Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates: Difference between revisions
→RD: Joan Croll: the obit works |
|||
Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
{{cob}} |
{{cob}} |
||
---- |
---- |
||
==== Separatist republics ==== |
==== (Ready) Separatist republics ==== |
||
{{ITN candidate |
{{ITN candidate |
||
| article = International recognition of the Donetsk People's Republic and the Luhansk People's Republic <!-- Do not wikilink --> |
| article = International recognition of the Donetsk People's Republic and the Luhansk People's Republic <!-- Do not wikilink --> |
||
Line 77: | Line 77: | ||
*'''Support''' Incredibly significant news in the world. While [[WP:NOTNEWS]] is in action, you cannot deny how important this is... [[User:Fakescientist8000|Fakescientist8000]] ([[User talk:Fakescientist8000|talk]]) 03:39, 22 February 2022 (UTC) |
*'''Support''' Incredibly significant news in the world. While [[WP:NOTNEWS]] is in action, you cannot deny how important this is... [[User:Fakescientist8000|Fakescientist8000]] ([[User talk:Fakescientist8000|talk]]) 03:39, 22 February 2022 (UTC) |
||
:* '''Comment''' with all these supports, and only 2 opposes (one of which was on technical grounds instead of notability grounds), I'm fairly sure consensus has developed. [[User:Juxlos|Juxlos]] ([[User talk:Juxlos|talk]]) 03:58, 22 February 2022 (UTC) |
:* '''Comment''' with all these supports, and only 2 opposes (one of which was on technical grounds instead of notability grounds), I'm fairly sure consensus has developed. [[User:Juxlos|Juxlos]] ([[User talk:Juxlos|talk]]) 03:58, 22 February 2022 (UTC) |
||
*Marking as '''Ready'''. [[Special:Contributions/64.231.158.212|64.231.158.212]] ([[User talk:64.231.158.212|talk]]) 04:37, 22 February 2022 (UTC) |
|||
==== RD: Paul Farmer ==== |
==== RD: Paul Farmer ==== |
Revision as of 04:37, 22 February 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
February 22
February 22, 2022
(Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Health and environment
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
RD: Joan Croll
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Sydney Morning Herald
Credits:
- Nominated by Oronsay (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.
Oronsay (talk) 02:08, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose
The provided death source does not work, and I cannot find another. Also,article directly cites a marriage certificate. Joofjoof (talk) 03:43, 22 February 2022 (UTC)- The given obit works. At 1290 characters, though, the article is currently a stub. Joofjoof (talk) 04:00, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
February 21
February 21, 2022
(Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
(Ready) Separatist republics
Blurb: Government of Russia officially recognized separatist Donetsk and Luhansk People's Republics (Post)
Alternative blurb: The Government of Russia officially recognizes the separatist Donetsk and Luhansk People's Republics in eastern Ukraine, and orders Russian forces to enter the territory.
Alternative blurb II: Russia officially recognizes the
Alternative blurb III: In an escalation of the Russo-Ukrainian crisis, Russia officially recognizes the self-proclaimed Donetsk and Luhansk republics in eastern Ukraine, and orders its military forces to enter their claimed territory.
News source(s): Reuters, AP, BBC, Guardian, DW, France24, PBS
Credits:
- Nominated by Andrew J.Kurbiko (talk · give credit)
Andrei (talk) 21:46, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
- This is the kind of news that moves the Ongoing to a dedicated blurb. However, the article is not ready. --Tone 21:54, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
- Substantially in agreement with Tone. Support pending improvements to the article. Btw, the proposed image has an error, as the apparent salient on the border of the two oblasts is far from being that deep - it used to be so until February 2015, but when Ukrainian forces lost the battle of Debaltseve, it became much shallower. Use Openstreetmap for reference. Szmenderowiecki (talk) 22:12, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support — Globally significant news. The next step would be deploying Russian nuke missiles in these republics. Be afraid. STSC (talk) 22:32, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support once the article is improved and remove from ongoing. This is clearly something concrete in the pissing match.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 23:03, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support -- and added an altblurb.-- RockstoneSend me a message! 23:05, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support This is a de jure Russian invasion of Ukraine. Even though Donetsk and Luhansk have been under DPR and LPR control since 2014, they are still legally part of Ukraine and as such, the presence of Russian forces there is blurb-worthy news. Davey2116 (talk) 23:17, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support — as per STSC = Emperor Putin rips up the Minsk Protocol. Martinevans123 (talk) 23:19, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support – BIG news. This will be the No. 1 story for days, weeks, if not longer. Favor Alt2. – Sca (talk) 23:35, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
- Strong support - Huge news. This is an (almost) superpower recognizing an independent country CR-1-AB (talk) 23:37, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support in principle clearly noteworthy news, however a blurb will have to dance that important line of neutrality between the two sides, and simply stating what one side said it did is not neutral. The two altblurbs do an okay job of that. NorthernFalcon (talk) 23:41, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Alt-blurb 3 is the best-worded blurb and should be the one that is used. NorthernFalcon (talk) 02:12, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose The title of the nominated article seems tendentious – "International recognition of the Donetsk People's Republic..." is not what has happened, is it? It mainly seems to amount to more diplomatic posturing and fist-waving and there's not much change on the ground. There will be much more of this as the other international countries have their say and this could still take years to work out. The current ongoing entry still seems best to cover this latest development. Andrew🐉(talk) 23:45, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, who cares about Ukraine, a "far-away country of which we know nothing," as Neville Chamberlain said in 1938? – Sca (talk) 23:50, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
- It was Czechoslovakia that Chamberlain said that about. Certainly not his finest hour. WaltCip-(talk) 00:04, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, who cares about Ukraine, a "far-away country of which we know nothing," as Neville Chamberlain said in 1938? – Sca (talk) 23:50, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
- No kidding! Those who don't know history are condemned to repeat it. – Sca (talk) 00:36, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
- Since we all care so much, we should not be presenting this as a done deal, as the nominated title suggests. This is clearly a disputed and ongoing situation and the final outcome is far from clear. This issue has been ongoing for 8 years now while the latest crisis was the threat of a general invasion of the Ukraine which still has not happened yet. We should await further developments, while maintaining the ongoing entry. Andrew🐉(talk) 00:16, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support — Probably the most concrete development in this story for a while, also I think the sending in of troops should probably be included. Llewee (talk) 23:51, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
- 2021–2022 Russo-Ukrainian crisis seems like it should be the bolded article, and §Recognition of the Donetsk and Luhansk people's republics by Russia looks sufficiently updated. The real news isn't Russia's recognition of the territories but its use of that as a pretext for invasion, which the International Recognition article doesn't even mention. —Cryptic 00:02, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support as per above. Redoct87 (talk) 00:07, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose The event is significant, but the headline is very misleading, and plays into Russian propaganda. Something along the line of Russia invades eastern Ukraine or Russian troops enter Ukraine. Surely the invasion of Ukraine is more significant than the legal shenanigans. This is a bit of a moving target though, as the invasion started after the article was nominated. The proposed target seems inappropriate as well - either 2021–2022 Russo-Ukrainian crisis or Russo-Ukrainian War. Nfitz (talk) 00:07, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
- Comment I feel the target article is not the most appropriate here, though taking into account the mention of the balance between the two sides of the stories. Using that downplays the invasion aspect significantly. Perhaps a second article is needed here. --Masem (t) 00:29, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
- Proposed ALT3 and another target article. starship.paint (exalt) 00:47, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support at the very least, this is equivalent to the Crimean annexation in 2014. At worst, this is the start of a full invasion. Juxlos (talk) 00:50, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
- Strong Support alt 3 albeit not a full invasion yet considering the separatism/quasi-states, Russian troops entering internationally-recognized Ukrainian territory is a significant-enough escalation to merit a blurb. The Kip (talk) 01:19, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support altblurb 3 as per above. Vanilla Wizard 💙 01:22, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support Alt 2 Obvious major development. Alt 2 appears to be factually accurate and w/o any editorial language. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:28, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
- Strong support but "officially" is redundant. Recognition is inherently an official govt decision Bumbubookworm (talk) 01:45, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
- Strong support it's a hot news.--Nickispeaki (talk) 01:52, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support Alt 3, Oppose other blurbs The main article here is the crisis, and it is much better trafficked and edited than the articles about either of the Republic articles. CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 02:00, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support Incredibly significant news in the world. While WP:NOTNEWS is in action, you cannot deny how important this is... Fakescientist8000 (talk) 03:39, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
- Comment with all these supports, and only 2 opposes (one of which was on technical grounds instead of notability grounds), I'm fairly sure consensus has developed. Juxlos (talk) 03:58, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
- Marking as Ready. 64.231.158.212 (talk) 04:37, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
RD: Paul Farmer
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Miami Herald, NPR
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Spencer (talk · give credit)
Article needs updating
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: Was confirmed by Partners in Health; am sure more mainstream news services will add stories shortly and will add those to the nom. updated with news link. Article needs some work with referencing. Have resolved referencing issues. SpencerT•C 17:28, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support - article seems to meet requirements. - Indefensible (talk) 23:11, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support Looks ready to go. Thriley (talk) 02:15, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
RD: Mekapati Goutham Reddy
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Hindu
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by DaxServer (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: C class and sourced — DaxServer (t · c) 11:17, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support Looks long enough and adequately sourced for RD. -- Ab207 (talk) 14:14, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
- Weak oppose Limited depth of coverage. Political career section only lists election results without much if any information about what he accomplished in his positions or political views. SpencerT•C 17:52, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
- In progress (cc Ab207) — DaxServer (t · c) 22:58, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
February 20
February 20, 2022
(Sunday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Health and environment
International relations
Sports
|
(Posted) RD: Franz Grave
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Diocese of Essen
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk · give credit)
- Created by RFD (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: Auxiliary bishop of Essen, working for Latin America and structural change in Ruhr area - no article yet Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:58, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support nicely updated. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 21:49, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
- Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 01:07, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
RD: Shakuntala Choudhary
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): India Today
Credits:
- Nominated by Ktin (talk · give credit)
- Updated by To be updated (talk · give credit)
Article needs updating
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: Indian social worker. Have not had a chance to work the article. Will get to it later tonight. Ktin (talk) 16:51, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Jamal Edwards
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC The Guardian
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Spicy Veggie (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.
Spicy Veggie (talk) 22:33, 20 February 2022
- Support Decent article solidly referenced. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:27, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support looks good enough for RD. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:28, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
- Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 13:03, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) 2022 Winter Olympics closing ceremony
Blurb: The 2022 Winter Olympics conclude, with Norway finishing on top of the medal table. (Post)
Alternative blurb: The 2022 Winter Olympics conclude, with Norway winning a record number of 16 gold medals to top the medal table.
Alternative blurb II: The 2022 Winter Olympics conclude in Beijing, China.
Alternative blurb III: The 2022 Winter Olympics conclude in Beijing
Credits:
- Nominated by Kiril Simeonovski (talk · give credit)
Article needs updating
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: The closing ceremony starts in about 20 minutes. I'm unsure about the image of the Beijing National Stadium, which was already posted with the blurb on the opening ceremony. --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 11:38, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- The stadium picture wasn't previously posted, we had a photo of the opening ceremony. It is a 11-year-old photo though, illuminated for some different event. Stephen 12:15, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, my fault. I failed to recall on that image probably because the general coverage of these Olympics in pictures is extremely poor.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 13:44, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose The blurbs link to the opening ceremony, not the closing ceremony. Clumsy copying. Andrew🐉(talk) 12:47, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- That’s a very lame reason to oppose an ITNR item.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 13:14, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- The nomination was made before the event had taken place (and the page was started 6 years ago!). Even now, the first section, Theme and Concept, is written in the future tense, has no source and makes a vague prediction that "somewhere during the closing ceremony will re-create a moment...". The blurb errors indicate that the article requires much careful and close checking to avoid such blatant errors. The main point is the Olympics is over but, as ITN has been showing it as ongoing for some time now, it does not seem necessary to do more than remove that entry. And that has been done. Andrew🐉(talk) 17:07, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- That's still not a reason to oppose the ITNR. If the article can be improved in time, it still qualifies as ITNR. Just that it has a long way to go and if its not improved in a few days, I think it would be pointless to post it with the ongoing already removed. --Masem (t) 17:14, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Take a look at the second section, which is just one sentence, "Dancers lightened the emblem as Frank Mortenson's brand new record for the 2022 Olympics, "It's a Lovely Day Tomorrow" written originally in 1938 by Irving Berlin, was played." Again this has no source and I can't find any evidence that it's actually true. The word "lightened" is ungrammatical. And Mortenson is a red link now. If the song was written in 1938, it's not "brand new". There's no quality here; not even close. And the ceremony didn't make any flag-waving point about Norway did it? From what I saw, it was Italy that got most of the attention as the next host country. If we blurb about Norway then that would be misrepresenting what happened at the ceremony. Andrew🐉(talk) 17:36, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- That's why as noted below, if we do post, the blurb should just be "The Olmypics closed" and not recognize any record. And yes, the target article is woefully out of shape for posting. No one is disagreeing on that. But if it got into shape, it is an ITNR to be posted. --Masem (t) 17:44, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- I always strive for a brief blurb without mentioning the most successful nation but without any success so far. I, therefore, proposed three different blurbs this time so that everyone is happy and no objections are made on those grounds.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:01, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Note that the ceremony in 2018 was not posted due to similar quality issues. There is therefore no guarantee that this will ever meet an acceptable level of quality. As the event was mostly a formality, I reckon that we should move on. The talk has been that Putin has been waiting for the Olympics to end, as the starting gun for his Ukrainian adventure. We may soon have some real news... Andrew🐉(talk) 18:29, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- I wonder where do you get that information from and why he didn't wait until the end of the previous meeting in Beijing for his military adventure along the Black Sea.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 21:06, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- So, the day after the Olympics ends, Putin holds an extraordinary council meeting to agree to violate the Minsk treaty by tearing away two more chunks of Ukrainian territory. This timetable was planned in advance with Macron and Scholz. That's what's in the news now. Q.E.D. Andrew🐉(talk) 19:56, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
- I wonder where do you get that information from and why he didn't wait until the end of the previous meeting in Beijing for his military adventure along the Black Sea.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 21:06, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Checking back on this on the following day, I see that the first two sections are unchanged; still no sources and even the howler of "lightened" is still there. There's a picture though so I checked that out. It appears to be a copyright violation of this! Tsk. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:04, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
- That's why as noted below, if we do post, the blurb should just be "The Olmypics closed" and not recognize any record. And yes, the target article is woefully out of shape for posting. No one is disagreeing on that. But if it got into shape, it is an ITNR to be posted. --Masem (t) 17:44, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Take a look at the second section, which is just one sentence, "Dancers lightened the emblem as Frank Mortenson's brand new record for the 2022 Olympics, "It's a Lovely Day Tomorrow" written originally in 1938 by Irving Berlin, was played." Again this has no source and I can't find any evidence that it's actually true. The word "lightened" is ungrammatical. And Mortenson is a red link now. If the song was written in 1938, it's not "brand new". There's no quality here; not even close. And the ceremony didn't make any flag-waving point about Norway did it? From what I saw, it was Italy that got most of the attention as the next host country. If we blurb about Norway then that would be misrepresenting what happened at the ceremony. Andrew🐉(talk) 17:36, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- That's still not a reason to oppose the ITNR. If the article can be improved in time, it still qualifies as ITNR. Just that it has a long way to go and if its not improved in a few days, I think it would be pointless to post it with the ongoing already removed. --Masem (t) 17:14, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- The nomination was made before the event had taken place (and the page was started 6 years ago!). Even now, the first section, Theme and Concept, is written in the future tense, has no source and makes a vague prediction that "somewhere during the closing ceremony will re-create a moment...". The blurb errors indicate that the article requires much careful and close checking to avoid such blatant errors. The main point is the Olympics is over but, as ITN has been showing it as ongoing for some time now, it does not seem necessary to do more than remove that entry. And that has been done. Andrew🐉(talk) 17:07, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- That’s a very lame reason to oppose an ITNR item.