Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
→Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva: Reply |
||
Line 36: | Line 36: | ||
| sign = [[User:Teossmoam|Teossmoam]] ([[User talk:Teossmoam|talk]]) 02:17, 2 January 2023 (UTC) <!-- Do NOT change this --> |
| sign = [[User:Teossmoam|Teossmoam]] ([[User talk:Teossmoam|talk]]) 02:17, 2 January 2023 (UTC) <!-- Do NOT change this --> |
||
}} |
}} |
||
:*'''Support''', great importance for the geopolitics of the americas and the planet earth itself - [[User:Otávio Astor Vaz Costa|Otávio Astor Vaz Costa]] ([[User talk:Otávio Astor Vaz Costa|talk]]) 02:44, 2 January 2023 (UTC) |
|||
==== RD: R. K. Krishna Kumar ==== |
==== RD: R. K. Krishna Kumar ==== |
Revision as of 02:44, 2 January 2023
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
January 2
January 2, 2023
(Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Sports
|
January 1
January 1, 2023
(Sunday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Science and technology
|
Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva
Blurb: Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (pictured) is sworn-in as President of Brazil. (Post)
News source(s): BBC, The New York Times
Credits:
- Nominated by Teossmoam (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: Three times elected President of Brazil, returning to office. Teossmoam (talk) 02:17, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
- Support, great importance for the geopolitics of the americas and the planet earth itself - Otávio Astor Vaz Costa (talk) 02:44, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
RD: R. K. Krishna Kumar
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): LiveMint
Credits:
- Nominated by Ktin (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Tachs (talk · give credit), SPC27205 (talk · give credit), Ramlingamr (talk · give credit) and Ktin (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Indian business executive. Padma Shri winner. Ktin (talk) 20:02, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
RD: Anita Pointer
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian, Reuters
Credits:
- Nominated by 2A00:23C7:95C4:5401:8D7:AC77:FBA4:702C (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: American singer-songwriter, best known as a founding member of the vocal group the Pointer Sisters. 2A00:23C7:95C4:5401:8D7:AC77:FBA4:702C (talk) 19:14, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- There's a lot of CN tags and lead issues. MarioJump83 (talk) 02:08, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
RD: Frank McGarvey
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC Sport, The Herald
Credits:
- Nominated by Joseywales1961 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Scotland, Celtic, St Mirren (and more) footballer, age 66 (Note: shows copyvio 86% to this site which is copied from Wikipedia) Josey Wales Parley 18:24, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
(Posted) Croatia joins Eurozone and Schengen Area
Blurb: Croatia joins the Eurozone and Schengen Area. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Croatia changes its national currency from the Kuna to the Euro to become 20th member state of the Eurozone, and also joins the European passport-free zone, the Schengen Area.
News source(s): Al Jazeera, AFP via France 24
2001:268:C080:CC31:D9B0:E994:2D8A:BAFD (talk) 02:52, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Support Notable and articles are up to date with Croatia properly listed. GamerOfStrategy (talk) 04:18, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Support, pretty notable and the EU is one of the few international associations where joining it makes a pretty big difference to a country. AryKun (talk) 04:51, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- technically they've already been in the EU for a while, they're just "much more in it" than before. Abcmaxx (talk) 09:58, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Support A currency change in any country is probably notable in itself, as is joining the Schengen area, which a huge impact on the whole EU and a large swathe of its population. Abcmaxx (talk) 09:58, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose This is just some Balkan bureaucracy comparable with the fuss about number plates in Kosovo. One of the key points about such developments in the EU is that it is preceded by a period of alignment and stability so that the change is not disruptive. So, when the change happens it's not actually very significant. There's much bigger currency news elsewhere such as the collapse of crypto-currencies or the hyperinflation in other places. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:13, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- I strongly disagree. The freedom of movement involving so many countries is a huge change for those going to and from Croatia and all those holding passports. Same with adopting a multinational currency, significant economic impact, whether done gradually or not. Also the "fuss about number plates in Kosovo" had both armies on standby so it's somewhat dismissive to say it's nothing on a sensitive point for all those in the region. Abcmaxx (talk) 11:13, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- The Kosovo issue has its own article but still wasn't posted. This EU tweak doesn't have a separate article and isn't getting much news coverage. Andrew🐉(talk) 11:51, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- I strongly disagree. The freedom of movement involving so many countries is a huge change for those going to and from Croatia and all those holding passports. Same with adopting a multinational currency, significant economic impact, whether done gradually or not. Also the "fuss about number plates in Kosovo" had both armies on standby so it's somewhat dismissive to say it's nothing on a sensitive point for all those in the region. Abcmaxx (talk) 11:13, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Support Significant change for the country itself both in international standing and practical effects for the citizens living day to day with the new currency. Notable imapct on the wider Eurozone and Schengen area, who are 400+ million people, most of whom are English speakers of various levels of competence and thus enwiki audience. The relevant articles are updated and highly detailed. Melmann 11:48, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Question - Do we have any precedent on this kind of issue? The ⬡ Bestagon[t][c] 12:08, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- New countries adopting the Euro have been posted in the past, see Latvia (2013), Estonia (2010), Slovakia (2009). – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 12:30, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- In that case I'll !vote support. The ⬡ Bestagon[t][c] 12:55, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Support although it'd be more ideal to link an article like Croatia and the euro than the article Eurozone. I also fixed the grammar of the original blurb. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 12:33, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- The Eurozone article has little about this and has plenty of quality issues – lots of {{cn}} and paragraphs without citations. There's a table about debt in which Croatia is a complete blank. And so on. Andrew🐉(talk) 12:54, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Comment The proposed blurb sounds like it came out of the blue. Perhaps preceding legal framework/background should be mentioned. Brandmeistertalk 14:22, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Support, although linking to Croatia and the euro rather than Eurozone. CMD (talk) 14:42, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Support per above. GenevieveDEon (talk) 14:52, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Support, per above. MSN12102001 (talk) 18:04, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Support altblurb1 though Croatia and the euro should probably be the bolded link? Sam Walton (talk) 18:17, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Support - It's safe to say that a country joining the Eurozone in full for the first time would probably be considered an automatically significant item. --🌈WaltCip-(talk) 18:23, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Support Change of currency and a significant step for Croatia in european integration This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 19:11, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Support Significant development for the country, added image suggestion of newly minted euro coin.✨ 4 🧚♂am KING 19:17, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Support, Notable event, Alex-h (talk) 20:47, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Posting, though I'll modify the blurb. The Schengen article is not in the condition to be bolded. --Tone 21:10, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
December 31
December 31, 2022
(Saturday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Politics and elections
|
RD: Jeremiah Green
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Variety, RollingStone
Credits:
- Nominated by Anarchyte (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Vacant0 (talk · give credit) and Οἶδα (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Drummer for Modest Mouse. Orange tagged. Needs some work. Anarchyte (talk) 08:01, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Support Everything is cited now. --Vacant0 (talk) 11:36, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
(Posted) RD/Blurb: Pope Benedict XVI
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.
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb: Former pope Benedict XVI (pictured) dies at the age of 95. (Post)
Alternative blurb: The death and funeral of Pope Benedict XVI begins in Vatican City
News source(s): BBC, Rappler (Reuters)
Credits:
- Nominated by 4iamking (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.
- Blurb ec'd me on the nom, haven't checked the article yet. Kingsif (talk) 09:53, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- okay, Wait Not really tagged, but significant referencing work needs doing. Kingsif (talk) 09:57, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb This one is obvious. Davey2116 (talk) 09:54, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb for obvious reason. HurricaneEdgar 09:57, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb, clearly. Nsk92 (talk) 09:58, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb but not yet on quality that's so obvious. I've added a couple of CN tags and changed the proposed photo. I have always considered weird the ones with the background blurred. Aesthetically they are horrible. _-_Alsor (talk) 09:59, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb as the former leader of a state and the only Catholic Pope who abdicated in several hundred years. Kirill C1 (talk) 10:02, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support Blurb Notability obvious. First pope to voluntary resign in almost a millenia. Religious leader of more than a billion Catholic for a considerable period. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 10:10, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb. Obviously. Vida0007 (talk) 10:11, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose both on quality grounds. When the unsourced points and unreliable sources are addressed, I will support blurb. - SchroCat (talk) 10:13, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb One of the most influential Pontiffs of his time. aeromachinator (talk to me here) 10:17, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb clearly appropriate for a former Vatican king and leader of the largest denomination of Christianity. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 10:19, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- He wasn't 'Vatican king' - there is not and never has been such a title. GenevieveDEon (talk) 14:24, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Vatican City is an Absolute Monarchy with the Pope as Head of State, making him King. This isn’t a fact that’s up for debate. Spman (talk) 14:42, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Hogwash. It's an elective monarchy (you don't need capitals for the names of types of government, by the way), and not every monarch is a king or queen. The Grand Duke of Luxembourg isn't, the princes of Monaco and Liechtenstein aren't, the Emperor of Japan isn't, and nor is the Pope. GenevieveDEon (talk) 14:45, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Vatican City is an Absolute Monarchy with the Pope as Head of State, making him King. This isn’t a fact that’s up for debate. Spman (talk) 14:42, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- He wasn't 'Vatican king' - there is not and never has been such a title. GenevieveDEon (talk) 14:24, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb once fixed It's the (former) Pope. What else needs saying? However, the article as it stands could use some restructuring, and there are enough missing citations that it would be inappropriate to post. Juxlos (talk) 10:20, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment There will be a consensus to post a blurb but at least the honors and awards section needs to be fixed first. Otherwise, the article is excellent. --Tone 10:33, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb—An ex-Pope is sort of a given. Kurtis (talk) 10:39, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb As per the above. Compusolus (talk) 10:45, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb and comment - Highly notable and now historical figure. However, I would consider linking the article Death and Funeral of Pope Benedict XVI in the blurb. Knightoftheswords281 (talk) 10:48, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality. Multiple "needed" tags outstanding.—Bagumba (talk)
- Support blurb One of the most important religious leaders on earth. -TenorTwelve (talk) 10:53, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb obviously. Darylgolden(talk) Ping when replying 11:49, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Still not ready Honros & Awards is almost completely unreferenced, and besjdes tthat, there are nearly 10 CN tags left. We don't need to debate whether or not he's deserving of a blurb- of course he is- but nobody who has just said "Support blurb" seems to have actually looked at the article. We need people who care enough about the subject to find references. -- Kicking222 (talk) 11:50, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb Clearly obvious. Also, RIP to him Icantthinkofanamexd (talk) 12:14, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb once referencing issued sorted (now down to 6 CNs and 1 section) Josey Wales Parley 12:25, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment No CNs left now, I will try to get to awards section this evening (UTC) if not already fixed by then Josey Wales Parley 13:41, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Several cite tags and an uncited section. Pawnkingthree (talk) 12:30, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support blub Extremely notable death, easy blurb. I have added a link to Death and funeral of Pope Benedict XVI in the blurb. echidnaLives - talk - edits 12:40, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb Extremely notable death. Thingofme (talk) 12:50, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Alted Easier target to clean up, more timely. InedibleHulk (talk) 12:54, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- As it stands, it reads like his death has begun. SchroCat (talk) 13:15, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- We should stick with the original blurb. That is the standard format for death blurbs of any kind. No need to add extra fluff. — Amakuru (talk) 13:22, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- He's not standard, he's the pope. When people have notable funerals, that's saying something (everyone has an age). And his death has begun, it's his life that's over. Anyway, just a suggestion. I'm also OK with the boring standard line. InedibleHulk (talk) 13:37, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- 'His death has begun' is not idiomatic for describing a person who is fully dead, in any dialect of English I know. The death-and-funeral article is linked in the original blurb. GenevieveDEon (talk) 13:45, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- As an event, yeah, he's no longer dying. He is now in the state of death, among the dead, however you say. In any words, the death and funeral seem more timely still, should (in my opinion) be the bolded news. InedibleHulk (talk) 13:51, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- The blurb The death and funeral of Pope Benedict XVI begins in Rome is just not gramatically correct. He died, so death can't begin. The funeral did not begin too, only plans and preparations for funeral. Choosing this as target article is one thing, phrasing is another. It is in blurb anyway. Kirill C1 (talk) 14:11, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- It's not set in stone, it was the best I could do without piping. You want to pipe something, go for it. But just as a general bit of advice, I'm telling you, death begins at death as surely as life begins at birth/conception/what-have-you. It's one of those weird things about English, like how two moose are moose. InedibleHulk (talk) 14:19, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- No, it's grammatically wrong. He died: this is not ongoing; like "his death" it is a singular event. "He is dead" is an ongoing state. There is nothing weird about the English on this! SchroCat (talk) 14:28, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- "Dead" is the adjective for those in the lasting noun of death. InedibleHulk (talk) 14:34, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Furthermore, the death/funeral is not taking place "in Rome" as the alt blurb states. It is taking place in Vatican City, which is another entity entirely. Throw this whole blurb out. 174.113.161.1 (talk) 14:41, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- How about I just fix that for you and you don't choose it? InedibleHulk (talk) 14:44, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Furthermore, the death/funeral is not taking place "in Rome" as the alt blurb states. It is taking place in Vatican City, which is another entity entirely. Throw this whole blurb out. 174.113.161.1 (talk) 14:41, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- "Dead" is the adjective for those in the lasting noun of death. InedibleHulk (talk) 14:34, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- No, it's grammatically wrong. He died: this is not ongoing; like "his death" it is a singular event. "He is dead" is an ongoing state. There is nothing weird about the English on this! SchroCat (talk) 14:28, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- It's not set in stone, it was the best I could do without piping. You want to pipe something, go for it. But just as a general bit of advice, I'm telling you, death begins at death as surely as life begins at birth/conception/what-have-you. It's one of those weird things about English, like how two moose are moose. InedibleHulk (talk) 14:19, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- The blurb The death and funeral of Pope Benedict XVI begins in Rome is just not gramatically correct. He died, so death can't begin. The funeral did not begin too, only plans and preparations for funeral. Choosing this as target article is one thing, phrasing is another. It is in blurb anyway. Kirill C1 (talk) 14:11, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- As an event, yeah, he's no longer dying. He is now in the state of death, among the dead, however you say. In any words, the death and funeral seem more timely still, should (in my opinion) be the bolded news. InedibleHulk (talk) 13:51, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- 'His death has begun' is not idiomatic for describing a person who is fully dead, in any dialect of English I know. The death-and-funeral article is linked in the original blurb. GenevieveDEon (talk) 13:45, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- He's not standard, he's the pope. When people have notable funerals, that's saying something (everyone has an age). And his death has begun, it's his life that's over. Anyway, just a suggestion. I'm also OK with the boring standard line. InedibleHulk (talk) 13:37, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support RD and blurb once fixed - Per above. The original blurb with the added link is better than the altblurb. GenevieveDEon (talk) 13:32, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb Obviously Pope Benedict's death should be featured in ITN, but the way the alt blurb is phrased is odd. Unlimitedlead (talk) 14:41, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb Thriley (talk) 14:54, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- With the honors trimmed down and cited, the only cn tags appear in the election to papacy section, and they appear to be trivial. Posting now. --Tone 15:04, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- If the six outstanding cite tags were so "trivial", why weren't they fixed before posting? -- Pawnkingthree (talk) 16:38, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- The link to Death and funeral of Pope Benedict XVI should be bolded. Of course, obvious support.VR talk 15:05, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment I think we should use the title "Emeritus", rather than "Former", since that is how he wanted to be treated. _-_Alsor (talk) 15:24, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Wanted to be and officially was, so agreed. InedibleHulk (talk) 15:32, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Emeritus Pope Benedict XVI (pictured) dies at the age of 95? Or Pope Emeritus? Kirill C1 (talk) 15:33, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- 'Pope Emeritus' is the usual style, and I think we should use it here. GenevieveDEon (talk) 15:57, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Yep, “Pope Emeritus” is the formula we should use in the blurb. _-_Alsor (talk) 16:02, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Disagree. Let's stick with plain language. -- Alanscottwalker (talk) 17:01, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Former and emeritus have different meanings. Kirill C1 (talk) 19:35, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Agreed. We wouldn't blurb "Former Queen X" if we meant "Dowager Queen X." Emeritus is a distinction with a real difference. Dr Fell (talk) 22:37, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Former and emeritus have different meanings. Kirill C1 (talk) 19:35, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Disagree. Let's stick with plain language. -- Alanscottwalker (talk) 17:01, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Yep, “Pope Emeritus” is the formula we should use in the blurb. _-_Alsor (talk) 16:02, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- 'Pope Emeritus' is the usual style, and I think we should use it here. GenevieveDEon (talk) 15:57, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Image? Thank you for posting before I even got to searching for references. Can he be pictured, please. We've sen two pics of Pelé already. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:27, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- I would definitely support an image. (If either of the other death-blurb nominations below succeeds, we could perhaps rotate the images, but we've had Pelé for a bit now.) GenevieveDEon (talk) 15:57, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Little late, but oppose blurb. Why would we blurb a former head of state or a church who died of old age? nableezy - 15:52, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Because he was massively influential in his field. Even as a cardinal he was very prominent and influential, and then he was elected to the highest post in the billion-plus member organisation he belonged to, and then he made history by being the first Pope in centuries to resign. GenevieveDEon (talk) 15:57, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- I dont quite get how he was "massively influential" in any field tbh, and his resignation probably was ITN when it happened. I dont get how old retiree dies is front page blurb worthy. Much less with a photo. nableezy - 17:23, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- I tried to make it more about his continuing decomposition and journey through Purgatory, but failed miserably. In the end, the people get what the people want. This time, like other times, they want old age! InedibleHulk (talk) 16:06, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- (?) This is a major event that affects Catholics worldwide, former Pope or not. MarioJump83 (talk) 20:32, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Says who? In what world is any Catholic affected by this? nableezy - 00:12, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- The death of any pope would warrant a blurb, regardless of perceived influence. Not all states and churches (nor their leaders) are equal. Suggesting this is 'old man dies' is inaccurate. Dr Fell (talk) 22:43, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Really, inaccurate? He hasnt been pope in almost a decade, he is a former head of state (being generous with the term state). We dont blurb former heads of state when they die of old age. A current head of state, like the current pope, sure. This is firmly old man dies of being old. nableezy - 00:12, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- He was the very first Pope to resign in 600+ years. --RockstoneSend me a message! 01:40, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- We did with the former Angolan dictator. Curbon7 (talk) 01:43, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- And George H.W. Bush. 🌈WaltCip-(talk) 05:58, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Really, inaccurate? He hasnt been pope in almost a decade, he is a former head of state (being generous with the term state). We dont blurb former heads of state when they die of old age. A current head of state, like the current pope, sure. This is firmly old man dies of being old. nableezy - 00:12, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Because he was massively influential in his field. Even as a cardinal he was very prominent and influential, and then he was elected to the highest post in the billion-plus member organisation he belonged to, and then he made history by being the first Pope in centuries to resign. GenevieveDEon (talk) 15:57, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Post posit my support of blurb The pope, of course, has the level of fame to merit a blurb, as will any pope. 65.246.72.70 (talk) 18:58, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Post-posting support Clearly a serious event. If there's some uncited tags, it should be cited by now. MarioJump83 (talk) 20:32, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
Deposition of Guaidó
Blurb: Venezuela interim president Juan Guaidó deposed by opposition. (Post)
Alternative blurb: The Venezuelan opposititon votes to dissolve the contested interim government led by Juan Guaidó.
News source(s): https://www.voachinese.com/a/venezuelan-opposition-dissolves-guaido-s-interim-government-20221230/6898756.html
Credits:
- Nominated by FK8438 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
FK8438 (talk) 08:11, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Wasn't this a few days ago? At least, I read it a few days ago and I don't think I have psychic news apps. (They were hopefully better sources than VOA China, too) Kingsif (talk) 09:53, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Kingsif: As far as I know, the original vote planned to dissolve the presidency on 4 January 2023 (while maintaining structures to keep foreign assets), but another vote took place yesterday to confirm the decision. Based on the sources I'm reading, the decision has been made effective just after the vote. Here's a Reuters source, too: Venezuela opposition removes interim President Guaido. --NoonIcarus (talk) 11:03, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose, as per article, his presidency was not universally recognized and some countries (the EU members) do not recognize him anymore after he lost his position as head of parliament. So, this is really an internal political story. --Tone 10:38, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment I would support this if there was a different blurb and the linked article was the Venezuelan presidential crisis. "Deposed" is not a neutral term, and more context would be useful. Marking the end of the presidential crisis, however, is newsworthy. (edit conflict) --NoonIcarus (talk) 10:48, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose While I do think the story is notable, neither the Juan Guaido nor the Venezuelan presidential crisis articles are in any shape to be posted. Mount Patagonia (talk) 11:42, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose - The blurb is misleading, making it sound as though a sitting president has been deposed by his opponents. In fact, the opposition faction has dissolved its own shadow presidency as part of moves to normalise the nation's political situation. As such, I don't think this merits posting. GenevieveDEon (talk) 13:35, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose for now - The blurb as currently phrased is misleading or incorrect, and I think trying to construct a more accurate blurb would be more likely to confuse our readers than interest them. --🌈WaltCip-(talk) 16:26, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Added altblurb - To more accurately convey the situation. GamerOfStrategy (talk) 04:39, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose on notability. Nothing has changed on the ground. The ⬡ Bestagon[t][c] 12:12, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
December 30
December 30, 2022
(Friday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
RD: Janaki Ballabh
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Hindu
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Ktin (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Indian sinologist. Ktin (talk) 21:23, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
RD: Jian Xianfo
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): 3g.163.com (Chinese)
Credits:
- Nominated by Dumelow (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Normantas Bataitis (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: An article I created last year whose subject has just died. Chinese politician. Dumelow (talk) 23:05, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support Seems sufficient. Kafoxe (talk) 01:24, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Support Looks good. --Vacant0 (talk) 17:35, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Support, Article is fine. Alex-h (talk) 20:42, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
(Closed) (RD Posted) RD, Blurb: Barbara Walters
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.
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb: American television journalist Barbara Walters dies at the age of 93. (Post)
News source(s): [1]
Credits:
- Nominated 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 RD: This is a given, while I would even Support Blurb for her stature in the whole world broadcasting legacy she has made for women.GovernmentAssistant (talk) 03:13, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support RD: Her legacy in broadcasting, interviewing every US president from Nixon to Biden (Albeit Trump and Biden were before being president) makes this one a given. Weak oppose blurb Probably a hard case to make. Might make more sense with some further discussion. TheCorriynial (talk) 03:48, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Note I made a procedural addition of a blurb to the nom, since there have been multiple comments already.—Bagumba (talk) 04:05, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support RD & Blurb: RD is a no brainer. Support Blurb role in breaking barriers for women and being a legendary broadcaster. Rushtheeditor (talk) 23:06, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb: I don't think quite top-tier influential/transformative in her field, and, to me, "legendary" and "breaking barriers" is news-speak that doesn't tell us too much. I don't think she has much of a worldwide legacy - she was well-known broadcaster in North America but she is utterly known outside of it, and I do think that counts for something if we are talking about a journalist's impact. Humbledaisy (talk) 04:15, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb. Blurbs should only be considered when there could be a separate article on the death and/or funeral of the person. Abductive (reasoning) 04:25, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Abductive: That's never been the status quo. If someone is a significant enough figure in their field (e.g. Pelé), we post them. Kurtis (talk) 07:50, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- You will note that Pelé had worldwide news media attention earlier for just being sick, and therefore meets the rule that for a blurb there needs to be suffiecient sourcing for an article on their death and/or funeral. Pelé's article also has just had 2.5 million pageviews in two days. He is orders of magnitude more important than most blurb nominees. Stop nominating doomed RD blurbs. Abductive (reasoning) 13:27, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Abductive: That's never been the status quo. If someone is a significant enough figure in their field (e.g. Pelé), we post them. Kurtis (talk) 07:50, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support RD, oppose blurb: I don't think she was notable and impactful to such a degree to warrant being on top of the In the News Category. She still however was a trailblazer in many ways so a RD listing is certainly required. Knightoftheswords281 (talk) 04:27, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- RD - close to blurb-worthy but just shy imo. Though I do think some of the above comment understates her significance a bit. And we dont have a Death of Pele article either, though that was an obvious blurb. nableezy - 04:25, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose RD on quality at the moment; oppose blurb or we'll need to be blurbing every veteran national newsreader from around the world. Frankly, even in 20th century American broadcast journalism as an industry, I'm not sure she's even the most prominent woman - Nancy Dickerson, no? She had a great career and impact within a limited sphere, but if Pelé is obvious and Vivienne Westwood is debatable, Barbara Walters is a firm no, I'm afraid. Kingsif (talk) 04:30, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Any honest assessment of her career will show that Barbara Walters was not a mere "newsreader." - Fuzheado | Talk 10:03, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- I think you're replying to the wrong person. Either that or read my comment like Swiss cheese. Kingsif (talk) 10:08, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Any honest assessment of her career will show that Barbara Walters was not a mere "newsreader." - Fuzheado | Talk 10:03, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support RD, soft support blurb: Too frequently heretofore unknown rules are used to lobby for or against a blurb. Was Walters top-tier influential and transformative in her field? Yes. Should a death be blurbed only if the death itself and/or funeral be worthy of an article? No. Would blurbing the death of this journalist require blurbing every the deaths of every veteran newsreader from around the world? No. She was the dean of television journalism (but without the heft of a Cronkite) and a media touchstone. Dr Fell (talk) 04:46, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Agree 100%. Curbon7 (talk) 04:47, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- I and a number of other editors state the rule every single time a bad nomination for an RD blurb is made. Users who pretend not to hear us are engaging in Wikipedia:IDIDNTHEARTHAT which is a kind of disruptive editing. Abductive (reasoning) 05:35, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Is this rule documented?—Bagumba (talk) 05:45, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Assuming your argument is the one you state above ("Blurbs should only be considered when there could be a separate article on the death and/or funeral of the person"), you far overstate your hand, considering I do also recall Jean-Luc Godard passing pretty easily a few months ago. Curbon7 (talk) 05:57, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- I know that not all users agree with the rule. Still, it would be nice if users would stop nominating ~80% of RD blurbs beginning in the new year. Make it a resolution to stop stinking up this page in your efforts to stink up the main page. Abductive (reasoning) 06:23, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
I know that not all users agree with the rule.
: So it is not documented, correct? —Bagumba (talk) 07:06, 31 December 2022 (UTC)- Ah, now let the wikilawyering begin. Abductive (reasoning) 13:27, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- You;re the one asserting the existence of a rule no-one has heard of. Decrying requests that you produce is as 'wikilawyering' is tendentious. GenevieveDEon (talk) 13:38, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Not wikilawyering. Your assertion that this is the only standard by which death blurbs are posted is outright false per WP:ITNRD. 🌈WaltCip-(talk) 15:07, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Ah, now let the wikilawyering begin. Abductive (reasoning) 13:27, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- I know that not all users agree with the rule. Still, it would be nice if users would stop nominating ~80% of RD blurbs beginning in the new year. Make it a resolution to stop stinking up this page in your efforts to stink up the main page. Abductive (reasoning) 06:23, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- I and a number of other editors state the rule every single time a bad nomination for an RD blurb is made. Users who pretend not to hear us are engaging in Wikipedia:IDIDNTHEARTHAT which is a kind of disruptive editing. Abductive (reasoning) 05:35, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- There is no such rule. If you disagree, point us to it. GenevieveDEon (talk) 13:38, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Agree 100%. Curbon7 (talk) 04:47, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support RD, Oppose blurb Same reason as Westwood. IMO, doesn’t meet global/public renown standard. We can’t just blurb people because they’re the “among the best in their field;” hypothetically, would we really blurb a little-known ornithologist or a museum curator upon their passing, just because they were recognized as such? The Kip (talk) 05:51, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Old Woman Dies, suggest Photo RD. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:00, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Blurb Vague descriptors that this person was "legendary" and that she "broke barriers", was "top tier influential" or "transformative", are just vague descriptors. The same low-effort vague labels could be equally applied to many TV presenters. Chrisclear (talk) 06:15, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb - Walters is close in my view, but as I comprehend the standards currently in place on this page, and compare the unanimous support for Pele, I oppose a blurb for the main page in this case. I must add that I hope 2023 will bring more kindness in our rhetoric here. Cheers! Jusdafax (talk) 06:37, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb - Pele was well-known to people who have little-to no knowledge or interest in football. Not the case here. The ⬡ Bestagon[t][c] 06:48, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb A transformative figure, and household name at a similar level to Pele who was just posted as blurb. Davey2116 (talk) 07:56, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Please tell me this one is trolling, at least. Trying to claim Walters has the same international renown and impact as Pelé is going to hurt your argument more than anything. Kingsif (talk) 08:06, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- An absolutely ridiculous comparison. Pawnkingthree (talk) 12:33, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- If it were about international renown and impact, sure, that's stupid. But there's nothing weird about Barbara Walters being the bigger name in househoulds where she was on TV for most days of the week for years and Pelé only showed up now and then in archival footage. It's all relative, fans. InedibleHulk (talk) 12:44, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- The !vote did try to claim comparable renown, though. Which it shouldn't, you're right, and what I was trying to point out: a support based on comparing the global icon status of Pelé and Walters basically legitimises using such a comparison as an argument, when each item should be considered on its own merits. And surely the overwhelming majority of people comparing the two in such a way will deduce that Walters doesn't measure up. Like, she belonged to a much more niche field, and may have led in an even more niche part of it. They shouldn't be compared, really, because of the difference in scope… Kingsif (talk) 02:33, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- If it were about international renown and impact, sure, that's stupid. But there's nothing weird about Barbara Walters being the bigger name in househoulds where she was on TV for most days of the week for years and Pelé only showed up now and then in archival footage. It's all relative, fans. InedibleHulk (talk) 12:44, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb I think it’s highly disrespectful for Vivienne Westwood and utterly humiliating for Pelé to put them in the same basket as a mere newsreader.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:32, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- I'm not supporting a blurb, but any honest assessment of her career will show that Barbara Walters was not a "mere newsreader." - Fuzheado | Talk 10:01, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- I know. That was a deliberate belittling for the sake of the comparison to Pelé and Westwood because some people really got very unreal in the discussion.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:44, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- I'm not supporting a blurb, but any honest assessment of her career will show that Barbara Walters was not a "mere newsreader." - Fuzheado | Talk 10:01, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Calm everyone down. Just because Pelé has been included does not mean that the rest of the very famous/important people have to be included. The international impact of Walters is very low unlike him (and that also matters) and not because she is a transformer in the American television she has to be included. _-_Alsor (talk) 08:58, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support RD, oppose blurb Very notable journalist but unfortunately her demise comes between that of Pele and Pope Benedict XVI, who are (let’s face it) more notable than her. Vida0007 (talk) 10:21, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support RD, oppose blurb A notable journalist within the US but barely known in the rest of the world. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 10:24, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support RD Not notable enough for blurb; certainly enough for RD. Compusolus (talk) 10:47, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Strong oppose blurb Major politicians, generals or religious figures are notable because of the large numbers of victims/people under their control/influence, researchers/scientists and to a degree artists can be evaluated based on new inventions/discoveries/concepts/techniques that they developed, sportspeople can be evaluated on new innovations or vast statistical superiority. There is no evidence of any technical/stylistic advance that the subject contributed to, and if so, it should be explained in their article. Meeting a lot of famous people is not a sign of superiority or improved skill Bumbubookworm (talk) 10:53, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- This is nonsense, and basically writes off professional broadcasting as an area of expertise. GenevieveDEon (talk) 13:37, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- I hope the admins give this statement as much respect as it gives to journalism as a whole. 🌈WaltCip-(talk) 15:05, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Not significant internationally and with Pelé and Pope Benedict XVI being so much more notable, better to not fill up the ITN section with deaths. Krisgabwoosh (talk) 12:46, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb, doesn't meet the globally transformative bar. Oppose RD on quality currently, there are large unsourced parts of the article in the sections "Interviews", "The View" and "Awards and Nominations". Black Kite (talk) 12:51, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support RD, oppose blurb She is known throughout North America (well, more United States) as a household name but I don't think she had enough of a worldwide impact that she would need a blurb. An RD would be suitable. --Harobouri • 🎢 • 🏗️ (he/him) 13:13, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Don't let the name fool you, most Canadians have lived near enough an American Broadcasting Company transmitter for their entire analog lives. InedibleHulk (talk) 13:24, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support RD, tentatively support blurb - While I (as a Brit) was not familiar with her work, the BBC's article on her life alone makes it clear that she was both transformative within her area of work and widely respected by a broad range of people. (We do risk having four death blurbs at once, but we live with multiple Nobel Prize blurbs, and so on, so I'm sure we will do fine here too.) GenevieveDEon (talk) 13:37, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Television news some 45, 50 years ago, was incredibly important and this woman in television news was absolutely transformative,[2] but I'll defer on the international issue, although it's hard not to note such changes in the roles of women has transformed broad swaths of world society in the last 50-some years. Alanscottwalker (talk) 14:08, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support RD, oppose blurb Not important enough for blurb. Tradediatalk 15:34, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support RD and blurb not a run of the mill journalist. Bruxton (talk) 15:39, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support RD, oppose blurb. Blurbed deaths should be held to a very high standard that precludes all but the most prominent figures globally. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 17:43, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support RD, oppose blurb Blurbed deaths need to be extremely notable, and she just does not have the level of fame to be on RD. Plus, this reeks of US-centrism. 65.246.72.70 (talk) 18:57, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support RD and blurb - Anecdotal but I'm not American and I was well aware of her and her work, especially from her creating "The View" not to mention her prior newscasting/interview work before that. Amazing career.SitcomyFan (talk) 19:29, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support RD and blurb Her interviews have often being cited as sources, including right here on wikipedia, such as in the Tank Man article for her interview with the General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party. Interviewed every US president from Nixon onward, and I believe she interviewed Fidel Castro more than any other western journalist, are just two of her many accomplishments that has/will see her referenced/cited in countless biographies of the many historical people she interviewed. In addition to her record as a trailblazer for women in TV journalism. And yes, even as a Canadian, I think America is culturally significant enough internationally that even if she lacks the same kind of fame elsewhere, her important status in a culture behemoth like America is enough. Pele has a blurb, and he was merely someone highly regard in his field; Whereas Barbara Walters was highly regarded AND a groundbreaking figure. 38.18.130.229 (talk) 22:45, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Obviously Support RD. I am willing to support the blurb due to her being a transformative figure in broadcasting, but I'm not sure if she's popular enough internationally. MarioJump83 (talk) 23:59, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Update This is mostly ready, but for that damned list of Emmy nominations. None of the sources I've found are usable, IMDb and other sites on the blacklist. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:14, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Copied over refs from the articles on the ceremonies, hope they're suitable. Kingsif (talk) 04:18, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you! We should be ready now. – Muboshgu (talk) 04:29, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Copied over refs from the articles on the ceremonies, hope they're suitable. Kingsif (talk) 04:18, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Posted to RD. Leaving open to allow further discussion on the blurb, though at this stage it does look unlikely to gain consensus. Anarchyte (talk) 05:58, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Stats It is interesting to look back at 2022, the RDs which were blurbed and those that weren't. Looking for systemic bias, we find that there were two women but zero Americans. (Thích Nhất Hạnh; Lata Mangeshkar; Abu Ibrahim al-Hashimi al-Qurashi; Shane Warne; Khalifa bin Zayed Al Nahyan; José Eduardo dos Santos; Mikhail Gorbachev; Ayman al-Zawahiri; Elizabeth II; Jean-Luc Godard; Jiang Zemin; Pelé; Pope Benedict XVI)
- Our readership takes a different view as Barbara Walters is currently beating both Pelé and Pope Benedict (views). See how they compare with the other RD blurbs of 2022 (22M total). For comparison, here are 10 celebrity deaths which didn't get blurbs (52M total). Queen Elizabeth is best done separately because she's in a class of her own (44M total).
- Andrew🐉(talk) 10:02, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
Opposition leader arrested in Bolivia
Blurb: Luis Fernando Camacho, (pictured) the governor of Santa Cruz and opposition leader of Bolivia, is arrested on terrorism charges and sent to four months preventative detention. (Post)
News source(s): AlJazeera, TheGuardian, Reuters, BBC, AP
Credits:
- Nominated by BastianMAT (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: The governor arrested is recognized to be the opposition leader of Bolivia by WP:RS. The arrest has caused a political crisis and protests. Covered by every news outlet out there, and due to the nature of the arrest, nomination worthy (being the opposition leader). BastianMAT (talk) 02:12, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose on article quality; would support on newsworthy. If anyone remembers the Venezuela opposition saga, this is somewhat comparable. Kingsif (talk) 04:25, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose both on article quality and newsworthyness. I'll remind other users that Jeanine Áñez's arrest was also declined, and she was a former president. While this is definitely huge news in Bolivia and probably one of the biggest events of the year there, I doubt it's hugely important outside the region. Krisgabwoosh (talk) 08:09, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Note Given Camacho's popularity in Santa Cruz, this event does have the possibility of spiraling into its own fullscale national crisis. If that ends up happening, whatever new article springs forth from the event would probably be newsworthy. Krisgabwoosh (talk) 08:13, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose per Krisgabwoosh. _-_Alsor (talk) 09:33, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose - This does seem to be a purely internal matter. If the events surrounding the arrest develop further, we could look at it again, but it seems premature to do so at present. GenevieveDEon (talk) 13:40, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose, May be we have to wait and see what will happen, but right now it is not suitable for ITN. Alex-h (talk) 20:36, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
December 29
December 29, 2022
(Thursday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
International relations
Politics and elections
Sports |
RD: Keenan Cahill
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
Credits:
- Nominated by Rushtheeditor (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Article has some issues, hoping someone can update this. Rushtheeditor • talk 23:01, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
RD: Don West
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
Credits:
- Nominated by Lee Vilenski (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Article updated with death, has a few citations needed, just working my way through the article. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 20:54, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support Looks good now. --Vacant0 (talk) 17:46, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose: The article title violates NPOV, considering the significant amount of time he spent in the public eye apart from working as a professional wrestling announcer. The structure of the article violates NPOV, as the "Career" section gives excessive weight to trivia about his time as a professional wrestling announcer, while the following "Personal life and death" section relegates his life as a whole to a mere footnote in comparison. We have the temerity to call that a biography. To make matters worse, it smacks of forum-shopping to nominate this at ITNC, where editors are solely concerned about superficial "article quality" concerns such as how pretty the formatting looks or whether it happens to have citations of some sort in certain places, and aren't likely to give it the degree of scrutiny I gave it. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 19:52, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Forum shopping for a candidate at ITN? I'm really confused. I can't say I care too much about the article title, but most of the citations talk about his lengthy time as a commentator. There isn't much talking about TV salesmen out there. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 20:58, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
RD: Ian Tyson
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Toronto Star, New York Times
Credits:
- Nominated by Yeeno (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Jkaharper (talk · give credit) and Jeremy Butler (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Canadian folk singer active in the U.S. and Canada, citations still needed for a handful of sentences and discography. Yeeno (talk) 19:22, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Photo RD Internationally influential folk legend/country icon/major broadcast figure, article looks tag-free now, may contain lies. InedibleHulk (talk) 15:54, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
RD: Edgar Savisaar
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ERR, Estonian World
Credits:
- Nominated by Abc347834 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: A central figure in Estonian politics from the 1980s till recent times. Abc347834 (talk) 16:40, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Prominent figure but the article lacks sources. I'll change my vote to support once more sources get added. --Vacant0 (talk) 19:26, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose per Vacant. I’m up to work on his article ASAP. _-_Alsor (talk) 20:34, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
RD: Ruggero Deodato
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian, Variety, The Independent, EW.
Credits:
- Nominated by Kacamata (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Important film director. Saddly, the article is not ready and still need some work. --Kacamata! Dimmi!!! 00:00, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
(Closed) (Posted to RD) RD/Blurb: Vivienne Westwood
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.
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb: British fashion designer Vivienne Westwood (pictured) dies aged 81. (Post)
Alternative blurb: British fashion designer Vivienne Westwood (pictured), who is largely credited with bringing modern punk fashion into the mainstream, dies aged 81.
News source(s): BBC
Credits:
- Nominated by SchroCat (talk · give credit)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
- Support in principle One CN tag that needs fixing by the looks of things. Part of me wants to blurb it because of her impact on fashion but that might just be a British bias coming from me. XxLuckyCxX (talk) 21:32, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support This is ready, and I already fixed the lone cn tag. Wish that this could be blurbed but Pelé deserves it more (this situation is somewhat comparable to Michael Jackson and Farrah Fawcett's deaths in June 2009). Vida0007 (talk) 21:40, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- We don't necessarily have to have an image of Westwood if this was on ITN (although I do think there have been instances where there have been two images so completely fine) XxLuckyCxX (talk) 21:48, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose. Notable individual, but not to the level of import that usually merits a blurb. DarkSide830 (talk) 22:30, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb per DarkSide. _-_Alsor (talk) 22:35, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support RD, leaning oppose on blurb. I'm not sure the level of dominance of her field is there. BD2412 T 22:36, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb It must be a super high bar for a death blurb, such as Pele, who even non-sports fans are familiar with. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:37, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support RD, oppose blurb per above. - Indefensible (talk) 22:42, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support RD, oppose blurb Unlike Pele, this isn’t someone who was the GOAT. 12.68.17.162 (talk) 23:00, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support RD, weakly support blurb - Let's not under-estimate her influence. GenevieveDEon (talk) 23:15, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, whilst she may not be as influential Pele, I don't think we should be ruling out a blurb because "this isn't someone who was the GOAT". Westwood did wonders in her field & the world of fashion for bringing punk and new wave styles into the mainstream, so should definitely be considered at least. XxLuckyCxX (talk) 23:30, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support RD, Oppose blurb as per above. MyriadSims (talk) 23:16, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support RD, weakly support blurb — Sadko (words are wind) 23:54, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support both very influential in her field Oscar666kta420swag (talk) 00:55, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb: Blurbs are not merited on comparative recent deaths (where we should not post one because we have another already) nor on intagible GOAT labels. Dame Vivienne Westwood is definitely on the top of her field here, having designed punk fashion as we know it. Gotitbro (talk) 02:33, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
Support both Per above. But I preferred RD a little bit more.MarioJump83 (talk) 02:53, 30 December 2022 (UTC)Oppose blurb It is posted on RD now but I decided to take back my support on blurb. In 2022 article, there's an importance tag repeatedly putted on, which is a cause of concern.MarioJump83 (talk) 20:23, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb One of the most influential figures in her field. -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:14, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support both I would have to say that Westwood is quite influential in her field, I would lean more towards RD but a blurb would not be unwarranted. Ornithoptera (talk) 04:15, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support both. In my opinion, she is influential and well-known enough (to even individual outside of the fashion industry) to warrant a blurb. The decision on who gets a blurb or not though is not particularly well-defined and I wish there was more done to clear things up regarding that. Aoba47 (talk) 04:32, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb, support RD; she isn't really notable enough outside of the fashion industry specifically to merit a blurb, imo. AryKun (talk) 05:14, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support RD, oppose blurb per above. The ⬡ Bestagon[t][c] 06:19, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb, support RD. As mentioned above, she isn't really notable outside the fashion world. --Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 09:30, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Some comments on page quality, esp. the couple of "citation needed" tags outstanding, are needed.—Bagumba (talk) 09:43, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- I've sorted the CN tags with decent sources. - SchroCat (talk) 11:08, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support RD, Oppose Blurb Tommie345 (talk) 13:09, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support RD, oppose blurb slightly too fashion-centric for blurb, but definitely RD. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:21, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support RD Looks ready to go, quality-wise. No to a blurb.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 13:41, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- 'Posted to RD. The quality seems OK per consensus above, but there's no consensus for a blurb right now. It seems unlikely one will develop, but you never know I suppose. — Amakuru (talk) 14:47, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb - It's not necessary for someone to be notable outside of their realm of expertise to be blurbable. They just need to be a sui generis transformative figure in their field. It's unfortunate that the larger-than-life legendary Pele would happen to pass around this time, as this would create an observer bias that only someone who is as famous as Pele deserves to be blurb, and that's not so at all.--🌈WaltCip-(talk) 15:31, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- It needs to be more than "They just need to be a sui generis transformative figure in their field" because there are tons of "fields" which are ignored. Which are important enough to qualify? It's entirely subjective. - Indefensible (talk) 18:38, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, it is entirely subjective. That's how ITN works. See also WP:ITNRD under the blurb criteria for "Major figures". 🌈WaltCip-(talk) 19:12, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- It needs to be more than "They just need to be a sui generis transformative figure in their field" because there are tons of "fields" which are ignored. Which are important enough to qualify? It's entirely subjective. - Indefensible (talk) 18:38, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb Usually blurbed deaths have to be at a certain level of global/public renown so as to make them extremely commonly known; I don’t feel that Westwood reaches that standard. The Kip (talk) 16:07, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb per Walt. Kingsif (talk) 18:30, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb In the field of fashion designers, Westwood strikes me as both widely recognised and highly transformative. If Westwood doesn't fill the criteria for a blurb, then truly who in her field would? Humbledaisy (talk) 19:35, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb. Blurbed deaths should be held to a very high standard, limited to people that are internationally household names. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 21:13, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Do they though? My feeling was they need to be transformative, top-level figures in their field - Westwood was. I can think of several figures blurbed in recent times who are nothing internationally. Humbledaisy (talk) 03:04, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Some of those cases were errors of products of an era where our standards for death blurbs were lower. It's fair to say Westwood was transformative in her field, but not every field's advancements are of the same level of note. DarkSide830 (talk) 04:55, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Do they though? My feeling was they need to be transformative, top-level figures in their field - Westwood was. I can think of several figures blurbed in recent times who are nothing internationally. Humbledaisy (talk) 03:04, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support RD, oppose blurb I can understand posting it for a recent death, but I don't think she is world famous enough like Pelé, so a blurb shouldn't be posted about her in my opinon. TomMasterReal (talk) 02:29, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- support blurb At the dawn of punk, the dawn of new wave music and fashion, made a Dame; of course she's worth a blurb. Her inspiration goes from 60s to today. A worthy event. Ofdoktorb wordsdeeds 21:16, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb: Transformative and influential, with a lasting impact. And free from the RD/death blurb bias toward athletes and trivial 'Google Doodle' type figures. Dr Fell (talk) 04:52, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb. Famous and influential. Kirill C1 (talk) 10:14, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- If we blurbed everyone who was famous and influential there would be a recent death blurb up virtually all the time. There has to be a higher standard than that. Pawnkingthree (talk) 12:36, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- I think she goes beyond that. She was one of the most influential designers of the late 20th century, with a unique relationship between fashion and popular culture in the punk movement. GenevieveDEon (talk) 13:41, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- If we blurbed everyone who was famous and influential there would be a recent death blurb up virtually all the time. There has to be a higher standard than that. Pawnkingthree (talk) 12:36, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment - At this point, even though it looks like we have a weak consensus for a blurb, I'm not sure an admin would be willing to run three death blurbs on the Main Page at the same time. It might look a bit confusing when juxtaposed with the Recent Deaths line.--🌈WaltCip-(talk) 16:23, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Is there, though? To me this discussion seems to be in no consensus territory. I marked it for needing attention, however.65.246.72.70 (talk) 19:00, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- I know the “votes ≠ consensus” guideline, but by my count we have 32 total votes and the yes/no to a blurb is an even 16/16. I wouldn’t even say there’s a weak consensus; we’re pretty firmly in no consensus. The Kip (talk) 19:43, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Okay, fine, no consensus. Whatever. 🌈WaltCip-(talk) 19:56, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- I know the “votes ≠ consensus” guideline, but by my count we have 32 total votes and the yes/no to a blurb is an even 16/16. I wouldn’t even say there’s a weak consensus; we’re pretty firmly in no consensus. The Kip (talk) 19:43, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Is there, though? To me this discussion seems to be in no consensus territory. I marked it for needing attention, however.65.246.72.70 (talk) 19:00, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb per others; don't oppose based on things happening too fast anymore than you would support a blurb based on things happening too slow. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 20:10, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb Per above. Punk rock is one of many genres that had a strong international reach and her contributions in this field is enough that the punk rock would look different if not for her. Inclusion of Pele and Pope Benedict should not matter. MarioJump83 (talk) 23:15, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose blurb. I posted this to RD and left it open for blurb discussion, but will now cast a vote on that and on reflection I don't think she rises to the level of transformative influence that would merit a blurb. There are numerous artists of similar standing and we can't blurb all of them. — Amakuru (talk) 23:38, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Mihalj Kertes
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Danas, N1, Politika, Radio Free Europe
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Vacant0 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Close associate to Slobodan Milošević --Vacant0 (talk) 21:12, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support Relevant figure in context of the Yugoslav wars and political climate of the former country. — Sadko (words are wind) 23:53, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 21:07, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
(Closed) Proposal to merge current glut of new PMs into one line
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.
So, Nepal, Fiji, and Israel have all swapped in new prime ministers within the past few days, meaning that half of ITN will be lines on these new figures being elected. I propose smushing them into a single line:
- After elections, Pushpa Kamal Dahal becomes Prime Minister of Nepal, Sitiveni Rabuka becomes Prime Minister of Fiji, and Benjamin Netanyahu returns as Prime Minister of Israel.
No image needed, as Pelé will occupy that box anyway. BD2412 T 20:57, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose this isnt how we do things at ITN. Each item gets its own line. that's how it's always been. NoahTalk 21:02, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Fiji will get pushed off once Bibi gets posted, so its not a big deal in this case, I think. I can see this solution being useful if circumstances were different, though. Curbon7 (talk) 21:16, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Weak oppose Per Curbon7, once Netenyahu's blurb is posted, Fiji will fall off. However, in the future, this could be a useful technique. --2601:249:8E00:420:3194:A2F9:8A7D:7629 (talk) 21:27, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Meh This is going to self correct in the near future. -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:46, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose this time
, and for the future such thing should be proposed at a relevant talk page I guess, to be discussed and !voted on by the community.The ⬡ Bestagon[t][c] 04:06, 30 December 2022 (UTC)- Per #Suggesting updates, it seems more suitable here than at WP:ERRORS.—Bagumba (talk) 05:58, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Fair enough, striked. The ⬡ Bestagon[t][c] 12:04, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Per #Suggesting updates, it seems more suitable here than at WP:ERRORS.—Bagumba (talk) 05:58, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose As another editor has stated, each item should get its own line. I'm highly sceptical that this proposal would be put forward if it the blurbs in question related to the heads of government in wealthier countries and/or countries with higher populations, such as the US or the UK. Chrisclear (talk) 06:47, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Agreed with this as well. 🌈WaltCip-(talk) 16:10, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- I would not dispute that at all, but the fact that these are relatively small countries (Nepal, population 30 million, Israel, population 10 million, Fiji, population 1 million) diminishes the significance of having separate lines for each. BD2412 T 16:27, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- ITN/R is pretty clear - one country, one blurb. I'd definitely suggest taking up your argument at WT:ITN if you want to initiate something like this in the future. 🌈WaltCip-(talk) 16:47, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- I would not dispute that at all, but the fact that these are relatively small countries (Nepal, population 30 million, Israel, population 10 million, Fiji, population 1 million) diminishes the significance of having separate lines for each. BD2412 T 16:27, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Agreed with this as well. 🌈WaltCip-(talk) 16:10, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose. Absolutely not. The new PMs are ITN/R, that means they get automatic blurbs. — Amakuru (talk) 14:44, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment - Nepal, Fiji, and Israel are about as alike as George Bush, broccoli and a cloud-scudded sunset on the Bosphorus Sea. A merger is not appropriate, certainly not without a change in our guidelines. 🌈WaltCip-(talk) 16:02, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose no one provided reason as to why 3 PM blurbs is bad per se.--75.105.36.46 (talk) 16:38, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
Ongoing removal: Mahsa Amini protests
Nominator's comments: Article is not receiving continued substantial updates. Most recent substantial update regarding events on 23 December, and this was just a 10-sentence quote from Reuters (possible borderline WP:OVERQUOTING?), without any description of specific new events. Outside of "As of # December" casualty updates, the only other major update in the past 2 weeks appears to be 2 sentences about New Zealand placing travel bans on several members of Iranian security forces. SpencerT•C 19:33, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- It is not the case that nothing happens, see [3][4] [5] Kirill C1 (talk) 19:54, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- I did not say that nothing is happening; I stated that the article is not being regularly updated, which is a requirement for items to remain in Ongoing. SpencerT•C 20:50, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose removal - This story is still continuing and developing. GenevieveDEon (talk) 20:26, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Just as the Invasion of Ukraine is still happening, so are the Mahsa Amini Protests. MyriadSims (talk) 20:52, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose - still ongoing and receiving updates, although perhaps more to dedicated subpages. - Indefensible (talk) 21:33, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose for now. Coverage is slowing somewhat, but there is still enough updates to retain it in ongoing for the time being. -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:42, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support The updates need to be to the MAIN ARTICLE.12.68.17.162 (talk) 23:25, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Weak Support for now per Spencer and the IP editor above. Recent updates do not clearly appear substantial enough to justify continued Ongoing placement. This can change, but I must note to those above simply noting that the protests are still ongoing that such updates are crucial to Ongoing placement. DarkSide830 (talk) 23:48, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
support at Best Its a side story, but more importantly theres no update.171.103.249.78 (talk) 02:00, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support removal - The protests have faded into a background story now, and the article has not been getting substansive updates for some time. The ⬡ Bestagon[t][c] 04:03, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support, as it is not receiving ongoing coverage. Sahaib (talk) 06:00, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- It is receiving ongoing coverage. Kirill C1 (talk) 11:05, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- So is COVID, and we removed that from ITN. Back in late August.--75.105.36.46 (talk) 17:28, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- That was a contentious decision and mistake imo. - Indefensible (talk) 18:19, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- So is COVID, and we removed that from ITN. Back in late August.--75.105.36.46 (talk) 17:28, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- It is receiving ongoing coverage. Kirill C1 (talk) 11:05, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support' consistent with other ongoing removals. Slowdown in both coverage and updates. Teemu08 (talk) 00:53, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- It doesn't seem to be slowing, there is a piece of news from today [6] Kirill C1 (talk) 12:57, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose/keep Still a major story. -TenorTwelve (talk) 02:37, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose removal There is still enough new coverage to justify keeping it. Tradediatalk 14:46, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Weak oppose - Timeline of the Mahsa Amini protests indicates that it is still ongoing, albeit with significantly reduced coverage. Revisiting in a week or two may yield a different outcome. Anarchyte (talk) 11:02, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Updates should be to the main Mahsa Amini protests article that is displayed in Ongoing, not to the timeline. The ⬡ Bestagon[t][c] 12:26, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Support – The most recent significant update was older than the oldest blurb item. This is textbook case for removal. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 11:58, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
(Closed) (Posted blurb) Blurb/RD: Pelé
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.
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb: Pelé (pictured), the only three time Men's World Cup champion, dies in Brazil at the age of 82 (Post)
Alternative blurb: Brazilian footballer Pelé, considered one of the greatest footballers of all time, dies in Brazil at 82.
Alternative blurb II: Brazilian [soccer player/footballer] Pelé dies aged 82
News source(s): [7]
Credits:
- Nominated by Kingsif (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.
- Blurb obviously. Added to nom nableezy - 19:05, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support Forward, footballer, 'greatest ever' by Fifa. Cheers! Fakescientist8000 19:08, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support. BLURB. MSN12102001 (talk) 19:09, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb - beaten to the nom, keep getting edit conflicts. Article is GA class so shouldn't be any issues. Mjroots (talk) 19:11, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- My only concern is there isn't a dedicated section about his health. If the article is attracting readers because of his passing, it maybe needs to be mentioned more than just the date. But as said, the article is busy, I expect it will come soon. Kingsif (talk) 19:13, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- There is now. Mjroots (talk) 19:23, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Indeed. Kingsif (talk) 19:24, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Obvious support blurb -- Pawnkingthree (talk) 19:12, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support RD & Blurb the article in good shape (and being heavily edited) RIP Josey Wales Parley 19:12, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb - No-brainer. Article is GA and Pelé was one of the greatest and most influential athletes in history.--Kacamata! Dimmi!!! 19:13, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support both RD, and blurb if someone writes one. On quality, the article is a GA. On significance, he's considered one of the greatest soccer players of all time. Note my use of "soccer" instead of "football" - I'm an American who has very little interest in any sport, let alone soccer, and he's one of the few palyers I've heard of. If I've heard of him, he should meet the significance bar of being a major figure, transformative in his field. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 19:12, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb One of the greatest athletes of all time. The Kip (talk) 19:14, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb Article is GA and is being updated atm. --Vacant0 (talk) 19:14, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb. Probably the most influential and well-known player of the last century, even more so than Diego Maradona who also had a blurb iirc. Regards SoWhy 19:14, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb No brainer. Article in good shape. --2601:249:8E00:420:7D41:8C6B:2BFE:2201 (talk) 19:15, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb - If I've heard of an athlete, you know they're famous. EvergreenFir (talk) 19:15, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb Regarding article quality, the article looks fine. Regarding the blurb: ITN has in the past chosen to blurb people who are the "greatest ever" in their field (as that is a fair interpretation of the "major figure" clause). In some cases, there may be multiple people who have a legitimate claim to being the "greatest ever". Pelé is one of those rare soccer players who has a legitimate claim to being "the greatest ever". That term may be thrown around loosely in some fields, but it is not puffery here: FIFA itself called Pelé "the greatest of them all". Pelé's death will be a top headline story for the rest of the week, and blurbing his death will meet ITN's mission to help readers find stories that are in the news that readers will be looking for. Therefore, we should blurb this. NorthernFalcon (talk) 19:17, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- think its ready to post with photo. nableezy - 19:18, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb Looks good to go. RIP to the legend. Vida0007 (talk) 19:20, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb. A no-brainer for a true legend of the beautiful game. Article is in good enough shape but can be improved further. SounderBruce 19:21, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb as has been stated above. rawmustard (talk) 19:24, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support blurb as per all the above. - SchroCat (talk) 19:27, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Posted blurb. SpencerT•C 19:27, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Post posting support blurb, support publishing first blurb, where was mentioned about his 3 World Cup wins. Kirill C1 (talk) 19:34, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Post-posting support. But I think the appropriate blurb is the first "Alternative blurb", also with photo. Alexcalamaro (talk) 19:44, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Yeah, photo should be definitely changed, as usual. Kirill C1 (talk) 19:55, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Photo was changed. Got undone by accident. Have restored. -- KTC (talk) 20:03, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Yeah, photo should be definitely changed, as usual. Kirill C1 (talk) 19:55, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Post-posting support of the current blurb It's Pelé, no need for the blurb to describe so much. We would have to keep the format that was used when Maradona passed away. _-_Alsor (talk) 19:56, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Post-posting blurb support. Clearly entailed as a legend/top of field in the article. This is a no brainer for blurbing. Masem (t) 20:37, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
(Closed) All solar system's planets visible in night sky
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: All solar system's planets will be visible in the night sky on Thursday (Post)
News source(s): BBC News
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.
- Comment 1. Not sure about the ITN/R label. This is not mentioned at WP:ITN/R#Celestial events.
- 2. Not sure the proposed target is suitable. That article is about the solar system and it'll probably contain a maximum of 1-2 sentences on this event (haven't checked it though), which is not enough to meet WP:ITNCRIT. For this type of event, a separate article is best, but I don't know if this meets the notability criteria.
- 3. The event sure is interesting, and I'll be happy to support this nomination, albeit with a better blurb, if the above issues are resolved.
Regards, The ⬡ Bestagon[t][c] 18:20, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose 1. This is not mentioned in the target article. 2. This is not exactly a rare occurrence. From The Guardian "The last time all of the planets were visible in the sky simultaneously was in June." According to Space.com "Such "grand tours" happen roughly every one to two years, on average." ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 18:47, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- The name of BBC article is "All solar system's planets visible in night sky". The lead says "There will be a chance to see all the planets in the solar system in the night sky on Thursday." Kirill C1 (talk) 18:53, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, but what I meant by "this is not mentioned in the target article" is that it is not mentioned in Wikipedia's article on the solar system. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 19:00, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose - This is a picturesque occurrence, but a routine one. 'It's interesting' is not, on its own, a reason to put this on the front page. GenevieveDEon (talk) 20:28, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose - Unnecessary, things like this happen once every few years, and doesn't feel worthy of putting on the front page. TomMasterReal (talk) 03:17, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose WP:ROUTINE, fun-facty "and finally..." stuff you see at the end of daily news broadcasts, rather than legitimate news, especially given its commonality. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 17:40, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
New PM in Israel
Blurb: Benjamin Netanyahu (pictured) becomes Prime Minister of Israel after the legislative election. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Benjamin Netanyahu (pictured) becomes the Prime Minister of Israel after the legislative election, for the third time in total.
Alternative blurb II: Benjamin Netanyahu (pictured) becomes Prime Minister of Israel.
News source(s): BBC News
Credits:
- Nominated by Rushtheeditor (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: New prime minister of Israel. Rushtheeditor talk 16:56, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment - blurb should say that he became a prime minister again, previously serving for more than 15 years as a PM. Artem.G (talk) 18:48, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- I mean we don't have that for Prachanda who is currently on the MP. Curbon7 (talk) 20:55, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Looks like Prachanda was a PM two times before, but for just 2+ years. It is important to say that Netanyahu was (and is) the PM who sits in the office for many years. Artem.G (talk) 08:40, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- I mean we don't have that for Prachanda who is currently on the MP. Curbon7 (talk) 20:55, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Added alt blurb. This section on Netanyahu's article is blank, while this section should be expanded. --Vacant0 (talk) 19:27, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Note: I have proposed in a section above to merge the three recent new Prime Minister elections onto one line. BD2412 T 21:01, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment This article should be added to blurb: Thirty-seventh government of Israel. --Triggerhippie4 (talk) 22:59, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support Big election. 𝕸𝖗 𝕽𝖊𝖆𝖉𝖎𝖓𝖌 𝕿𝖚𝖗𝖙𝖑𝖊 🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦 ☎️ 📄 23:07, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Dont bold Benjamin Netanyahu, as it has too many outstanding "needed" tags.—Bagumba (talk) 09:56, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Election already blurbed in November. Suggest using Thirty-seventh government of Israel instead of repeating 2022 Israeli legislative election again. Suggest alt II.—Bagumba (talk) 11:01, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose and not ITN/R as we already posted him as the winner of the election. GreatCaesarsGhost 14:01, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Changes in heads of state/government are ITN/R. Although Bibi's party won, it did not necessarily guarantee he would be pm. Curbon7 (talk) 21:14, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose - we already posted this when his opponents conceded and he became presumptive incoming PM, see here and here. nableezy - 21:30, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
Support in principle We posted the Italian election and Melloni becoming prime minister separately. As I stated above, changes in head of government are ITN/R. I don't see why we should apply the same standard differently.Curbon7 (talk) 21:43, 30 December 2022 (UTC)- We dont post the election result for American president and then separately the inauguration. And what WP:ITNR actually says is except when that change was already posted as part of a general election. The change was already posted as the result of a general election. nableezy - 22:13, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- It was not stated that Bibi would be prime minister in that blurb, as there was a chance he would not be prime minister; note the Government formation section. Again, this is the same circumstance as Italy and Denmark, both of which were recently double posted. Curbon7 (talk) 22:40, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- It was stated the coalition that he headed won a majority. That absolutely means he would be PM, as anybody remotely familiar with parliamentary politics would immediately understand. The government formation section of that article is about the negotiations for lower ministerial postings, not PM. If Italy and Denmark were double-posted thats a problem, but not one resolved by repeating the same mistake again. nableezy - 23:44, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Ok I'll take your word on it since I know you know more about the region than I do. Curbon7 (talk) 04:49, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Nothing is certain in parliamentary democracies (especially Israel) until the government is sworn in. Governments with apparent majorities have failed to seal the deal many times in the past. 95.86.78.45 (talk) 18:02, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- It was stated the coalition that he headed won a majority. That absolutely means he would be PM, as anybody remotely familiar with parliamentary politics would immediately understand. The government formation section of that article is about the negotiations for lower ministerial postings, not PM. If Italy and Denmark were double-posted thats a problem, but not one resolved by repeating the same mistake again. nableezy - 23:44, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- It was not stated that Bibi would be prime minister in that blurb, as there was a chance he would not be prime minister; note the Government formation section. Again, this is the same circumstance as Italy and Denmark, both of which were recently double posted. Curbon7 (talk) 22:40, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- In reference to Meloni and Italy, here is the October 2022 posting of her as Italy's PM. This was after the September posting showing her as a leader of one of the parties of the majority coalition. —Bagumba (talk) 10:18, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- We dont post the election result for American president and then separately the inauguration. And what WP:ITNR actually says is except when that change was already posted as part of a general election. The change was already posted as the result of a general election. nableezy - 22:13, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
December 28
December 28, 2022
(Wednesday)
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
International relations
Law and crime
|
RD: Alain Bernheim
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): 450.fm
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: French pianist and historian --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:21, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
RD: Arata Isozaki
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Washington Post
Credits:
- Nominated by Thriley (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Japanese architect. Winner of the Pritzker Architecture Prize. Thriley (talk) 06:23, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: Awards, notable works, and current projects need references. SpencerT•C 21:03, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
(Closed) 2022 North Kosovo crisis
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
Credits:
- Nominated by Abcmaxx (talk · give credit)
Support.Major ongoing political dispute. Well-written article. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 00:53, 29 December 2022 (UTC)- Oppose. Convinced by Andrew. This is not the most severe conflict of its category at this moment. Myanmar and Ethiopia in particular are better examples of recent escalations of civil conflict. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 20:17, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support Agree with Thebiguglyalien. --Bedivere (talk) 01:16, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support, but link simply as North Kosovo crisis; I know WP:CRYSTAL, but I don’t see the conflict resolving itself in the next three days. The Kip (talk) 05:15, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support in principle. We usually avoid years when posting onto ongoing, so it's clear that North Kosovo crisis is what should go.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:33, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Seems insignificant compared to the numerous list of ongoing armed conflicts. That includes six major wars with tens of thousands of deaths. The Kosovo spat doesn't even make the list as a skirmish. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:01, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose - I have to agree with Andrew here; we can't possibly include every dispute/crisis/war into ongoing. The ⬡ Bestagon[t][c] 12:22, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose unless something substantially changes on the ground. The tensions have been simmering for years, there's a risk it will never go off Ongoing if posted there. Yakikaki (talk) 14:27, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose ongoing Consider a blurb if there's a particular escalation of events, but not every ongoing conflict can fit in Ongoing. SpencerT•C 19:24, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose As someone who wrote this article, I'm against posting it in ongoing. At the time of posting this nomination, barricades were still up and Vučić did not yet announce their removal. It is in the news, but the crisis, as of now, is de-escalating and only a few have been wounded and arrested during the entire period. --Vacant0 (talk) 20:20, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose If Kosovo and Serbia go to war, then that will obviously make it to ongoing, but that looks far from the case. It is a usual tension flare-up, but as stated above, seems to be resolving itself and is not major at the moment. Curbon7 (talk) 21:20, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Weak oppose not least because a BBC article this evening suggests that it's about to come to an end. GenevieveDEon (talk) 23:24, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose, Not a major event. Alex-h (talk) 17:44, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose There are many conflicts that are more important and that are not part of ongoing. Tradediatalk 15:13, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Not a war, just tensions. You could say that for many nations right now. TomMasterReal (talk) 01:26, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
RD: John Bird
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC, Sky
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Sunshineisles2 (talk · give credit)
- Updated by 86.187.175.4 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Died on the 24th, but not announced until today. Sourcing problems in the main (career) section. Sunshineisles2 (talk) 20:42, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
RD: Abdul Hamid (voice actor)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [8]
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Nyanardsan (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Spinixster (talk · give credit) and Tri Ardiansyah (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Recently died, article start, expansion very welcome if it doesnt meet minimum crit for ITN Nyanardsan (talk) 04:52, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment - Current article is well-referenced but could do with more information. The ⬡ Bestagon[t][c] 12:25, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Expanded and added some stuff, CE probably needed Nyanardsan (talk) 15:45, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support - Article now meets ITNRD. The ⬡ Bestagon[t][c] 12:29, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Expanded and added some stuff, CE probably needed Nyanardsan (talk) 15:45, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support, Article is good enough. Alex-h (talk) 17:38, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
December 27
December 27, 2022
(Tuesday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Sports
|
(Posted) RD: Arnie Ferrin
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Salt Lake Tribune
Credits:
- Updated and nominated by Bagumba (talk · give credit)
- Updated by Strattonsmith (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Basketball player won two championships with the Minneapolis Lakers in the BAA/NBA. Four-time All-American in college and member of National Collegiate Basketball Hall of Fame. —Bagumba (talk) 09:16, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support Article looks good enough for RD, pretty well sourced Josey Wales Parley 15:08, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 19:21, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
Northern Mindanao floods
Blurb: Monsoon floods in Northern Mindanao, The Philippines, cause at least 13 deaths and a further 23 people are missing according to the national disaster agency. (Post)
News source(s): Al Jazeera
Credits:
- Nominated by Abcmaxx (talk · give credit)
Article needs updating
Nominator's comments: Article needs major expansion, event is currently ongoing though, recent news. Abcmaxx (talk) 13:59, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose I don't think that with 13 victims in a flood-prone country like the Philippines is ITN-notorious enough. We can't include every deadly disaster that happens in the world (I'm not saying this for you, but it seems like that's what many editors are after). We need to be stricter. _-_Alsor (talk) 18:49, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose per _-_Alsor and op on quality Dora the Axe-plorer (explore) 03:08, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose - I think in another country, 13 deaths would be enough. But in countries where floods aren't so uncommon, the bar should be much higher. The article quality doesn't meet WP:ITNCRIT as well. The ⬡ Bestagon[t][c] 06:42, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality. This is becoming a huge event in the said area/region (death toll has risen to 29); however, the target article is still marked as a stub. Vida0007 (talk) 20:52, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose. An event does not become ITN worthy simply because it involves death. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 00:52, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
December 26
December 26, 2022
(Monday)
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
International relations
Law and crime
|
(Posted) RD: John Kinch
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Legacy.com
Credits:
- Created and nominated by BeanieFan11 (talk · give credit)
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Died on December 23, appears to have been first reported on December 26. BeanieFan11 (talk) 02:30, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support Adequate depth, fully referenced. SpencerT•C 19:19, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 13:00, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
[Needs attention] Ongoing blockade of Artsakh
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
News source(s): France24
Credits:
- Nominated by RaffiKojian (talk · give credit)
Nominator's comments: 120,000 people have been under blockade for 13 days already, while peacekeepers have not opened the road by removing protestors with what many believe to be ulterior motives. Seems unusual and important. Not sure if this is how "ongoing" stories are proposed. --RaffiKojian (talk) 17:14, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment This is the first I've heard of this, so not sure how much coverage it's been getting. I also note there is a current debate over the article title that may have some political overtones. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:34, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support The article appears to be constantly updated (which is good) and it is already in a good shape with proper sources. Harut111 (talk) 23:41, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support - In good shape. Still in the headlines. Updated.BabbaQ (talk) 01:20, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support As per above. 125.59.140.165 (talk) 03:21, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: This was recently closed as stale (Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates/December_2022#(Closed)_2022_Artsakh_Blockade), but the article timeline of events is not exactly clear. There also seem to be parallel sections in "Blockade" and "Humanitarian crisis" (not sure how info is allocated to each section since there seems to be a lot of overlap). With more clarity, I think a blurb is a more ideal choice for this kind of item, with a consideration for a possible ongoing item afterward. SpencerT•C 03:46, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose - Not much in the article about the blockade itself. More than half the article is just reactions. Plus, Not the sort of continuous media coverage I'd like for an ongoing item. The ⬡ Bestagon[t][c] 06:10, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
- Concerned neutral – I'm still not seeing any non-region-based news publications on this through Google News. I'm also noticing that a lot of the sources used in the article are tweets. Some alarm bells ring for me with this sourcing, for our front page anyway, but I hardly have the knowledge to say more. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 10:17, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
- More coverage today from Reuters, Foreign Policy, Le Figaro and Le Monde. RaffiKojian (talk) 17:28, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
- Procedural oppose until the article title is settled. Nearly all countries mentioned in the article, particularly in the International reaction section, do not diplomatically recognize the Republic of Artsakh, as such they often use either the term Lachin corridor or Nagorno-Karabakh instead. A country (in this case Azerbaijan) cannot blockade the entity not recognized by that country. Brandmeistertalk 13:57, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
- I'm sorry but this is an "ongoing news" proposal, and to wait for a title change vote/discussion to end makes no sense. It's an easy way to prevent something from showing up in this section by the time it (hopefully) end, and a bad precedent. The name change proposal itself is flawed because the person proposing it was under the impression Armenians had other routes to enter and exit the region, which there is not. Whether it is called Artsakh or Karabakh is not even the topic of the proposed name change. RaffiKojian (talk) 16:09, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
- It makes sense first to settle on a title before posting the article with controversial title. It appears there's more to it than just remaining routes. All those countries that do not recognize Artsakh refer to the place of the incident either as Lachin corridor or Nagorno-Karabakh. Brandmeistertalk 20:03, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
- Sorry but I don't think the news should be suppressed for such secondary discussions, which as I said can easily be proposed by anybody again in the future to purposely keep news off of the front page. I believe there are people who would rather not see this news shared......... RaffiKojian (talk) 03:41, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
- I don't think this is a "secondary discussion" though - It might even be a POV issue on a controversial topic, even when we set aside the notability question. The ⬡ Bestagon[t][c] 06:57, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
- Sorry but I don't think the news should be suppressed for such secondary discussions, which as I said can easily be proposed by anybody again in the future to purposely keep news off of the front page. I believe there are people who would rather not see this news shared......... RaffiKojian (talk) 03:41, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
- It makes sense first to settle on a title before posting the article with controversial title. It appears there's more to it than just remaining routes. All those countries that do not recognize Artsakh refer to the place of the incident either as Lachin corridor or Nagorno-Karabakh. Brandmeistertalk 20:03, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
- I'm sorry but this is an "ongoing news" proposal, and to wait for a title change vote/discussion to end makes no sense. It's an easy way to prevent something from showing up in this section by the time it (hopefully) end, and a bad precedent. The name change proposal itself is flawed because the person proposing it was under the impression Armenians had other routes to enter and exit the region, which there is not. Whether it is called Artsakh or Karabakh is not even the topic of the proposed name change. RaffiKojian (talk) 16:09, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
- "A country (in this case Azerbaijan) cannot blockade the entity not recognized by that country." - This is nonsense. Recognition is a legal/political position; blockading is a matter of practical fact. And I'm very tired of procedural quibbles being used to oppose the inclusion of important news stories. GenevieveDEon (talk) 11:39, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support in principle - We still have the problem of relatively few English-language sources for this event. But as I stated before, it's my understanding (gained from informal statements by Anglophone journalists familiar with the region) that this is a serious ongoing situation. GenevieveDEon (talk) 11:39, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
- This part of the world doesn't get as much English language news coverage as some others, it's true, but the UN Security Council has met over this, the head of the UN, UNICEF, the EU, the pope, the Council of Europe, and many of the governments of the world's leading powers have spoken out against this blockade already. It is indeed a serious ongoing situation and while there isn't an avalanche of articles about it, there has been coverage by serious, international news companies (I've linked to a couple). The longer it continues, the more it will get coverage, as it has now been 16 days and shortages of food, medicine and fuel are only going to get more acute :( RaffiKojian (talk) 17:16, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose The dispute has been ongoing since the breakup of the Soviet Union and there are numerous border disputes of this sort around the world. This one does not seem sufficiently in the news or major enough to warrant an entry. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:31, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support A blockade, that includes the blockade of food and other essential supplies, of over a hundred thousand people, is easily significant enough to be included in ITN. BilledMammal (talk) 10:14, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose - The article was recently translated from the Armenian Wikipedia, and no consensus on the stable version has yet been established. The article currently has a number of WP:NPOV issues, one of which is an ongoing controversy concerning the article name. Artsakh is a self-proclaimed unrecognized republic, the territory of which is internationally recognized as part of Azerbaijan. No UN country or respectable reliable source acknowledges Artsakh's existence as a republic, instead using the neutral term "Blockade of Nagorno Karabakh" to describe events. Taking the article to the news at this moment is not a good idea; we should at the very least wait until there is consensus on how the article should be titled, because otherwise it will be an advertisement for a low-quality article with a POVname. A b r v a g l (PingMe) 17:43, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- So fix it - I agree that Nagorno-Karabakh is the WP:COMMONNAME of the region, so we should just use that and get on with it. The existence of the blockade is newsworthy, ongoing, and independent of what we call the affected area. GenevieveDEon (talk) 20:30, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
- I don't care whether it's called one or the other, I'm fine with either. Perhaps it can be posted with the ITN blurb text saying Nagorno-Karabakh, and linking to whatever the article is called? Whatever it is, I think the discussion can go on forever, especially with some people seemingly not wanting this news to get out. It needs a final decision. RaffiKojian (talk) 04:43, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support – The situation is unique - 120 000 Armenians besieged by Azerbaijan, deprived of free movement, food, fuel, medicine, with families torn apart. It is not "just another border event" - the sole humanitarian corridor of a large ethnic group is blockaded for 18 days now, with looming threat of a humanitarian catastrophe highlighted by Genocide_Watch [9], Human Rights Watch [10], World Medical Association [11], UNICEF [12], United Nations Security Council [13], PACE [14], Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights [15], EU, US [16] and France [17] with another dozen countries. The events are covered by BBC [18], RadioFreeEurope/RadioLiberty [19] , Euronews [20], Reuters [21], Forbes [22], Le Figaro [23], Le Monde [24], France24 [25]
- The situation has attracted the attention of leaders such as Pope Francis [26] and President Emmanuel Macron [27], celebrities such as Jean Reno, Pierre Richard and Carole Bouquet [28], and so on. I do not see how the preferred wiki-name under discussion or the political status of the blockaded entity should affect featuring an article that describes an ongoing, widely commented-on humanitarian catastrophe. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 02:23, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Support, this is a clear-cut and widely-reported humanitarian crisis involving over 100 thousand people – the name of the article being in contention shouldn't prejudice the article's candidacy for appearing "In the news". – Olympian loquere 01:56, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose This is just another episode in the long term Azerbijan-Armenia conflict. Also, there are POV issues. Tradediatalk 15:10, 31 December 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose on quality - the blockade section does not have a neutral point of view. I don't have an opinion on whether it should be posted on its merits. Anarchyte (talk) 10:46, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose. As pointed by others, the article has issues, in particular with neutrality, and there is an ongoing dispute with regard to the appropriate title. Grandmaster 10:58, 1 January 2023 (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: