Wikipedia talk:How the Current events page works

This page is part of WikiProject Current events, an attempt to expand and better organize information in articles related to current events. If you would like to participate in the project, visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.Current eventsWikipedia:WikiProject Current eventsTemplate:WikiProject Current eventsCurrent events articles

Standards / rules[edit]

Where was the discussion of this "supposed" standards/rules/etc .... I didn't see it ... a discussion on this need to take place ... otherwise it's rather "unenforceable"; other than by an editor that wants to edit the items other place in CE).

Looks like Maveric149's opinion mostly ... copied by Magnus Manske (and tweaked by Viajero) ...

Sincerely, reddi

OK, let's discuss them. Which parts do you have problems with? – Hjr 16:44, 15 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Abbreviations[edit]

I have added advice to annotate URLs as per current usage. Should Wikipedia:News collections and sources be augmented with canonical abbreviations? --Phil | Talk 13:18, Sep 7, 2004 (UTC)

Deciding on which day a news event occurred[edit]

There's currently an editing scuffle--not to become a war, I hope--over which date should be used when listing a certain story. Do we always go by UTC? If so, then something which occurs in U.S. during the evening (local time) could well belong under the following day's heading, especially if it happens on the West coast. Just checking ... DSatz 00:19, August 24, 2005 (UTC)

Go with the day it happened in the place it happened. -- user:zanimum

See talk page of Current events concerning highlighting some key words[edit]

The actual version does not respect the policy to introduce the context. Beside, because of an abuse of wikilinks, everything is highlighted (this may not be the case just now, as several clean-up have been made this last week - however, it is a recurrent problem), thus nothing is highlighted. It is impossible to scan the page, and thus the user has to read all complete sentences before understanding that the subject doesn't interest him, making him lose time best spend other places. Something should be done; please discuss it on the talk page of Current events concerning highlighting some key words. Tazmaniacs 17:15, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sidebar relationships[edit]

I'm a bit unsure about the intended relationship between sections in the sidebar and the related full articles Deaths in 2006, Ongoing wars, Electoral calendar 2006. Should the sidebar list all (within a certain time period) or only the most important and if the latter then what is the threshold. Can anyone help? AndrewRT - Talk 15:21, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Only the more important things, but there is no agreed threshold. Best name (talk) 21:18, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Stories without links[edit]

Some editors seem to be adding stories which don't link into any significant wikipedia articles. Taking an example, Beijing criticises the President of Taiwan for making calls for independence.(The Times) from 6 March, the only links are to Beijing the city (instead of the Peoples Republic of China which is the real subject) and Taiwan the island (instead of Republic of China, President of the Republic of China or Chen Shui-bian). It has no links to the in-depth articles on Political status of Taiwan or Taiwan independence.

I'm not sure the value of these entries. The how-to page states:

The Current events portal and associated pages are where we list news on a daily basis with a link to background articles ... The current events portal is a news backgrounder

I would like to propose a new policy: Any items which don't have any links other than trivial ones can be deleted by any another editor. This policy would ensure editors linked into the appropriate backgrounders and remove stories that add nothing to wikipedia.

Any thoughts? AndrewRT(Talk) 20:56, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why not just use similar guidelines to in-the-news, including only events that merit a change to an article? Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 16:34, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would skew towards encouraging editors who see an article linked only trivially to link them to significant relevant articles if possible. Other editors may not be aware of the best articles to link them to. Exposing them to those articles, with an enlightening edit summary and a message on their talk page (and Portal talk:Current events) suggesting how to find the more in-depth articles, would help editors search for the best links. --Gotyear (talk) 23:53, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Recent deaths sidebar[edit]

How long ago should the least recent deaths be? It varies a great deal; is there an agreed length of time? Best name (talk) 21:18, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]