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 13:14, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support alt blurb, record should be in blurb. Kingsif (talk) 14:12, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose mentioning the medal count, this is not a competition in how many medals each nation gets (at least nominally). I've now removed the link from Ongoing. --Tone 14:55, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Comment According to Article 6 in Charter 1 of the Olympic Charter, which states "The Olympic Games are competitions between athletes in individual or team events and not between countries.", we shouldn't highlight the achievement of the most successful nation. However, those supporting it have always formed a majority in such discussions and we regularly post an extended blurb, so it'd have been unwise for practical reasons not to propose an extended blurb from the beginning. As for the record, we posted the previous record of 14 gold medals set by Canada at the 2010 Winter Olympics.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 15:10, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support in principle but oppose both blurbs, and any blurb listing country with the most medals. We had this debate for the Summer Games last year, and we don't post the country with the most medals, as it is inconsistent with the Olympic charter quoted above. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:06, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- You know what, perhaps it's more probable to get the most successful nation out of the blurb this time, given that it's not the US and people probably won't fight to get it there in order to show the superiority of their country.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 21:14, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Also, oppose on quality for now, as it needs expansion. So many pointless empty sections that need information added. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:07, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support Alt We did it for the opening, so this is significant enough for ITN. Hcoder3104☭ (💬) 21:07, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- The article is still dreadful though, you shouldn't be supporting unless article quality is sufficient. Joseph2302 (talk) 21:14, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support in principle for importance, but the article quality doesn't want itself to be included in the ITN. Time isn't really an essence, maybe the article could be repaired in another 2-3 days. PenangLion (talk) 13:22, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
- Not ready. The closing ceremony article is an utter mess. I would prefer bolding 2022 Winter Olympics, which is in much better shape and has some content summarising the actual sporting events that were held. But that needs to expand 2022_Winter_Olympics#Closing_ceremony to a full paragraph, not one sentence. I also strongly prefer alt2 i.e. without stating the medal table in the blurb - the Olympics are a set of contests between athletes in specific sports, not a national ranking. Modest Genius talk 14:03, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support in principle, the event definitely has the significance to be posted but the closing ceremony doesn’t have the best article quality. I would prefer if the 2022 Winter Olympics was the bolded article as mentioned before but it is a little hard to make a good blurb while doing that. If someone can come up with a blurb which has the 2022 Winter Olympics as the bolded article or the closing ceremony can be improved then I think it should be posted. Hamza Ali Shah Talk 16:53, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
- Easy, alt3 added. Modest Genius talk 17:44, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support — With link to 2022 Winter Olympics closing ceremony. - STSC (talk) 21:10, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 01:05, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
February 19
February 19, 2022
(Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
International relations
Law and crime
Sports
|
(Posted) RD: Joey Beauchamp
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Black Kite (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Dave.Dunford (talk · give credit) and Egghead06 (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: English footballer. Article is in good shape. Black Kite (talk) 11:32, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Length (400+ words) Use of Footnotes Formatting . This wikibio is READY for RD. --PFHLai (talk) 14:55, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support Good to go. Pawnkingthree (talk) 20:50, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 21:18, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Emile Francis
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times; NHL.com; Associated Press
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Bloom6132 (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.
Bloom6132 (talk) 09:41, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Length (700+ words) Use of Footnotes Formatting . This wikibio is READY for RD. --PFHLai (talk) 15:18, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 21:50, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
(Closed) Ongoing removal: COVID-19 pandemic
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.
Nominator's comments: Instead of having the general COVID-19 pandemic article at ongoing, I think instead we should list specific events that happened during the pandemic like the Canada truck protest. The COVID pandemic article is not updated as often these days. It should be removed and replaced with major events associated with the pandemic. Interstellarity (talk) 20:33, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose for the thousandth time No way. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 20:42, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- Extremely strong support - Everyone knows this is ongoing. I really don't even know why people still care about covid. Remove. CR-1-AB (talk) 20:57, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- 'Extremely strong support' = support. – Sca (talk) 13:12, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose per Alsoriano. COVID is still an ongoing pandemic, and it ravages people daily. It's not like the black death, where 2 people get it every decade; it is an incredibly dangerous virus. I suggest speedy close. Fakescientist8000 (talk) 21:01, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- Snow Oppose I'm assuming this was not intended as a joke. -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:07, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- Closed Hcoder3104☭ (💬) 21:13, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- (procedural comment) I have reverted the NAC. With a vote total of 2-4 (considering the close as a supervote) this isn't eligible for a SNOW close, and certainly is not eligible for a SNOW close by a non-admin. User:力 (powera, π, ν) 01:30, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Comment I hinted that this might be reasonable a week ago. The Canada protests had consensus not to post then, and they are less notable now, so there is no reason to entertain the notion of a swap. As far as a removal ... soon, but probably not today. No vote as I have taken an administrative action on this topic. User:力 (powera, π, ν) 01:30, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose in the strongest terms Are you mad? This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 02:03, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support removal. Public health officials around the world are begining to use the word "endemic". At this point COVID-19 is ongoing the same way climate change, extinction, and the Israel-Palestine conflict are ongoing. It's here to stay, and it could be a decade or more before the WHO "declares" it over but here in planet real-world life has been returning to normal for quite some time. --LaserLegs (talk) 02:15, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose -- COVID-19 is still a serious threat, killing thousands of people daily. Removing it from ongoing makes no sense. I think people asking why others care must have their heads in the sand. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 02:23, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- List_of_epidemics the AIDS pandemic has been ongoing since 1982 and has killed more than COVID-19 so we ought get it into the ongoing box too huh? --LaserLegs (talk) 02:28, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- No, because it is not killing thousands of people daily. HiLo48 (talk) 02:43, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- What HiLo48 said. AIDS is not experiencing uncontrolled daily spread across the world. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 02:51, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Well COVID-19 is being controlled with safe and effective vaccines. Meanwhile 100's of thousands of annual deaths from HIV/AIDS and no vaccine. Probably better if you just keep your head in the sand. --LaserLegs (talk) 03:14, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- And 3,000,000+ died from COVID-19 last year. I'll tell you what, when the WHO reclassifies COVID-19 as an epidemic from a pandemic, then we can remove it from ongoing. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 03:38, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Well COVID-19 is being controlled with safe and effective vaccines. Meanwhile 100's of thousands of annual deaths from HIV/AIDS and no vaccine. Probably better if you just keep your head in the sand. --LaserLegs (talk) 03:14, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- List_of_epidemics the AIDS pandemic has been ongoing since 1982 and has killed more than COVID-19 so we ought get it into the ongoing box too huh? --LaserLegs (talk) 02:28, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose - It is still massively deadly across the world. HiLo48 (talk) 02:45, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Strong Oppose Millions are dying; this is a global event. It is on or near the top of the policy agenda of basically every country in some way, shape, or form. -TenorTwelve (talk) 03:04, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Strong titanic oppose Apologies for me opposing, this is still a thing, it's not like if the news doesn't pick up, the deaths of 6 million are nothing. PenangLion (talk) 03:39, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Kingsized Olympic Support Not to say it isn't still generally covered everywhere (not just news). It is, so we're not educational, we're redundant in stating the obvious. Things are happening beside protests, including policy changes, new wonderdrugs and marvelous mutations. We should open up and let them in. Mangeshkar died of COVID treatment, and she's still here, minus concurrent coverage. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:35, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Regular further observation If this was originally intended as a public safety initiative, prevention through awareness and such, that was noble. But it was clearly ineffective. See the ravaged millions in votes above for corroboration of this, if you think I'm lying. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:32, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Strong Oppose Pandemic is still ongoing, this should be removed when WHO declares it no longer a pandemic. I have suspicions that the nominator is just mad because the Canadian Convey protests weren’t posted to ITN, so they’re trying to get revenge by removing this from ongoing. Likewise if we were to be posting individual posts related to the pandemic, it would virtually clutter up the board. 24.166.251.29 (talk) 05:34, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- This nominator didn't support posting anything about the convoy, so I suspect your suspicions are your own problem. If COVID -related noms were allowed, they'd still be subject to discretion. The important turning points would stand out and be read; better than just telling readers it still matters, for unwritten reasons, and making them click and skim for whatever new info. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:02, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose - over 300,000 dead this year, around 5,000-13,000 dead per day... this is assuredly ongoing and pervasive. starship.paint (exalt) 06:35, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Then I'll leave. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:03, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose many people are still dying each day from this relatively new disease. Although there are vaccines available which reduce the likelihood of death, it's important to remember that they are not as readily available in poorer countries as they are in richer countries. And even in those richer countries with high vaccination rates, there are still plenty of people still dying from Covid. Chrisclear (talk) 07:37, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose – Get real. Toll (6.2 million) rises every day. – Sca (talk) 13:09, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Covid is still ongoing and still in the news. Rhino131 (talk) 13:57, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
RD: Jean-Luc Brunel
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CNN
Credits:
- Nominated by Kafoxe (talk · give credit)
- Updated by CAWylie (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: Disgraced talent scout, Epstein associate, suicide in prison. Kafoxe (talk) 17:35, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
Not Quite ReadyTwo cites needed.-Ad Orientem (talk) 18:36, 19 February 2022 (UTC)- Not Ready per Ad Orientem. Also this death seems mildly suspicious. Hcoder3104☭ (💬) 21:13, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- Comment CN tags resolved. Kafoxe (talk) 21:35, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support per additional citations. Comment I am not a fan of the word "allegedly" in the sentence on his suicide unless it is explicitly used by RS sources. It's not our place to be promoting conspiracy theories. -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:41, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- News outlets can't typically explicitly say that someone has committed suicide without an "allegedly" until it's been officially ruled as such, and in this case, I believe the investigations are still ongoing (though I may be out of date on that). Kafoxe (talk) 23:28, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- I think we have moved on from using "committed suicide" to replace it with "died by suicide". We should use the latter imo. Ktin (talk) 00:03, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- News outlets can't typically explicitly say that someone has committed suicide without an "allegedly" until it's been officially ruled as such, and in this case, I believe the investigations are still ongoing (though I may be out of date on that). Kafoxe (talk) 23:28, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- (Note: not Jean-Jacques Burnel) Martinevans123 (talk) 21:47, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
RD: Tom Veitch
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Gizmodo GamesRadar CBR BleedingCool
Credits:
- Nominated by Jonas1015119 (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: notable comics author, particularly for Dark Empire jonas (talk) 03:20, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- Not Ready for the usual reason. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:59, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
February 18
February 18, 2022
(Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
International relations
Law and crime
Sports
|
(Decision required) Storm Eunice
Blurb: In Europe, 17 people are killed in Storm Eunice (pictured). (Post)
Alternative blurb: In Europe, fifteen people are killed in Storm Eunice (pictured). A windspeed of 122 miles per hour (196 km/h) is the highest ever recorded in England.
News source(s): BBC, BBC South
Credits:
- Nominated by Mjroots (talk · give credit)
- Created by Toonling (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Edl-irishboy (talk · give credit), Pigsonthewing (talk · give credit) and Pohjamadesse1 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Nominator's comments: Significant European Windstorm, causing much disruption in Ireland, UK, France, Belgium, Netherlands and Germany Mjroots (talk) 18:44, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support - Certainly an unusual event of this type, and it's in the news.--WaltCip-(talk) 18:47, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
- Comment What is the need to put a weather record of a specific country in a blurb that mentions a natural disaster at European level? _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 19:07, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
- Adds to the significance of the storm. Higher winds than the Great Storm of 1987! Posting admin is free to amend blurb as they see fit. Mjroots (talk) 19:17, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
- I don't see the need, honestly and respectfully. I would understand if it was the highest wind gust ever recorded in Europe (although I wouldn't support it either), but not when we are talking about a specific country when it's a natural disaster that affects many more nations. Also I don't recall seeing other blurbs about storms mentioning these types of records. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 19:23, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
- Just because we haven't done it before does not mean we should never do it. WaltCip-(talk) 19:27, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
- I've restored the original blurb and made that an altblurb. Mjroots (talk) 19:30, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support The original blurb (now alt) is better as focussing purely on the body count is crude. Andrew🐉(talk) 20:33, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
- @Andrew Davidson: original blurb is the one without the windspeed record for UK. Mjroots (talk) 21:10, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose -- doesn't seem that significant to warrant a blurb. Seems not notable. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 23:49, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support Seems significant enough to warrant a blurb. Hcoder3104☭ (💬) 02:45, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- Comment The wind speed was the highest ever recorded in England, not the entirety of the UK. Kline | yes? 04:05, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support Unusual weather events are frequently featured. The alt blurb (which I prefer) should be reworded as "In Europe, seven people are killed in Storm Eunice (pictured), a cyclone with gusts of 122 miles per hour (196 km/h), the highest ever recorded in the United Kingdom." — Preceding unsigned comment added by An anonymous username, not my real name (talk • contribs) 04:08, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Not historically significant and the picture is just clouds to all but diehard meteorology buffs, no prejudice against 2021–2022 European windstorm season in Ongoing. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:55, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- The only other image availabe is one showing damage to the O2 Arena. If that is used, (damage to O2 Arena pictured) would be the image caption. Mjroots (talk) 09:07, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- Better, but not enough to save it, especially after realizing how many Europeans have been killed by similar wind since mid-October (~62). InedibleHulk (talk) 09:18, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- The only other image availabe is one showing damage to the O2 Arena. If that is used, (damage to O2 Arena pictured) would be the image caption. Mjroots (talk) 09:07, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support unusual event for that part of Europe, article is clearly good enough. Support ALT0. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:04, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
Support - Worst storm to hit the UK for almost 35 years. Unusual event, though there is a certain lack of international coverage and notability.PenangLion (talk) 08:45, 19 February 2022 (UTC)- BBC says it's "one of" the worst.InedibleHulk (talk) 08:56, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- If "worst" means deadliest, it's tied with Storm Malik from three weeks ago (our article doesn't count this true Scotsman). InedibleHulk (talk) 09:03, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- Coverage mostly refers to wind speeds and intensity rather than the death toll. In terms of intensity, it is one of (thanks for the correction) the worst since the Storm of 1987. PenangLion (talk) 10:13, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- "Strongest". InedibleHulk (talk) 10:42, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- I changed my mind. Would suggest wait per Andrew PenangLion (talk) 13:30, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
- "Strongest". InedibleHulk (talk) 10:42, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- Coverage mostly refers to wind speeds and intensity rather than the death toll. In terms of intensity, it is one of (thanks for the correction) the worst since the Storm of 1987. PenangLion (talk) 10:13, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb. SN54129 11:11, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb. Ten deaths in one place would be marginal. It’s a bus crash. Ten deaths scattered over a wide area is no more than routine misfortune on any old Monday. Article is good quality. Praise for the work but it’s not quite an ITN level event. Jehochman Talk 11:27, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- Yeah obvs. Daily battering? Martinevans123 (talk) 11:35, 19 February 2022 (UTC) [1]
OpposeComment – Widespread property damage, but RS coverage has been spotty. – Sca (talk) 13:13, 19 February 2022 (UTC)- I'm not what you mean by "spotty." The storm has been widely covered by reliable sources, as you would expect from the worst storm to hit the UK since 1987. Pawnkingthree (talk) 13:28, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- Coverage on primary int'l RS sites' main pages seemed thin (overshadowed by RU-Ukraine, still topic No. 1). – Sca (talk) 13:45, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- Ottawa number one, Rukraine, hack phooey! InedibleHulk (talk) 14:48, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- Seriously though, the CBC cares about Russia and Ukraine. But not this, not really. Just carries the AP copy. InedibleHulk (talk) 15:03, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- Coverage on primary int'l RS sites' main pages seemed thin (overshadowed by RU-Ukraine, still topic No. 1). – Sca (talk) 13:45, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- I'm not what you mean by "spotty." The storm has been widely covered by reliable sources, as you would expect from the worst storm to hit the UK since 1987. Pawnkingthree (talk) 13:28, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support. Significant event and the article looks to be in great shape. -- Tavix (talk) 14:51, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support
original onlyThe wind speed record seems trivial to me, but 15 people died which is surely a significant event. But the secondary blurb mentions this, sorry, didn’t see.12.246.51.130 (talk) 15:25, 19 February 2022 (UTC)- That's 15 out of several hundred million survivors, though, not some shared mass tragedy for anywhere in particular, like in events that people remember later. InedibleHulk (talk) 15:47, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
I've not seen that toll on AP, BBC, Guardian or Reuters. Nor do I see where 15 is specifically documented in the article.– Sca (talk) 15:52, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
DW reports nine storm fatalities, two in Germany and seven elsewhere.
- That's 15 out of several hundred million survivors, though, not some shared mass tragedy for anywhere in particular, like in events that people remember later. InedibleHulk (talk) 15:47, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- On Sunday BBC reported 16 storm fatalities, DW 12. – Sca (talk) 13:19, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Regardless, as a percentage, it's still 0.00% of those affected, connected only through posthumous world news aggregation, as a number, nothing realer. InedibleHulk (talk) 16:06, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- Weak oppose. The article is in good shape, but the wind speed record is trivia, and is apparently only for England and not even the whole country. [2] Looking at the 2021–22 European windstorm season page, this storm isn't the strongest in terms of pressure difference or fastest in terms of wind speed this season. Compared to the Great storm of 1987 or even other storms this season, the level of fatalities isn't particularly elevated, and damages seem quite limited, to less than half a billion pounds [3] With no other civic indicators (e.g. states of emergency), I don't see the significance for posting, though this could change as the situation develops. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 19:10, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose, no lasting impact, media hype including the filthy habit of naming a winter storm. Abductive (reasoning) 19:27, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose. Unusual, but not sufficiently significant to be posted. Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:53, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose (Moderate to Fresh). Can't say I'm blown away by this nomination. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:57, 19 February 2022 (UTC) (gusting, occasional Strong)
- Support Decent quality article; receiving international coverage. SpencerT•C 04:27, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support in Theory Fairly impactful windstorm, but it seems the article could use some expanding, especially in the Meteorological history section. DarkSide830 (talk) 15:48, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support. Extremely powerful storm for European standards. Here we don't get many fatalities, because here we maintain our infrastructure to be able to deal with rare weather events. Count Iblis (talk) 18:38, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support rare European storm with an impact and death toll that would get posted almost anywhere. Article quality is fine for ITN. Also, the oldest blurb is 9 days old, about an event that took place 14 days ago. NorthernFalcon (talk) 19:21, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose - it was certainly a bit windy, but there were thankfully very few deaths and long-term impact limited. — Amakuru (talk) 20:08, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Update The wind hasn't let up but it's called Franklin now. What seems to be happening is that the jetstream has formed a powerful sting jet which is driving a series of Atlantic depressions. This is now another record – three named storms in a week – and there's more to come. See BBC while next up is Gladys with talk of snow and tornadoes... Andrew🐉(talk) 10:39, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
- Good point, I suggest wait for more updates then. PenangLion (talk) 13:23, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
RD: Boris Nevzorov
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): TASS
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: Russian actor, died of COVID-19. Kirill C1 (talk) 15:51, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
- Not Ready Article needs expansion. Only eleven sentences of actual prose. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:12, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Jim Hagedorn
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NBC News
Credits:
- Nominated by Kafoxe (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Coltanders (talk · give credit), Jkaharper (talk · give credit), Brossow (talk · give credit) and Sunshineisles2 (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: Incumbent U.S. representative, cancer. Kafoxe (talk) 15:51, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support, though I note that no official cause of death has been announced (AFAIK). He had stage 4 kidney cancer but was recently admitted to hospital with COVID-19. B.Rossow · talk 16:21, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support, marking ready. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:34, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
- Comment' some election results tables are unsourced. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 16:57, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
- "Committee assignments" are unreferenced, too. --PFHLai (talk) 17:54, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
- True. I just added new cn tags. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 19:27, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support Article looks good. Hcoder3104☭ (💬) 02:44, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Missing refs are now resolved. Kafoxe (talk) 17:12, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 19:05, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
February 17
February 17, 2022
(Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
(Posted) RD: Surajit Sengupta
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): India Today
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Ktin (talk · give credit)
Article needs updating
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: Indian soccer (football) player. I am working on edits to the article. Edits done. Article is a reasonable start class biography. Meets hygiene expectations for homepage / RD. In the meantime if someone has the powers to mark the article patrolled, I would appreciate that since I do not have those rights. Seems patrolled now. Thanks. Ktin (talk) 05:56, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Length (400+ words) Use of Footnotes Formatting . This wikibio is READY for RD. Earlier versions of this wikipage have been deleted due to copyvio, which is no longer a concern per Earwig. --PFHLai (talk) 13:54, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Weak support Meets minimum standards; are there domestic league records available for his career statistics? (e.g. goals scored and appearances for each team) SpencerT•C 21:53, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- @Spencer: Trying to find some stats -- is there an ESPNCricinfo kind of stats database for soccer / football? If there are any databases, I am happy to have this information added. Seems like the infobox has space for this information, but, I am having some difficulty in identifying stats databases. Ktin (talk) 01:06, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
- @Robby.is.on: Tagging you here. Just saw your edit on this article. Seems like you might be able to help us here. Would you be able to point us to a trusted database that can help us with Surajit Sengupta's career statistics? Thanks. Ktin (talk) 01:24, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
- @Ktin: Usual sources such as worldfootball.net, national-football-team.com, footballdatabase.eu don't seem to have any records of the player. Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Links lists country-specific sources but there's no section for India. Posting a query to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football may be worth a try, perhaps experts on Indian football would respond. Kind regards, Robby.is.on (talk) 09:06, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
- @Robby.is.on: Tagging you here. Just saw your edit on this article. Seems like you might be able to help us here. Would you be able to point us to a trusted database that can help us with Surajit Sengupta's career statistics? Thanks. Ktin (talk) 01:24, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
- @Spencer: Trying to find some stats -- is there an ESPNCricinfo kind of stats database for soccer / football? If there are any databases, I am happy to have this information added. Seems like the infobox has space for this information, but, I am having some difficulty in identifying stats databases. Ktin (talk) 01:06, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 23:01, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- It would be very hard to find statistics for clubs which aren't in Europe's top-5 leagues pre-2000s (and, for some countries, even pre-2010s). The article is very well written given that he was active during the 1970s, so I wouldn't be too concerned with the lack of club stats. Nehme1499 19:07, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
RD: Martin Tolchin
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times
Credits:
- Nominated by Thriley (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 political correspondent for The New York Times. Co-founder of The Hill and Politico. Thriley (talk) 02:55, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- This wikibio with only 270 words of readable prose seems too stubby for ITN. 40 years at the New York Times summarized with a two-sentence paragraph? Then one sentence each for founding The Hill and Politico? Can more be written about his long career? --PFHLai (talk) 05:52, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- Agree. – Sca (talk) 16:19, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support as founder of Politico. SN54129 16:24, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose I agree with PFHLai and Sca- for someone with such a long, illustrious career, we have very little detail in this article. As such, I don't think it meets the necessary article quality, as I don't think it meets
Articles should be a minimally comprehensive overview of the subject, not omitting any major items.
(it doesn't seem to be comprehensive at all). Joseph2302 (talk) 16:26, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
February 16
February 16, 2022
(Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
Law and crime
Sports
|
(Posted) RD: Lorinda Cherry
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): LWN.net, heise.de
Credits:
- Nominated by Joofjoof (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Kumboloi (talk · give credit) and RDBrown (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: Bell Labs computer scientist who developed some of the original Unix utility programs. Death coverage is a bit thin, but the article has decent detail about her work. Joofjoof (talk) 01:33, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Comment we do not have an exact date of death in the article. However, that's not required; for procedural purposes the date the death was announced can suffice. And we no longer "sort by date of death" on the front page, so it certainly doesn't matter for that purpose. The article certainly could be better, but is probably good enough -- it is fully referenced. User:力 (powera, π, ν) 01:37, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: There are some quotes without context in the article, such as: "Cherry's work on approximate parsing and Aho's on fast pattern search turned out to be just the right foundation for an English style-appraiser suggested by Professor William Vesterman of Rutgers. That in turn was elaborated into Writer's Workbench by Nina MacDonald and others in the Human Performance Engineering Department."[5] Who said this quote? Should be paraphrased into the article not quoted directly. SpencerT•C 02:34, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for catching this. I have rewritten the paragraph and added attribution for the remaining quote. Joofjoof (talk) 11:10, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support Meets minimum standards, referenced. SpencerT•C 21:49, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for catching this. I have rewritten the paragraph and added attribution for the remaining quote. Joofjoof (talk) 11:10, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Posted. AGF'ing LWN.net is RS. --PFHLai (talk) 22:51, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Jack Smethurst
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC, Sky, MEN
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Martinevans123 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Jkaharper (talk · give credit) and Beryl reid fan (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: British actor best known for playing a racist shop steward in the controversial but popular TV sitcom Love Thy Neighbour Martinevans123 (talk) 19:12, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support Short but adequate. Referencing is decent. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:22, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
- Posted --PFHLai (talk) 06:37, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Gail Halvorsen
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Salt Lake Tribune
Credits:
- Nominated by Ryan Reeder (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Renewal6 (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: Known as the "Berlin Candy Bomber" for his involvement in Operation Little Vittles following World War II; Congressional Gold Medal recipient, among other honors Ryan Reeder (talk) 18:09, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support Solid article and well referenced. Article is justly graded GA. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:45, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
- Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 03:05, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
- Post-posting support Saw this earlier in the news, and confirming the article's quality is good for posting. --Masem (t) 03:09, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
- Post-posting support Article's subject is notable, article is in good quality. Keep on RD. Not sure about blurb. Fakescientist8000 (talk) 21:56, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Chennaveera Kanavi
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Indian Express
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Ktin (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Pachu Kannan (talk · give credit) and Arthashastra007 (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: Indian Kannada language poet. Article requires significant work. But, it is worth investing time imo. I will get to it later tonight. Edits done. Rater.js says the article is B-class, but, I think it might be a C-class biography. Meets hygiene expectations for homepage / RD and good to go. Ktin (talk) 17:33, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
Not Ready Article needs expansion. Take out the lists and you have a stub with ten sentences of prose.-Ad Orientem (talk) 01:42, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
- Edits completed. @Ad Orientem: please can you have a look at your convenience. Thanks. Ktin (talk) 00:00, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support Much improved. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:04, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: Infobox and intro say that the subject's DoB is "28 June 1928", the "Early life" section says "18 June 1928" and this ref says "June 29, 1928". Please confirm and make things consistent / explain the discrepancy in the wikibio. Thanks. --PFHLai (talk) 01:59, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for the catch @PFHLai:. I think in this case The Hindu has got it wrong. This article from the Sahitya Akademi has it as 28 June 1928. The Indian Express also has it as 28 June 1928. The Wire also has it as 28 June 1928. I have updated the early life section. Ktin (talk) 03:57, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you for sorting things out there, Ktin. Now Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 05:12, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for the catch @PFHLai:. I think in this case The Hindu has got it wrong. This article from the Sahitya Akademi has it as 28 June 1928. The Indian Express also has it as 28 June 1928. The Wire also has it as 28 June 1928. I have updated the early life section. Ktin (talk) 03:57, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
(Closed) Yahgan language becomes extinct/dead
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 Yahgan language becomes extinct following the death of Cristina Calderón as its last native speaker. (Post)
Alternative blurb: The Yahgan language becomes dead following the death of Cristina Calderón as its last native speaker.
News source(s): France 24
Credits:
- Nominated by Kiril Simeonovski (talk · give credit)
- Oppose on quality as the Yahgan language is orange-tagged with multiple issues, because it needs a lot more sourcing. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:11, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
- Comment The Yaghan language isn't an extinct language, but rather is a dead language (as defined in the article) as of Calderon's death. An extinct language is a language with no longer any speakers, and given that there are people who are speaking Yaghan thanks to Calderon's tireless work, including Calderon's daughters, however not as a their native language, thus making it a dead language instead. The article itself does not refer to the language, nor even the culture, as dead, due to Calderon's hard work in preserving the Yagan language and cultural traditions. Ornithoptera (talk) 10:12, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
- That also raises the issue of the France24 article listed does not say that the language is extinct following her death, so that raises an additional concern. The conclusion is garnered from something that is indirectly gleaned from reading between the lines rather than something explicitly stated by the news article being used as its source. Ornithoptera (talk) 10:16, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
- I've proposed an alternative blurb to specify it's a language death.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:25, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
- That also raises the issue of the France24 article listed does not say that the language is extinct following her death, so that raises an additional concern. The conclusion is garnered from something that is indirectly gleaned from reading between the lines rather than something explicitly stated by the news article being used as its source. Ornithoptera (talk) 10:16, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
- Neutral - It's a bit of a wobbly nomination given there are no previous examples to this. Personally I would like to support the nomination, but on the basis that there hasn't been any similar ITNs about language-extinctions, I'm abstaining the vote until a consensus has been generally reached. Cheers, PenangLion (talk) 10:14, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
- Comment The category Category:Languages extinct in the 21st century shows that more than 50 languages have gone extinct in just the last twenty years. It does not appear to be as unique of an event even when accounting for the isolate bit. Moreover the article has maintenance tags all over. Gotitbro (talk) 10:31, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose - Orange-tagged article, and I really don't see the lasting significance of this. Kafoxe (talk) 14:16, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Unclear if it's accurate as written. One anthropologist said,
The younger generation know the language but not to the same degree that Cristina does,
[4] Perhaps it's more nuanced, like she was the last full-blooded, fluent speaker—but that seems too narrow to blurb. RIP.
- Preceding comment posted by Bagumba. – Sca (talk) 16:46, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose per Ornithoptera, Gotitbro, and Bagumba. Dead rather than extinct takes some of the air out of this, in my opinion, and personally this is kind of like posting a species extinction. They, sadly, happen to a frequent degree, and just the acknowledgement of this is what is news. And, like a species extinction, this is somewhat hypothetical, as in Calderón is the last known native speaker. DarkSide830 (talk) 16:04, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Per not that rare and Calderón being posted to RD. Kingsif (talk) 16:26, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose – According to our article, 20 years ago there were 1,685 Yaghan in Chile, a total that by 2017 had declined a bit. Apparently all, or nearly all, have gone to Spanish as their mother tongue. Since that process has been under way for many years, this announcement does not seem to have notable significance or impact, though it may be of interest to ethnologists. Also, not widely covered. – Sca (talk) 16:42, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
- RD This is mostly a recent death. It's weak as a blurb because, currently, there's not much news coverage out there. There has been quite a bit of coverage of the language's fading status in recent years – see Atlas Obscura, for example. Of course, just listing the woman's name in RD doesn't provide any context or clue but that's a general failing of the current RD format. Andrew🐉(talk) 17:15, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support A language going extinct sounds like a pretty big deal. Hcoder3104☭ (💬) 00:18, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
- I think, to respond to this, the species extinction comparison is a good one. When white rhinos go extinct, there will be lots of media and lots of people caring because white rhinos are big and beautiful, were pretty common, and humans are a cause of extinction. The language comparison would be French going extinct and a massacre being partially responsible. That would get posted. But lots of species go extinct quite regularly, actually, and when it is microbial life that few humans have ever witnessed, very isolated, and there were only about 1000 examples that just died by natural causes, nobody really cares. That is this. Kingsif (talk) 08:22, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose -- is a language with no native speakers actually "extinct"? I don't think it is. --RockstoneSend me a message! 00:22, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose on article quality. Referencing is dreadful and will require a great deal of work before this could be seriously considered for posting on the main page. Suggest closing for now as there is no point in even discussing the merits with the article in its current shape. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:38, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
(Posted RD) RD/Blurb: Cristina Calderon
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb: Cristina Calderón, the last native speaker of the Yahgan language, dies at the age of 93. (Post)
News source(s): France 24
Credits:
- Nominated by Ornithoptera (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: Last known native speaker of the Yaghan language and last full-blooded Yaghan person, I have been updating and sourcing portions of the article that have been unsourced previously, should be relevant for RD. This is my first RD nomination so if I get something wrong just let me know! Ornithoptera (talk) 00:35, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support Referenced, appropriate depth of coverage. SpencerT•C 00:49, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support Relevant enough for RD. I did update it when she died but there were no news reports at the time and later I could not continue modifying the article. Bedivere (talk) 01:11, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support Solid article and well referenced. Marking as Ready. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:08, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 03:22, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Her death marks the extinction of a language. This is perhaps a story for a blurb. As an alternative centred on the language extinction, see the nomination above.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:48, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb Unclear if it's accurate as written. One anthropologist said,
The younger generation know the language but not to the same degree that Cristina does,
[5] Perhaps it's more nuanced, like she was the last full-blooded, fluent speaker—but that seems too narrow to blurb. RIP.—Bagumba (talk) 14:34, 17 February 2022 (UTC) - Oppose blurb While her passing is sad it is not on a level justifying a blurb. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:47, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
(Closed) Ongoing: Protests over responses to the COVID-19 pandemic
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): The Guardian, Reuters
Credits:
- Nominated by DadOfTheYear2022 (talk · give credit)
- Oppose Stop it. This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 17:25, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose and snow close Stop it. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 17:26, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose the target article is not regularly updated (has almost no content from this month, ongoing demands it would need to be updated daily), one section is orange-tagged, and article lacks sources in places. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:27, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support A lot of international daily coverage. - EugεnS¡m¡on 17:29, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Target article not regularly updated. SpencerT•C 17:56, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose - Regular but stupid thing that happens a lot, but with only major effects right now in Canada CR-1-AB (talk) 17:57, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- SNOW OPPOSE This has become vexatious. Stop it. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:58, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- I was wondering if someone was going to try and renominate this today. ITN/C never disappoints me.--WaltCip-(talk) 18:06, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- Closed. Hcoder3104☭ (💬) 18:16, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Luigi De Magistris
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): L’Unione Sarda
Credits:
- Nominated by Joseywales1961 (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: Italian Roman Catholic Cardinal, short but sufficient article for RD Josey Wales Parley 16:41, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support Solid article. Referencing is good. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:01, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support Well referenced, meets RD standards. Hcoder3104☭ (💬) 18:13, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- There is a request for citations for an unreferenced paragraph in the Biography section. Please add REFs there. --PFHLai (talk) 07:17, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
- PFHLai taken care of now Josey Wales Parley 08:09, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you for the new footnotes there, Joseywales1961. This wikibio is now READY for RD to me. --PFHLai (talk) 08:25, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
- PFHLai taken care of now Josey Wales Parley 08:09, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support article looks good and ready. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 11:26, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
- Posted --PFHLai (talk) 13:21, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
RD: Dorce Gamalama
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [6]
Credits:
- Nominated by Nyanardsan (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.
