Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates: Difference between revisions
Onegreatjoke (talk | contribs) |
|||
Line 62: | Line 62: | ||
*'''Support''', but the article needs more expansion to meet ITNCRIT. The [[WP:RGW]] opposes are specious. [[User_talk:Black Kite|Black Kite (talk)]] 14:33, 21 December 2022 (UTC) |
*'''Support''', but the article needs more expansion to meet ITNCRIT. The [[WP:RGW]] opposes are specious. [[User_talk:Black Kite|Black Kite (talk)]] 14:33, 21 December 2022 (UTC) |
||
*:And I also think slightly off-putting to those who don't regularly contribute to ITN. The lingo that we circulate around here doesn't always make sense to people who make good faith nominations, and it can also present a chilling effect against future noms. '''[[User:WaltCip|🌈<span style="color: white; font-weight: bold; background: linear-gradient(red, orange, green, blue, indigo, violet)">WaltCip</span>]]'''-''<small>([[User talk:WaltCip|talk]])</small>'' 15:13, 21 December 2022 (UTC) |
*:And I also think slightly off-putting to those who don't regularly contribute to ITN. The lingo that we circulate around here doesn't always make sense to people who make good faith nominations, and it can also present a chilling effect against future noms. '''[[User:WaltCip|🌈<span style="color: white; font-weight: bold; background: linear-gradient(red, orange, green, blue, indigo, violet)">WaltCip</span>]]'''-''<small>([[User talk:WaltCip|talk]])</small>'' 15:13, 21 December 2022 (UTC) |
||
:'''Oppose on quality''' - I would actually support this but the article makes little to no mention about this at all. Because of that it's hard for me to actually support this. i would support it once added though. [[User:Onegreatjoke|Onegreatjoke]] ([[User talk:Onegreatjoke|talk]]) 16:16, 21 December 2022 (UTC) |
|||
== December 20 == |
== December 20 == |
Revision as of 16:16, 21 December 2022
Welcome to In the news. Please read the guidelines. Admin instructions are here. |
In the news toolbox |
---|
This page provides a place to discuss new items for inclusion on In the news (ITN), a protected template on the Main Page (see past items in the ITN archives). Do not report errors in ITN items that are already on the Main Page here— discuss those at the relevant section of WP:ERRORS.
This candidates page is integrated with the daily pages of Portal:Current events. A light green header appears under each daily section – it includes transcluded Portal:Current events items for that day. You can discuss ITN candidates under the header.
view — page history — related changes — edit |
Glossary
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
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.
Headers
Voicing an opinion on an itemFormat 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...
Please do not...
Suggesting updatesThere are two places where you can request corrections to posted items:
|
Archives
December 21
December 21, 2022
(Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
International relations
|
RD: Franco Harris
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): AP via ESPN
Credits:
- Nominated by Rawmustard (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: His death comes days before the 50th anniversary of the Immaculate Reception, which will be commemorated at this weekend's game. rawmustard (talk) 12:45, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose At least four completely unsourced paragraphs in the "Career" section, and miscellaneous uncited statements elsewhere. Black Kite (talk) 14:30, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
Treatment of women by the Taliban
Blurb: In Afghanistan, the Taliban indefinitely ban women from University education on orders of the Minister of Higher Education (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Paradise Chronicle (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Nominator's comments: Article is updated but maybe there will be a better article to wikilink to. The fact that a country consciously deprives half the population of higher education I would see as a prominent issue. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 04:01, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose, sadly, only because this is more of the same by the Taliban in how women are treated there, and really isn't a step away from the current status quo. Masem (t) 05:22, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support I agree this approach from the Taliban is nothing new, but it is a major reversal of a long-standing consensus and a big turn in ramping up their doctrine after initially claiming they would not do so. Abcmaxx (talk) 08:15, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
- Weak oppose - I can see the logic behind the nomination, but this happening in Afghanistan is not really news. The Bestagon (previously Quantum XYZ) (chat) 08:11, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
- Plus, I don't think the one sentence-long update (Forgive me if I'm wrong here; haven't thoroughly looked at the article.) meets WP:ITNCRIT. The Bestagon (previously Quantum XYZ) (chat) 08:14, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
- WP:ITNCRIT has been met by now, I guess. I included new info from the Talibans first Government. Will expand more. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 15:57, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
- Plus, I don't think the one sentence-long update (Forgive me if I'm wrong here; haven't thoroughly looked at the article.) meets WP:ITNCRIT. The Bestagon (previously Quantum XYZ) (chat) 08:14, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support A country banning the right to higher education, which under normal circumstances is constitutionally protected everywhere, for a specific group of people in the 21st century is notable news.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:13, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose WP:RGW. Banedon (talk) 09:32, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
- What? How is this tendentious? This was really not the aim. Please explain, so I can avoid this perception in the future. My rationale was: If the death of a few people is worth an ITN blurb, half the population of a country should be, too. It will affect far more people than the deaths of a many catastrophes we post on ITN. Who will think of the deaths of a catastrophe a few weeks later. This will be news for months if not years to come. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 10:30, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose - Per above. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 09:58, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose per all above. _-_Alsor (talk) 10:21, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose – Our article does not seem to mention this news at all? Might support if our article had an in-depth description of how this is a unique change compared to all the other Taliban bans and laws put into place in the past year (such as the November ban from public spaces). It's particularly confusing because our article suggests that most schooling for women has been largely banned since March. Does this new ban only affect the current cohort? ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 11:01, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose per Banedon / Fully expected and not really important on the global scale 5.44.170.26 (talk) 13:12, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support. I think we need to lower the bar for human rights/women's rights stories to be posted on ITN. Yes, it's the Taliban and we all expect it. But it was apparently newsworthy enough for the Grauniad to cover.--🌈WaltCip-(talk) 14:27, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support, but the article needs more expansion to meet ITNCRIT. The WP:RGW opposes are specious. Black Kite (talk) 14:33, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
- And I also think slightly off-putting to those who don't regularly contribute to ITN. The lingo that we circulate around here doesn't always make sense to people who make good faith nominations, and it can also present a chilling effect against future noms. 🌈WaltCip-(talk) 15:13, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality - I would actually support this but the article makes little to no mention about this at all. Because of that it's hard for me to actually support this. i would support it once added though. Onegreatjoke (talk) 16:16, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
December 20
December 20, 2022
(Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Science and technology
Sports
|
Bannu counterterrorism centre attack and siege
Blurb: Pakistan's security forces storm and re-take a counterterrorism office in Bannu, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, ending the siege and freeing all the hostages but resulting the death of 2 officers and all 33 local Pakistani Taliban insurgents. (Post)
News source(s): BBC News
Credits:
- Nominated by Abcmaxx (talk · give credit)
Article needs updating
Nominator's comments: A significant amount of deaths in a short space of time and rare fashion. Article needs to be significantly expanded and linked to the Insurgency in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa article. Clumsy blurb but unsure how to cut it down, suggestions welcome. Abcmaxx (talk) 08:46, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support - Blurb is a little too convoluted maybe, but we could fix it. The event itself is definitely notable, but the articles need a lot of work. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 09:56, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support in principle, oppose on quality per Precarious. The Bestagon ⬡ talk ⬡ contribs 11:41, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support once updated as I believe this is notable enough for ITN.--🌈WaltCip-(talk) 14:26, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support but the title & blurb are too long. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 14:57, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
- Proposing a reworded blurb that may be more lean?: Pakistan's security forces free all hostages at a counterterrorism office in Bannu, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, killing 33 local Pakistani Taliban insurgents and losing 2 officers. QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 15:24, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
- it maaaaayyyyyy be okay to ommit "losing 2 officers"?
- Alternatively:
- Pakistani security forces end the Bannu counterterrorism office hostage situation, freeing all hostages, killing 33 Pakistani Taliban insurgents, and losing 2 officers. QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 15:41, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
- Actually, the numbers seem to be changing - so maybe it will be best to omit the numbers and say somethign like, "killing all the Pakistani Taliban insurgents / hostage takers"? Sorry for multiple comments instead of one unified one.
