Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates: Difference between revisions
Dunutubble (talk | contribs) →Ondo church attack: Reply |
→Ondo church attack: tentative/weak support |
||
Line 34: | Line 34: | ||
:'''Support per Rockstone''', but the death toll is still unclear so I would caution from explicitly saying that at least 50 died. [[User:Dunutubble|Dunutubble]] ([[User talk:Dunutubble|talk]]) ([[Special:Contributions/Dunutubble|Contributions]]) 20:10, 5 June 2022 (UTC) |
:'''Support per Rockstone''', but the death toll is still unclear so I would caution from explicitly saying that at least 50 died. [[User:Dunutubble|Dunutubble]] ([[User talk:Dunutubble|talk]]) ([[Special:Contributions/Dunutubble|Contributions]]) 20:10, 5 June 2022 (UTC) |
||
:{{Comment}} Could "mass shooting and bomb attack" be changed to something simpler such as "attack" or "massacre"? [[User:Dunutubble|Dunutubble]] ([[User talk:Dunutubble|talk]]) ([[Special:Contributions/Dunutubble|Contributions]]) 20:11, 5 June 2022 (UTC) |
:{{Comment}} Could "mass shooting and bomb attack" be changed to something simpler such as "attack" or "massacre"? [[User:Dunutubble|Dunutubble]] ([[User talk:Dunutubble|talk]]) ([[Special:Contributions/Dunutubble|Contributions]]) 20:11, 5 June 2022 (UTC) |
||
*'''Tentative/weak support''' so far. This [https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-61697409 BBC piece] makes this event sound like it does not stand out against the broader backdrop of recent violence there, but it does not have the death toll. The unconfirmed 50+ strikes me as significant. It is hard to tell at this point whether this attack is part of some broader conflict, and which one. [[Insurgency in Southeastern Nigeria]] has casualties just over 100 people on one side of that conflict, so if it's that one, this would be a significant escalation.[[User:Chaser|Chaser]] ([[User talk:Chaser|talk]]) 20:17, 5 June 2022 (UTC) |
|||
==== Kazakh constitutional referendum ==== |
==== Kazakh constitutional referendum ==== |
Revision as of 20:17, 5 June 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
June 5
June 5, 2022
(Sunday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Sports
|
Ondo church attack
Blurb: At least 50 people die and others are abducted in a mass shooting and bomb attack at a Roman Catholic church in Owo, Ondo State, Nigeria. (Post)
Alternative blurb: In Nigeria, at least 50 people die and others are abducted in a mass shooting and bomb attack at a Catholic church in Owo, Ondo State.
News source(s): Agence France-Presse, Reuters, The Guardian, Al-Jazeera, ABC News, VOA, BBC
Credits:
- Nominated by Abcmaxx (talk · give credit)
- Created by Dunutubble (talk · give credit)
Article updated
- Support on notability, but needs expansion. I would also say "Catholic Church" and not "Roman Catholic Church". -- RockstoneSend me a message! 20:00, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support per Rockstone, but the death toll is still unclear so I would caution from explicitly saying that at least 50 died. Dunutubble (talk) (Contributions) 20:10, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: Could "mass shooting and bomb attack" be changed to something simpler such as "attack" or "massacre"? Dunutubble (talk) (Contributions) 20:11, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Tentative/weak support so far. This BBC piece makes this event sound like it does not stand out against the broader backdrop of recent violence there, but it does not have the death toll. The unconfirmed 50+ strikes me as significant. It is hard to tell at this point whether this attack is part of some broader conflict, and which one. Insurgency in Southeastern Nigeria has casualties just over 100 people on one side of that conflict, so if it's that one, this would be a significant escalation.Chaser (talk) 20:17, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
Kazakh constitutional referendum
Blurb: Kazakhstan votes in overhauling its constitution after facing deadliest unrest in history. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Kazakhstan holds a constitutional referendum in changing 56 amendments to constitution following the January 2022 unrest.
Alternative blurb II: A constitutional referendum is held in Kazakhstan to democratize its political system following the violent civil unrest in January.
News source(s): France 24, Kazinform, News.com.au
Credits:
- Nominated by ShadZ01 (talk · give credit)
- Wait until results. --RockstoneSend me a message! 09:58, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Wait I can't tell easily when the results are expected but it seems like within a few weeks or months so it is best to wait. --Masem (t) 12:40, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Wait per above. The article looks great and are constitutional amendments in very important aspects of the country, so, IMO, is ITN-worthy. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 13:12, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Wait till results Don't care about the specifics, but the blurb should mention the preceding unrest DzhungarRabbit (talk) 16:36, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Wait - Needs at least the preliminary results. 4iamking (talk) 17:00, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) Bangladesh fire
Blurb: At least 49 people are killed and over 400 wounded by an explosion and fire at a storage depot in Sitakunda, Chittagong District, Bangladesh. (Post)
News source(s): NDTV, BBC, Reuters, DW, AP
Credits:
- Nominated by Debjyoti Gorai (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Dying (talk · give credit)
Article updated
- Support It could be a tad bit longer (I added some information) but given that they're still battling the fire and priority is on health services, I don't expect more details to emerge immediately. --Masem (t) 12:39, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support decent C class. Notable event. Venkat TL (talk) 12:44, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support because it's easily important enough & the article is good enough. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 12:45, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support on notability and quality. Very fast on article creation as well.Abcmaxx (talk) 12:51, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment – Widely covered due to toll, now put at 49. We might wait a bit for further detail additions to 400-word article. – Sca (talk) 13:29, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support looks important enough for ITN, it's the top story on BBC News for me right now. And article is more than just a disaster stub, so good enough to post IMO. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:00, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support, This should be in ITN and article explains well. Alex-h (talk) 15:19, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Still a bit thin – 500 words – for Main Page promotion. Still burning at 10 p.m. local time, and still developing as to death toll. – Sca (talk) 16:00, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- I've been looking at available sources and there's almost nothing else that can be added at this point, since the fire is still going and toll still rising. --Masem (t) 16:08, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Still a bit thin – 500 words – for Main Page promotion. Still burning at 10 p.m. local time, and still developing as to death toll. – Sca (talk) 16:00, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support "Readable prose size" is 665 words, which is long enough, and there aren't any significant gaps. Pawnkingthree (talk) 17:28, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Weak support – Yeah, it does total about 665 words now, and is quite readable. ('Weak' due to lack of wider import.) Suggest change "as of Sunday afternoon" to "at Sunday evening" (AP: "The fire raged for a second night"). – Sca (talk) 17:50, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 18:44, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
June 4
June 4, 2022
(Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Sports
|
June 3
June 3, 2022
(Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
Politics and elections
Science and technology
Sports
|
RD: Sophie Freud
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): New York Times
Credits:
- Nominated by TJMSmith (talk · give credit)
- Created by Arms & Hearts (talk · give credit)
- Updated by BlackAmerican (talk · give credit), Thriley (talk · give credit) and Silver seren (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.
- Support, Good Article for an honorable academic person. Alex-h (talk) 15:12, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
RD: Larry Hillman
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CBC News (Canadian Press); National Post
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.
- Support Article is good enough. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 19:09, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
RD: Ann Turner Cook
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NYTimes
Credits:
- Updated by Normantas Bataitis (talk · give credit) and Mount Patagonia (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.
- There are still some [citation needed] tags that need to be sorted out. After that, we are good to go! Cheers! Fakescientist8000 02:32, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
June 2
June 2, 2022
(Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Health and environment International relations
Politics and elections
Science and technology
|
RD: Agneta Klingspor
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Dagens Nyheter
Credits:
- Created and nominated by Urve (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.
- Support Article has no issues. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 19:04, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
RD: Kai Bumann
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): kultura.trojmiasto.pl
Credits:
- Created 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.
- Support 368 words. Sourced. Well done, Gerda! Grimes2 (talk) 08:07, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support, Article is good and has enough information. Alex-h (talk) 15:03, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support Good enough. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 19:03, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Alden Roche
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Green Bay Packers
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.
- Support Good enough. Grimes2 (talk) 13:58, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support, appears good enough. BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:33, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 14:12, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
RD: David Holford
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Cricinfo
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Hamza Ali Shah (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.
- Oppose Article needs expansion, for starters, it doesn't mention any info about his death. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 01:55, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- @TDKR Chicago 101, I've expanded it a little bit to include info about his death. Any more advice would be appreciated. Hamza Ali Shah Talk 22:01, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Marion Barber III
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CNN
Credits:
- Nominated by The Kip (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Muboshgu (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.
- Support Article looks good enough for posting. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 01:56, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support Article is good. Alex-h (talk) 14:19, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 02:40, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) Platinum Jubilee of Elizabeth II
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: Seventy-one nations, territories, and dependencies celebrate the Platinum Jubilee of Elizabeth II (Brisbane pictured). (Post)
News source(s): AP, BBC, Guardian, France24 (AFP)
Credits:
- Nominated by Kingsif (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Pigsonthewing (talk · give credit) and Peter Ormond (talk · give credit)
- Generally Support as I can't find any lack of citations in the article, and for most, we will never likely see another one of these in our lifetime. I wish the article was reworked to kill off the proseline ("On date, this happened") and be more cohesive, but that's not a requirement for posting. --Masem (t) 12:10, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose as this is just a ceremonial celebration with absolutely no impact.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 12:18, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose per Kiril. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 12:47, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support as we had posted the Diamond Jubilee back in 2012, so we have solid precedence for this. These don't happen very often.--WaltCip-(talk) 12:53, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support – Very widely covered historic – though ceremonial – event. Ignoring it could been seen as a gratuitous snub of Britain's longest-reigning monarch. – Sca (talk) 13:15, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- PS: – Surely a more on-topic photo could be found. – Sca (talk) 13:49, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support - I can't see why this wouldn't be notable enough, how many monarchs make 70 years? The Queen is probably the most well known in the world. Article seems fine, could do with splitting some proseline down, but not enough to keep off the main page Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:07, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support Only the 4th Platinum Jubilee in history. Will be a long time until we see another. Mjroots (talk) 14:22, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support Obviously significant event with worldwide coverage. Polyamorph (talk) 14:25, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support Probably the only such jubilee apt for ITN and we have precedent. Gotitbro (talk) 15:07, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose per Kiril Simeonovski Gamaliel (talk) 15:08, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support per Lee Vilensky. Queen will, for sure, live forever, so shouldn't we consider adding her jubilee to ITNR? Arado Ar 196 (talk/contributions) 15:58, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- I actually do think there's a legitimate case to make for adding jubilees to ITN/R, and I'm rather surprised they weren't there already. WaltCip-(talk) 16:29, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- the jubilees of all reigning monarchs at the time? From Monaco to Bahrain, passing through Bhutan and the Netherlands? I don't see it... _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 16:36, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- If it was done, I think it would have to be certain rare jubilees added to ITN/R--maybe golden jubilees and up. NorthernFalcon (talk) 17:51, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- the jubilees of all reigning monarchs at the time? From Monaco to Bahrain, passing through Bhutan and the Netherlands? I don't see it... _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 16:36, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- I actually do think there's a legitimate case to make for adding jubilees to ITN/R, and I'm rather surprised they weren't there already. WaltCip-(talk) 16:29, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support The celebration of Platinum Jubilees (70th anniversary of taking reign) is pretty rare. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 16:47, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Weak Support Widly covered and fairly rare event that directly impacts a number of nations. Maybe a ceremonial event which is why my support is just a slight one, but still seems worthy. DarkSide830 (talk) 16:56, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose, per Kiril. Alex-h (talk) 17:02, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support per Polyamorph and Lee Vilenski. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 17:07, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support It's a decent article on a notable event, there aren't many platinum jubilees and this is getting widespread coverage.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 17:09, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support - an almost unique event with worldwide media coverage. We previously posted the Diamond Jubilee of Elizabeth II, which is far less common event. The only comparable event in modern times would have been the uncelebrated 70th jubilee of the Thai king in 2016, who was in very-poor health and died during the year. And of course there was Louis XIV of France in 1713. Nfitz (talk) 17:14, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support extremely rare event that is clearly getting significant international coverage. NorthernFalcon (talk) 17:51, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment now that it's clear that for most editors this event is ITN-worthy, can we talk about quality? There is still an orange-tagged section. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 18:05, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- The overall article is in good shape. I'm a little confused about the expansion tag says it needs more info about events planned in Canada, but reading further such as the "Events from February to May" subsection it covers the events planned and executed so I don't see the need for this tag. I might need some clarification about this tag's purpose. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 18:11, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support A large event with international attention. Would be very unlikely to happen again in our lifetimes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Haris920 (talk • contribs) 19:44, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Posted The image will follow once cascading protection takes effect. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:03, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Muboshgu: -- Would this be a better picture? Ktin (talk) 21:08, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- I personally have no preference. I have not changed the image yet because I'm not clear on if cascading protection happened. The image doesn't appear at Commons:Auto-protected files/wikipedia/en, though a box with the file name is present. Strange. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:13, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- This image transcluded properly, so I am changing to it now. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:22, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- I personally have no preference. I have not changed the image yet because I'm not clear on if cascading protection happened. The image doesn't appear at Commons:Auto-protected files/wikipedia/en, though a box with the file name is present. Strange. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:13, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Muboshgu: -- Would this be a better picture? Ktin (talk) 21:08, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Pull -- this is completely expected, and her reign is non-notable; monarchies are silly. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 21:18, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- "Monarchies are silly" sounds very "I don't like it" to me. DarkSide830 (talk) 22:22, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Off-topic dispute |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
- Pull. Not a long term significant event, and we're not a news ticker. I'm glad of the extra day holiday and all, but it's a bit absurd to post fluff like this when we also regularly bypass news items that actually have a real effect on people's lives. — Amakuru (talk) 21:31, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- You got a holiday, which means it's already had more of an effect on your life than a rickety airplane crashing in the mountains of Nepal. --LaserLegs (talk) 22:57, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- (ec) It is probably by far the most significant monarchist event in recent history. And it's certainly all over the news. And it's relevant to hundreds of millions of people on English language Wikipedia. And it's 100% more relevant and longer lasting than the most recent mass shooting in the US. No problem at all with this, and I'm the opposite of a Royalist btw. I'm like a Democrat voting for "thoughts and prayers". The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 23:00, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Pull In the same category as trivia or celebrity news, and it's certainly misleading and inaccurate to portray this as something all commonwealth countries celebrate in any significant way.Abcmaxx (talk) 21:52, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment I share concerns about the wording of the blurb. The "celebrations" are almost exclusively limited to the Commonwealth realms not the larger Commonwealth of Nations. Indeed the celebrations, especially things such as street parties, will be a very British affair. It was only this week the Australian PM appointed a new minister to oversee the country becoming a republic. AusLondonder (talk) 22:21, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Not to send you down a process rabbit-hole, but, please take blurb refinement recommendations to WP:ERRORS. They are handled in a time-judicious manner there. Ktin (talk) 22:26, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- PP weak support It's getting a lot of attention and it doesn't have a body count. The Queen's article is also FA. Realistically the next time she makes it onto this page will be with her passing. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:39, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Ad Orientem or possibly if she makes it to May 28, 2024 and becomes the longest reigning monarch ever. Black Kite (talk) 22:58, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Can we have a non-breaking space between Elizabeth and II? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:52, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support headline news around the world. Sad that the Depp/Herd trial got shot down as "beneath" ITN -- I half expected to find this one had the same fate. --LaserLegs (talk) 22:55, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support definitely one of the top 300 global news stories of the year. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 22:56, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Off-topic dispute |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
RD: Uri Zohar
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Reuters, Haaretz, Times of Israel, National Post
Credits:
- Nominated by Dunutubble (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.
- Oppose on quality Regarding the nom com,
"Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post"
. Anywho, there needs to be additional citations regarding the filmography section. (Someone tried to link IMDb as a citation. Yuck.) Cheers! Fakescientist8000 13:15, 2 June 2022 (UTC)- I fixed the IMDB issue. Dunutubble (talk) (Contributions) 13:24, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment - Something seems off about the formatting. "Biography" is not a standard heading style in biographies. Havradim leaf a message 19:04, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Doesn't need to be, as long as the structure is a readable. Gotitbro (talk) 21:40, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
June 1
June 1, 2022
(Wednesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Science and technology
|
RD: Barry Sussman
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.
(Posted) RD: Andrée Geulen
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): RTBF, De Morgen, Times of Israel
Credits:
- Nominated by Brigade Piron (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Mellonne (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.
- Support good to me. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 16:25, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 18:52, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
(Closed) Tulsa shooting
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: 5 people die in a mass shooting at a hospital in Tulsa, Oklahoma. (Post)
News source(s): CNN, NBC, BBC, ABC, CBS, AP
Credits:
- Nominated by BubbaDaAmogus (talk · give credit)
- Oppose If "no one brought this up" it will be for a reason...another shooting in a country where it's routine and few victims. Please take a look at previous nominations to see what is the usual trend in deciding shootings in the United States. Snow close. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 22:03, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Uhh, what does "snow close" mean? BubbaDaAmogus (talk) 23:22, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- BubbaDaAmogus, WP:SNOW as in "a snowball's chance in hell". On the first vote too. Facepalm – Muboshgu (talk) 23:32, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- WP:SNOWCLOSE, where the outcome of a discussion is largely known and winding discussions are only to prove futile. Gotitbro (talk) 23:36, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Uhh, what does "snow close" mean? BubbaDaAmogus (talk) 23:22, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support. This is in the news and the article looks to be in good shape. -- Tavix (talk) 22:09, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose And close. The recent shootings were posted because they were exceptional in aspects (racially motivated/inordinate child killing), no such factor is apparent here, the article as of now itself notes "233rd mass shooting in the United States in 2022". ITN is clearly not a newsticker. Gotitbro (talk) 23:29, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support I don't remember motive being an ITN criteria anywhere. We have a mass shooting that is in the news and we have a good article for it. That it's the 233rd mass shooting in the US in 2022 showcases that this is a significant problem, much more of an important issue than a Depp/Heard trial or whatever else. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:32, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Those were arguments on which the recent ITN postings were predicated upon, nothing sets this apart from the others which have not been posted. Gotitbro (talk) 23:36, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Sorry but it sounds like you're now trying to use ITN as a way to WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS and that's totally not what this part of the main page is all about. We're not going to post each and every mass shooting in the United States in an attempt to make someone/anyone/the NRA/the GOP/Biden pay attention. No-one there does pay attention, but in any case, this is an encyclopedia. To even dare imagine than a mass shooting in the US with just five victims would be considered newsworthy is patently absurd. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 23:57, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Biden hates guns (at least by USA standards) but presidents aren't absolute monarchs (shudder), they can't pass laws without over half of the 435 equal population "MP's" AND 60% of the 100 state-sized districts' "MP's" agreeing (33 states elected theirs in 2020, 33 in 2018 & 34 in 2016, this makes getting 60 on anything harder cause extreme swings like Obama's coattails 2008 and Trump 2016 never repeat and in fact often reverse, Obama and Trump would've been worse off if all 100 senators were elected in 2010 and 2018 instead of just 1/3rd of them). Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 01:09, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose mass shootings are a daily occurrence in the US and this one is nothing special, since there have been more than 200 mass shootings this year alone. I'd suggest we stop nominating these trivial events. If we need to highlight a problem in the US (and that's not what English language Wikipedia is here to do) put "mass shootings in the US" in ongoing. (PS we didn't post the ultra-trivial Depp/Heard shit either). The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 23:37, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- You're right, I should have pointed out that this is way more important than the jubilee. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:40, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- No, you should have pointed out this is way more common than the Jubilee. Five people being killed in a mass shooting in America? That's any day ending with -day, right? The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 23:44, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- That's actually a good idea. But first, this discussion has to be closed. Let's wait to do that. BubbaDaAmogus (talk) 23:56, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- You're right, I should have pointed out that this is way more important than the jubilee. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:40, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose and yes. Snow close.--WaltCip-(talk) 23:53, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose -- this doesn't rise to the level of ITN. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 23:59, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Shooter revealed this was a revenge of sorts at a surgeon that he claims gave him long-term pain issues. [5] Eg akin to a disgruntled worker and doesn't rise to the level of race-related or school shootings. --Masem (t) 01:13, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
RD: Gerard Brennan
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Pelly, Michael (1 June 2022). "Former High Court chief justice Gerard Brennan dies". Australian Financial Review. Retrieved 2 June 2022.
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Sdkb (talk · give credit)
- Updated by 101.167.224.100 (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.
The Chinese name part needs to be cited or removed. After that, we're good to go. Cheers!Support Article is well cited, long enough, and generally issue free. Fakescientist8000 11:33, 2 June 2022 (UTC)- @Fakescientist8000, commented out, since I couldn't find a source. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 14:29, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- I think he has a sufficiently interesting career to have such a short biography...I think it could be expanded more. There are some tags to fix, yet. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 16:24, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Alsoriano97, at 2500 characters of prose, it's well over the 1500-character standard often used at DYK. I wish it were longer, too, but this is ITN, not GAN/FAC. On tags, there was only one ill-placed clarify tag, which I removed. Please remember the salient question: not, "Is it as good as it can be?" but rather, "Is it in decent enough shape that we can present it widely to readers without embarrassing ourselves?" If the answer to the latter question is yes, we should get it up while it's still timely. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 18:17, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- What is clear is that you still do not respectfully assume constructive opinions. But beyond that, don't you think the article should talk about what he did as a High Court justice or even as Chief Justice? At least briefly? _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 18:29, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- You're welcome to expand on the information about his term as High Court justice/Chief Justice already present in the article. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 19:48, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- I guess that, since you are the nominator, there is no better person to do so. ;) _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 20:06, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- You're welcome to expand on the information about his term as High Court justice/Chief Justice already present in the article. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 19:48, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- What is clear is that you still do not respectfully assume constructive opinions. But beyond that, don't you think the article should talk about what he did as a High Court justice or even as Chief Justice? At least briefly? _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 18:29, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Alsoriano97, at 2500 characters of prose, it's well over the 1500-character standard often used at DYK. I wish it were longer, too, but this is ITN, not GAN/FAC. On tags, there was only one ill-placed clarify tag, which I removed. Please remember the salient question: not, "Is it as good as it can be?" but rather, "Is it in decent enough shape that we can present it widely to readers without embarrassing ourselves?" If the answer to the latter question is yes, we should get it up while it's still timely. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 18:17, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Immediately after "Early life and education", we jump to "After retirement"? Where is the "Career" section? That's three decades of his life, often in prominent positions. These things establish notability and should not be missing from anyone's biography. Please fill this glaring gap (e.g. his legal training? what he did as a lawyer before becoming a judge? his appointment to the High Court and subsequently becoming Chief Justice? Perhaps a line of two about the Mabo case? Don't forget that he was also president of two Bar Associations and the founding president of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal before he "retired"... What a career!) --PFHLai (talk) 00:43, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
Danish EU Opt out Referendum
Blurb: Denmark votes to eliminate its opt-out of the EU's Common Security and Defence Policy. (Post)
News source(s): DR, FT, Politico, BBC, France24, DW, AP
Credits:
- Nominated by 4iamking (talk · give credit)
- I updated the results table now, full results are in article. 4iamking (talk) 00:12, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Oppose on quality this is the kind of news that is ITN-worthy because of its real impact in many aspects. This is a serious place. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 22:14, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support On par with a national election in importance This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 22:46, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support - Important referendum,
first EU opt-out to ever be reversed.Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 04:00, 2 June 2022 (UTC); Edited 17:21, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Hmmn, no. The UK ending it's opt out on the social chapter came first. 3142 (talk) 16:34, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you, corrected. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 17:21, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Hmmn, no. The UK ending it's opt out on the social chapter came first. 3142 (talk) 16:34, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose The article could use some more work, particularly a reactions/aftermatch section. In addition, we don't just include all national referendums here, and I don't think the referendum is of such worldwide importance that it ought to be included. Gust Justice (talk) 07:12, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose This is just a change in the position of a member state regarding the participation in one particular policy area with no immediate implications. If the country had an opt-out that was abolished for the first time is only symbolic and the method of direct democracy doesn’t really give any additional weight here. The opt-out they had didn’t veto the implementation of policies in that area, so this is really a marginal change by a relatively small member state. I’d have perhaps considered supporting had Denmark abolished its opt-out regarding membership in the Eurozone and subsequently announced adoption of the euro.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:02, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support This is a fairly significant development especially given Denmark's history of euroscepticism and another consequence of Russia's invasion of Ukraine. I would argue that a nationwide referendum would almost always be of ITN significance. AusLondonder (talk) 11:34, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Needs some prose in the results/reactions section, otherwise this is an ITN story. --Tone 11:53, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support ... in principle, pending article development. Widely covered as a foreign policy sea-change occasioned by the Russian invasion of Ukraine. – Sca (talk) 13:21, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose doesn't seem that significant in the grand scheme of things. — Amakuru (talk) 17:10, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support. I had a read-through of the article and it looks to be in postable shape. The results and reactions sections look to be fleshed out, everything seems to be well-sourced and it's certainly noteworthy. -- Tavix (talk) 15:24, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support article is in good shape and it's unquestionably ITN-worthy. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 16:05, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Is this really in the news? I stay pretty well informed, and the only mention I've seen of this is in this thread. Looking at this week's (June 4) and last week's Economist there is no mention of this - even in the summary of various issues in the front section. Looking at the references in the articles, they all appear to be Danish, except for a Tweet from Emmanuel Macron. This seems to be a very local issue. Nfitz (talk) 18:51, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- The Guardian, the ABC, CNN, and the BBC all covered this, as did many overs. BilledMammal (talk) 06:38, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- I'd think that the BBC article being 7 years old, say a lot. That said - media coverage of something doesn't make it ITN. There's been similar media coverage of numerous Swiss or California referendums over the years. The way the other articles are written, it looks to be more part of the ongoing Ukraine fallout than anything else. Nfitz (talk) 13:42, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Are you really comparing the referendums in Switzerland and California with the one held in Denmark, whereby a country, historically less subject to EU law, becomes subject to EU defense and security policies? Lol. And the fact that some news are not widely covered doesn't make them non-ITNR (look at the finals of sports competitions that are ITNR, for example). _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 18:09, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Or the entry into operation of the Elizabeth line whose nomination you supported... _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 18:12, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Most Swiss/California referendums concern local laws and happen with way greater frequency, a referendum on a local tax or budgetary issue is going to be way less significant than one that concerns the exercising of provisions in international treaties. 4iamking (talk) 19:53, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Are you really comparing the referendums in Switzerland and California with the one held in Denmark, whereby a country, historically less subject to EU law, becomes subject to EU defense and security policies? Lol. And the fact that some news are not widely covered doesn't make them non-ITNR (look at the finals of sports competitions that are ITNR, for example). _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 18:09, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- I'd think that the BBC article being 7 years old, say a lot. That said - media coverage of something doesn't make it ITN. There's been similar media coverage of numerous Swiss or California referendums over the years. The way the other articles are written, it looks to be more part of the ongoing Ukraine fallout than anything else. Nfitz (talk) 13:42, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support Significant event that affects the entire EU, and a significant change of policy for Denmark. In addition, the result is unusual - Denmark usually votes no in EU referendums. BilledMammal (talk) 06:38, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
(Closed) Depp v. Heard verdict
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:
Alternative blurb: Actors Johnny Depp and Amber Heard are both found liable in a defamation lawsuit.
News source(s): The New York Times
Credits:
- Nominated by Andise1 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
- Nope, absolutely not. We are not a tabloid magazine. This has little impact on the world. (Remember, this was a defamation trial, NOT a domestic abuse trial.) Cheers! Fakescientist8000 19:56, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Its on the front page of the New York Times so is not Tabloid fodder. Aircorn (talk) 00:11, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose no way. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 19:56, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- strongest possible oppose this is nothing more than tabloidy gossip glorifying bad and abusive behavior in relationships and hardly relevant to an encyclopedia despite social media interest. PRAXIDICAE💕 19:59, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Celeb gossip does not belong on the main page at all. --Masem (t) 19:59, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Vehement oppose Absolutely not. Blade Jogger 2049 Talk 20:07, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support Re-opened. We post all manner of sports competitions and disasters of dubious long term notability. There are some facts: our WP:READERS are interested in entertainment, a massive world-wide industry. This story is in the news, and has been for some time, making headlines around the world (albeit that is not a requirement). The article is detailed with more prose than the four items currently in the box combined. Lastly, this isn't some simple gossip column, it's a libel case against content published in the press where libel cases are traditionally hard to make. I know this is going to go down in flames but seriously, this is getting more coverage than anything else currently in the box and everyone who opposes this knows that to be true whether the like it or not. --LaserLegs (talk) 20:24, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- If any of the opposes thinks the story lacks encyclopedic value, then I suggest WP:AFD and if you're not willing to put in the effort I'd suggest your oppose is without merit. --LaserLegs (talk) 20:24, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
I know this is going to go down in flames
Then there's no point in reopening it - you're just wasting everyone's time.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 20:28, 1 June 2022 (UTC)- Stories can be of encyclopedic value dye to broad coverage, but at the same time, utterly fail for they type of stories that ITN is meant for. The legal tribulations of formerly married people is definitely of this sort. --Masem (t) 20:46, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- If any of the opposes thinks the story lacks encyclopedic value, then I suggest WP:AFD and if you're not willing to put in the effort I'd suggest your oppose is without merit. --LaserLegs (talk) 20:24, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support per LaserLegs. 2A00:23C7:3D09:6001:2C41:F38E:27F5:DD2B (talk) 20:31, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support per LaserLegs, and I'd like to express my bemusement at this nomination being originally closed after just 16 minutes. 49 TL 20:35, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment I'm striking ALT0 and proposing ALT1, because Depp was also found liable for one count of libel, and though he "won" in terms of getting more money, it's not a pure vindication for him. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:44, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support Very notable and high profile case. --TheDutchViewer (talk) 20:47, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality The article goes into an excessively detailed day-by-day (almost proseline), witness-by-witness rehashing of the trial. The trial itself should be summarized. The article also does not go into enough discussion of the ramifications of this case for libel law and free speech issues more broadly. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 20:50, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Yeah I was just skimming through the article myself... and my god is it long and overly detailed. And what are the larger ramifications? – Muboshgu (talk) 20:54, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose little relevant, encyclopedic, worldwide, case. Two people suing each other in a defamation case is hardly a worldwide event. -- Asartea Talk | Contribs 20:57, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Don't be ridiculous. WaltCip-(talk) 21:13, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Incredibly strong oppose. The article is a mess, and as far as relevance, this trial is of interest only to a particular (primarily American) audience who has been following it and probably already knows the verdict. Others do not care or are actively trying to avoid the case. — GhostRiver 21:17, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality alone per ONUnicorn. Way, way, way too much detail. Article needs work before being on the front page. —Sirdog (talk) 21:30, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment While I know this is very polarizing, it disheartens me to see so many editors providing a vote without presenting rationale that comments as to why (particularly in relation to article quality or notability). I'd like to encourage anyone reading this comment to do so, regardless of the vote. —Sirdog (talk) 21:43, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Strong Oppose Unless the case fundamentally changed how defamation is handled in the United States, there's nothing significant about two overpampered celebrities slinging mud against each other in court.
And it's not just because I'm so annoyed at how social media algorithms kept shoving this "story" in my face for the past couple of weeks.Mount Patagonia (talk) 21:35, 1 June 2022 (UTC) - Strongest possible oppose tripe, baloney, codswallop Bumbubookworm (talk) 21:36, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Codswallop! Thanks for teaching me a new word! PRAXIDICAE💕 21:39, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Strongest Possible Support per LaserLegs. This is ITN, even if we want to pretend it's beneath ITN's dignity. Also, this is not primarily an American story; it's one of those few celebrity dramas that have an international angle: Heard was first found not liable in the UK. This also has another interesting angle: proving defamation is an extremely high bar in the US, much higher than in the UK: that defamation was proven in the US and not in the UK provides an interesting and unique legal angle. It is not just a celebrity drama. Finally, it appears as the headline news in the BBC. For all of these reasons, I strongly support this being posted ITN. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 21:44, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Remember, "strongest possible support" = support. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 21:56, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Right, and "strongest possible oppose" = oppose. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 22:01, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Wasn't it clear from my previous statement that that applies too? Cheers! Fakescientist8000 22:08, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Right, and "strongest possible oppose" = oppose. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 22:01, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- ITN is purposely not a.newdticker, hence why we care little about stories dominate headlines, and consider articles of broader relevance. Masem (t) 22:54, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Remember, "strongest possible support" = support. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 21:56, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Strongest possible support This is ITN. The page in question has been running at over 50,000 page views per day. Odds on that it will make the top 25 report this week. This is what our readers are interested in. I disagree that the case has no broader significance in the #MeToo era. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:11, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- our readers have the tabloids to read this kind of news. This place is an encyclopedia. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 22:17, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose - quality of article isn't suitable. Item goes into ridiculous depths. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 22:15, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose two shitty people being shitty with other and being found guilty of variously being shitty with each other is not something I'd expect an encyclopedia to promote on its main page. Grow up. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 22:33, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment. The world's first real-life soap series has ended, there are no plans for a sequel. Count Iblis (talk) 22:39, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- We've Heard that before. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:44, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose per WP:NOT. Wikipedia is neither a celebrity gossip magazine or even an ordinary newspaper. Even setting that aside, article also needs severe reworking as way too much of it is dedicated to a WP:INDISCRIMINATE recollection of events. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 22:49, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment I've done some entirely non-precision cutting ([6]), which needed to be done anyways. Doesn't address the this-is-not-what-Wikipedia-is issue, but at least removes most of the cruft. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 23:50, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Tabloid, celebrity trivia. HiLo48 (talk) 23:21, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Terrible article which goes into mind-numbing levels of detail about an ultimately trivial story. Pawnkingthree (talk) 23:37, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support per Rockstone. -- Tavix (talk) 23:55, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose and reclose. This is not the sort of story which rises to ITN importance, and there's also clearly no chance of it being posted, so time to put it out of its misery. — Amakuru (talk) 23:57, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Strong Oppose and Reclose A defamation case between two people of very little influence is gossip stuff and nothing else. DarkSide830 (talk) 00:11, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose on article quality alone. While most of the other opposes are without merit the article contains too much excessive detail. Also don't reclose yet. Aircorn (talk) 00:16, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose This is not the place to post a celebrity trial with no real long term importance. Thriley (talk) 01:37, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Tabloid ITN is not. Depp is a well known actor, he has not been featured on ITN so far and if it was to be so it definitely shouldn't be about personal issues. Gotitbro (talk) 02:05, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- The only instances where personal issues, IMO, rise to an ITN item would be of heads of countries/others which have an impact beyond themselves. The merit here (as some have pointed out) might have been in the defamation aspect of the case itself but news media is not highlighting that and this is clearly not a landmark case. Lasttly, what readers are "interested" in at the moment can be gauged from WP:TOP25 but that is neither here nor there and not what ITN is for, if so we can do away the ITN noms and replace them with the TOP25 itself. Gotitbro (talk) 02:26, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose This is celebrity tittle-tattle, nothing more. Than doesn't mean it isn't of interest to a portion of the readership but there is an apparent contradiction with the earlier UK case. ITN is not the place to even attempt to resolve an issue such as that. 3142 (talk) 02:12, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose per reasons above. ArsenalGhanaPartey (talk) 02:18, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
May 31
May 31, 2022
(Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
Law and crime
Science and technology
|
(Posted) RD: Jim Parks (cricketer, born 1931)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC News; ESPN; The Daily Telegraph; Sussex County CC
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.
- This wikibio is READY for RD. It is long enough to qualify (500+ words), has footnotes where they are expected, and there are no concerns with formatting. Apart from a long quote, Earwig found no other problems. --PFHLai (talk) 13:49, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support Looks ready. Pawnkingthree (talk) 19:18, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 21:03, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Victor von Halem
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): WDR
Credits:
- Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk · give credit)
- Created by LouisAlain (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Voceditenore (talk · give credit) and 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.
- We have now details in English, updated further. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:30, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support Sourced. 600 words. Fine. Grimes2 (talk) 18:24, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 21:03, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: KK (singer)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NDTV
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Venkat TL (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.
- Oppose Article needs ref work
and the lead could be beefed up to mention more about his career (such as why is he regarded the "most versatile singers of his generation") because it only mentions the languages his songs were in.such as the career section and his album/awards section contain no sources. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 18:55, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Will try to update in some time. As a fan, very sad due to his untimely passing. 😭 Venkat TL (talk) 19:18, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support, Seems to be an important figure to Indians. Prodrummer619 (talk) 19:31, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Prodrummer619: It's not about if the person is important, the main criteria is if the article is in good state (good sources, good info, etc.) TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 19:43, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment will try and assist folks on adding more sources to the article. Other than that, it has my Support. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 03:39, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Early life: "graduated from Kirori Mal College" in what?; two uncited statements: "This song featured members of the Indian Cricket Team.", "KK also has a daughter named Tamara Kunnath." Career: a lot of cn tags along with an additional refs banner. Awards and honors: completely uncited.
- Also, related article List of songs recorded by KK contains three wholly uncited sections (and subsections): Film Songs in other languages, Albums, TV Title Songs, TV Performances, Other Non-Film Songs; and uncited 2020, 2022, 2023 sub-sections. Gotitbro (talk) 07:23, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment The missing references have been added. Needs review. Venkat TL (talk) 11:10, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Ready I think. --Venkat TL (talk) 14:49, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Venkat TL: All the instances of songs/singles are in italics, the format is double quotes, no italics (only films/albums should be in italics). The statements highlighted below need to be cited, also looks like some articles were AfD'd therein UTV (I guess for UTV Software Communications) and Star Parivaar Awards (Star Plus (TV Channel)) and should be linked aptly. Gotitbro (talk) 02:55, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment There are still a number of uncited sentences. Some appear trivial ("He got his first break in Mumbai with UTV to sing jingles.", "He has also sung the theme song for Star Parivaar Awards 2010 with Shreya Ghoshal.") and could probably be removed. Black Kite (talk) 22:18, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Black Kite, @Gotitbro, I have implemented these improvement suggestions. I thought Italics were needed for the song titles, thanks for correcting me. I havve removed italics. Venkat TL (talk) 07:19, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support Looks good to me. A similar cleaning up of List of songs recorded by KK which appears integral to the main article would also be appreciative. Gotitbro (talk) 09:39, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Gotitbro thank you. List of songs recorded by KK is already in the correct quote/italic format as you said. It has 480 refs. Venkat TL (talk) 10:02, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, but I was talking about the wholly uncited sections (see above) regardless of the citations currently present. Gotitbro (talk) 10:40, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- OK, I will look at it, but filmography is a separate article than KK and one section in it should not hold this RD nomination from getting posted. Venkat TL (talk) 10:44, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, but I was talking about the wholly uncited sections (see above) regardless of the citations currently present. Gotitbro (talk) 10:40, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Gotitbro thank you. List of songs recorded by KK is already in the correct quote/italic format as you said. It has 480 refs. Venkat TL (talk) 10:02, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Ready again. This nom is 3 day old and fast getting stale. Venkat TL (talk) 12:19, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- There is a 7 day window to post RDs.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 15:17, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support, it does appear to be fully cited now.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 15:17, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- How come the Career section does not mention anything after 2015? He was still active, according to List of songs recorded by KK. --PFHLai (talk) 01:24, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- @PFHLai This HT article provides answer to your question. His last album came out in 2008, yes he was active after 2015 too but he was doing playback songs for films and concerts. I guess there were no new major popular songs from him since then. His Bio only lists popular songs, while the other songs are listed in discography. I am checking for popular songs in this period. will add if I find. Venkat TL (talk) 09:22, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you for revising the Career section to fill the gap in coverage. The funeral has been held -- if you like, please update and elaborate on this as you see fit (I've updated the tense and changed the date). A separate issue: Things mentioned in the intro are usually just highlighted or summarized there and are then elaborated upon in the main body of the article. However, the Filmfare Awards nominations currently only appear in the intro (and unref'd!) but not mentioned elsewhere in the prose. The table following the prose indicated that he was not only nominated, but won once! Please fix. Thanks. --PFHLai (talk) 10:51, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Fixed @PFHLai, funeral section added. Award win added. Refs for the award/nominations are in the table, not in the lead per WP:REFLEAD. After lot of searching I dont find popular songs he sang after 2015, notably he did not get award nominations too for the period. I have added his interviews he gave in the period to fill the void. Marked it as ready as no major issues holding the nomination. Venkat TL (talk) 15:04, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- It should be in the prose, not in the table afterwards. But it's alright. --PFHLai (talk) 14:11, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- @PFHLai thank you. I agree. I have added it now. Venkat TL (talk) 14:23, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for adding. -- PFHLai (talk) 14:54, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- @PFHLai thank you. I agree. I have added it now. Venkat TL (talk) 14:23, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- It should be in the prose, not in the table afterwards. But it's alright. --PFHLai (talk) 14:11, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Fixed @PFHLai, funeral section added. Award win added. Refs for the award/nominations are in the table, not in the lead per WP:REFLEAD. After lot of searching I dont find popular songs he sang after 2015, notably he did not get award nominations too for the period. I have added his interviews he gave in the period to fill the void. Marked it as ready as no major issues holding the nomination. Venkat TL (talk) 15:04, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you for revising the Career section to fill the gap in coverage. The funeral has been held -- if you like, please update and elaborate on this as you see fit (I've updated the tense and changed the date). A separate issue: Things mentioned in the intro are usually just highlighted or summarized there and are then elaborated upon in the main body of the article. However, the Filmfare Awards nominations currently only appear in the intro (and unref'd!) but not mentioned elsewhere in the prose. The table following the prose indicated that he was not only nominated, but won once! Please fix. Thanks. --PFHLai (talk) 10:51, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- @PFHLai This HT article provides answer to your question. His last album came out in 2008, yes he was active after 2015 too but he was doing playback songs for films and concerts. I guess there were no new major popular songs from him since then. His Bio only lists popular songs, while the other songs are listed in discography. I am checking for popular songs in this period. will add if I find. Venkat TL (talk) 09:22, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support good to go. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 09:29, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 14:11, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
RD: Miangul Adnan Aurangzeb
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Dawn, The News, 24 News
Credits:
- Nominated by Ainty Painty (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.
- Oppose Article needs a lot of work such as expansion and source work. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 16:29, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Beyond the person being an MNA, there doesn't seem to be anything to warrant an RD mention. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 03:40, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- As the ITN template above notes, for RDs only article quality needs to be sufficient, notability is not a factor. But the article is barely above a stub here. Gotitbro (talk) 06:01, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality far from ready. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 15:36, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
2022 monkeypox outbreak
Blurb:
Alternative blurb: The number of confirmed cases in the 2022 monkeypox outbreak has doubled to around 700 over the past week.
Nominator's comment: Check the chart from OurWorldInData (local version linked to on the right):
Disclaimer - I am an involved editor in the article.
Notes: I had read some of the comments on the previous nomination. For all the epidemiological points, I'd like to point out that, as of now, there is too much unclear about the outbreak to be able to say whether this will go "pandemic" or not (even if due to the nature of transmission, a pandemic would be quite different to that of COVID-19 in any case). Also, I'd like to point out that - rather than being "hypersensitive" to the subject, my impression is that opposite - I think this would have been making more headlines before the pandemic (70 new cases of a disease - in one day in the UK - that was previously restricted to West Africa?).
So anyway, even if its not in the news that heavily anymore, I think this is warranted to presentation here on Wikipedia. (Also - I think it would be a shame not to showcase an article that many editors have put good work into - and which might be substantially out of date within a couple weeks though). Regards Sean Heron (talk) 11:18, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support The WHO are not ruling out that this might become a pandemic. Me, I'm planning a trip to Colorado but see that it has already reached the Rockies! Andrew🐉(talk) 11:21, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- "not ruling out that this might...: is the sloppiest reason to post. HiLo48 (talk) 23:24, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Blurb, Support Ongoing The only news about 500 cases I'm seeing is about Nigeria's 500 cases since 2017 and Sankuru's 500 cases since January. In a non-African context, it's just apparently some number. But the broader outbreak keeps chugging along in general, with however many new cases (article says 568). InedibleHulk (talk) 11:54, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Ongoing it's an ongoing event with ongoing news coverage. However, there is no single event so far that meets the threshold for an ITN blurb. And once again, there is no rule that something has to be a blurb before being added to ongoing, contrary to people that will inevitably argue this. Joseph2302 (talk) 12:00, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Wait It is fair game that this potentially can be a pandemic or the like, but we're still talking 500 cases out of 7 billion people, compared to COVID that by the time we posted was in the high thousands. Feels too premature at this point for ongoing. --Masem (t) 12:09, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- You can't go the rest of your life comparing everything to COVID. Apples and oranges. How long did the Russian invasion take? InedibleHulk (talk) 12:21, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Exactly! From creation, 19 days, 18 hours and 42 minutes of continual news and article updates. God knows how many seconds. InedibleHulk (talk) 13:18, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- For the record, this article is now precisely 13 days, 14 hours and 50 minutes old. InedibleHulk (talk) 13:28, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Without checking for sure, we didn't add Covid as ongoing until about 3 to 4 months after its first major news of spread. I am pretty confident our first articles on Covic were created that December before the pandemic declaration. Masem (t) 18:34, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Again, everything about that storyline is weird. The bards in charge had to whip up an entirely new and never-before-seen word just to describe its twists and turns. The "fight against monkeypox" is also not combat in the traditional sense, but as this enemy is selectively targeting gay men through physical contact and turning them red, it's closer in spirit to Russian barbarism than some ethereal indiscriminate upper respiratory threat. The simplest choice, of course, is to treat it on its own merits. Its incremental updates are novel, unique and original, after all. InedibleHulk (talk) 08:20, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Without checking for sure, we didn't add Covid as ongoing until about 3 to 4 months after its first major news of spread. I am pretty confident our first articles on Covic were created that December before the pandemic declaration. Masem (t) 18:34, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Ongoing - A COVID-19 comes along only once in a lifetime. All other pandemics in this generation will pale in comparison to it. But this is still newsworthy despite its limited impact thus far.--WaltCip-(talk) 12:42, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Ongoing. The blurb would happen if a pandemic is declared. Jehochman Talk 13:03, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support Ongoing ... oppose blurb, since the situation doesn't appear to have changed markedly since the blurb nom. last week failed to fly, and because as Walt notes impact has been limited. – Sca (talk) 13:14, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb first - unusual outbreak. I would hold off on ongoing until the blurb sinks down though, within the week or so in which that happens we should know for sure whether it's Ongoing-worthy or not. Either way, hopefully it wouldn't be. Juxlos (talk) 13:47, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb or ongoing Either or should be fine, but this should 100% be on the main page ITN section ASAP. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 16:27, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Wait Still 0 deaths; it has also largely rolled off of the front page at most news organizations. The last blurb was nominated during peak media hysteria about a new potential public health crisis 47.176.81.182 (talk) 18:00, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose unless WHO declares this a pandemic. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 20:42, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Honestly, not yet a pandemic, and with HIV/AIDS not posted, even that bar alone is not an auto-inclusion in my mind. 500 cases of a disease - and none of which yet fatal - in a span of a few weeks is notable, but not quite seismic in impact, nor unique. DarkSide830 (talk) 04:02, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Clarification question - is this opposition to a "blurb" or inclusion as "ongoing" ? (Just going by the current "ongoing" events, I could understand your seismic comment - for the blurb, I'm not sure how eg the winner of a Sports event would qualify as "seismic") Sean Heron (talk) 06:02, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- P.S. Actually, bar SARS and COVID, and to an extent the 2003 US monkeypox outbreak (which was zoonotic though) - this outbreak is in fact unique, as far as I can tell (happy to be pointed to other examples though!) Sean Heron (talk) 06:02, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support I'm not sure where in the ITN guidelines it says that a public health issue has to be declared a pandemic before it reaches sufficient newsworthiness. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 06:17, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Good point. -- Sca (talk) 12:41, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support Last major outbreak was in 2003, looks significant. Gotitbro (talk) 07:25, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose unless it's declared a pandemic. This disease is also endemic to some parts of Africa already, so to suddenly highlight it just because it's moved to the "western" world is not a good look IMHO. — Amakuru (talk) 09:34, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- its not that it's moved to the western world, its that the disease has moved to countries where it shouldn't be found in. 4iamking (talk) 10:54, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support but Ongoing its getting alot of news coverage, and its not going away anytime soon. There is no requirement for it to be anther pandemic to be featured in ITN, it just has to take up a lot of oxygen in the news.4iamking (talk) 10:53, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment – Why isn't this nom. using the standard template? – Sca (talk) 12:51, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Strong oppose ZERO deaths. I don't think natural disasters with zilch fatalities get posted. At least bother to nominate this once the first fatality is confirmed. I personally have a hard time finding differences between this and a panic-obsessed media complex trying to generate clicks. It's like the media complex has become habituated about posting every incremental update about possible but unconfirmed health condition that might or might not have an economic impact. 81.181.130.106 (talk) 14:13, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Blaming 'the media' is always a good ploy. -- Sca (talk) 15:05, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support. A new mutated pox virus that is going to become endemic is bad news given that pox viruses tend to evolve to become deadlier over time. Count Iblis (talk) 15:15, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- We don't post on speculations. Masem (t) 15:25, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Or on specula, either. -- Sca (talk) 15:28, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- We don't post on speculations. Masem (t) 15:25, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose let's not put the cart before the horse. Trillfendi (talk) 20:18, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Made the news here for a couple of days a week or so ago, then disappeared. Obviously not a major issue for the world. Maybe if it escalates.... HiLo48 (talk) 23:25, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
Support blurb - It is in the news, article looks good, blurb first and discuss "Ongoing" status depending on how events continue to unfold. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 03:59, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support ongoing - Ongoing event with continuous coverage. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ♥) 06:43, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose There has not even been 1,000 confirmed cases yet and no reported deaths. This can perhaps be renominated in a few weeks if the reported number of cases explodes. Thriley (talk) 23:44, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support because it's easily important enough & the article is good enough. It doesn't need to be an epidemic/pandemic to be important enough to post. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 11:55, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb or ongoing. It's in the news, article quality is good enough. There are no rules about it having to be declared a pandemic, or having to kill a certain number of people, or having to be in the news in the place where editors live... all of these are oppose rationales that should be discounted. Levivich 22:17, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Actually, in regards to "having be declared a pandemic", we do not want to post the same story multiple times to ITN so we want to be at a point where we move out of speculation into when it is a proven event (eg high-profile criminal convictions, business merger announcements). There's a potential for this to be a pandemic, so ideally we don't want to post the story before it reached that turning point. Masem (t) 22:21, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- but then, with the absence of the pandemic hook, wouldn't the logical thing be to add this to ongoing (given that it is receiving a lot of attention in the news and has been for a few weeks now), and when it actually gets declared a pandemic if that ever happens, then we would blurb it? 4iamking (talk) 23:18, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- In the spirit of WP:NOTCRYSTALBALL, we shouldn't not post an ITN blurb about an outbreak because we think it will become a pandemic later. Also there really is no problem with posting a story twice, it's not like we don't have room or we have too many blurbs rolling off too soon; in fact the problem is the opposite, ITN blurbs are perpetually stale... mostly because good blurb candidates are voted down by a myriad of new and inventive reasons like "might become a pandemic later". Also also, posting it to ongoing avoids this issue entirely. Levivich 01:22, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Actually, in regards to "having be declared a pandemic", we do not want to post the same story multiple times to ITN so we want to be at a point where we move out of speculation into when it is a proven event (eg high-profile criminal convictions, business merger announcements). There's a potential for this to be a pandemic, so ideally we don't want to post the story before it reached that turning point. Masem (t) 22:21, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support ongoing. There's no major recent development that would warrant a blurb, but this has been in the news enough at a high enough sustained frequency, with regular gradual developments, that ongoing makes sense. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:30, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
Questions (by nominator):
I'm not understanding some things here (and have doubts I would understand better by reading the policies on ITN in more detail). So:
- Will an administrator be looking over the nomination and bringing it to a conclusion, or not? I'm asking, because the first nomination was "simply" auto-archived from what I can tell.
- What criteria are used to decide on inclusion for ITN - is it whether the Wikipedia article has been updated (and of high enough quality)? Or whether the subject matter / article is being reported on in big (international) media outlets? Or if the news item some passes some kind of notability criteria? What guides notability? (For the Outbreak, notability has been dismissed with arguments ranging from "no deaths yet" to "when it is declared a pandemic")
- -> My feeling right now (and looking at other nominations, eg for the Texas elemenary school shooting), is its some kind of amalgation of all of those, (but then in certain cases, the question of how many people take one view or another is not deemed relevant?)
- In general - people weighing in, on both sides for the Monkeypox outbreak, seem mostly to be strongly swayed by their personal opinion. Is that the general idea of how ITN nominations are to be resoved? Put differently, my impression is the process is pretty badly broken, or at least could be considerably improved (to make for more structured discussions, along more objective and deliminated criteria).
Sorry if there are answers to these questions somewhere already, or if there is a better forum to pose the questions - I'm happy to be pointed there! Regards, Sean Heron (talk) 23:05, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Your observation about the process is a valid one. See this discussion. --RockstoneSend me a message! 00:20, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- The main concern is if this has passed a threshold that is recognized as a key point. Eg: We don't post on arrests or the like until the person is convicted in a court of law, etc. When the best time to report a potential epidemic/pandemic is unclear but we do know there are points like when WHO officially names it as such. Hence the hesitation for posting this now when we don't have that, and thus harming if we have to post again when the WHO make their assessment. --Masem (t) 00:44, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Sean shouldn't stress about ITN's manifest flaws because the monkeypox topics are actually doing fine. Here's how they compare in recent readership with the current bold entries in the ITN blurbs:
Topic | Readers |
---|---|
Elizabeth II | |
Monkeypox | |
2022 monkeypox outbreak | |
Platinum Jubilee of Elizabeth II | |
Tara Air Flight 197 | |
2022 Port Harcourt stampede | |
2022 Indian Premier League Final |
- It's clear from this that ITN is driving few readers to the topics in question. Our readers mostly decide for themselves what's important and go straight there. That includes monkeypox and so Sean's efforts have not been in vain. Well done.
- Andrew🐉(talk) 09:45, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for the friendly comments, and the pointers :) . Sean Heron (talk) 10:29, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
May 30
May 30, 2022
(Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment International relations
Politics and elections
|
(Posted) RD: Costen Shockley
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The News Journal, Cape Gazette
Credits:
- Updated 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.
- With 1648 words of readable prose, this wikibio is more than long enough to qualify. Footnotes can be found in expected spots. No obvious formatting issues. And the similarities found by Earwig are mostly quotes. This wikibio is READY for RD. --PFHLai (talk) 10:49, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Posted to RD. TJMSmith (talk) 13:20, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
RD: Boris Pahor
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): DW, France 24
Credits:
- Nominated by NovumChase (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Doremo (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.
- Oppose Article needs a lot of ref work. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 01:51, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality per above. A lot of work to do. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 16:21, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Too many orange tags. Too many footnote-free paragraphs. No improvements in the past couple of days. --PFHLai (talk) 10:53, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Friedrich Christian Delius
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Der Spiegel and many others
Credits:
- Nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Grimes2 (talk · give credit) and 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.
- The wikibio is long enough to qualify (485 words of readable prose), has footnotes at expected spots, with no obvious formatting issues, and Earwig found nothing wrong. It is READY for RD. BTW, is it worth mentioning his 2004 Fontane Prize of the City of Neuruppin? (Not a requirement for posting.) --PFHLai (talk) 11:26, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- I added it, - it's among the 16 literary prizes the German Wikipedia has. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:44, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for adding. --PFHLai (talk) 13:40, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- I added it, - it's among the 16 literary prizes the German Wikipedia has. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:44, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 02:33, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Sean Thackrey
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): San Francisco Chronicle
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.
- There are a few sentences tagged for missing citations. --PFHLai (talk) 14:57, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- @PFHLai: done – citation needed tags addressed and unsourced statement removed. I removed one CN tag (first para. of "Early life") because it is an uncontroversial statement re. his university prof that was already verified by ref 7 at the end of the paragraph. —Bloom6132 (talk) 16:30, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for the fixes. This wikibio is more than long enough to qualify (987 words of readable prose), has footnotes where they are expected, with no concerns with formatting. And Earwig has found no problems. This is READY for RD. --PFHLai (talk) 00:02, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 02:34, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Ramses Ohee
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Liputan 6
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Jeromi Mikhael (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.
- This wikibio is long enough to qualify (749 words of readable prose). Footnotes can be found in expected spots. Formatting looks fine. Earwig found absolutely no problems. So, this is READY for RD to me. I just have one minor question: Is the subject really a pharmacist (essentially a chemist with post-graduate training and clinical responsibilities) or an administrator in pharmacy? --PFHLai (talk) 11:36, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- @PFHLai: Sorry about the late, I think he's a pharmacist despite the lack of higher education. Earlier in his life he worked as a regular employee (the clerk is just a rank, doesn't really mean he's a clerk) in the pharmacy. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 06:53, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- No worries. Thanks for the explanation. -- PFHLai (talk) 11:35, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- @PFHLai: Sorry about the late, I think he's a pharmacist despite the lack of higher education. Earlier in his life he worked as a regular employee (the clerk is just a rank, doesn't really mean he's a clerk) in the pharmacy. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 06:53, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 03:13, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Jeff Gladney
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Fort Worth Star-Telegram Former TCU teammate Jalen Reagor
Credits:
- Nominated by KingOfAllThings (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.
- Support, I was just planning on nominating this. BeanieFan11 (talk) 18:52, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support The Kip (talk) 19:29, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support Sad death, article looks good, is well cited, and generally issue free. Cheers. WimePocy 20:33, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
He was released on August 3, 2021 after his indictment for domestic violence.
What indictment for domestic violence? This sentence is the only mention of it. Article is incomplete without more detail there. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:38, 30 May 2022 (UTC)- The info on that was removed by an IP here. BeanieFan11 (talk) 22:01, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Marking for needed attention. KingOfAllThings (thou shalt chatter!) 20:18, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support Article looks good enough. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 20:31, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Posted --PFHLai (talk) 12:29, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
2022 IIHF World Championship
Blurb: In ice hockey, the IIHF World Championship concludes with Finland defeating Canada in the final. (Post)
News source(s): CBC/The Canadian Press, National Post/Reuters
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.
- Oppose on quality there is no summary text in the article, either for explaining how this complicated tournament works, or any match summaries. These are standard issues with sports articles, and is why most of them don't get posted (see for example all the other ITNR sports things below that haven't been accepted). Joseph2302 (talk) 15:14, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- I might be able to work on it tomorrow, can’t guarantee it however. The Kip (talk) 22:31, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Ronnie Hawkins
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CTV News, New York Times
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Floydian (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Carlstak (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.
- Comment A legendary pioneer, sure, but also continued rockin' into the 21st century. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:17, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Note, prose is pretty much fully sourced now, just need to get the band lineups and discog/singles referenced and this will be nearly ready. - Floydian τ ¢ 17:30, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support because no one else seemed to say they were. AdoTang (talk) 21:18, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Unsourced discography and singles still to be addressed. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:34, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Discography (all but one) and singles now sourced to his official website. - Floydian τ ¢ 22:26, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Ronnie Hawkins#Hawks lineups needs sources. Was the graph drawn based on the tabulated names and years above it? How come the graph's timeline is longer than that in the table? --PFHLai (talk) 09:21, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Seems like it's meant to show the transition of The Hawks into The Band, but I don't see the point of including the portions after Hawkins left. I'm sure there's a biography out there that could source all this, but I have no qualm moving it to the talk page until sources can be found for it. - Floydian τ ¢ 11:35, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for the removal. It seems like a good idea, but not yet ready for use with the sourcing thus far. This wikibio is more than long enough to qualify (2684 words of readable prose), has footnotes at expected spots, with no obvious formatting problems. Apart from a few quotes, Earwig has found no issues. This wikibio is READY for RD. --PFHLai (talk) 12:49, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support looks great now. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 20:46, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 02:47, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Stan Rodger
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Stuff.co.nz, Otago Daily Times, NZ Herald
Credits:
- Nominated by Kiwichris (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Paora (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.
- Support Article looks in good enough shape. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 01:58, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support Came here to suggest the article for RD but Kiwichris has beaten me to it. Schwede66 02:08, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support Nothing to complain. Grimes2 (talk) 05:38, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 09:46, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
May 29
May 29, 2022
(Sunday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
International relations
Politics and elections
Sports
|
(Posted) Indy 500
Blurb: In auto racing, Marcus Ericsson (pictured) wins the Indianapolis 500, the second Swede to do so. (Post)
News source(s): Associated Press
Credits:
- Nominated by 2600:1702:38D0:E70:452C:FB38:4B5A:A417 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Waluigithewalrus (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.
- Oppose right now - article isn't updated yet - seems to have no information on the actual race. Still has a lot of uncited text in other parts as well. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 20:32, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment/question wouldn't a picture of the winner (we have one) be better than a picture of an oval? Thryduulf (talk) 23:39, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- As it comprises multiple ovals, yes, it certainly would. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:23, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- OK, he's here. InedibleHulk (talk) 08:10, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose. Minimal international coverage; even in international media where it is mentioned it is displayed less prominently than other recent races that we are not considering posting, such as the 2022 Monaco Grand Prix. It is listed on ITNR, but we are permitted to make exceptions, and given the clear lack of significance of this race we should do so. BilledMammal (talk) 01:38, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- The history of the race alone for both makes them suitable for posting, I would argue. I also would argue that, if we excluded this, other ITNR items such as the Kentucky Derby should be excluded as well. Personally, I believe this, the Monaco GP, and the Kentucky Derby are all suitable. DadOfTheYear2022 (talk) 02:54, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- The Indy 500 is also the "flagship event" of that racing season, like a final is in some other sports. That's not the case with the Monaco GP (probably because the racing there is awful). Either way, this is ITNR, so only article quality should be considered. Any other discussion should be done at WT:ITN. Joseph2302 (talk) 07:45, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- The history of the race alone for both makes them suitable for posting, I would argue. I also would argue that, if we excluded this, other ITNR items such as the Kentucky Derby should be excluded as well. Personally, I believe this, the Monaco GP, and the Kentucky Derby are all suitable. DadOfTheYear2022 (talk) 02:54, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Looks it's pretty simple. If you don't want this on ITN/R head over to WT:ITN and propose a removal so I can oppose it. Your oppose in this nom is invalid. --LaserLegs (talk) 12:40, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Very bizarre that Monaco Grand Prix is not ITNR listed but this is given they both form part of the Triple Crown of Motorsport. I know what race attracts more international coverage and it isn't this one. AusLondonder (talk) 15:57, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Yeah there is a secret WP:CABAL of US only motorsport enthusiasts who conspire to keep the whatever you linked to off the main page. When you re-enter the earths atmosphere and the radio blackout has ended I'll transmit instructions to you on how you can nominate your favorite events at ITN, then if successful nominate for inclusion at ITN/R. I'm not sure from which planet or other celestial body you're originating from, just call me when you make it to Earth. --LaserLegs (talk) 18:59, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for your constructive, collaborative, insightful comments as usual. A real asset to the project, you are. AusLondonder (talk) 08:01, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Yeah there is a secret WP:CABAL of US only motorsport enthusiasts who conspire to keep the whatever you linked to off the main page. When you re-enter the earths atmosphere and the radio blackout has ended I'll transmit instructions to you on how you can nominate your favorite events at ITN, then if successful nominate for inclusion at ITN/R. I'm not sure from which planet or other celestial body you're originating from, just call me when you make it to Earth. --LaserLegs (talk) 18:59, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Very bizarre that Monaco Grand Prix is not ITNR listed but this is given they both form part of the Triple Crown of Motorsport. I know what race attracts more international coverage and it isn't this one. AusLondonder (talk) 15:57, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Looks it's pretty simple. If you don't want this on ITN/R head over to WT:ITN and propose a removal so I can oppose it. Your oppose in this nom is invalid. --LaserLegs (talk) 12:40, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality there doesn't seem to be a summary of the actual Sunday race itself (just a results table). Joseph2302 (talk) 10:50, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- I think this needs to be codified somewhere: ITN/R is not a guideline and there are no exceptions. Any attempts to treat it as such by opposing an ITN/R item based on notability, usually with the accompanying argument of WP:IAR, should itself be ignored. Any consensus established on ITN/R supersedes any attempt to block a posting on such grounds, and in order to remove an item's ITN/R status, consensus needs to be established on WT:ITN.--WaltCip-(talk) 15:12, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- WP:ITNR is a "generally accepted standard that editors should attempt to follow, though it is best treated with common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply" AusLondonder (talk) 15:54, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Per Wikipedia:In_the_news#Sports_and_other_recurring_events " Items listed there are considered exempt from having to prove their notability through discussion on the candidates page" --LaserLegs (talk) 19:01, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Which is neither a policy nor a guideline. The guideline is WP:ITNR, and it says
occasional exceptions may apply
. BilledMammal (talk) 19:28, 30 May 2022 (UTC)- What has more weight - a boilerplate template that is applied to every "guideline", or the wording of WP:ITNR itself which provides for NO exceptions? WaltCip-(talk) 11:50, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- WP:5P5: "Wikipedia has no firm rules". People pretending otherwise sound at best like lawyers (not in a positive sense); and more likely just silly. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 22:53, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- What has more weight - a boilerplate template that is applied to every "guideline", or the wording of WP:ITNR itself which provides for NO exceptions? WaltCip-(talk) 11:50, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Which is neither a policy nor a guideline. The guideline is WP:ITNR, and it says
- Per Wikipedia:In_the_news#Sports_and_other_recurring_events " Items listed there are considered exempt from having to prove their notability through discussion on the candidates page" --LaserLegs (talk) 19:01, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- WP:ITNR is a "generally accepted standard that editors should attempt to follow, though it is best treated with common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply" AusLondonder (talk) 15:54, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support – there's a solid race summary now in place, with refs throughout, and no maint tags present. Article is of sufficient quality to post now, imo. And I don't find the arguments for invoking WP:IAR over WP:ITNR compelling, personally. There are far more appropriate avenues for disputing the presence of something on ITNR than in the nominations of ITNR items; forcing nominators and editors to repeatedly jump through the same hoops on every other nomination was exactly why ITNR was drawn up in the first place. I see no reason for setting aside the well-established consensus developed by editors and codified in that guideline. Cheers! Buttons to Push Buttons (talk | contribs) 20:07, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- More citations are needed, and I see several places in the body where mph is given without a template converting to km/h. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:17, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Many thanks for tagging those -- they should all be dealt with now. Buttons to Push Buttons (talk | contribs) 21:23, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support Don't see any quality issues. Pawnkingthree (talk) 00:34, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support The article looks to go. Unnamelessness (talk) 04:40, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support - Article seems to have been updated. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 05:51, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Posted Left out Swede tidbit. We didn't post regarding 1st Japanese winner for 2021 Masters Tournament, so I'd expect an explicit consensus to add that for a 2nd here.—Bagumba (talk)
- Oppose second tidbit The "important thing" is he's the first person in the world to drive around a famous oval 200 times this year. InedibleHulk (talk) 09:59, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) Tara Air Flight 197
Blurb: Tara Air Flight 197 crashes with 22 people on board after going over some high mountains in Nepal (Post)
Alternative blurb: Tara Air Flight 197 crashes in Nepal, killing all 22 people on board.
News source(s): AP, Guardian, Reuters
Credits:
- Nominated by Debjyoti Gorai (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Dora the Axe-plorer (talk · give credit)
Article needs updating
- Debjyoti Gorai, This article isn't at ITN/R (I'm not really sure how it could be). You should remove that. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:08, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Removed it. Debjyoti Gorai 18:13, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose for now - so far the plane has been missing for around 12 hours (as far as I can tell). Seems quite disingenuous to say "with deaths". Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:14, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment – Reuters says search for plane suspended due to darkness. – Sca (talk) 18:38, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Wait until confirmation of its fate. --Masem (t) 18:59, 29 May 2022 (UTC)- Now Support with both confirmation of the wreckage and the updated article. Cause is not likely to be known for days so expansion related to the search efforts is fine. --Masem (t) 13:28, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment The disappearance is confirmed. The problem is that there isn't enough to fill up the wikiarticle yet. There will be more to write about after the crash site is found. --PFHLai (talk) 20:39, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- The disappearance of course happened. What could be (hopefully) the case is the passengers all surviving but simply unable to communicate their status. That's what we should wait on the fate. --Masem (t) 22:23, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- The plane has been found in crashed state. "Fourteen bodies have been recovered so far, search continues for the remaining. The weather is very bad but we were able to take a team to the crash site. No other flight has been possible," spokesman Deo Chandra Lal Karn told AFP a day after the crash. Please check here. Debjyoti Gorai 05:28, 30 May 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Debjyoti Gorai (talk • contribs)
- The disappearance of course happened. What could be (hopefully) the case is the passengers all surviving but simply unable to communicate their status. That's what we should wait on the fate. --Masem (t) 22:23, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Wait Article just passes for ITN but should be posted when more details come out. Gotitbro (talk) 23:08, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose because it was a small plane, on a domestic route, no notable people were on board & there's no indication of it being deliberate. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 05:25, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support Crash confirmed. Grimes2 (talk) 05:51, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Weak Oppose By plane crash standards, it seems a bit below MINIMUMDEATHS. Without (as Jim says) a notable person or apparent criminal onboard, I don't see this lasting the week as news. Plus, the article
seemsseemed a tad mistitled, as most RS consider this a Tara Air flight, like Tara Air Flight 193 (or the equally deadly and mistitled 2010 Tara Air Twin Otter crash). InedibleHulk (talk) 07:01, 30 May 2022 (UTC) - Support If this template is correct, this is the second deadliest plane crash this year, and it seems like there aren’t a lot of accidents/incidents that are notable enough to warrant a standalone article. Also, WP:MINIMUMDEATHS doesn’t exist, so it has no weight to refer to it.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:52, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment – Bodies being recovered. [7] [8] – Sca (talk) 12:59, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support WP:MINIMUMDEATHS isn't even a page, yet alone an actual, established policy like some people try to use it as. It's the second deadliest plane crash of the year (so far), and significant news coverage. Article quality is much better than some almost-stub about disasters that often get posted. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:32, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Updated Reuters report says 21 bodies (all but one) retrieved. -- Sca (talk) 14:23, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support - Although we don't have a WP:MINIMUMDEATHS, I do have a page that I use to reference what type of accident and death tolls are most likely to be posted to ITN. For aviation incidents, Brandmeister stated that accidents with double digit death tolls are almost always notable enough.--WaltCip-(talk) 14:31, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support – Death toll moderately significant, but what makes this crash noteworthy is the altitude at which it occurred, ± 14,000 ft. (4,200 m) and the drama of the search/retrieval effort at that height. – Sca (talk) 14:34, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support as it is confirmed crash and 21 bodies has been found. Fade258 (talk) 14:49, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose utterly insignificant crash of a 43 year old long out of production aircraft operated by a tiny regional airline. The only thing adding any "significance" to this rubbish disaster stub of a story is the body count -- among which there was no one of particular note. Of course we'll post this. We shouldn't, but we will. --LaserLegs (talk) 18:56, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Weak oppose Not particularly significant as per Jim, a domestic flight of a small airline with a comparatively low passenger total and an accidental nature. Could see an argument, but it doesn't seem truly notable enough. Article is a bit short as well. The Kip (talk) 19:21, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Doesn't seem a particularly noteworthy crash. Pawnkingthree (talk) 00:38, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support. We discussed this some time back, I forget when. A complete hull-loss as well as loss of all lives (in the double-digits) is a significant event. Was on NPR and CBC earlier today. RIP and condolences. Ktin (talk) 00:45, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support - Seems to be a major news story in Nepal and India at the very least; article looks in decent enough shape. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 06:34, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment All 22 bodies have been recovered. The black box has also been recovered. Please see BBC news article here. I think it's time to list/post the article now. Debjyoti Gorai 10:52, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Pre posting, post ready Support Article looks ready to go. RIP to the 22 people who died. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 10:53, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment. Following up to see if we have an admin who can consider posting this one? If not ready, please remove the 'ready' tag. Thanks. Ktin (talk) 14:10, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Posted — Amakuru (talk) 15:47, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Pull This is nowhere near significant enough to be posted, per all the previous. Crash into terrain, in poor weather, in mountainous area, low-double-digits casualties, in a country and with an airline which both have a not-particularly stellar safety record, with a similar accident that happened five years ago (
This was Tara Air's second deadly accident on this route, after Flight 193 in 2016.
)? Tragic, yes, but unlikely to be of much long-term significance, or significant enough to be posted on the main page. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 22:37, 1 June 2022 (UTC) - Pull. I'm sorry, I don't think there was any consensus to post this. I agree with RandomCanadian here. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 05:00, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) 2022 Indian Premier League Final
Blurb: In cricket, Gujarat Titans win the Indian Premier League, defeating Rajasthan Royals in the final. (Post)
Alternative blurb: In cricket, Gujarat Titans win the Indian Premier League, defeating Rajasthan Royals in the final (player of the final Hardik Pandya pictured).
News source(s): Cricbuzz
Credits:
- Nominated by Sherenk1 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by MNWiki845 (talk · give credit), Ktin (talk · give credit) and Angole17637 (talk · give credit)
Article needs updating
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.
- Oppose on quality too short, not enough match summary text, and lots of citations needed. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:53, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- oppose - almost entirely unsourced. Bit odd to nominate significantly before it's finished. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:57, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- I just noticed this too. The match isn't over, so nonsense to nominate it now, when there is literally no blurb available. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:01, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Irrelevant and immaterial. |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
- Comment C'mon, we're really going to nom this before it's even over? SMH. DarkSide830 (talk) 20:01, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Added a blurb, but the target has barely any prose. Gotitbro (talk) 23:07, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Far too little prose and far too many CN tags. The Kip (talk) 19:25, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment. Prose added for the finals. All of the [citation needed] tags have now been fixed. Meets base-requirements for homepage / ITN. Please have a look and let me know if anything else is required. Thanks. Ktin (talk) 00:35, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Looks fine to me per the last one that was posted (2021 Indian Premier League Final), Support. Gotitbro (talk) 10:32, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support - looks OK now, and marking as ready. — Amakuru (talk) 10:40, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support Quality now sufficient. -- Pawnkingthree (talk) 13:21, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment. Do we have an admin available who can consider posting this one? Seems ready. Thanks. Ktin (talk) 14:10, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Posted. I did support above, but there seems clear consensus that it's ready and it's ITN/R too, so doesn't seem controversial. — Amakuru (talk) 15:48, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
[Attention needed] Madjoari massacre
Blurb: At least 50 people are killed by armed assailants in a rural commune of eastern Burkina Faso. (Post)
Alternative blurb: In Kompienga Province, Burkina Faso, over 50 civilians are massacred by an armed group believed to be linked to the jihadist insurgency in the country.
Alternative blurb II: Over 50 civilians are killed in Kompienga Province, Burkina Faso.
News source(s): France 24, Reuters, CNN, DW
Credits:
- Created and nominated by Mooonswimmer (talk · give credit)
Article needs updating
- Support but needs to be expanded. Added an altblurb,. Sheila1988 (talk) 15:47, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Weak Support Article is short, but good enough for a start. Juxlos (talk) 16:27, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Weak support for ALT1. ALT0 seems to be a bad copy/paste of the other ITN nomination today, as it has the wrong location listed. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:29, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Too stubby, article barely expands beyond the single-line blurbs here. Gotitbro (talk) 16:48, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Ongoing The article says that "Civilians and soldiers in northern and eastern Burkina Faso are regularly attacked" and that this is the third big attack this month. This seems to be like US shootings – a regular occurence. See the List of ongoing armed conflicts (right) and note how many generate over 10,000 deaths annually. Andrew🐉(talk) 17:24, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support because it's important enough & the article is good enough. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 18:37, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Weak oppose: (I'm the one who made the Jihadist insurgency in Burkina Faso article) This is certainly a high death toll, and the article is written well. The issue is with the notability- such actions happen regularly in the country. Madjaori is probably the first major massacre in the country in 2022, but what makes it so special? It's unlikely to result in significant changes or reactions. Such events are just normal occurences in many countries. Dunutubble (talk) (Contributions) 18:51, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- This would be my concern - the Burkina Faso area has been undergoing such conflicts for years that highlighting any specific conflict may be a problem. I dunno if this also makes it viable for ongoing. --Masem (t) 19:01, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment – Stubby. Of 290 words of text, 80 are devoted to background. Toll of at least 50 seems corroborated by RS coverage. (France24/AFP cite is in French. English version may be found here.) Note that event occurred four days ago. – Sca (talk) 19:02, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support This should be posted now as this individual conflict seems to be notable. I don’t see any reason to consider the Jihadist insurgency for ongoing when that article doesn’t get regular updates because the last major incident before this massacre was more than three months ago.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:01, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support, As the article says it was condemned by UNSG, so it happened and is notable. Alex-h (talk) 12:34, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose disaster stub. What little original content exists could be a single paragraph in Jihadist insurgency in Burkina Faso --LaserLegs (talk) 19:02, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Weak support The article is too stubby, but the event itself seems notable enough. The Kip (talk) 19:26, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Currently 7 support vs. 3 oppose. Yet no sign of it being added to the front page. If 50 people were massacred in a western country in a similar manner... and saying it's a regular occurrence makes the case for the jihadist insurgency in west africa to be added to Ongoing. Sheila1988 (talk) 21:18, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- The article is still too short for posting as a main page target. I don't know if the inability to expand is necessarily due to this, but this definitely a problem with systematic bias of sources from Western countries not likely covering this. --Masem (t) 12:13, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Sidhu Moose Wala
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Indian Express, NDTV
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Venkat TL (talk · give credit)
- Updated by DeluxeVegan (talk · give credit) and Fylindfotberserk (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.
- Oppose Needs heavy copy edit for poor English and slang phrasing ("On the next day, case was registered on him for the song", "Moose Wala founded a record label of his name and released numerous tracks on the record label.", "He released the first song "Warning Shots", which is diss track to Karan Aujla's track Lafaafe"). No update for death either. Black Kite (talk) 16:41, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Death Update was added. >>> Extorc.talk 18:05, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Updated and copy edited by User:DeluxeVegan and User:Fylindfotberserk Venkat TL (talk) 18:44, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support One of the biggest Indian singers in recent history. Not posting this would be direct evidence of Wikipedia's massive American bias, where even the deaths of mediocre, relatively unpopular American celebrities gets posted. 2001:569:57B2:4D00:B918:FF3C:751E:85F5 (talk) 17:43, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose - Not a notable person outside India. --TheDutchViewer (talk) 17:56, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Doesn't make any difference, per the RFC linked in the nomination. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:02, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Also disturbingly false - I've seen multiple news stories here in Canada. Nfitz (talk) 03:15, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Please be reminded that for RD noms, "recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD." PFHLai (talk) 18:05, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Doesn't make any difference, per the RFC linked in the nomination. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:02, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support - He is well known person among the Punjabi community around the world specially in India, Canada and the UK. He is most well known among the Sikhs. His membership with the INC and participation in the 2020-2021 Farmers' protest also makes him known even more. Debjyoti Gorai 18:28, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Strong Support- Well known subject and notable event. -Tow (talk) 20:20, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support Looks fine for an RD. And as Lai/the ITN template above notes, notability is not a factor for RD noms, only the article quality (prose et al) should be discussed here. Gotitbro (talk) 22:52, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Posted. Thryduulf (talk) 23:45, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) Port Harcourt stampede
Blurb: At least 31 people die at a church charity event in a stampede in Port Harcourt, southern Nigeria. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Over 30 people are killed in a stampede in Port Harcourt, Nigeria.
News source(s): AP, BBC, DW, CNN, Al Jazeera, Vanguard, The Guardian (Nigeria)
Credits:
- Nominated by Abcmaxx (talk · give credit)
- Created by Jim Michael 2 (talk · give credit)
Article needs updating
- Support once destubbed current article is far off main page standards. Juxlos (talk) 10:32, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment @Abcmaxx and Juxlos: I've put some time into expanding the article based on what I could find online. Sam Walton (talk) 11:09, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- I’d say it could use a little bit more - at 1700 characters I’m a little hesitant to call it for a blurb ITN. Juxlos (talk) 11:34, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment needs a map to fully implement the DISASTERSTUB then good to go. --LaserLegs (talk) 12:43, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- @LaserLegs: I've added a map to the article, please check if it is in accordance to the stub guide or not. Please ping me back if it is not. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 12:55, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Wait until fully destubbed. Per LaserLegs, map should be added. I have tagged the article as under construction, so we still have some time before we can blurb it. Side note, did we ever decide whether "stampede" or "crowd crush" would be better in this scenario? Cheers! Fakescientist8000 12:46, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
OpposeComment – Stubby. One-third of 290 words of text is background. Seems to have been agroup riotstampede. – Sca (talk) 12:52, 29 May 2022 (UTC)- Nothing implied to be a riot. It's comparable to what happens on Black Fridays, stores open their doors and people rush and push over each other to try to get at the bargains first, though here it resulted in 31 deaths. And it has international coverage so, outside of the stubby article size, it definitely is the type of mass casualty incident we'd post. --Masem (t) 13:25, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support alt blurb - This is easily important enough & the article is almost good enough. Had this happened in the developed world, it would have already been posted. I used the word stampede because RS do. The original blurb is too long. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 13:44, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- I think that's a little harsh, it's not always down to bias. There's far few fewer editors from that part of the world and local sources are harder to find on the internet, so it's only natural this is the way these things pan out.Abcmaxx (talk) 15:27, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Had it happened in the developed world, far more editors & readers would be interested in it. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 17:18, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Based on my read, its simply this is an area of the world not routinely covered by English and/or Western-based sources, meaning that there's a lack of information to be used for expanding the article. The event seems to have support of being recognized at ITN, but the lack of sourcing is what is limiting. --Masem (t) 19:03, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Had it happened in the developed world, far more editors & readers would be interested in it. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 17:18, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- I think that's a little harsh, it's not always down to bias. There's far few fewer editors from that part of the world and local sources are harder to find on the internet, so it's only natural this is the way these things pan out.Abcmaxx (talk) 15:27, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support - term stampede is widely use in Nigerian media. Sheila1988 (talk) 15:42, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Has been tagged for expansion but as of now is barely more than a stub. Gotitbro (talk) 16:50, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- I've expanded the article a little more but I honestly believe we've summarised all the information that's out there online about this incident right now. Sam Walton (talk) 19:04, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Ergo, wait. -- Sca (talk) 22:27, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Leaning support I've tidied up the existing references so what's there is properly formatted and makes use of all the parameters that it can. Schwede66 05:34, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support The article now looks sufficiently good to go.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:22, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support, The article is good. Alex-h (talk) 12:25, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Posted — Amakuru (talk) 15:49, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Lester Piggott
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Guardian, Bloomberg, BBC, Sky Sports
Credits:
- Nominated by Mjroots (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Seth Whales (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.
- Oppose as stands 19 citation needed tags, not including the whole of his extensive honours section. I'm unsure as to whether blurb could be a possibility, as he was the record Derby winner with nine, and competed for nearly a half century. I would say the average person on the street in the UK knows only him and Frankie Dettori, though I can't speak for the rest of the world. Horse racing can hardly be called a niche due to the millions (billions?) put into it by the richest people in the world in order to get winners. Unknown Temptation (talk) 11:21, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- 9 tags now. I guess you mean "Major wins" which is wholly unsourced (although many of the horses have their own articles. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:03, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Sourcing needs to be fixed, content appears alright otherwise. Can be considered for a blurb but as it stands, no. Gotitbro (talk) 16:46, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- support -
lots of unsourced information, CN tags and quite a few MOS issues, such as flags in the competition victories section. Also, the shirts under the infobox take up about 8 pages on mobile view. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:24, 29 May 2022 (UTC)Supporting now, have made some changes for MOS. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 08:30, 30 May 2022 (UTC) - Support Refs now added (citation needed tags removed).SethWhales talk 19:23, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Well done Seth, great work. Any ideas about the "Major wins" section? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:28, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comments: The green boxes of jerseys placed just under the infobox, presumably not added there just as pretty decorations, need to be explained and sourced. --PFHLai (talk) 19:56, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- On that, I've opened a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Horse racing.Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 20:46, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- They should never have been included in the article relating to Lester Piggott, they should only be in a specific horse race, such as 1983 Epsom Derby. They include also include second and third place finishes too, I have therefore removed them. I have been bold. SethWhales talk 21:09, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- The reason I started a topic is because this isn't restrained to only this item - see Walter Swinburn for instance. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 21:14, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, they should also be removed too.SethWhales talk 21:36, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- I have removed the Cite banner Unreferenced section too, as each race win does not need to be referenced as this information is widely available such as Willie Carson, Pat Eddery, Eddie Delahoussaye etc. SethWhales talk 21:36, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, they should also be removed too.SethWhales talk 21:36, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- The reason I started a topic is because this isn't restrained to only this item - see Walter Swinburn for instance. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 21:14, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- They should never have been included in the article relating to Lester Piggott, they should only be in a specific horse race, such as 1983 Epsom Derby. They include also include second and third place finishes too, I have therefore removed them. I have been bold. SethWhales talk 21:09, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- On that, I've opened a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Horse racing.Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 20:46, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Pretty sure that this would all have been covered in major UK newspapers at the time, such at The Times. Mjroots (talk) 05:23, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- I have added an archived reference as a source at bottom of the "Major wins" section from racingbase.com. Is it now good to go? SethWhales talk 06:20, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Posted. Issues mentioned above, including citation of Major wins section and the disruptive list of jersey pictures, appear to have been resolved satisfactorily. — Amakuru (talk) 10:53, 30 May 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:
- ^ (2day.kh.ua) (in Ukrainian)