Nyanardsan (talk) 14:51, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support Decent article. Referencing is good. No issues. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:08, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support - Well referenced. Seems notable enough. (PenangLion (talk) 15:11, 16 February 2022 (UTC))
- Support Well referenced, article looks good. Hcoder3104☭ (💬) 16:37, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: Career section is mostly WP:PROSELINE, and could use some organization and cleanup (e.g. is it important to have "In December 2019, Gamalama had a reunion with Sinta Nuriyah, the widow of former Indonesian president Abdurrahman Wahid" in that section, and how does that relate to her career?) Filmography is unreferenced. Occupation in infobox says that she was a "singer-songwriter" but career section has no information about her musical career. Rm "ready". SpencerT•C 17:51, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: Filmography has remained unreferenced. The Career section still lacks info on her career in the music industry. Please expand the article and add more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 18:25, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
RD: Sandy Nelson
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [7]
Credits:
- Nominated by PeterSelIers (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: 1960s hit drummer. Article seems well sourced with no major issues. peter sellers is my best friend 14:37, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- Comment The Discography section has been tagged for clean-up since 2013 (and has no sources).-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 14:48, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- Not Ready per Pawnkingthree. Large chunks of the article are unsourced. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:16, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- Not Ready per above. Hcoder3104☭ (💬) 16:36, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: The Discography section has remained unreferenced and in need of clean-up. There are also a couple of {cn} tags in the prose. --PFHLai (talk) 19:18, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
RD: Bappi Lahiri
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:
- Nominated by Sherenk1 (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: Indian music composer. Ref issues for awards, discography. Death section is missing Sherenk1 (talk) 04:23, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support Looks good enough for RD. Hcoder3104☭ (💬) 14:11, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- Not Ready Significant gaps in referencing. I have tagged the article. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:13, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- Death section is added. But the article still has many unreferenced items. Venkat TL (talk) 16:22, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose as per above. Also lots of links to DAB pages that it'd be good to fix (I fixed a few links, but the rest weren't obvious to me, as I have no subject knowledge and there were many films of the same name). Joseph2302 (talk) 16:40, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Article needs work. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 21:02, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) 2022 Petrópolis floods
Blurb: At least 146 people are killed by mudslides and floods in Petrópolis, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. (Post)
News source(s): DW, AP, BBC, Agência Brasil, R7
Credits:
- Nominated by Nave do Conhecimento (talk · give credit)
- Created by Tet (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Tet (talk · give credit)
Nave do Conhecimento (talk) 19:15, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- This is probably better as a blurb as it appears to be damage and loss of life from the amount if rain over a short 3 hrs, not a prolonged period. Article needs expansion. --Masem (t) 19:38, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- Change made. Nave do Conhecimento (talk) 20:45, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Article needs work, currently stub Flameperson (talk) 21:05, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality. Needs a lot of work... _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 21:28, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support in principle. Death toll is huge for any standard, but oppose on quality, the article is a stub and needs a lot of work to be ready for MP.--Kacamata! Dimmi!!! 23:28, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support in principle, oppose on quality In my eyes, the event is clearly notable enough for a blurb. Article is poor right now, in need of significant expansion; but a simple google search turns up a ton of quality English-language sources, so expanding the article should not be difficult. I'm busy at the moment, but I'll do it myself in a few days if someone else doesn't do it first. NorthernFalcon (talk) 01:39, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
- Abstain - Event is supposedly huge enough, but the article says otherwise. More expansions needed. Once it's done, I'll support. Cheers, PenangLion (talk) 03:30, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
- Comment – Fairly widely covered, significant mortality. – Sca (talk) 13:07, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
- Sadly, this article has not improved since I checked it yesterday, aside from the infobox. I don't want no stubs. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:24, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support Death toll is high and increasing. ArionEstar (talk) 23:38, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose solely on article quality. It's a stub. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:00, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
- Comment I have tried to expand , it should be over 5k of readable prose now, but there's surprisingly little about this event in the news that gets into depth. It's covered (eg ticks that box for ITN) but just not the level you'd see if this had happened in the US or UK. --Masem (t) 19:05, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose too short. expand then maybe. Redoct87 (talk) 20:14, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support Article is expanded. 12.246.51.130 (talk) 15:01, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- This wikiarticle now contains 450+ words of readable prose and is not longer a stub. Time for a re-review, please. --PFHLai (talk) 16:21, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: What is the current death toll? The footnotes where the figures are found on the wikipage lead to online news articles reporting a different figure. Please update the refs. --PFHLai (talk) 16:38, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
- It would likely be the 136 number from G1 (a Brazilian news outlet). The English sources are a day or so behind --Masem (t) 01:37, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- It's 146 now. I've updated the proposed blurb. --PFHLai (talk) 05:33, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- It would likely be the 136 number from G1 (a Brazilian news outlet). The English sources are a day or so behind --Masem (t) 01:37, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support Seems to have been expanded sufficiently to meet minimum standards. SpencerT•C 02:38, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 05:41, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- PFHLai I'm not sure if this happens with US or UK outlets, but Brazilian news sites often update the same post/link with a different title. I had that problem while updating Murder of Moïse Mugenyi Kabagambe too. Tet (talk to me) 14:25, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, Tet, I have encountered cases where a news agency would update the contents of its online reports without changing the URL. However, when the death toll is part of the title and/or part of the URL, they will need new ones when there is an updated death toll. And then, sometimes, we have bad edits (example) where contents in our wikipages got changed without new source materials added as references to support the new info, producing citation errors that need to be fixed on sight. --PFHLai (talk) 14:40, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
February 15
February 15, 2022
(Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
(Posted) RD: Peter Merseburger
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Prisma and others
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Grimes2 (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: influential German journalist, famous for tv controversies, correspondent from Washington, D.C. and London, biographer of Willy Brandt and others - and had no article until today Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:00, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support Solid article and well referenced. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:24, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
- Posted --PFHLai (talk) 03:59, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Charles Juravinski
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CBC News; The Hamilton Spectator; Global News; McMaster University
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Bloom6132 (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.
Bloom6132 (talk) 09:43, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
- Long enough (600+ words), with enough footnotes and properly formatted, this wikibio is READY for RD. --PFHLai (talk) 14:31, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support Short but adequate and well referenced. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:05, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
- Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 17:36, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Ronald Lou-Poy
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Times Colonist (Victoria); University of Victoria
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Bloom6132 (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: Death announced on this date; date of death not specified. —Bloom6132 (talk) 04:59, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
- Long enough (almost 500 words), with enough footnotes across the article, and properly formatting, this wikibio is READY for RD. --PFHLai (talk) 07:55, 17 February 2022 (UTC)
- Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 06:07, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
(Closed) Former president of Honduras Juan Orlando Hernández arrested
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 former president of Honduras Juan Orlando Hernández, who was in office between 2014 and 2022, is arrested on a drug trafficking warrant after the US files a request formally for his extradition. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Honduran police arrest Juan Orlando Hernández, former president of the country between 2014 and 2022, on drug trafficking charges.
News source(s): teleSUR
Credits:
- Nominated by Viva Nicolás (talk · give credit)
- Support A former head of state being arrested, especially on serious charges, seems important enough. Article seems well-referenced. The Kip (talk) 05:41, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose for now. We usually wait for the final verdict and post if the person is convicted. At this point, we don't know how this is going to end, and it won't be significant if he's acquitted.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:13, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- Wait until more worthwhile developments occur. Cheers, PenangLion (talk) 08:42, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose per Kiril. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 08:59, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- Strong oppose we don't post arrests, if in the future there is a conviction, then we could post that. But posting now violates WP:BLPCRIME:
A living person accused of a crime is presumed innocent until convicted by a court of law. Accusations, investigations and arrests do not amount to a conviction.
Joseph2302 (talk) 09:14, 16 February 2022 (UTC) - Oppose – Per Simeonovski, Alsoriano, Joseph. Longstanding and well-founded policy for an online encyclopedia. Suggest snow. – Sca (talk) 13:22, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: PJ O'Rourke
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [8], [9]
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Muboshgu (talk · give credit)
- Updated by 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.
– Muboshgu (talk) 21:39, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support Solid article and well referenced. G2G. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:31, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support That's sad news. I shall get one of his books down to reread now. Andrew🐉(talk) 01:02, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support The article looks good. I didn't like the bastard but he made me laugh.;-) Carlstak (talk) 03:42, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- Posted --PFHLai (talk) 10:18, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- Post-posting support One of the few Americans to appeal to the cutting British sense of humour and win. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:06, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Deep Sidhu
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NDTV, India Today
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Venkat TL (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: Start class and fully sourced Venkat TL (talk) 17:01, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
- Support - Looks good and well sourced. Hcoder3104☭ (💬) 17:09, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
- Comment This is ready, what is the hold up? --Venkat TL (talk) 09:46, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- I've marked it as ready (as I agree it's ready)- hopefully marking it as ready will mean an admin sees it. It needs an admin to promote to front page, and I guess no admin is around at the moment. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:49, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- @Joseph2302 I see. Thank you for your action. Venkat TL (talk) 09:49, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- I've marked it as ready (as I agree it's ready)- hopefully marking it as ready will mean an admin sees it. It needs an admin to promote to front page, and I guess no admin is around at the moment. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:49, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
- Posted --PFHLai (talk) 10:09, 16 February 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: