be a net positive for our project. --
2080:
1254:
Re four overwhelmed, yes. What we need is help from bilinguals, help keeping the talk page in order, help dealing with
657:
463:
449:
1867:
1548:
103:
1840:
74:
2125:
2075:
Knowledge (XXG) talk:Naming conventions (Macedonia)/2019 RFC#Concerns about
Current Readability of this Talk Page
1109:
1768:
so people can try to collaborate on how to describe this noticeboard in parallel with the request for comments.
1697:, by all means you or another user are welcome to close it. I know I am having enough trouble as it is updating
647:: Totally sensible proposal, and something that could be incredibly useful in times of rapidly changing events.
298:
2004:
1122:
854:
278:
180:
2113:
510:
168:
1773:
1724:
1677:
1655:
1606:
1299:
1274:
1233:
944:
911:
543:
420:
400:
368:
355:
770:
2024:
1913:
1101:
1084:
789:
1898:
164:
99:
1080:
2039:
1751:
1105:
1011:
570:
313:
1484:
1201:
924:
810:
806:
160:
1584:
1527:
1331:
1210:
959:
686:
441:
891:
1405:
1125:. If you wish to discuss them, use their talk page. And if it's about what appears on main page,
867:
845:
826:
672:
497:
333:
273:
260:
1544:
1401:
1126:
1097:
172:
52:
1805:
1769:
1720:
1694:
1673:
1651:
1616:
1602:
1469:
1290:
1265:
1229:
980:
979:, I would very much be okay with a one-year trial. That certainly could also possibly address
972:
940:
932:
907:
738:
539:
416:
391:
364:
346:
41:
1927:
1743:
1487:. I suspect people do this for background information on a subject (like how I might look up
1255:
1070:
902:. The WikiProject format is going to be more effective model than the one in which I sit at
724:
1902:
1796:: Seeing this RfC reminded me of similar ideas we had in a research paper back in 2015 (see
1416:
1373:
1173:
784:
757:
655:
235:
1620:
1552:
1480:
1426:
1397:
928:
903:
778:
774:
535:
221:
207:
152:
95:
2034:
1747:
1492:
1488:
1134:
1020:
1007:
618:
566:
306:
514:
211:
151:
Okay, now that housekeeping is out of the way; I can go into more details. According to
1580:
1540:
1523:
1438:
1387:
Knowledge (XXG):Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 January 30#2017–2019 Iranian protests
1377:
1362:
1340:
1327:
1206:
968:
955:
936:
634:
433:
224:
is an appropriate place, as the scope of the proposed page would be for more than just
68:
2210:
2186:
2160:
2121:
2094:
2053:
1989:
1973:
1962:
1945:
1886:
1709:
1632:
1579:
Thanks MJL, you did, and it could be my concern is itself a fringe theory. Thanks. --
1569:
1506:
1380:, actually I have a few examples where a Current events noticeboard could be helpful.
1351:
1154:
1050:
1031:
995:
983:
and others' concerns as well. The noticeboard is quite different because there is no
878:
822:
709:
668:
583:
525:
506:
493:
379:
329:
256:
191:
141:
114:
1391:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/2018–2019 Iranian general strikes and protests
1801:
1473:
1075:
729:
228:
753:
648:
1701:(luckily, no deadline... but still..). This news cycle has been killer on me. ―
1121:
per
Markbassett. If you want to keep up to date what are current events, go to
517:
is very associated with Copy Editing. Thank you so much for participating! :D ―
1931:
1130:
611:
1543:
I suppose I have not considered whether the noticeboard being something like
1096:
We already have a place where people pontificate about the news of the day –
1746:. There could still be useful input from editors who have yet to respond. --
976:
631:
255:
The examples in the discussion section convince me that it could be useful.
62:
931:
and other venues are for. I would appreciate the opinion of, for instance,
2204:
2180:
2154:
2117:
2088:
2047:
1983:
1967:
1939:
1880:
1703:
1626:
1563:
1500:
1345:
1321:
1149:
1044:
1025:
989:
872:
704:
519:
373:
185:
135:
108:
1409:
601:- an added safety net to help ensure we're getting the article right.
509:, you know I never thought about where it will be located. I recommend
1766:
Knowledge (XXG):Requests for comment/Current events noticeboard/Header
1699:
National Emergency Concerning the Southern Border of the United States
90:
RfC on the need for and implementation of a Current events noticeboard
1191:
Neutral for now, as I too am not immediately seeing a need for this.
538:
links to Centralized Discussion. CURN is the only available option.
2015:
Knowledge (XXG):Requests for comment/WikiProjects and collaborations
1422:
currently is (and probably shouldn't always) be discussed on there.
2020:
Knowledge (XXG):Requests for comment/Politics, government, and law
1343:, I am glad you asked! Currently almost done typing as we speak. ―
1404:, neither are meant to discuss specific articles. Whether or not
36:
1873:
Knowledge (XXG) talk:Don't misuse the Current Events template
1147:
i more likely to fragment discussions than centralize them.
98:
about maintaining accurate information on article subjects
805:. I see recent news items pop up in AfD a lot because of
210:'s get out of hand. I see it as the intermediary between
177:
Knowledge (XXG):Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard
2010:
Knowledge (XXG):Requests for comment/Wikipedia proposals
1522:
topics simply because the article is a current event. --
2199:
1958:
1935:
1462:
1460:
1458:
1456:
1454:
1450:
1447:
1444:
1441:
1431:
2109:
Talk:2019 American Declaration of a State of Emergency
2140:
Category:Non-talk pages that are automatically signed
1831:
This RfC is being posted in the following locations:
1326:
Can you explain your rationale behind having this? --
2178:I just opened up a RfC. Please check it out! :D ―
248:(striked part I have later decided is a bit moot)
1856:Knowledge (XXG) talk:WikiProject Current events
61:
1547:. I suppose that is sort of an issue with all
8:
1861:Including the Talk pages of its participants
898:involving living people) and solve problems
1650:to create new articles, despite the news).
890:I think that it would be more effective to
2111:
1819:
1464:This is an event where details can change
923:as placing too much emphasis on violating
895:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Current events
2035:User talk:Swarm#Accepting Adoptees still?
1619:, yes ongoing and failed nominations for
1432:whether or not Qatar supports the Taliban
2146:Talk:2019 Venezuelan presidential crisis
1836:Knowledge (XXG):Village pump (proposals)
1023:Beats me; I don't work here. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ ―
842:That's what article talk pages are for.
47:The general consensus of the editors is
1224:I'm all for it -- but that article is
1197:Knowledge (XXG):In the news/Candidates
156:
7:
272:Sounds reasonable, probably useful.
28:The following discussion is closed.
18:Knowledge (XXG):Requests for comment
1222:2019 Venezuelan presidential crisis
987:policy unlike other noticeboards. ―
667:- Support as potentially useful. --
2174:Previous Comment on Village Pumped
2030:Knowledge (XXG):Village pump (all)
2005:User talk:MJL/Archive 4#No Heading
752:noticeboard would help with this.
24:
2000:Further mentioned or Located at:
1846:Knowledge (XXG) talk:Noticeboards
777:problems (and related ones, like
369:Thank you for your contributions.
2227:The discussion above is closed.
1851:Knowledge (XXG) talk:In the news
1193:Knowledge (XXG) talk:In the news
183:. Thank you all for your time. ―
40:
1868:Knowledge (XXG) talk:Recentism
1670:2019 Nigerian general election
815:2019 Boeing 737 MAX crisis AfD
582:as a good idea worth a try. ~
1:
2166:15:42, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
2130:17:10, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
2104:Spur-of-the-moment Mentions:
2100:03:23, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
2059:01:32, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
1810:15:06, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
1786:17:51, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
1756:20:25, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
1737:16:55, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
1715:16:49, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
1690:16:34, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
1396:Example Two, while I do like
1159:20:13, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
1139:10:29, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
1114:11:13, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
1089:21:02, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
1056:03:04, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
1037:03:04, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
1016:18:00, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
1001:18:52, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
964:09:18, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
949:03:05, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
916:20:32, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
884:14:07, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
863:12:50, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
798:05:27, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
782:
762:16:01, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
744:09:33, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
714:00:04, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
694:17:55, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
677:13:11, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
660:09:10, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
640:16:47, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
623:02:07, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
603:01:37, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
594:01:22, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
575:00:09, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
556:22:34, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
531:20:30, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
502:07:18, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
405:01:04, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
2216:20:08, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
2192:23:12, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
2081:Template talk:Current events
1995:14:05, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
1978:14:04, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
1951:13:37, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
1922:13:27, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
1892:23:22, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
1815:HouseKeeping / Notifications
1660:00:34, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
1638:23:25, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
1611:22:56, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
1589:22:49, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
1575:20:55, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
1532:12:32, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
1512:01:58, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
1357:23:36, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
1336:23:33, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
1304:13:47, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
1279:17:40, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
1246:17:08, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
1215:23:40, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
1183:17:40, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
485:08:22, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
454:06:18, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
425:12:21, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
385:22:36, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
360:11:21, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
338:08:06, 8 February 2019 (UTC)
321:22:01, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
289:21:28, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
265:20:23, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
245:10:52, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
197:23:42, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
147:22:55, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
120:22:54, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
717:see below changed to oppose
2246:
1841:Portal talk:Current events
1498:So there you have it! :D ―
831:01:26, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
813:(e.g. a recent one is the
82:08:46, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
1965:for my own convenience. ―
2229:Please do not modify it.
1226:already on the main page
819:US college bribe scandal
102:or which are related to
30:Please do not modify it.
1981:Stricken and removed. ―
1123:Category:Current events
181:Category:Current events
1798:Signpost coverage here
1412:should be tagged with
465:Abelmoschus Esculentus
2025:User talk:Dreamy Jazz
1468:. If it were not for
1144:Oppose as unnecessary
1102:The Independent Group
131:Support, as Proposer.
2040:User talk:Yellowdesk
628:Support 1 year trial
721:Support with caveat
220:I don't think that
1406:Maidan Shar attack
939:on the matter. --
94:Should there be a
31:
2224:
2223:
2218:
2132:
2116:comment added by
2070:Later mentioned:
2066:
1997:
1549:WP:CONTENTDISPUTE
1366:
1188:
1058:
637:
591:
318:
249:
87:
86:
29:
2237:
2214:
2197:
2190:
2164:
2098:
2064:
2057:
1993:
1980:
1977:
1949:
1910:
1909:
1906:
1890:
1824:Extended content
1820:
1782:
1776:
1733:
1727:
1713:
1686:
1680:
1636:
1573:
1510:
1421:
1415:
1361:
1355:
1325:
1296:
1271:
1242:
1236:
1187:moved to support
1186:
1054:
1041:
1035:
999:
882:
861:
852:
848:
796:
741:
737:
735:
732:
691:
689:
653:
635:
630:pinged by EEng.
615:
587:
552:
546:
529:
500:
480:
474:
466:
438:
397:
383:
352:
316:
312:
309:
247:
233:
227:
195:
145:
118:
80:
77:
71:
65:
44:
37:
2245:
2244:
2240:
2239:
2238:
2236:
2235:
2234:
2233:
2232:
2225:
2203:
2179:
2176:
2153:
2087:
2068:
2065:Arbitrary Break
2046:
1982:
1966:
1938:
1907:
1904:
1903:
1879:
1825:
1817:
1780:
1774:
1731:
1725:
1702:
1684:
1678:
1625:
1562:
1499:
1489:Jussie Smollett
1419:
1413:
1344:
1319:
1316:
1294:
1269:
1240:
1234:
1167:
1043:
1024:
988:
871:
850:
844:
843:
839:
779:WP:NOT#MEMORIAL
739:
733:
730:
728:
687:
685:
649:
636:◊distænt write◊
613:
590:
550:
544:
518:
496:
478:
472:
464:
434:
395:
372:
350:
314:
307:
231:
225:
184:
134:
127:
107:
92:
75:
69:
63:
34:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
2243:
2241:
2226:
2222:
2221:
2220:
2219:
2207:
2183:
2175:
2172:
2171:
2170:
2169:
2168:
2157:
2149:
2148:
2144:In a reply at
2142:
2133:
2091:
2084:
2083:
2078:
2067:
2062:
2050:
2043:
2042:
2037:
2032:
2027:
2022:
2017:
2012:
2007:
1986:
1970:
1959:transcluded it
1954:
1953:
1942:
1924:
1883:
1876:
1875:
1870:
1865:
1864:
1863:
1853:
1848:
1843:
1838:
1827:
1826:
1823:
1818:
1816:
1813:
1791:
1790:
1789:
1788:
1762:
1761:
1760:
1759:
1758:
1706:
1641:
1640:
1629:
1596:
1595:
1594:
1593:
1592:
1591:
1566:
1535:
1534:
1515:
1514:
1503:
1496:
1477:
1437:Example Four,
1435:
1423:
1394:
1382:
1381:
1371:
1370:
1369:
1368:
1367:
1348:
1315:
1312:
1311:
1310:
1309:
1308:
1307:
1306:
1283:
1282:
1249:
1248:
1217:
1189:
1166:
1163:
1162:
1161:
1141:
1116:
1091:
1067:
1066:
1065:
1064:
1063:
1062:
1061:
1060:
1059:
1047:
1039:
1028:
992:
985:Current Events
918:
904:my noticeboard
888:
887:
886:
875:
838:
835:
834:
833:
800:
764:
746:
718:
696:
688:Rhododendrites
679:
662:
642:
625:
605:
596:
588:
577:
560:
559:
558:
533:
522:
487:
456:
427:
411:
410:
409:
408:
407:
376:
340:
323:
291:
267:
250:
201:
200:
199:
188:
138:
126:
123:
111:
104:current events
91:
88:
85:
84:
45:
35:
26:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2242:
2230:
2217:
2213:
2212:
2208:
2205:
2201:
2198:(moved. from
2196:
2195:
2194:
2193:
2189:
2188:
2184:
2181:
2173:
2167:
2163:
2162:
2158:
2155:
2151:
2150:
2147:
2143:
2141:
2137:
2136:
2134:
2131:
2127:
2123:
2119:
2115:
2110:
2107:
2106:
2105:
2102:
2101:
2097:
2096:
2092:
2089:
2082:
2079:
2076:
2073:
2072:
2071:
2063:
2061:
2060:
2056:
2055:
2051:
2048:
2041:
2038:
2036:
2033:
2031:
2028:
2026:
2023:
2021:
2018:
2016:
2013:
2011:
2008:
2006:
2003:
2002:
2001:
1998:
1996:
1992:
1991:
1987:
1984:
1979:
1976:
1975:
1971:
1968:
1964:
1960:
1952:
1948:
1947:
1943:
1940:
1936:
1933:
1929:
1925:
1923:
1919:
1915:
1911:
1900:
1896:
1895:
1894:
1893:
1889:
1888:
1884:
1881:
1874:
1871:
1869:
1866:
1862:
1859:
1858:
1857:
1854:
1852:
1849:
1847:
1844:
1842:
1839:
1837:
1834:
1833:
1832:
1829:
1828:
1822:
1821:
1814:
1812:
1811:
1807:
1803:
1799:
1795:
1787:
1783:
1777:
1771:
1767:
1763:
1757:
1753:
1749:
1745:
1740:
1739:
1738:
1734:
1728:
1722:
1718:
1717:
1716:
1712:
1711:
1707:
1704:
1700:
1696:
1693:
1692:
1691:
1687:
1681:
1675:
1671:
1667:
1664:
1663:
1662:
1661:
1657:
1653:
1649:
1645:
1639:
1635:
1634:
1630:
1627:
1622:
1618:
1615:
1614:
1613:
1612:
1608:
1604:
1600:
1590:
1586:
1582:
1578:
1577:
1576:
1572:
1571:
1567:
1564:
1559:
1554:
1550:
1546:
1542:
1539:
1538:
1537:
1536:
1533:
1529:
1525:
1520:
1517:
1516:
1513:
1509:
1508:
1504:
1501:
1497:
1494:
1490:
1486:
1482:
1478:
1475:
1471:
1467:
1466:by the minute
1463:
1461:
1459:
1457:
1455:
1452:
1449:
1446:
1443:
1440:
1436:
1433:
1428:
1424:
1418:
1411:
1407:
1403:
1399:
1395:
1392:
1388:
1385:Example One,
1384:
1383:
1379:
1375:
1372:
1364:
1360:
1359:
1358:
1354:
1353:
1349:
1346:
1342:
1339:
1338:
1337:
1333:
1329:
1323:
1318:
1317:
1313:
1305:
1301:
1297:
1293:
1287:
1286:
1285:
1284:
1281:
1280:
1276:
1272:
1268:
1261:
1257:
1253:
1252:
1251:
1250:
1247:
1243:
1237:
1231:
1227:
1223:
1218:
1216:
1212:
1208:
1203:
1198:
1194:
1190:
1185:
1184:
1180:
1179:
1178:
1169:
1168:
1164:
1160:
1156:
1152:
1151:
1145:
1142:
1140:
1136:
1132:
1128:
1124:
1120:
1117:
1115:
1111:
1107:
1103:
1099:
1095:
1092:
1090:
1086:
1082:
1077:
1072:
1068:
1057:
1053:
1052:
1048:
1045:
1040:
1038:
1034:
1033:
1029:
1026:
1022:
1019:
1018:
1017:
1013:
1009:
1004:
1003:
1002:
998:
997:
993:
990:
986:
982:
978:
974:
970:
967:
966:
965:
961:
957:
952:
951:
950:
946:
942:
938:
934:
930:
926:
922:
919:
917:
913:
909:
905:
901:
896:
893:
889:
885:
881:
880:
876:
873:
869:
868:Pigsonthewing
866:
865:
864:
860:
856:
851:Pigsonthewing
847:
841:
840:
836:
832:
828:
824:
820:
816:
812:
808:
804:
801:
799:
794:
791:
788:
787:
780:
776:
772:
768:
765:
763:
759:
755:
750:
747:
745:
742:
736:
726:
722:
719:
716:
715:
711:
707:
706:
701:
697:
695:
690:
683:
680:
678:
674:
670:
666:
663:
661:
658:
656:
654:
652:
646:
643:
641:
638:
633:
629:
626:
624:
620:
616:
609:
606:
604:
600:
597:
595:
592:
586:
581:
578:
576:
572:
568:
564:
561:
557:
553:
547:
541:
537:
534:
532:
528:
527:
523:
520:
516:
512:
508:
505:
504:
503:
499:
495:
491:
488:
486:
482:
481:
475:
468:
467:
460:
457:
455:
451:
447:
443:
439:
437:
431:
428:
426:
422:
418:
415:
412:
406:
402:
398:
394:
388:
387:
386:
382:
381:
377:
374:
370:
366:
363:
362:
361:
357:
353:
349:
344:
341:
339:
335:
331:
327:
324:
322:
319:
317:
311:
310:
301:
300:
295:
292:
290:
287:
286:
282:
281:
277:
276:
271:
268:
266:
262:
258:
254:
251:
246:
242:
241:
240:
230:
223:
219:
213:
209:
205:
202:
198:
194:
193:
189:
186:
182:
178:
174:
170:
169:WP:NOTCRYSTAL
166:
162:
158:
154:
150:
149:
148:
144:
143:
139:
136:
132:
129:
128:
124:
122:
121:
117:
116:
112:
109:
105:
101:
97:
89:
83:
78:
72:
66:
59:
54:
50:
46:
43:
39:
38:
33:
19:
2228:
2209:
2185:
2177:
2159:
2112:— Preceding
2103:
2093:
2085:
2069:
2052:
2044:
1999:
1988:
1972:
1963:my Talk Page
1956:
1955:
1944:
1885:
1877:
1830:
1793:
1792:
1770:power~enwiki
1721:power~enwiki
1708:
1695:Power~enwiki
1674:power~enwiki
1665:
1652:Cambalachero
1647:
1643:
1642:
1631:
1617:Cambalachero
1603:Cambalachero
1598:
1597:
1568:
1557:
1518:
1505:
1470:SandyGeorgia
1465:
1350:
1291:
1266:
1262:
1259:
1230:power~enwiki
1225:
1176:
1175:
1170:
1148:
1143:
1118:
1093:
1076:Donald Trump
1049:
1030:
994:
984:
981:SandyGeorgia
973:Softlavender
941:Softlavender
933:BullRangifer
920:
908:WhatamIdoing
899:
877:
859:Andy's edits
855:Talk to Andy
846:Andy Mabbett
802:
785:
771:WP:RECENTISM
766:
748:
720:
703:
699:
698:
681:
664:
650:
644:
627:
607:
598:
584:
579:
562:
540:power~enwiki
524:
489:
470:
461:
458:
435:
429:
417:Cambalachero
413:
392:
378:
365:SandyGeorgia
347:
342:
325:
305:
304:
297:
293:
284:
279:
274:
269:
252:
238:
237:
216:
203:
190:
140:
130:
113:
93:
57:
48:
27:
1899:WP:POST/N/S
1493:2019 attack
1439:Juan Guaidó
1374:Dreamy Jazz
1081:Markbassett
786:SMcCandlish
775:WP:NOT#NEWS
299:In the news
165:WP:BREAKING
100:in the news
96:noticeboard
1957:I've also
1764:I created
1748:Tryptofish
1491:after the
1485:WP:NOTNEWS
1314:Discussion
1202:WP:NOTNEWS
1127:WP:ITN/Cis
1021:Tryptofish
1008:Tryptofish
925:WP:NOTNEWS
811:WP:NOTNEWS
807:WP:TOOSOON
567:Tryptofish
308:Newslinger
161:WP:NOTNEWS
2138:Added to
1926:Added to
1581:LaserLegs
1541:LaserLegs
1524:LaserLegs
1378:Thryduulf
1363:DannyS712
1341:DannyS712
1328:DannyS712
1207:Thryduulf
1106:Andrew D.
969:Galobtter
960:pingó mió
956:Galobtter
937:Galobtter
892:WP:REVIVE
436:Doc James
2135:Plus...
2126:contribs
2114:unsigned
1918:contribs
1897:Also on
1599:Question
1545:WP:CABAL
1519:Question
1451:disputes
1445:numerous
1402:WP:ITN/C
1098:WP:ITN/C
823:Ununseti
682:Support
669:Jax 0677
665:Support
511:WP:CUR/N
507:Levivich
479:contribs
446:contribs
330:Tom (LT)
257:Schazjmd
218:support.
173:WP:CAFET
53:WP:ITN/C
1928:WP:CENT
1802:Nettrom
1794:Comment
1744:WP:CENT
1666:Comment
1644:Comment
1474:Kingsif
1448:content
1417:Current
1410:Taliban
1408:or the
1365:, Done.
1295:Georgia
1270:Georgia
1256:WP:TEND
1174:Dreamy
1165:Neutral
1071:WP:TALK
900:in situ
803:Support
767:Support
749:Support
725:WP:ITNC
700:Support
645:Support
608:Support
599:Support
580:Support
563:Support
490:Support
459:Support
430:Support
414:Support
396:Georgia
351:Georgia
343:Support
326:Support
294:Support
270:Support
253:Support
236:Dreamy
234:pages.
204:Support
125:Support
58:minimum
2211:-Talk-
2187:-Talk-
2161:-Talk-
2095:-Talk-
2054:-Talk-
1990:-Talk-
1974:-Talk-
1946:-Talk-
1908:coder
1905:python
1887:-Talk-
1710:-Talk-
1633:-Talk-
1621:WP:ITN
1570:-Talk-
1558:ad hoc
1553:WP:FTN
1507:-Talk-
1481:WP:BLP
1427:WP:ITN
1398:WP:ITN
1352:-Talk-
1119:Oppose
1094:Oppose
1051:-Talk-
1032:-Talk-
996:-Talk-
975:, and
929:WP:RSN
921:Oppose
879:-Talk-
837:Oppose
769:. The
754:SD0001
734:umbolo
651:GN-z11
536:WP:CEN
526:-Talk-
513:since
380:-Talk-
192:-Talk-
171:, and
153:WP:PNB
142:-Talk-
115:-Talk-
1932:Swarm
1292:Sandy
1267:Sandy
1155:talk
1131:Pudeo
710:talk
515:WP:CE
494:Leviv
450:email
393:Sandy
348:Sandy
280:Hyper
16:<
2200:here
2122:talk
1914:talk
1806:talk
1752:talk
1656:talk
1607:talk
1585:talk
1528:talk
1472:and
1400:and
1389:and
1376:and
1332:talk
1300:Talk
1275:Talk
1211:talk
1195:and
1181:🎷
1177:Jazz
1135:talk
1110:talk
1085:talk
1012:talk
977:L3X1
945:talk
935:and
912:talk
827:talk
809:and
773:and
758:talk
673:talk
632:L3X1
614:asem
571:talk
473:talk
442:talk
421:talk
401:Talk
371::D ―
356:Talk
334:talk
315:talk
285:cube
275:Semi
261:talk
243:🎷
239:Jazz
64:QEDK
2206:MJL
2202:) ―
2182:MJL
2156:MJL
2118:MJL
2090:MJL
2049:MJL
1985:MJL
1969:MJL
1961:on
1941:MJL
1930:by
1882:MJL
1705:MJL
1648:not
1628:MJL
1565:MJL
1502:MJL
1442:had
1347:MJL
1322:MJL
1302:)
1277:)
1150:DGG
1046:MJL
1027:MJL
991:MJL
874:MJL
853:);
795:😼
740:^^^
705:DGG
692:\\
585:Rob
521:MJL
498:ich
403:)
375:MJL
358:)
229:ITN
222:ITN
208:BRD
187:MJL
137:MJL
110:MJL
106:? ―
49:for
2128:)
2124:•
1934:.
1920:)
1916:|
1808:)
1784:)
1778:,
1754:)
1735:)
1729:,
1688:)
1682:,
1658:)
1609:)
1587:)
1530:)
1453:.
1420:}}
1414:{{
1334:)
1244:)
1238:,
1213:)
1157:)
1137:)
1112:)
1087:)
1014:)
1006:--
971:,
962:)
947:)
914:)
857:;
829:)
783:—
760:)
712:)
675:)
621:)
589:13
573:)
554:)
548:,
483:)
476:•
452:)
448:·
444:·
423:)
336:)
263:)
232:}}
226:{{
212:AN
167:,
163:,
155:,
73:☕
2152:―
2120:(
2086:―
2077:.
2045:―
1937:―
1912:(
1901:—
1878:―
1804:(
1781:ν
1775:π
1772:(
1750:(
1732:ν
1726:π
1723:(
1685:ν
1679:π
1676:(
1654:(
1624:―
1605:(
1583:(
1526:(
1330:(
1324::
1320:@
1298:(
1273:(
1241:ν
1235:π
1232:(
1209:(
1153:(
1133:(
1108:(
1083:(
1010:(
958:(
943:(
910:(
849:(
825:(
793:¢
790:☏
756:(
731:w
708:(
671:(
619:t
617:(
612:M
569:(
551:ν
545:π
542:(
469:(
462:―
440:(
419:(
399:(
354:(
332:(
259:(
133:―
79:)
76:桜
70:後
67:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