- The article itself could also use some work, so Oppose on quality. QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 15:43, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
December 19
December 19, 2022
(Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
|
RD: Gary Knafelc
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Green Bay Press-Gazette
Credits:
- Nominated by Indefensible (talk · give credit)
- Created by Gypaetus (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Professional American football player. - Indefensible (talk) 20:53, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Very short, yet not completely sourced. Black Kite (talk) 14:24, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
RD: Encarna Hernández
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ABC (Spanish), RTVE (Spanish)
Credits:
- Nominated by Indefensible (talk · give credit)
- Created by Drunk in Paris (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Spanish professional basketball player & coach. - Indefensible (talk) 20:50, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support Looks sufficiently sourced to me. Black Kite (talk) 14:25, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
RD: Mircea Dușa
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Romania Insider
Credits:
- Nominated by Indefensible (talk · give credit)
- Created by Norden1990 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Turgidson (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Romanian Minister of Interior, Minister of Defense. Could use some article expansion. - Indefensible (talk) 20:44, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
RD: Max Brito
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Daily Monitor, The Sun, Rugbyrama (French)
Credits:
- Nominated by Indefensible (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Ivorian professional rugby player. - Indefensible (talk) 20:39, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Not updated with details of death. Black Kite (talk) 14:27, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
RD: Tom Browning
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
Credits:
- Nominated by GreatCaesarsGhost (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: American baseball pitcher. Needs some work. GreatCaesarsGhost 19:19, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Martin Duffy
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Black Kite (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Keyboard player with Primal Scream, The Charlatans and Felt. Article is short but cited. Black Kite (talk) 09:54, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
WeakSupport Referencing looks good but article length does not impress. I think it's adequate. But only barely. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:53, 20 December 2022 (UTC)- Ad Orientem I've expanded it a bit from the obits now. Black Kite (talk) 19:01, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
- Sufficiently improved to strike my "weak." -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:02, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support - article seems to meet requirements. - Indefensible (talk) 21:54, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 00:02, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Terry Hall
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by SchroCat (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Lead singer of The Specials, Fun Boy Three and a few others - a musical legend. Unfortunately there is a fair amount of work needed in providing citations before it can go on the FP. Should now be all all supported with citations. - SchroCat (talk) 13:27, 20 December 2022 (UTC) SchroCat (talk) 23:01, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality - This is going to need a lot more citations before this can be supported. Onegreatjoke (talk) 00:43, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support Looks to be well referenced now. Pawnkingthree (talk) 14:12, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
- Supoort, well sourced now, fine job. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:18, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support, Article is fine Alex-h (talk) 15:51, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support Article looks good. Important member of the UK Ska scene. TartarTorte 18:26, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
- Posted by Spencer. -- Pawnkingthree (talk) 14:15, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
RD: Santino (chimpanzee)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [1] [2]
Credits:
- Nominated by Chrill (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Chimpanzee who earlier in life has been source of both national (Swedish) and international media, as cited in article, was shot and killed under circumstances which has generated media intensity. Chrill (talk) 22:59, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Missing a couple refs at the moment. - Indefensible (talk) 01:19, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support: RIP. --MZMcBride (talk) 16:53, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Needs more citations, and the circumstances of his death need to be mentioned in the body of the article, not just the lead.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 17:33, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
(Closed) Sargam Koushal
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.
Blurb: Sargam Koushal of India selected as Mrs. World in 2022 competition. (Post)
News source(s): The National, Hindustan Times and India Today
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by LordVoldemort728 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
- Comment - Did we blurb the result in 2021? PrecariousWorlds (talk) 12:05, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- No - we didn't even blurb Miss World 2021, which is the premier pageant. Black Kite (talk) 12:13, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- In fact I can't remember us ever blurbing any beauty pageant, though I may be wrong about that. Black Kite (talk) 12:14, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Then I would oppose based off of precedent. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 14:29, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- I would also say that the article should include an image if it was to be posted. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 15:11, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Then I would oppose based off of precedent. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 14:29, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- In fact I can't remember us ever blurbing any beauty pageant, though I may be wrong about that. Black Kite (talk) 12:14, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose. Mrs. World is a minor pageant (the article is a partially sourced table of winners and a couple of controversies - there is nothing about the actual pageant itself). The winner's article is pretty much a stub with multiple grammar errors and it could actually be argued that she fails WP:BLP1E. Black Kite (talk) 12:07, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose per black kite. The Bestagon (previously Quantum XYZ) (chat) 12:47, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose - Not the top tier in this field. GenevieveDEon (talk) 14:05, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Strong oppose. Not only is this a minor beauty pageant, I don't think ITN should post any beauty pageants. Modest Genius talk 15:01, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose per above. _-_Alsor (talk) 16:36, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Insignificant.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 19:51, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
(Closed) Elon Musk to step down as head of Twitter
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.
Blurb: Twitterverse citizens decide in a referendum in favor of Elon Musk stepping down as head of Twitter (Post)
News source(s): Twitter
Credits:
- Nominated by Count Iblis (talk · give credit)
Article needs updating
- Wait - Even though this result seems likely, the poll is still going on. We don't call an election before all the results are in, even if a candidate winning seems overwhelmingly likely. This is especially true in this case, where we don't know what role Elon will assume at Twitter, or what will even happen. It's quite a vague poll.
- As for the actual notability, it does seem dubious to post the results of a Twitter poll to ITN, but if it leads to Elon stepping down from the company entirely, that could be notable for ITN. Either way, there is no way to know what exactly this will lead to, and thus we should wait until after the poll, and after whatever change takes effect in order to make a decision. Though this is a good faith nomination, remember WP:CRYSTAL. We can't predict the future. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 10:51, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Changing to Oppose, as the nomination mainly addresses the Twitter poll, which in itself isn't notable. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 10:59, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose First, the Twitter poll itself is not notable. Only the potential outcomes that may result from the completion of the poll. Second, the blurb is at best misleading. The word "referendum" implies that this poll has some sort of official status, when it is in fact just a Twitter poll. Chrisclear (talk) 10:56, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Just another useless nomination by Count Iblis. _-_Alsor (talk) 11:05, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- There's no need to be rude, Alsor. We should always assume good faith, and while this nomination wasn't quite notable, we shouldn't disparage and put down others. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 11:13, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Watch this space/wait If a leadership change happens, I believe it would be notable. Also as a note, the time has expired and the Yes vote has prevailed. Musk has not reacted yet as of posting. I likely will likely be offline when something does happen, so I can't change my "vote"/comment on this nomination yet. -TenorTwelve (talk) 11:36, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose - And just what are we going to do?! Call the United Nations if he doesn't adhere to the results of this meaningless poll? Let's wait for something tangible rather than this disincarnate bullshit.--🌈WaltCip-(talk) 13:08, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Until we know for sure, and what the implications are (he's implied he might close down Twitter completely which would be newsworthy), we're in the realm of speculation. --Masem (t) 13:17, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose on its face. This is a proposed reshuffling of deck chairs. Ownership, and therefore power over the company, remains the same no matter whether a functionary is named as a titular new "head". BD2412 T 13:26, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) 2022 Fijian general election
Blurb: FijiFirst win a plurality of votes in the Fijian general election (Post)
Alternative blurb II: In the Fijian general election, FijiFirst (leader Frank Bainimarama pictured) wins a plurality of votes
Alternative blurb III: Following the Fijian general election, People's Alliance led by Sitiveni Rabuka forms a new coalition government with Social Democratic Liberal Party and National Federation Party, ending FijiFirst eight-year rule and Frank Bainimarama's 16-year tenure as prime minister.
News source(s): RNZ
Credits:
- Nominated by Abcmaxx (talk · give credit)
- Updated by KRtau16 (talk · give credit) and N Panama 84534 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: was hoping they would have formed a government by now for a more concise blurb but it's unlikely to happen any time. Nonetheless the article is great. Abcmaxx (talk) 10:58, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support - ITN/R, change in government, article is of sufficient quality. Good to go. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 11:01, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- And I also support the Altblurb PrecariousWorlds (talk) 13:13, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support - Notable per WP:ITNR, and article quality meets WP:ITNCRIT. Why not? The Bestagon (previously Quantum XYZ) (chat) 12:49, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support Article looks good and it seems to be up to date. --Vacant0 (talk) 12:53, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support - ITN/R. GenevieveDEon (talk) 15:06, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support altblurb. ITNR and the article is in good shape. The results have been updated, referencing is good, and there's prose on the outcome in the 'aftermath' section. Seems good to go. Modest Genius talk 15:14, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support altblurb. Looks good; this is ready to be posted. Vida0007 (talk) 16:13, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support ALTBLURB Always a good sign when an election article is such high quality so quickly. Major credit to all involved. Curbon7 (talk) 17:15, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support, Article is fine. Alex-h (talk) 17:38, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Posted – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 17:51, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment please could we phrase this blurb in plain English? Readers aren't necessarily likely to know what a "plurality" is, and sources don't usually use that term. I suspect it just means he got the most votes, right? — Amakuru (talk) 18:24, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- We cannot, because...Fijifirst and the opposition coalition are both negotiating with another party to reach a majority, so he is not certain to remain in office. This nom seems premature to me. Joofjoof (talk) 20:07, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- It would still not be inaccurate to say that Fijifirst received the most votes, no matter the outcome of the negotiations, and would be more likely to be understood by most readers. (This has also been raised at ERRORS). Pawnkingthree (talk) 20:20, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Fair enough, but could it also be called a Hung parliament [3]? Joofjoof (talk) 21:03, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- It would still not be inaccurate to say that Fijifirst received the most votes, no matter the outcome of the negotiations, and would be more likely to be understood by most readers. (This has also been raised at ERRORS). Pawnkingthree (talk) 20:20, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- We cannot, because...Fijifirst and the opposition coalition are both negotiating with another party to reach a majority, so he is not certain to remain in office. This nom seems premature to me. Joofjoof (talk) 20:07, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment, added blurb 3, new government formed. Blurb should be updated now. @Filelakeshoe: BastianMAT (talk) 17:39, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
- Blurb 3 is misleading. The blurb indicates that the coalition parties has now formed government when in fact they just agreed to form a coalition government. No government has been formed yet. The Parliament that is yet to be summoned by the President (Section 67) will elect the new PM per section 93 of the Fijian constitution. I think we should hold off for now because the ruling FijiFirst party still has not conceded. (Source). KRtau16 (talk) 08:07, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
December 18
December 18, 2022
(Sunday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
Sports |
RD: Wim Henderickx
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): operaballet.be (in English), de Volkskrant
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Prolific internationally recognised Belgian composer of operas and other classical music. The article was there but references were missing or no longer available. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:58, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support Never heard of him before. The article seems to be OK and well referenced. Grimes2 (talk) 17:24, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support, Article has enough information. Alex-h (talk) 17:29, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) HTMS Sukhothai
Blurb: The Royal Thai Navy's HTMS Sukhothai (pictured) capsizes and sinks leaving 31 crew members missing (Post)
Alternative blurb: HTMS Sukhothai (pictured), a corvette of the Royal Thai Navy, capsizes and sinks, leaving 31 crew members missing
News source(s): BBC
Credits:
- Nominated by Dumelow (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk · give credit), Doubledmkfc (talk · give credit) and Dumelow (talk · give credit)
Article needs updating
Nominator's comments: Article needs work but feels fairly significant, commissioned naval vessels don't sink that often. I'll see if I get time to improve the article today - Dumelow (talk) 13:29, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support in principle,
but no way the target article - as it currently is - is good enough to be on Wikipedia's main page. The Bestagon (previously Quantum XYZ) (chat) 14:18, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Full support now that the article has been improved. The Bestagon (previously Quantum XYZ) (chat) 16:25, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Significant event (ships in general, but particularly military ships, tend to not randomly slip below the waves during peacetime, even in storms), but the article is very minimal and needs some serious improvement. 173.179.105.16 (talk) 15:02, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support on merits, weak support on quality. Unusual event with (probably) substantial loss of life. Apparently this is only the fourth Thai warship to have sunk, ever. The article is quite bare-bones but does just about meet our minimum requirements. There's a disappointing lack of detail, both about the ship and the capsizing. I hope this can be improved while discussion continues; I don't see anything that would prevent it being posted though. Altblurb added. Modest Genius talk 15:05, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support once properly updated. Warships sinking is a big deal. GenevieveDEon (talk) 15:08, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- • Support per above Editor 5426387 (talk) 15:08, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment, article has since been significantly expanded (I've added editors to the template above) - Dumelow (talk) 15:25, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support Article quality appears adequate and much improved from the concerns expressed by the Bestagon above. The loss of a naval ship of this size is highly unusual. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:39, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support article looks good, pretty significant event I would say? QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 15:42, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support. A rare and noteworthy ship accident involving the Royal Thai Navy that has been making rounds in world news in the past few hours (the last sinking to occur to their navy was 77 years ago). The article has also been updated, and upon checking, I did not see any sourcing issues. Vida0007 (talk) 16:19, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support - article in good shape, no referencing issues. Mjroots (talk) 18:27, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Posting. Feel free to update the image at some point. --Tone 18:47, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Image not protected yet. Have added it to WP:CMP so that it will be. Mjroots (talk) 18:53, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Image now protected and added to template. Mjroots (talk) 19:05, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Image not protected yet. Have added it to WP:CMP so that it will be. Mjroots (talk) 18:53, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) Argentina wins World Cup
Blurb: In association football, the FIFA World Cup concludes with Argentina defeating France in the final. (Lionel Messi pictured) (Post)
Alternative blurb:
Credits:
- Nominated by PrecariousWorlds (talk · give credit)
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: We said we'd blurb the final, and we did back in 2018. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 17:54, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- An article needs to be nominated and bluelinked. Flibirigit (talk) 17:57, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support Duh. Article's great, as one would expect from a sporting event of this prominence and size. 5.44.170.26 (talk) 18:01, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Strong Support Let's just do it Twa0726 (talk) 18:07, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support,
with a preference for the alternative blurb for better formatting and linking.VR talk 18:10, 18 December 2022 (UTC) - Wait until a prose summary is added and unreliable sources are replaced. The article is clearly not ready. SounderBruce 18:11, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Wait It's ITN/R, so it doesn't matter what "we said". 2022 FIFA World Cup Final has not yet been updated. Curbon7 (talk) 18:12, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Also, the main blurb is the format for which we post these types of event, so oppose ALTBLURB. Curbon7 (talk) 18:14, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Sorry didn't realize there was a format convention.VR talk 18:50, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- No worries :) PrecariousWorlds (talk) 19:04, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Sorry didn't realize there was a format convention.VR talk 18:50, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Also, the main blurb is the format for which we post these types of event, so oppose ALTBLURB. Curbon7 (talk) 18:14, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Wait until 2022 FIFA World Cup Final is expanded. There are very literally empty sections currently. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:25, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support original blurb over alt, the host country is trivial at this point. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 18:50, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Blurb should also remove the entry from ongoing. - Indefensible (talk) 18:57, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support - no need to wait, finals article has extensive prose. Should be posted immediately. Nfitz (talk) 19:03, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
Opposeas there is no prose currently about the final at 2022 FIFA World Cup Final#Match.—Bagumba (talk) 19:07, 18 December 2022 (UTC)- Striking, given that there is a summary now.—Bagumba (talk) 19:36, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- In association football, the 2022 FIFA World Cup concludes with Argentina defeating France can be used until the final article gets an update. 2A02:2F0B:B400:9600:3896:2CB8:9866:A0D1 (talk) 19:10, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Wiki is not primarily a news site, there is no reason to rush before the article is ready. - Indefensible (talk) 19:11, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose the current Blurb is bad and American biased, we are talking about the biggest sports tournament in the world not a small event that end with a "conclusion" as if no one is interested in it. --Ibrahim.ID ✪ 19:22, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Ibrahim.ID: What alternative blurb would you suggest? Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 19:26, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Ks0stm: yes I think the alternative blurb is good and neutral, but I suggest the change (FIFA World Cup in Qatar) to (2022 FIFA World Cup) that the most common name. Ibrahim.ID ✪ 19:34, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- How in the world is the blurb at all Americo-centric? Curbon7 (talk) 19:35, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- I'm guessing this is a dig at the use of "association football". – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 19:46, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Au contraire, the altblurb might be the American-centric one, as it does not follow MOS:PLURAL per British English:
Argentina win the FIFA World Cup in Qatar...
—Bagumba (talk) 19:53, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment - I've gone ahead and added a very basic match report (the same one I put together for the main page), which needs expansion and a bit of TLC over-time. Feel free to expand with a bit more info, as previous events have very well written and extensive match reports. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 19:36, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- I see the cited prose match summary in the finals article. The proposed blurb is standard we are using for sport events for tournaments. Ready to post or am I missing anything? --Tone 19:36, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Wait Let's just wait until the article is actually completed, then we can do it. --BlakeIsHereStudios (talk) 19:37, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support Article now looks better than it was a few minutes ago, as the details of this (historic) match have already been written in the target article. No sourcing issues too. Vida0007 (talk) 19:49, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Posting. --Tone 19:57, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Update: Image added. 2600:1700:31BA:9410:54B8:BCAC:8A19:D8F3 (talk) 20:06, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: It should include that it was only after a penalty shootout after the match ended 3-3 after extensions. Also Kylian Mbappé hat-trick against Argentina is notable.--Gazozlu (talk) 21:44, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- A little too trivia for our purposes. These are both covered in the article itself. Curbon7 (talk) 22:31, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- I think adding "in a shoot-out" would be worth it, and says enough. Especially given the rarity of such an event in the final. Nfitz (talk) 00:24, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Three times in the last 8 editions isn't really rare at all. Fram (talk) 11:55, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- It's not really about how rare it is, rather it's about how notable it is within the context of the whole match. It is quite an important and notable detail that it went to a penalty shootout and that the match wasn't concluded in regular playing time. Gazozlu (talk) 12:14, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- ITN has always avoided putting scorelines in sport blurbs. I see no reason to change that. Modest Genius talk 15:08, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- It's not about the actual score, its about the fact that they were 'evenly matched' and the game had to go to penalties in order to force a winner. It's quite different than if Argentina won by actual goals. Gazozlu (talk) 21:45, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Sure, that's just a detail though. Some matches are close, others are not close, we only generally say who the winner was though, no other editorialising. — Amakuru (talk) 22:16, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- It's not about the actual score, its about the fact that they were 'evenly matched' and the game had to go to penalties in order to force a winner. It's quite different than if Argentina won by actual goals. Gazozlu (talk) 21:45, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- ITN has always avoided putting scorelines in sport blurbs. I see no reason to change that. Modest Genius talk 15:08, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- It's not really about how rare it is, rather it's about how notable it is within the context of the whole match. It is quite an important and notable detail that it went to a penalty shootout and that the match wasn't concluded in regular playing time. Gazozlu (talk) 12:14, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Three times in the last 8 editions isn't really rare at all. Fram (talk) 11:55, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- I think adding "in a shoot-out" would be worth it, and says enough. Especially given the rarity of such an event in the final. Nfitz (talk) 00:24, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- So if I'm getting this right, you want the blurb to be "In association football, the FIFA World Cup concludes with Argentina defeating France in the final in a shootout after the game ended 3-3 AET, despite a hat trick from Kylian Mbappe, while Croatia defeats Morocco, the first African team to reach the semifinals, in third place." Sounds really succinct. -- Kicking222 (talk) 22:55, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- That is not how you make it succinct. Rather it should include enough information to give a correct picture of the event.
- It should be, The FIFA World Cup concludes with Argentinas victory over France in a penalty shoot-out. Gazozlu (talk) 13:17, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
- A little too trivia for our purposes. These are both covered in the article itself. Curbon7 (talk) 22:31, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Question, Is it possible to add Croatia defeated Morocco to won the third place? B-MIKE -(Talk) 14:43, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Why? That would make the blurb far too long for no obvious benefit. Modest Genius talk 15:08, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- I'm just suggesting just as zh-wiki posted on their ITN, or should I make another nominate about this. B-MIKE -(Talk) 15:15, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Mikelolggmrox, I can't speak for our friends at zh.wiki as I don't know their standard, but our standard here is considerably strict. It is extremely doubtful that it will pass. Curbon7 (talk) 17:21, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Morocco's historic achievement at the world cup being the first African country to reach the semis can be its own in-the-news. Gazozlu (talk) 21:46, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- We aren't a ticker tape. It was enough that the event was ongoing. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 21:53, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- It is more than just a factoid, it was a big deal and became a cultural phenomena. Gazozlu (talk) 13:05, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
- Because the articles should be relatively fresh or expanded, the statement "Morocco being the first African country to reach the WC semis" would be perfect DYK material. But's not groundbreaking news, hence why not ITN. Masem (t) 13:11, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
- Feel free to nominate a blurb. But FWIW I won't support. IMO the winner of the World Cup gets all the marbles and a mention on Wikipedia's main page. The various runners up get a set of steak knives and a T shirt. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:58, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
- DYK? What article would that be tied to? 🌈WaltCip-(talk) 16:33, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
- Probably Morocco national football team or 2022 FIFA World Cup. But DYK has different eligibility criteria. Recent events don't make an article eligible for DYK, there are other requirements such as: the article has be be newly written, or has to have been expanded 5 times in size, or has to have recently been promoted to "Good Article" status. Gazozlu (talk) 22:09, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
- Exactly, that was the point I would have made once I had received an answer from Masem. 🌈WaltCip-(talk) 14:23, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
- Probably Morocco national football team or 2022 FIFA World Cup. But DYK has different eligibility criteria. Recent events don't make an article eligible for DYK, there are other requirements such as: the article has be be newly written, or has to have been expanded 5 times in size, or has to have recently been promoted to "Good Article" status. Gazozlu (talk) 22:09, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
- Because the articles should be relatively fresh or expanded, the statement "Morocco being the first African country to reach the WC semis" would be perfect DYK material. But's not groundbreaking news, hence why not ITN. Masem (t) 13:11, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
- It is more than just a factoid, it was a big deal and became a cultural phenomena. Gazozlu (talk) 13:05, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
- We aren't a ticker tape. It was enough that the event was ongoing. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 21:53, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Morocco's historic achievement at the world cup being the first African country to reach the semis can be its own in-the-news. Gazozlu (talk) 21:46, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Mikelolggmrox, I can't speak for our friends at zh.wiki as I don't know their standard, but our standard here is considerably strict. It is extremely doubtful that it will pass. Curbon7 (talk) 17:21, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- I'm just suggesting just as zh-wiki posted on their ITN, or should I make another nominate about this. B-MIKE -(Talk) 15:15, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Why? That would make the blurb far too long for no obvious benefit. Modest Genius talk 15:08, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
Afghanistan tunnel fire
Blurb: A fuel tanker explodes in the Salang Tunnel, Afghanistan killing at least 31 people and injuring over 30 others. (Post)
Alternative blurb: A fuel tanker explodes in the Salang Tunnel, Afghanistan, killing at least 31 people.
News source(s): Reuters, Al Jazeera, The Guardian
Credits:
- Nominated by Ainty Painty (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: Needs expansion. Ainty Painty (talk) 15:48, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support - Notable tragedy, though the article needs a lot of work. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 16:14, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Cleaned the article up and added a new section. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 16:34, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment What global significance does this tragedy have? What long-term impact will it have? 🌈WaltCip-(talk) 16:18, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Those aren't necessary for an article to be posted to ITN. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 15:14, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
- Conditional support Needs expansion. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:42, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support in principle but the article still needs to be worked on; it is still marked as a stub as of this writing. Vida0007 (talk) 19:51, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment This might be better in the article about the tunnel itself, since several incidents have happened in it before and are documented there. I can't see much extensive coverage of this type of disaster coming out of Afghanistan to expand the separate article on its own. --Masem (t) 02:40, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support, Agree with Masem , but the number of dead makes it a notable tragedy. Alex-h (talk) 17:25, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support and updated blurb to refresh numbers of victims. Article seems to meet requirements. - Indefensible (talk) 21:40, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
- I still don't have an answer to my question.--🌈WaltCip-(talk) 14:23, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
December 17
December 17, 2022
(Saturday)
Arts and culture
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Sports
|
RD: Werner Leich
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): MDR
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: German regional Lutheran bishop under the East German regime. Article expanded. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:34, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
RD: Philippe Tillous-Borde
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Le Figaro (French), Le Monde (French)
Credits:
- Nominated by Indefensible (talk · give credit)
- Created by Jmanlucas (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: French agriculturalist, businessman, cofounder of Avril Group. - Indefensible (talk) 21:15, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
RD: Drew Griffin
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CNN, People, NYT
Credits:
- Nominated by Indefensible (talk · give credit)
- Updated by P37307 (talk · give credit) and Sunshineisles2 (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: American journalist. - Indefensible (talk) 21:01, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Christian Saulsberry
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Sportsnet
Credits:
- Created and nominated by BeanieFan11 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
BeanieFan11 (talk) 00:30, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Long enough with 660 words of prose. Formatting looks fine. Footnotes can be found at expected spots. Earwig has no complaints. This wikibio is READY for RD. --PFHLai (talk) 06:08, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 21:15, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
RD: Philip Pearlstein
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NYT, WaPo
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Indefensible (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Pachu Kannan (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: American painter. - Indefensible (talk) 05:35, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Almost there The awards listed need a cite. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:47, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- More sources added. - Indefensible (talk) 20:18, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: P-22 (mountain lion)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Los Angeles Times, USA Today
Credits:
- Nominated by Ackatsis (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Penitentes (talk · give credit) and Procyonidae (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Wild mountain lion that lived in Griffith Park, Los Angeles, and became something of a local fixture. Captured this week and euthanized due to health issues. Article is detailed, well referenced, and updated with P-22's death. Ackatsis (talk) 19:55, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support - article seems to meet requirements. Kind of unusual how much attention this cat received though. - Indefensible (talk) 20:36, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support Article is well-sourced. Wild that this is the top story on my news app. Kafoxe (talk) 23:42, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- Posted Perhaps the unusual name will attract clicks. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 04:06, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Post-posting support. BD2412 T 04:15, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
New Taoiseach in Ireland
Blurb: Leo Varadkar (pictured) becomes Taoiseach of Ireland, as Micheál Martin steps down. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Leo Varadkar (pictured) succeeds the resigned Micheál Martin to become Taoiseach of Ireland.
Alternative blurb II: Leo Varadkar (pictured) succeeds Micheál Martin to become Taoiseach of Ireland, as provided for by the terms of the government's coalition
News source(s): https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-63945064
Credits:
- Nominated by PrecariousWorlds (talk · give credit)
One or both nominated events are listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: Taoiseach is the head of the government of Ireland, and while not head of state, is still a major position. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 13:58, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support - perhaps Government of the 33rd Dáil#33rd Government of Ireland should be included as a target article Josey Wales Parley 18:13, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- That might be a better choice, yes PrecariousWorlds (talk) 18:52, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment - why is there a change? I feel like some sort of linked article (akin to the October 2022 United Kingdom government crisis article) or detail explaining what happened would be useful here. — Amakuru (talk) 18:55, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- The Government is a coalition of parties who agreed to a rotation of the post of Taoiseach. Black Kite (talk) 20:39, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment To @Amakuru and Black Kite:'s points, I think the blurb should be amended to note that this is a "pre-planned" rotation of the premiership, and have introduced alt2 to that effect. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 01:37, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support altblurb Change of government has been periodically posted here (the most recent was the 2022 Swiss Federal Council election I think), and the main target articles (Leo Varadkar and Government of the 33rd Dáil) look good too; hence, I do not see any problem with this, although the altblurb looks (and sounds) better. Vida0007 (talk) 09:30, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Needs work The target article just has a single sentence. There's nothing about the significance of the change for policies and personnel. Is he bringing a new team of staff with him? Cabinet changes? Official residence? Foreign reactions? Nothing. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:33, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support with 33rd gov't as the target. As Varadkar's article already covered the agreement, an update to his BLP significant enough to satisfy ITNCRIT would surely violate BALANCE. GreatCaesarsGhost 14:33, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support with both articles as targets. The Bestagon (previously Quantum XYZ) (chat) 15:03, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support both articles as target in principle, haven't really looked at either for quality. To GCG's point, Varadkar needs (IMO, anyway) to be a target article since he's the new head of government, intra-article balance notwithstanding. The 33rd government article is also a viable target given that's where the unusual "rotation" aspect comes from. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 05:44, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support but I'll ask again what I asked on the talk page a while back. Why isn't the name of the article "Prime Minister of Ireland?" We don't usually have the name of the head of government in a language other than English for other countries. Sir Joseph (talk) 02:25, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
- "It is the official title of the head of government in both English and Irish"; probably that I would reckon. Curbon7 (talk) 02:28, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support, It is a change of government, but of course the article could have a title relating to this change. Alex-h (talk) 15:48, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
December 16
December 16, 2022
(Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
RD: Elia Alessandrini
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Switzerland Times
Credits:
- Nominated by Indefensible (talk · give credit)
- Created by Ortizesp (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Swiss professional football player. - Indefensible (talk) 21:19, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
Robert Oppenheimer
Blurb: Physicist J. Robert Oppenheimer (pictured) is cleared of allegations that led to the 1954 revocation of his security clearance (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times, Department of Energy
Credits:
- Nominated by Hawkeye7 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Drbogdan (talk · give credit) and Billmckern (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Nominator's comments: An unusual nomination; both the linked articles are high quality featured articles, and the number of page views on the main article has shot up by over 30,000 per day since the announcement, indicating substantial reader interest. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 05:30, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Weak oppose I feel this is a "bygones-be-bygones" situation notwithstanding the readership increase (though I do wonder how this affects Teller's reputation). This is about a tenth of the importance of, say, the JFK assassination, much less 9/11 or COVID, so I don't know if analogies to revelations about those events decades from now would be useful. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 05:39, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose – Love our beautiful Manhattan Project articles of course, but this just being a one-line update makes this a no-go news story for me. If a more in-depth analysis was released alongside this and used to update the article, I might feel differently. It doesn't feel particularly major news either. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 09:07, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- It's good to know that the Manhattan Project articles were appreciated. It was a major project of mine over the last ten years. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 10:14, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose - This is a very cold case. GenevieveDEon (talk) 15:09, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose. Historical footnote. Modest Genius talk 15:10, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose per above PrecariousWorlds (talk) 15:57, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
RD: Jose Maria Sison
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Reuters, Inquirer
Credits:
- Nominated by Vida0007 (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Filipino activist and founder of the Communist Party of the Philippines who died yesterday in the Netherlands but his demise was only announced today. There is still some work to do on some sections (six {cn} tags remain) but I believe this is RD worthy. Vida0007 (talk) 08:26, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
AquaDom explosion
Blurb: The world's largest cylindrical aquarium (pictured) explodes in Berlin. (Post)
Alternative blurb: In Germany, over 1,000 fish are killed when the AquaDom aquarium (pictured) bursts.
News source(s): BBC; NYT; DW
Credits:
- Nominated by Andrew Davidson (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Dellex (talk · give credit), Elanguescence (talk · give credit) and Havanafreestone (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Nominator's comments: Over a thousand fish seem to have died. Andrew🐉(talk) 17:26, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support because I can't recall when an event like this happened last, so it seems out of the ordinary.VR talk 18:08, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support ALT Tragedy doesn't just have to be at the human-scale. The article is updated, though it needs expansion to be holistic, but it seems overall fine for our purposes. I've added an ALT which I think works better. Curbon7 (talk) 18:17, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose The thing destroyed is not significant, nor is the means of its destruction. ITN is not a venue for novelty stories. GreatCaesarsGhost 18:20, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support Unusual and notable This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 18:39, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose per GCG. Insignificant, without encyclopedic value and lacking in global significance. This is not a news journal. _-_Alsor (talk) 19:13, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose on article quality; would support if the article were in better shape. Article is currently too light on details and history of the structure, which leads to a WP:UNDUE problem that unnecessarily focuses too much of the text on the recent news. Furthermore, for such a short article, too much of the key information is uncited. Really needs a lot of work. If we had a good article, this has been in the news at the level where it would be appropriate for ITN, though. --Jayron32 19:15, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support pending updates to article Highly unusual event. The Kip (talk) 19:36, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment - This is currently ITN on the German Wikipedia, perhaps that is an indication of notability. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 20:41, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Am I the only one thinking that it's not an "explosion", but a "burst" or "collapse"? Abductive (reasoning) 20:45, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- The BBC headlined this as an explosion. The word "rupture" is another option but I don't think they know yet what failed first and how. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:56, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- The BBC could call a glacier a volcano, but they'd still be wrong. Abductive (reasoning) 10:58, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Loss on an interesting item but does not have a severe effect on the world at large (for example, if it were an aquarium used for scientific study, that might be different and comparable to the loss of Arecibo) --Masem (t) 20:57, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support International coverage. ArionEstar (talk) 22:17, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support alt blurb per Abductive. The article's quality seems okay now that the {{cn}} tags are gone. — Coolperson177 (message | about me) 23:00, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support - There continues to be this mistaken assumption that items need to be globally significant to be posted. But this is not so. 🌈WaltCip-(talk) 02:42, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support Actually seems to have gotten global news media attention; maybe because of the World Cup coming to an end and things generally slowing down with end-of-year holidays and the winter solstice coming up. Maybe it gives us the chance to pretend, briefly, that we live in a world where this is one of the worst things that can happen. Daniel Case (talk) 04:12, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- support. i think using "explosion" is fine; earwitnesses describe being awoken by a loud bang. the quality of the article appears sufficient now, although i am a little wary of how the disney and dubai incidents are mentioned, as i believe those were leaks rather than catastrophic failures, while the current wording may suggest otherwise. also, i believe the aquarium in dubai is not the world's largest; the mall it is in was the world's largest mall (by total land area) at the time. dying (talk) 05:58, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks. I've adjusted the wording and added a source. Please feel free to pitch in too if you're familiar with the details. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:47, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose - unfortunate, but not that big of an aquarium and not that notable. If, say, Osaka Aquarium Kaiyukan's main tank ruptured, then that would be notable. EvergreenFir (talk) 06:23, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support. Very rare event which has since received global coverage. The rupture/explosion section could still be expanded, but the article in general looks good to me. Vida0007 (talk) 08:30, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support. Posting items like this would represent a sea change (pun intended) in how ITN operates. But I think it would be a good change. What would actually be lost in posting this? It's an event, in the news, well-covered by an article. We often get long periods where no event meets our strict importance criteria for inclusion, resulting in the front-page ITN section looking embarassingly out of date. --LukeSurl t c 13:55, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- @LukeSurl: I completely agree with this. Any change that results in more inclusion rather than less is better for ITN in the long run. 🌈WaltCip-(talk) 17:28, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- We are not a news ticker, so we shouldn't care about the ITN box being seemingly out of date - we can't make news happen and should not be weakening our standards for inclusion for an arbitrary "freshness" reason. There's a reason we are more focused on stories with large and/or long-reaching effects, that things that are temporary curiousities. Masem (t) 17:40, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- Quite right, Masem. And this has been repeated so many times... _-_Alsor (talk) 18:15, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose This isn’t a major aquarium. Story has no long term significance. Posting this would encourage more clickbait news stories to be nominated and posted. Thriley (talk) 15:29, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose I feel sorry for the fish, but this is nowhere near globally noteworthy news, other than some trivial event, a curiosity. Bedivere (talk) 18:20, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose per above. Not the level of news we post, much as it's sad for the fish. — Amakuru (talk) 18:53, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose - Fish will be missed, but this isn't quite ntoable, despite being unusual. Perhaps a better fit for DYK PrecariousWorlds (talk) 18:54, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- For goodness sake, DYK is for newly created articles or articles expanded fivefold, not for events like these. 🌈WaltCip-(talk) 20:19, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- PrecariousWorlds, You really need to read Wikipedia_talk:In_the_news#ITN_isn't_DYK. This is not the first time you have this. Curbon7 (talk) 01:20, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- to be fair, an article about the explosion could be created and it would be DYK-worthy. Bedivere (talk) 02:03, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Read it. I apologise if I was being patronizing, but I would still oppose this on notability.
- Perhaps I misunderstand the purpose of both ITN and DYK though, so I will make sure to read up on WP:DYK. Thank you PrecariousWorlds (talk) 10:31, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support because not only a lot of exotic fish have died but this was a tourist attraction and the news seems to have made the world, one source also claims two humans were injured in the burst, there's also no saying if they will rebuild it this early on. OGWFP (talk) 20:46, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose. I think it's worth noting that the article itself notes that this is not the first time a major rupture has occurred in an aquarium of this type, and the article itself is at least 50% composed of prose regarding the failure, with little note about the impact and significance of the aquarium besides that it at one point in time held the record for being the tallest aquarium of it's type (with no note made to suggest whether or not it held the record until it ruptured). DarkSide830 (talk) 00:22, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose ITN is not a ticker for tabloid sensationalism. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:45, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose RIP fish, but we cannot base our criteria on cycle fastness/slowness. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 01:31, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Analysis These opposes do not stand up.
- The story is not especially tabloid in nature as it has been reported by numerous respectable sources such as the BBC and NYT.
- We are currently blurbing other explosions and structural failures which seem similar in scale
- Those other articles such as the landslide and explosion are 100% about those incidents. If the place in question already had an article so that the content about the event is at the 50% level then this demonstrates that the structure was more notable, not less.
- So, my impression that that the rhetoric is just for show and it's really just personal opinion – classic IDONTLIKEIT. That's the trouble with ITN – it's just a forum for opinions about the news rather than an objective process.
- Anyway, the good news is that this article has been crushing the posted blurbs when it comes to actual readership. See stats. ITN gatekeeping fails again.
- Andrew🐉(talk) 11:05, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- The landslides and the Jersey explosion had more support as it had a human death toll.
- And just because a page is getting more views doesn't mean it's more notable for ITN, otherwise we'd blurb 'Avatar: The Way of Water releases'. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 11:56, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Your "analysis" cherry picks facts to suit your argument - like omitting the factor of human fatalities! Please just state your case without insulting the other editors. GreatCaesarsGhost 14:18, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- What is the relevance of human fatalities when comparing to events like these? This is an apples-to-oranges comparison. 🌈WaltCip-(talk) 17:48, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Because those were the main driving factors behind the postings that Andrew is referencing in contrast to this one. DarkSide830 (talk) 02:24, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- What is the relevance of human fatalities when comparing to events like these? This is an apples-to-oranges comparison. 🌈WaltCip-(talk) 17:48, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Remember that news sources are trying to fill 24/7 coverage, so just because there's wide coverage of it doesn't mean it has the legs for an enduring story required by NEVENT. That's why we tend to post news that has more concrete impacts. Masem (t) 02:42, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose, Interesting, but not a notable event. Alex-h (talk) 16:46, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support – Very solid article, very much in the global news. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 09:04, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support Would consider this notable because the aquarium itself had an article that existed prior to its explosion; good quality article. SpencerT•C 21:12, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose. Unusual and unfortunate event but lacks wider significance. The aquarium was purely decorative and its failure only hurt fish (and the hotel's bank balance). This would make a good DYK blurb and is close to the 5 times expansion needed to qualify there. Modest Genius talk 12:23, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Does not meet the significance needed to post at ITN. As suggested above DYK may be a better bet.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 15:07, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
RD: Sinisa Mihajlovic
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian
Credits:
- Nominated by Pawnkingthree (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Serbian footballer; free kick specialist. Needs some more citations. Pawnkingthree (talk) 15:39, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Very sad, but a significant amount of unsourced material in the article. Black Kite (talk) 19:34, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose for now A warrior in two different ways, and I share the grief being felt in Serbia and Italy today, but this is an unusual article in that it's immensely long, and it's well-sourced in some areas but swathes of unsourced in others. Perhaps the historical editors only wanted to edit the parts about their favourite clubs. Unknown Temptation (talk) 22:10, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Not ready Sad to see him go, but his article is still orange-tagged, and three {cn} tags remain. Vida0007 (talk) 19:18, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) 2022 Batang Kali landslide
Blurb: At least 21 people are killed in a landslide on an organic farm at Batang Kali, Malaysia. (Post)
News source(s): BBC CNN Reuters The Straits Times New Straits Times Malay Mail
Credits:
- Created and nominated by PenangLion (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Nominator's comments: 16 dead, 17 missing, with 60 rescued. The landslide occurred around 12 hours ago, and prospects of any survivors are very low, given how most rescued personnel were found within 4-5 hours. Significant loss of life in a tragic event. Even though Malaysia is prone to landslides and floods, the death toll involved is rare. It's the deadliest landslide in Malaysia since 1996 (Kampar, 44 dead), and the third deadliest of all time for the country. (Right now: 19 killed, 14 missing) gavre (al. PenangLion) (talk) 07:26, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support - Well referenced Sherenk1 (talk) 09:41, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support - As the nominator says, an unusually lethal incident of a type that is otherwise common. GenevieveDEon (talk) 11:08, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support per above. SBS6577P (talk) 11:35, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support Looks ready to be posted, and I saw no sourcing issues on the article. (Also, RIP to the victims of this landslide.) Vida0007 (talk) 12:03, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support Article quality looks good, news sources are covering the story. Looks good to go! --Jayron32 12:10, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support - Per above. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 12:21, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support As stated in the nom, a common occurrence that has been unusually fatal. Curbon7 (talk) 17:03, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support per above Editor 5426387 (talk) 18:05, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Posted. Black Kite (talk) 19:33, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Update - Death toll has risen to 24, and a new image was created by another user. Cheers, gavre (al. PenangLion) (talk) 13:01, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- Why no Congolese floods\landslides, but this and the jersey explosion (the latter of which really beats me)? 41.58.242.167 (talk) 17:21, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- It just depends on volunteer activity, if those subjects have articles which meet the quality standards and get supported by the community then it gets posted. - Indefensible (talk) 17:29, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
December 15
December 15, 2022
(Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Health and environment
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Science and technology
|
Ayacucho riots/massacre
Blurb: The Peruvian army perpetrates a massacre against protesters in Ayacucho, leaving at least 9 dead and 52 wounded (Post)
Alternative blurb: The Peruvian army perpetrates a massacre on political protestors in Ayacucho, leaving at least 9 dead and 55 wounded
Alternative blurb II: The Peruvian army fires on a crowd of political protestors in Ayacucho, leaving at least 9 dead and 55 wounded.
News source(s): Axios, The Guardian, Infobae, Gestion
Credits:
- Nominated by WMrapids (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: Recognizing that ITN has recently been pretty saturated with news about Peru, this event seems extremely notable. The army of a nation is rarely seen brazenly using live ammunition against protesters in the open like this. This event will probably continue to develop as the regional hospital overflowed in Ayacucho and triage units are being established. WMrapids (talk) 08:58, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- It might make sense to replace the current Ongoing item with a blurb like this, which would also link to the general protests article? ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 09:06, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Maplestrip: A link to the protests could be placed in the blurb.--WMrapids (talk) 09:36, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Yeah, just proposed an alt-blurb for this. It's an option, at least, as we have only just put the protests themselves in ITN. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 09:41, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support Significant event and articles look good, just one CN tag in the massacre article to address. Sam Walton (talk) 10:42, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support once the CN tag is cleared. Neutral on removing the Ongoing entry. GenevieveDEon (talk) 11:08, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- I also have the same stance with Genevieve on this: support once the cn tag is gone. This is a major (and tragic) news from Peru after all, and is very worthy for ITN. As for the Ongoing item, remove that only if this particular article gets blurbed. By the way, I moved this to December 15 as it occurred on that day. Vida0007 (talk) 12:00, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Covered in ongoing - Though this is a terrible event and could probably be posted, maybe it's best to leave it to ongoing. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 12:23, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose It's covered in ongoing. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:01, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose This is the purpose of ongoing, and proves why it was a good idea of adding it to ongoing. The issue is that it is a slippery slope: if we post this in tandem with ongoing, then what about if there is (god forbid) another massacre, and another, in the same way we don't every horrible event in the war in Ukraine. Curbon7 (talk) 16:56, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Curbon7: Well, the Bucha massacre was posted during the Ukraine war placement in ongoing. Yes, the two death tolls in these events are separated widely, but the notability lies with an army openly firing on civilians, not the size of death toll.--WMrapids (talk) 17:39, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Bucha was far and beyond the exception rather than the rule, and even then it still met significant opposition. Curbon7 (talk) 17:52, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Curbon7: Well, the Bucha massacre was posted during the Ukraine war placement in ongoing. Yes, the two death tolls in these events are separated widely, but the notability lies with an army openly firing on civilians, not the size of death toll.--WMrapids (talk) 17:39, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Report from the regional hospital system says that 90% of those injured resulted from gunshot wounds.--WMrapids (talk) 18:40, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support, propose ALT2 per WP:NPOV. The Kip (talk) 19:03, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Proforma Oppose Highlighted article is already linked on the main page. We shouldn't have two links to the same article. --Jayron32 19:16, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose, already in Ongoing and whilst a nasty incident, doesn't appear to be significant enough to override that. Black Kite (talk) 19:27, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose under this title until it is confirmed that reliable sources do predominantly call this a "massacre"; this is a very loaded term and implies intentional mass murder, which does not appear clear from the article and the sources. Sandstein 20:10, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Sandstein: The usage of the word "massacre" does not suggest a mass murder. Reliable sources, such as El País are describing it as a massacre.--WMrapids (talk) 21:45, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose covered by ongoing, no sign this is a serious event to denote it above ongoing. ‐‐Masem (t) 20:58, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose - Sad event but it's already covered in ongoing so I don't believe that we need to blurb this. Onegreatjoke (talk) 21:33, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose per above. Covered by Ongoing. _-_Alsor (talk) 22:37, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Terrible event, but had been covered in Ongoing. I also have some concerns as well regarding the article which don't look quite adhering to WP:NPOV to me, even as I oppose the ousting of Pedro Castillo. MarioJump83 (talk) 01:12, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
December 14
December 14, 2022
(Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Sports
|
(Posted) RD: Frank J. Shakespeare
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Heritage, NYT
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Indefensible (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Jkaharper (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: American businessman, diplomat. - Indefensible (talk) 06:13, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- A drive-by comment: It seems a bit odd to see degrees received after the age of 50 in the "Early life and education" section. Perhaps in the wrong section? Wrong year? Wrong degree? --PFHLai (talk) 11:55, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- Those are honorary degrees based on a reputable career, early life and education are combined; article is a bit short but I guess it makes sense in my opinion. - Indefensible (talk) 17:06, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- I don't think those were related to education. I've moved that sentence to a new "Awards" section. --PFHLai (talk) 17:51, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- Ok, that makes sense. Looks good to me. - Indefensible (talk) 18:14, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- I don't think those were related to education. I've moved that sentence to a new "Awards" section. --PFHLai (talk) 17:51, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- Those are honorary degrees based on a reputable career, early life and education are combined; article is a bit short but I guess it makes sense in my opinion. - Indefensible (talk) 17:06, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support - Article looks to be in good shape. Sam Walton (talk) 13:34, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 18:09, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Billie Moore
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ESPN
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Bagumba (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: American basketball coach, member of Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame and Women's Basketball Hall of Fame —Bagumba (talk) 20:11, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support - article seems to meet requirements. - Indefensible (talk) 21:26, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
- Talk:Billie Moore#Date of Death: December 14th or 15th? Input, anyone? --PFHLai (talk) 03:01, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Resolved. It's the 14th. --PFHLai (talk) 14:01, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 18:02, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
(Closed) Sakharov prize
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.
Blurb: The European Parliament awards the Sakharov Prize to the people of Ukraine. (Post)
News source(s): Reuters; Guardian
Credits:
- Nominated by 331dot (talk · give credit)
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
- Support Sakharov Prize is a featured list and Ukraine is in good shape, so good to go.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:00, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
- Neutral – This feels extremely barebones. I find myself wondering if the article should even be a Featured List, as it doesn't go into much detail about the prize and its history. More importantly for ITN, it's only a one-line update, so we wouldn't be directing readers to any further information about this news item. That all being said, I don't know if I could reasonably oppose a FL ITN/R item being posted, so... I just refrain from !voting at all? ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 08:22, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support - Article might need work, but this is ITN/R, so I'd say it's notable. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 11:12, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose per all the above including the supports. ITN/R means significance is assumed; it does not mean there is an imperative to post. An update to either article substantial enough to meet WP:ITNCRIT would likely cause WP:BALANCE issues. Maybe we can thread that needle, but I doubt it. GreatCaesarsGhost 12:52, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
- Agree on the Oppose here. The past, we've generally used the winner's article for this, as the prize itself is just a listing. The problem is that being given the Ukraine people fighting back against Russia doesn't give us a nice article target for that. If there is a decent target article that is focused on the Ukraine's resistance to Russia that is also in good shape, that might help. --Masem (t) 13:21, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
- Stale. This was announced on 19 October [4] [5]. There was a additional ceremony yesterday, but the actual award is old news. Besides, the nominated article is just a list - there needs to be a prose update somewhere. Modest Genius talk 13:55, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
(Closed) Ongoing: 2022 Brazilian election protests
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.
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC, DW, Reuters, Zee News
Credits:
- Nominated by PrecariousWorlds (talk · give credit)
- Oppose We cannot be including all the protests that are currently going on in the world in Ongoing. They are commonplace and this one doesn’t seem to have an exceptionality beyond what the protests imply. _-_Alsor (talk) 16:27, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- Despite nominating this, I actually agree. The only reason why I decided to make this post was because it was brought up below, and I think it's good to get a consensus on this issue. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 20:09, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- This entry should be closed if the nomination was never serious, as noted earlier the comparison is not apples-to-apples with the Peruvian article. You should open a section on the project talk page if you want to discuss policy. - Indefensible (talk) 22:28, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- Yeah, you're probably right, my bad. I'm new to ITN, and Wikipedia in general, so I'm just getting used to it. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 11:13, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
- It's okay, we all start somewhere. Good effort & welcome. - Indefensible (talk) 17:19, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you! PrecariousWorlds (talk) 12:23, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- It's okay, we all start somewhere. Good effort & welcome. - Indefensible (talk) 17:19, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
- Yeah, you're probably right, my bad. I'm new to ITN, and Wikipedia in general, so I'm just getting used to it. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 11:13, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
- This entry should be closed if the nomination was never serious, as noted earlier the comparison is not apples-to-apples with the Peruvian article. You should open a section on the project talk page if you want to discuss policy. - Indefensible (talk) 22:28, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- Despite nominating this, I actually agree. The only reason why I decided to make this post was because it was brought up below, and I think it's good to get a consensus on this issue. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 20:09, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose, for now. Bolsanaro has conceded, the election results have been officially ratified by the courts, and it doesn't look like the protests aren't really growing. In particular, the "Timeline" section in the article is currently quite thin and does not justify an ongoing posting. If something more substantial develops on the grounds, the issue can be revisited. Nsk92 (talk) 16:45, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose. The three last updates to the article cover events that happened on 7 November, 15 November, and 12 December. With less than one worthwhile thing happening per week, this isn't really being updated at a level that demonstrates that it qualifies as an ongoing item for the main page. --Jayron32 18:20, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- This nomination was made for comparison with the December 2022 Peruvian protests, but discussions on policy should generally be done on the talk page. As Jayron32 noted above, there is currently a difference in article quality so the nominations are not apples-to-apples. However, a possible solution is to blurb this similar to the January 6 United States Capitol attack for the storming of the federal police HQ if article quality reaches the blurb requirements, and posting the Peruvian entry to ongoing, so there would be no conflict between them. - Indefensible (talk) 18:29, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose for now. Updates seem to have slowed down. If the article can be maintained with more frequent updates than maybe this could be posted. DarkSide830 (talk) 18:44, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- •Oppose per above. Editor 5426387 (talk) 23:42, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose for now - This is still an unfolding situation, but there's a good chance it will unfold into a damp squib. That said, we should keep an eye on it. GenevieveDEon (talk) 11:10, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Bolsonaro conceded and protests are dying down at this point. This doesn't rise to the level of Peru or even Stop the Steal. Curbon7 (talk) 17:00, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) Ongoing: Peruvian protests & political crisis
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
News source(s): Reuters, NBC, CNN, Guardian
Credits:
- Nominated by Indefensible (talk · give credit)
- Created by PLATEL (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Braganza (talk · give credit) and WMrapids (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: Previous related blurb has rolled off but event continues to develop and receive article updates. - Indefensible (talk) 06:57, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment I'm not sure if this has more, less, or equal merit as 2022 Brazilian election protests to be in ongoing.—Bagumba (talk) 08:17, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- The answer to that would be irrelevant to this discussion. If you want some other article's status in ongoing changed, start a new discussion. --Jayron32 15:48, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- It was only a comment, and neutral at that. The essay you linked also reads:
While these comparisons are not a conclusive test, they may form part of a cogent argument; an entire comment should not be dismissed because it includes a comparative statement like this.
—Bagumba (talk) 00:55, 15 December 2022 (UTC)- The functional part of that sentence is
...may form part of a cogent argument
. --Jayron32 15:26, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
- The functional part of that sentence is
- It was only a comment, and neutral at that. The essay you linked also reads:
- The answer to that would be irrelevant to this discussion. If you want some other article's status in ongoing changed, start a new discussion. --Jayron32 15:48, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support Article is in decent shape, seems to be being actively updated, most recent events covered by the article are less than 48 hours old. Looks to check all of the boxed. --Jayron32 15:47, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- Mixed - I feel like for this to be in ongoing, we also need to address other protests going on, like the Brazilian election which Bagumba brought up. Not too sure if I'm perfectly honest. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 16:14, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose We cannot be including all the protests that are currently going on in the world in Ongoing. They are commonplace and this one doesn’t seem to have an exceptionality beyond what the protests imply. _-_Alsor (talk) 16:27, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support, posting something, although the header would probably need to be reworded. The main underlying event here is an ongoing Peruvian constitutional crisis, which is much bigger than the protests. Nsk92 (talk) 17:20, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment this is the third protest in Peru over the past year. Thus seems like a case where protests happen at a drop of a hat, and we'd need a strong reason to post one over the other. --Masem (t) 17:39, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- A good metric to use to decide if something is worth posting is that there is evidence, as can be found in reliable sources, that it is significant, given the amount of attention that reliable sources give to it. If we did anything other than that, then we're all just using our own, very narrow, individual perspective, which isn't that great of a way to operate when dealing with a website designed to be used all over the world. Instead of making the decision based only on what we think (which is mostly based on what we may personally care about or what we are exposed to in each of our own very tiny corners of the world), instead we should strive to assess these things by looking at reliable sources and assessing whether or not the topic is being covered or not. I live no where near Peru, and I have no vested interest in what goes on there, so my own personal feelings would necessarily skew towards not thinking this was significant. I am not a reliable source, however. I can assess whether this is a major news event by seeing what major news sources are doing. --Jayron32 18:17, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- Except, of course, is when the mass media go crazy over something we consider routine. Masem (t) 19:13, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- Or to add why we do not use frequency of coverage of a story or where the story is published (like front page verse elsewhere) as metrics for UTN consideration. Masem (t) 19:15, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- But conversely the subject may be encyclopedic and notable enough for visibility, what may need to change is Wikipedia's format and space for such coverage rather than imposing artificial limitations, as well as potential debiasing in the community which prevents such entries from being included. - Indefensible (talk) 19:19, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- Of course, many forget that we are not a newspaper, and our coverage of news should be after the point a news event is clearly going to have an enduring impact. We have far too many articles being created on breaking news without consideration of long term factors. Masem (t) 21:52, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- This has nothing to do with not being a newspaper, the ongoing political crisis of a sizable country which this is a part of is certainly encyclopedic and deserves coverage. National Ignition Facility's current blurb seems far more problematic. - Indefensible (talk) 22:24, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- Of course, many forget that we are not a newspaper, and our coverage of news should be after the point a news event is clearly going to have an enduring impact. We have far too many articles being created on breaking news without consideration of long term factors. Masem (t) 21:52, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- Except, of course, is when the mass media go crazy over something we consider routine. Masem (t) 19:13, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- Why should my consideration make a difference? What I "consider" is based on my own very narrow view of the world. Wikipedia does not operate on personal "considerations" it operates on evidence. My "consideration" is not evidence. It's just my own feelings. It has no bearing on what should or should not happen. --Jayron32 19:24, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- A good metric to use to decide if something is worth posting is that there is evidence, as can be found in reliable sources, that it is significant, given the amount of attention that reliable sources give to it. If we did anything other than that, then we're all just using our own, very narrow, individual perspective, which isn't that great of a way to operate when dealing with a website designed to be used all over the world. Instead of making the decision based only on what we think (which is mostly based on what we may personally care about or what we are exposed to in each of our own very tiny corners of the world), instead we should strive to assess these things by looking at reliable sources and assessing whether or not the topic is being covered or not. I live no where near Peru, and I have no vested interest in what goes on there, so my own personal feelings would necessarily skew towards not thinking this was significant. I am not a reliable source, however. I can assess whether this is a major news event by seeing what major news sources are doing. --Jayron32 18:17, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support. Still very much in the news, fairly big, and tensions are still high. I think these protests are significant above the level that most protests are and thus worthy of posting. DarkSide830 (talk) 18:42, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support Things are becoming notably more severe as a national state of emergency was declared and some constitutional rights of an entire nation have been removed.--WMrapids (talk) 01:32, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
- Posted Sam Walton (talk) 10:17, 15 December 2022 (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: