Jump to content

Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Line 174: Line 174:
*'''Oppose blurb''' — Importance does not signify fame. <span style="font-family: monospace;">[[User talk:ElijahPepe|elijahpepe@wikipedia]] (he/him)</span> 15:19, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
*'''Oppose blurb''' — Importance does not signify fame. <span style="font-family: monospace;">[[User talk:ElijahPepe|elijahpepe@wikipedia]] (he/him)</span> 15:19, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
*'''Oppose blurb''' Blurbed deaths should be rare, based on a level of "fame" and noteworthiness of the death and public reaction to the death. Not every Nobel Prize winner should have a blurb. &ndash;&nbsp;[[User:Muboshgu|Muboshgu]]&nbsp;([[User talk:Muboshgu#top|talk]]) 15:24, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
*'''Oppose blurb''' Blurbed deaths should be rare, based on a level of "fame" and noteworthiness of the death and public reaction to the death. Not every Nobel Prize winner should have a blurb. &ndash;&nbsp;[[User:Muboshgu|Muboshgu]]&nbsp;([[User talk:Muboshgu#top|talk]]) 15:24, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
*'''Oppose blurb''' I don't want to set the precedent that every Nobel Prize winner gets a blurb. There were 14 Nobel Prize winners in 2022; are we prepared to add 14 death blurbs per year? Outside of the Nobel Prize, while his invention was transformative, you could say that about a lot of scientists, including many Nobel Prize winners; I don't think he as a person transcends the field of science the way someone like Jane Goodall or Stephen Hawking does. [[User:NorthernFalcon|NorthernFalcon]] ([[User talk:NorthernFalcon|talk]]) 15:54, 27 June 2023 (UTC)


==== RD: Craig Brown ====
==== RD: Craig Brown ====

Revision as of 15:54, 27 June 2023

Click here to nominate an item for In the news. In the news toolbox
Shortcut

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.

Paralympics opening ceremony
Paralympics opening ceremony

view — page history — related changes — edit

Glossary

  • Blurbs are one-sentence summaries of the news story.
    • Altblurbs, labelled alt1, alt2, etc., are alternative suggestions to cover the same story.
    • A target article, bolded in text, is the focus of the story. Each blurb must have at least one such article, but you may also link non-target articles.
  • Articles in the Ongoing line describe events getting continuous coverage.
  • The Recent deaths (RD) line includes any living thing whose death was recently announced. Consensus may decide to create a blurb for a recent death.

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

  • Make sure the item you want to nominate has an article that meets our minimum requirements and contains reliable coverage of a current event you want to create a blurb about. We will not post about events described in an article that fails our quality standards.
  • Find the correct section below for the date of the event (not the date nominated). Do not add sections for new dates manually – a bot does that for us each day at midnight (UTC).
  • Create a level 4 header with the article name (==== Your article here ====). Add (RD) or (Ongoing) if appropriate.
Then paste the {{ITN candidate}} template with its parameters and fill them in. The news source should be reliable, support your nomination and be in the article. Write your blurb in simple present tense. Below the template, briefly explain why we should post that event. After that, save your edit. Your nomination is ready!
  • You may add {{ITN note}} to the target article's talk page to let editors know about your nomination.

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.

Purge this page to update the cache

Headers

  • When the article is ready, updated and there is consensus to post, you can mark the item as (Ready). Remove that wording if you feel the article fails any of these necessary criteria.
  • Admins should always separately verify whether these criteria are met before posting blurbs marked (Ready). For more guidance, check WP:ITN/A.
    • If satisfied, change the header to (Posted).
    • Where there is no consensus, or the article's quality remains poor, change the header to (Closed) or (Not posted).
    • Sometimes, editors ask to retract an already-posted nomination because of a fundamental error or because consensus changed. If you feel the community supports this, remove the item and mark the item as (Pulled).

Voicing an opinion on an item

Format 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...

Shortcut
  1. Pick an older item to review near the bottom of this page, before the eligibility runs out and the item scrolls off the page and gets abandoned in the archive, unused and forgotten.
  2. Review an item even if it has already been reviewed by another user. You may be the first to spot a problem, or the first to confirm that an identified problem was fixed. Piling on the list of "support!" votes will help administrators see what is ready to be posted on the Main Page.
  3. Tell about problems in articles if you see them. Be bold and fix them yourself if you know how, or tell others if it's not possible.

Please do not...

Shortcut
  1. Add simple "support!" or "oppose!" votes without including your reasons. Similarly, curt replies such as "who?", "meh", or "duh!" are not helpful. A vote without reasoning means little for us, please elaborate yourself.
  2. Oppose an item just because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. We post a lot of such content, so these comments are generally unproductive.
  3. Accuse other editors of supporting, opposing or nominating due to a personal bias (such as ethnocentrism). We at ITN do not handle conflicts of interest.
  4. Comment on a story without first reading the relevant article(s).
  5. Oppose a recurring item here because you disagree with the recurring items criteria. Discuss them here.
  6. Use ITN as a forum for your own political or personal beliefs. Such comments are irrelevant to the outcome and are potentially disruptive.

Suggesting updates

There are two places where you can request corrections to posted items:

  • Anything that does not change the intent of the blurb (spelling, grammar, markup issues, updating death tolls etc.) should be discussed at WP:Errors.
  • Discuss major changes in the blurb's intent or very complex updates as part of the current ITNC nomination.
Skip to top
Skip to bottom

Archives

June 27

June 27, 2023 (2023-06-27) (Tuesday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

Law and crime

Politics and elections

RD: Cok Budi Suryawan

Article: Cok Budi Suryawan (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.balipuspanews.com/cok-budi-suryawan-mantan-bupati-gianyar-berpulang.html
Credits:

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: Balinese politician. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 14:44, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Manipur violence

Article: 2023 Manipur violence (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
Credits:

Nominator's comments: A significant event that has resulted in the loss of many lives and displacement of thousands of people. Ainty Painty (talk) 02:31, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

June 26

June 26, 2023 (2023-06-26) (Monday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Politics and elections

Turkish economic crisis (2018–current)

Article: Turkish economic crisis (2018–current) (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
Credits:

Nominator's comments: The Turkish lira falls to a record low against the United States dollar, while the central bank stops using its reserves to support the lira. Abcmaxx (talk) 10:44, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No updates to the article to show any key events in 2023. Absolutely required against a five-year ongoing event. Masem (t) 12:09, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

2023 Guatemalan general election

Article: 2023 Guatemalan general election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Vamos win a plularity of votes in the Guatemalan general legislative election (Post)
Credits:

The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.

Nominator's comments: there's a presidential election yet to be concluded but parliamentary results are in. Abcmaxx (talk) 09:25, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) RD: Lew Palter

Stale. Stephen 08:48, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Article: Lew Palter (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Hollywood Reporter CalArts
Credits:

Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
The discussion above 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.

RD: Richard Ravitch

Article: Richard Ravitch (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NYT
Credits:

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: former Lieutenant Governor of New York and chairman of the MTA, amongst other leadership roles in private businesses. Needs cause of death in body of article. 3rd RD nomination ever, let’s see if this goes better than the last two times. GhostStalker (Got a present for ya! / Mission Log) 21:46, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: David Bohrman

Article: David Bohrman (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CNN
Credits:

Article needs updating
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: American news executive. Needs a few citations. - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 21:20, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Raanan Gissin

Article: Raanan Gissin (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): JP
Credits:

Article needs updating
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Israeli political analyst. Needs serious rework. - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 20:21, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Lloyd Erskine Sandiford

Article: Lloyd Erskine Sandiford (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Jamaica Observer
Credits:

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: Barbadian PM. Might I ask, since the PM of Barbados holds executive power, making him a "world figure" in a sense, would that make him eligible for a blurb? - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 20:14, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support a RD, Not a Blurb I do not see this person being blurb able, not super well known. TheCorriynial (talk) 20:33, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Barbados achieved independence independence in 1966. I'm assuming this is referring to their status as a commonwealth nation, which seems to be a somewhat absurd criteria to me (so if Trudeau dropped dead today, we wouldn't blurb?). - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 21:28, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Trudeau is the current leader of Canada, Sandiford was the former leader of Barbados, so there is a clear difference in scope. Anyways, politicians are not considered for death-blurbs by mere virtue of holding an office, they are considered for the actions they do in that office. Curbon7 (talk) 21:40, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: James Crown

Article: James Crown (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CBS - CNN - USAToday
Credits:

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 businessman and heir who died while driving on a race track. Not a great way to go. Article is a little stubby ATM. - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 20:02, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Hugo Blanco (politician)

Article: Hugo Blanco (politician) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Infobae
Credits:

Article needs updating
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Peruvian political figure. - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 19:55, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(RD posted, blurb discussion can continue): John B. Goodenough

Proposed image
Article: John B. Goodenough (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  American physicist and Nobel chemist John B. Goodenough (pictured) dies at the age of 100. (Post)
News source(s): The Hindu Businessline
Credits:

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: Article updated and well sourced. Death announced today. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 15:05, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Article is well cited and well sourced. Great name, btw. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 18:09, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Support Prof. Goodenough's legacy extends far beyond lithium-ion batteries and Random Access Memory. As I write this, I want to point to his strong work ethic taking into account that he worked as long as he could to further improve materials science. As far as I know, he was working on solid-state batteries up until his death paving the way to replace the very batteries he helped to create.
From one longhorn to another, Hook 'em! SlavicNarwal (talk) 18:19, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That Forbes piece is from a contributer so it is unreliable, before people start jumping on adding it to the article. However, on the blurb, I don't think he represents the top of the field, as while receiving the Novel is important, we aren't blurbing the deaths of all Nobel winners. If anything, the article needs a clear section of his work's impact on the field of batteries, which otherwise right now is buried across the article. Masem (t) 19:54, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Craig Brown

Article: Craig Brown (footballer, born 1940) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

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: Longest-serving Scotland international football manager. Needs quite a bit of work. Black Kite (talk) 13:09, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Cameron Buchanan (politician)

Article: Cameron Buchanan (politician) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Midlothian View
Credits:

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: Scottish politician. Needs expansion - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 01:30, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: José Antonio Sistiaga

Article: José Antonio Sistiaga (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): eitb.eus
Credits:

Article needs updating
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Spanish Basque artist and experimental filmmaker. - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 01:25, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Tapas Das

Article: Tapas Das (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): TOI
Credits:

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 singer-songwriter, and guitarist. Needs some citation work. - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 01:21, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose Article has some unsourced statements here and there, but the Discography section is entirely unsourced. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 01:31, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Discographies rarely are, and don't really need to be. Good case of WP:BLUE. Good luck finding a website listing all of an artist's albums in one spot. — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 02:04, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Per WP:ITNQUALITY::

    Lists of awards and honors, bibliographies and filmographies and the like should have clear sources.

    Astrud Gilberto's was improved and finally posted to ITN. —Bagumba (talk) 08:46, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support when discography is sourced properly. TwistedAxe [contact] 12:43, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support whether or not the discography is sourced per WP:BLUE. De facto, discographies are rarely sourced. I took a random sample of 5 music performer good articles, and none of them had citations in the discographies. Holding ITN articles to such a high bar creates systemic bias to subjects with sparse sourcing (which is more likely with a person from the Global South). — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 20:22, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    No...no it doesn't. It just makes sure that unverified information doesn't get by onto the Main Page. Sample some featured articles and check if their discographies have citations in them. Besides, ITN quality is not the same as GA quality, and if the creator has enough sources to become a good article, you probably already know that the discography was actually made by them. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 20:37, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Ok, FAs:
    All the ones I checked don't have citations in the discographies. A few I had to exclude because they didn't have discography lists.
    Charles-Valentin Alkan
    John Lennon
    Gwen Stefani
    Mick Jagger
    Paul McCartney
    Lady Gaga
    I think this evidently shows that, de facto, sourcing in discographies isn't a problem whether or not ITN wants it to be. Should I check more? — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 20:41, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Go ahead. Could you check the second half of my statement, too? ITN quality is not the same as GA quality, and it isn't even the same as FA quality. Ask any posting admin here; they'll say what I'm saying. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 23:40, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    PerfectSoundWhatever ITN has very little oversight from the rest of the project, and accepted sitewide norms are routinely challenged or rejected here. I've written about this here. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 05:47, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Article needs ref work and more info is needed since it's a stub. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 22:15, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Page is currently 1291 B (216 words) of readable prose.—Bagumba (talk) 08:25, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Robert "Say" McIntosh

Article: Robert "Say" McIntosh (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): KARK
Credits:

Article needs updating
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: American political activist. Needs citation work. - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 01:15, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

June 25

June 25, 2023 (2023-06-25) (Sunday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

Politics and elections

RD: Simon Crean

Article: Simon Crean (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-06-25/former-labor-leader-simon-crean-dies-aged-74/102521856
Credits:

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: Former Australian Labor Party leader HiLo48 (talk) 23:31, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Dean Smith (sprinter)

Article: Dean Smith (sprinter) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Variety
Credits:

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.

23:59, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

  • Oppose as the article's quality is quite subpar. There are quite a few CN tags, and the overall length of the article is quite stubby. Improvement is needed, and fast. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 23:05, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment Worth noting that there were no CN tags when the article was nominated. Now there's a lot because you added them. Granted, some of these may be required but I think you might have gone a bit overboard with some of them. Sometimes it's just as easy to add a ref/citation as it is to add a tag. Plus the refs already in the article cover a lot - if not all - of the info now tagged. 2001:BB6:4E52:7D00:AD4D:4C49:94D1:E651 (talk) 08:10, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Now there's a lot because you added them...I think you might have gone a bit overboard some of them: I think that's good; now editors/readers know what needs sourcing. On the flip side, editors might only fix what is minimally tagged, and complain later on when they're fixed, but more is added: "But, you didn't tag it before". Plus the refs already in the article cover a lot or all of the info now tagged It's possible that WP:INTEGRITY of the sources declined with new text being added over time. If an existing source is applicable, by all means re-use it with a new footnote.—Bagumba (talk) 08:39, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Update - all the CN tags have now been fixed with sources. Plus new sources have been added. So no issue there. As for the length of the article itself, I've added headings and expanded it a bit with some info from sources. There's plenty of references with lots more info to draw from if other editors feel like expanding it more. Not sure if I'll have time to myself but might take a look if I find any. In the meantime, all the issues - except maybe length - seem to have been addressed. If more CN tags are added, I'll try to fix them with additional sources. 2001:BB6:4E52:7D00:AD4D:4C49:94D1:E651 (talk) 09:07, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Greek snap election

Proposed image
Article: June 2023 Greek legislative election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In Greece, the New Democratic party (leader Kyriakos Mitsotakis pictured) wins the legislative election. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In Greece, Kyriakos Mitsotakis (pictured) becomes prime minister after his New Democratic party in wins a majority of seats in the Greek parliament.
News source(s): BBC - NYT - Politico - The Guardian - AP
Credits:

Article updated
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.

Nominator's comments: Greeces New Democratic party has triumphed in today's elections, with it being hailed as a major victory for conservatism. The latter half of the article is a tablewall, which needs to be remedied. - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 22:35, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

General elections are already presumed to be inherently notable.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
  • Support as every other UN country when they elect a head of state or government. Smaller countries have been covered so not including Greece is racist by definition. —Dimsar01 Talk ⌚→ 08:36, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Perhaps read the rest of the discussion before you start throwing random accusations of "racism" around... As it literally says at the top of this section - "Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance". And that's what the opposition so far is regarding.  — Amakuru (talk) 10:50, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I think screaming "racist" having never once contributed to ITN and clearly not knowing how it works is an incredible violation of WP:AGF... not least because you have no idea what races other people are! Kicking222 (talk) 12:22, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Racist to whom? The Greeks are not a race. They're an ethnicity. Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 16:15, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Some analysis is needed to explain the result for general readers. I had to read the BBC report – which is a professionally written explanation. Our article doesn't come close. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:03, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support for the reason that alot of people in this discussion seem to be forgetting that this is a snap election. There's plenty of prose in the article for being a relatively new article, and not to mention that this election is a follow-up of the previous election from May, which has a TON of prose and is more than enough to post in ITN. The reason why we didn't post it the last time around was solely because of the fact that we knew these June snap elections were imminent and were posting to post them too. I opposed the last nom regarding these elections, and will be supporting this one for the reasons I stated before. TwistedAxe [contact] 12:49, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The May 2023 election article has a few uncited sources, and we aren't bolding/blurbing that. The prose on this nominated article, that being June 2023 Greek legislative election, has a considerable lack of prose in places needing prose. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 14:53, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not quite ready I think it'd benefit from at least a brief paragraph about the aftermath or some analysis about what the results will mean. Not every election article we post needs to have this, but given that other editors have already located quality RS that provide this (e.g. the BBC article Andrew linked) we have the potential to make the article better before putting it on the main page.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 16:44, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Yang Ti-liang

Article: Yang Ti-liang (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): SCMP
Credits:

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: Hong Konger judge. Need more sources. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 02:06, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Margaret McDonagh, Baroness McDonagh

Article: Margaret McDonagh, Baroness McDonagh (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: British Labour party politician. Article seems decent, though it could do with some lengthening. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 02:03, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Dahrran Diedrick

Article: Dahrran Diedrick (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CBC
Credits:

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 football player. It actually looks ready to go thanks to the work of @Cmm3:. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 01:59, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Claude Barzotti

Article: Claude Barzotti (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Le Monde
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Italian-Belgian singer. Suffers from the usual issues regarding sources. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 01:53, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Blurb Change: Wagner rebellion

Proposed image
Article: Wagner Group rebellion (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In Russia, the Wagner Group mercenary group rebels against the government, before standing down. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In Russia, after revolting against the Russian military, the paramilitary company Wagner Group (leader Yevgeny Prigozhin pictured) agrees to stand down.
Alternative blurb II: ​ In Russia, after brokering a deal with Belarussian president Alexander Lukashenko, the mercenary company Wagner Group (leader Yevgeny Prigozhin pictured) ends its revolt against the the Russian military.
Alternative blurb III: ​ In Russia, the Wagner mercenary group (leader Yevgeny Prigozhin pictured) stands down after rebelling against the government.
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Hello my friends! I have been following this recent episode of Earth quite closely, and I think it's fair to say that the rebellion is pretty much over by now. The Wagner forces have stood down, and are retreating. So, I think the blurb should reflect that, by making it clear that the whole escapade has ended. I may be wrong, and if so I'll be on my merry way. Just a suggestion and a thought. Cheers! :)) PrecariousWorlds (talk) 21:11, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support - RSes are reporting that Prigozhin is withdrawing from Rostov-on-don. Seems like many of the people voting pull in the below discussion aren't realizing that this exists so I'm adding Prigozhin's image as a sort of marker. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 02:43, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Knight! I am absolutely awful at adding images to blurbs. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 10:35, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - #1 news story in the world for agencies Associated Press and Reuters. [2] [3] starship.paint (exalt) 03:56, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    And it's still the top story 12 hours since the capitulation. Impressive. Very nice. Let's see the American coup now. 5.44.170.53 (talk) 06:39, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support It's been 12 hours, the deal hasn't fallen thru, i think it's time we can change the blur. 5.44.170.53 (talk) 06:36, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Proposing & supporting alt blurb 3 It describes what happened & is based on the current blurb. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 07:17, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb 3.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 11:47, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb 3 with thanks to Blaylockjam10 for proposing it. Succint and gets the point across effectively. Kurtis (talk) 11:58, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Big numbers for this yesterday as this and other related articles were top read. It's interesting that the titles Wagner Group mutiny and Wagner Group rebellion were roughly tied with about half a million views each. But the most common title search was for just Wagner Group with over two million views. Suggested blurb 3 includes all the most popular links and so fits what readers are looking for. Andrew🐉(talk) 12:19, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support any of the above. Time to get the outdated version of the MP. - SchroCat (talk) 12:38, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted altblurb 3 -- Kicking222 (talk) 12:53, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting support of altblurb 3 - Though I have my qualms about significance overall, that altblurb is the most appropriate to describe the course of events that took place. --Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 13:11, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull - all the above, non-story of no real consequence. nableezy - 14:46, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Non-story of no real consequence that is still #1 story in Reuters [4] and Associated Press [5] Russian mercenaries’ short-lived revolt could have long-term consequences for Putin? starship.paint (exalt) 14:51, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Or it could not. And either way, covered by ongoing. This is mostly people, Wikipedians, wishing for things to be true that arent true, but this blurb isnt going to make them true. Nothing happened here, we have a blurb that literally says the thing we so breathlessly reported to you as some major story yesterday ended without anything happening today. nableezy - 15:10, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    It does not saying nothing happened, things that stop still have impact. The aforementioned AP article details the impact. Aaron Liu (talk) 15:47, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    That article you linked does not really make any conclusions, for example it states the rebellion "could have long-term consequences" which indicates things are pretty much up in the air. Nothing could happen like nableezy said, or it might turn into something more. All of that seems like WP:CRYSTAL either way. I agree with pulling the blurb as it seems redundant with the ongoing item, but clearly the blurb has consensus so it does not really matter. - Indefensible (talk) 18:55, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Just to name a few:
    severely dented Putin’s reputation as a leader who is willing to ruthlessly punish anyone who challenges his authority which is true since Wagners don't have punishments yet and the leader will not face prosecution
    Several world leaders say even the halt shows something big is coming which is also part of the reason why 2021–2022 Russo-Ukrainian crisis became ongoing back before the war started.
    resulted in some of the best forces fighting for Russia in Ukraine being pulled from the battlefield: Prigozhin’s own Wagner troops, who had shown their effectiveness in scoring the Kremlin’s only land victory in months in Bakhmut, and Chechen soldiers sent to stop them on the approach to Moscow. The Wagner forces’ largely unopposed, rapid advance also exposed vulnerabilities in Russia’s security and military forces. Aaron Liu (talk) 19:19, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    That is still largely unproven conjecture, for example U.S. Secretary of State Blinken said that "It is too soon to tell exactly where they go and when they get there" and if Wagner troops can be moved that quickly then putting them back may not be hard either. We do not yet know whether this event will turn out to have been nothing much or have bigger consequences. - Indefensible (talk) 22:36, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Nor did we know when we put 2021 – 2022 Russo-Ukrainian crisis into ongoing. I think just that most world leaders think this will amount to something big (like the former) would be enough Aaron Liu (talk) 23:16, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The function of a blurb vs. an ongoing entry are different, and this event is a relatively small element of that larger subject. In any event they both have support, it does not really matter than much either way. - Indefensible (talk) 00:23, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Most world leaders publicly state that this is something big. We have to remember that when it comes to war, the party line from every country is going to have a different take on the events, based on their systemic ideological bias or their need to shape events in their favor. When it comes to ITN and stories like these, I tend to lean the same way as Masem -- we should report the actions iif they are individually noteworthy and significant, and try not to rely on our own biases and conjecture to explain events. Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 13:25, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    To add to this, a major problem across all of WP which also affects ITN is too many editors writing for the here and now, and not fir the 10-year view. We are supposed to summarize events from a backwards-looking view...Wikinews was created for those that want to write in the here and now. Thats when it comes to ITN we need to focus on the encyclopedic quality of events more than timeliness, and why we can wait to post something to make sure it is an actual, long term impact event than the knee jerk reactions of the media. Masem (t) 13:49, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Still oppose pull. This is a major development that deserves a mention outside of ongoing as it reveals internal tensions and popular anti-support. Yes it may have been posted prematurely, but that doesn't mean we need to pull it now. For one, it means that a lot of Russian citizens got first-hand influence against the war and there may not be popular support for the war (indicated by how the citizens welcomed the coupers) Aaron Liu (talk) 14:52, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting support blurb 3. I've been on the fence about how to address this, but I think we've found a good compromise. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 15:06, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think I've ever seen a "blurb change" nomination before. I thought WP:ERRORS was the venue for that. Pawnkingthree (talk) 20:00, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Errors is normally for literal errors (spelling, formatting, etc) while this was an update on a changing event. The Kip (talk) 20:55, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Blurb updates are regularly suggested at ERRORS. Pawnkingthree (talk) 21:16, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I haven't seen any bigger blurb changes suggested at ERRORS. Most of the blurb changes at WP:ERRORS were at most just a word. Also, Sca is banned from this page so they must suggest at ERRORS. Aaron Liu (talk) 21:28, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Indeed. Major blurb changes clearly go here, ERRORS is for either small tweaks or factual inaccuracies.  — Amakuru (talk) 10:52, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The top of ITNC says:

    For more complex updates that involve a major change in the blurb's intent, that should be discussed as part of the current ITNC nomination.

    —Bagumba (talk) 07:56, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    A nomination which is usually closed if a contentious consensus is reached, usually with the comment "please discuss any issues with the blurb at WP:ERRORS". Bit of a catch-22. I think a standalone discussion is appropriate. Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 13:06, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, this is the "current ITNC nomination", given the technicality of the original being already closed. —Bagumba (talk) 13:29, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

June 24

June 24, 2023 (2023-06-24) (Saturday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

Politics and elections

(Posted) RD: K. R. Parthasarathy (probabilist)

Article: K. R. Parthasarathy (probabilist) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Indian Express
Credits:

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 mathematician. Death announced in WP:RS on this day. Article requires some work, but, not terribly far away. Basic edits done. Article meets hygiene expectations for homepage / RD. Ktin (talk) 19:31, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Desmond Junaidi Mahesa

Article: Desmond Junaidi Mahesa (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.tvonenews.com/berita/nasional/132529-politikus-gerindra-desmond-mahesa-meninggal-dunia-disemayamkan-di-karawang-sabtu-siang
Credits:

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: MP since 2009. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 17:14, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Cédric Roussel

Article: Cédric Roussel (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC Sport
Credits:

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: Football player Pharaoh of the Wizards — Preceding undated comment added 19:05, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

Ongoing removal: 2023 Sudan conflict

Article: 2023 Sudan conflict (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item removal (Post)

Nominator's comments: No recent updates. Interstellarity (talk) 11:17, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - still receiving daily updates. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 14:58, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - I've thought about if it should be removed before since the map hasn't really changed at all since the conflict started, but the revision history is incredibly active. Things are still happening and being documented on Wikipedia.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 22:00, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Wagner Group mutiny

Blurb changed, refer to above discussion if you want to comment. starship.paint (exalt) 14:47, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Proposed image
Article: Wagner Group mutiny (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the pro-Russian mercenary company Wagner Group (leader Yevgeny Prigozhin pictured) mutinies after being shelled by Russian forces. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the pro-Russian mercenary company Wagner Group mutinies after being shelled by Russian forces, prompting the Russian Federal Security Service to open a criminal investigation into it's leader, Yevgeny Prigozhin (pictured).
Alternative blurb II: ​ Russia issues arrest warrant for Wagner mercenaries chief Yevgeny Prigozhin (pictured) on charges of mutiny
Alternative blurb III: ​ In Russia, the pro-Russian mercenary company Wagner Group (leader Yevgeny Prigozhin pictured) revolts against the Russian government.
Alternative blurb IV: ​ In Russia, the pro-Russian mercenary company Wagner Group (leader Yevgeny Prigozhin pictured) mutinies and launches a coup d'etat against the Russian government.
News source(s): Reuters - The Guardian - France24 - DW - VOA - WSJ - BBC - NBC
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Yes, "tHiS iS oNgOiNg," but this is a major development in the war: one of Russia's closest allies in the war and Putin's biggest buddies being shelled by Russian troops and mutinying against them. I mean, Yevgeny Prigozhin on Telegram went so far to literally to completely dismiss Russia's invasion rationale, saying that Ukraine and NATO were never going to attack Russia, accused Sergei Shoigu, the minister of defense, for fucking up the war effort, and other stuff so shocking, he's now had a criminal investigation opened about him by the Russian Federal Security Service. We've established with the ICC Putin charges, the recent dam explosion, the Crimean bridge and the like that just because an item is ongoing, extremely major news stories can still be blurbed. This seems like a textbox example of major blurb worthy news from an ongoing news event. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 01:27, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait the situation is too unclear for any blurb to be accurate. 217.180.228.188 (talk) 01:32, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support A major ally of Putin rejecting his now-former allyship is a major development of the war. CJ-Moki (talk) 01:33, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post shortly The top news stories so far seem to be mostly focusing on informational statements made by the Russians. We should wait until more physical effects (such as fighting, arrests, etc.) are seen.
2G0o2De0l (talk) 01:36, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose — No sign of any developments. As you said yourself, already covered in ongoing regardless. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 01:39, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait I agree that this is a major development and that this would definitely make it to ITN when things develop further, but I would call for some more time to pass before the situation is a bit more resolved. I would also consider adding "allegedly" before shelled because to the best of my knowledge this is an allegation that Prigozhin shared but is disputed, I may be wrong though. Ornithoptera (talk) 01:40, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wait As stated above, it's unclear precisely what is happening. Obviously fighting between Wagner and the Russian military is noteworthy and likely to attract significant media coverage, but thing are still developing, so it's too early to post a blurb. Gust Justice (talk) 01:42, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait but eventually Support. Currently developing and the media environment makes it difficult to see what is actually happening. We should probably exclude the alleged shelling, which is disputed and just simply say that the Wagner Group has mutinied. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 01:46, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose pull. Once reliable sources confirmed that Wagner had taken Rostov-on-Don (Russia's 10th largest city and a major military hub), this was suitable for posting independently of the war in Ukraine ongoing item. It seems with recent developments, the blurb might need to be updated, but the significance threshold for is met. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 19:01, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I think we need a better blurb. Mutinies seems to be the wrong word. Need something about the increasing rhetoric and accusations and threats about this side. I haven't got the words though. Nfitz (talk) 02:14, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wait Definitely a major development but more details need to be known. Alrdead (talk) 02:16, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait for more details/the fog of war to clear, then Support. Yeah, it’s somewhat covered by ongoing, but this is the type of major development that justifies a blurb in itself. The Kip (talk) 02:32, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - as both covered by ongoing and failing any significance unless and until something actually happens as a result of it. If he deposes the General Staff of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation then sure post. If he shuts up or is shut up then who cares? nableezy - 02:35, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    By that logic then we shouldn't have had any ITN on the Ukraine War yet, because they haven't deposed the Ukrainian president. Wagner forces have now moved 100s of kilometres along the road to Moscow, with little to no resistance. But the blurb needs work. I'm not sure why the Russian charges are that relevant at this point in time. Nfitz (talk) 03:20, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    No, by this logic you dont breathlessly rush to the main page for every piece of fast changing information that may, and did, amount to nothing. Believe I had that one. nableezy - 14:44, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    They’ve effectively seized Rostov-on-Don including the Southern Military District HQ, I fail to see how that has “no significance.” This is arguably the most significant development of the war since the invasion itself. The Kip (talk) 03:25, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Ahem, you were saying? nableezy - 14:44, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Slight Oppose It hurts me to say this to something so important, but it is Covered by ongoing. Still, I can see why this is important, and I truly hope that this can be an ITN as soon as the situation becomes clear. Once things clear up, I may change my vote to Support. Editor 5426387 (talk) 02:52, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The ongoing covers the invasion of Ukraine. These are Russians fighting (or at least moving unopposed) hundreds of kilometres up the highway to Moscow. It's either notable on it's own, or not; but this isn't part of the Ukrainian War ongoing. Nfitz (talk) 03:22, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So why does the blurb say "In the Russian invasion of Ukraine..."? HiLo48 (talk) 03:38, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I keep saying the blurb need a rewrite. Nfitz (talk) 03:47, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to change my vote to Support due to the fact that the Government of Russia has already stated this as a Coup attempt, which has not really been common since 1993, and that they have captured Rostov-on-Don. Based on this, the event goes far beyond Ongoing. Editor 5426387 (talk) 15:57, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait, bordering on Support The situation is probably clear enough to post now, but I'm not positive. I think the notability and news coverage are both there. I should note that the original blurb and alt 1 are way too long. -- Kicking222 (talk) 03:12, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait We have lots of unclear results, probably another 12 hrs will give us sufficient details to know if this was a successful coup or event that falls outside ongoing. --Masem (t) 03:14, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Support. If I remember correctly, a Russian missile attack got posted here once. This is orders of magnitude more important than those individual attacks, and the article in question is written adequately, especially considering it's such a quickly changing scene. - Mebigrouxboy (talk) 03:28, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose It is NOT obvious that "this is a major development in the war". Only time will tell us that. Lots of time. HiLo48 (talk) 03:40, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Bro, they've effectively captured Rostov-on-Don, and do you really think Wagner is just going to go back fighting Ukraine if defeated? This seems like WP:POINTY behavior. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 06:18, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Leaning Support -the removal of Wagner from Bahkmut will have major consequences by itself. Schierbecker (talk) 04:02, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support when ready If what I'm reading is correct, this is an ongoing coup attempt. It's not "covered" by the ongoing, regardless of its impact on the Ukraine War. The article isn't good enough to post as it is. – Muboshgu (talk) 04:04, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Needs a better blurb: The shelling may be staged and/or a false flag operation; the arrest warrant is not the main story. The blurb needs to focus on the mutiny. --Carnildo (talk) 04:39, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I favor altblurb 3: Prigozhin's statements have been about replacing the Minister of Defense, not Putin, so "coup" is overstating things right now. --Carnildo (talk) 05:36, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait This clearly deserves a blurb, but we need to wait to know what the proper blurb will be. Once that's clear & the article's quality is improved, I'll support a blurb. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 05:40, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb. The article should be improved though. --Bedivere (talk) 05:54, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted with provisional generic blurb: "In Russia, the Wagner mercenary group mutinies against the government." There is consensus to post in principle, and the article seems to be of reasonable quality now for a breaking news story. Discussion about what the blurb should read can continue. Sandstein 06:32, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reword The wording of the posted blurb seems inaccurate. "mutinies" is not the right word because Wagner Group is an independent force, not part of the Russian Army. The latter has been trying to get it into the chain of command and this may have provoked the conflict. It's very like the fighting in Sudan which we posted as "Clashes erupt after fighters from the Rapid Support Forces attack several army camps in Sudan." Andrew🐉(talk) 06:57, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Currently there are no clashes. Mellk (talk) 07:38, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Blurb is not even accurate. He is saying he will topple the military leadership, not the government.[6] Specifically he is after the chief of general staff and minister of defence. So these blurb options are poor. It can be summarized as following: Prigozhin makes accusations and blames MoD, says he is after Shoigu (there was a feud between them), criminal charges filed against him, Wagner forces are sent to Rostov-on-Don. No reports of fighting or anything. Mellk (talk) 07:05, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting support Undoubtedly a significant event. A good blurb is hard to write for this developing situation; for the reasons stated by others above, I suggest "... revolts against the military leadership" instead of "... mutinies against the government". Davey2116 (talk) 07:57, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I think that would be a better way to rephrase it. Mellk (talk) 08:10, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Mutiny is the correct word. Rebellions, revolts, and revolutions have at least a component of the general populace involved. This is a mutiny against the military leadership. Abductive (reasoning) 08:12, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Seems like it was changed to "rebels" now, though it still says "government" rather than military leadership. Mellk (talk) 10:38, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support and include “mutiny” or “revolt”. The blurb will need occasional updating as things develop. Both Putin and Prigozhin are garbage. I hope neither wins. Jehochman Talk 11:39, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Historic event. Definitely for ITN.BabbaQ (talk) 12:21, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Before we go running off to close this because "consensus won't change", I'd just like to ask one question. I understand the timeline of events that took place. What I do not understand is what the impact and consequences of this course of events will be. What is the outlook of the Russo-Ukrainian War as a result of the mutiny? How many troops does this take off the table, and how easily replaceable is this? I'd just like to have some details; I'm agnostic as to whether I support or oppose. Tell me why I ought to support. --Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 13:28, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is history in the making and its significance is political – its effect on hearts and minds and control of Russia. Times Radio reports "Russia coup: reports Putin is 'fleeing' to St. Petersburg as Prigozhin continues towards Moscow". Is this rumour wishful thinking? What will happen when push comes to shove? We shall see... Andrew🐉(talk) 14:14, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • No one really knows what Wagner is doing except Prigozhin, and we can't really predict what the rank-and-file Russians in Russia would do. We'll just have to wait and see. starship.paint (exalt) 14:15, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If I had to guess, since much of the fighting in the recent parts of the war have been done by Wagner and considering that they've occupied much of the area around the Russo-Ukrainian border and cut key supply lines, I would probably suggest that we may see Ukrainian incursions westward as the Russian occupied zone within the country becomes at least somewhat abandoned for the time been, with troops possibly being pulled back or having to deal with supply issues. Additionally, Wagner is already more than halfway along the route to Moscow, and with reports of Russian troops not doing anything to stop them, it seems like the Russian government may just be stacking all its energy in a defense of Moscow (damn, I can't believe I'm using that to refer to an ongoing event). This is all speculation however; Starship.paint (talk · contribs) is right: No one really knows what Wagner is doing except Prigozhin, and we can't really predict what the rank-and-file Russians in Russia would do. We'll just have to wait and see. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 14:57, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This is the reason why there were a lot of wait !votes, because we shouldn't be posting stories until there's clear understandings of the ramifications. We don't know what the endgame is here so we should wait until it is clear what the Wagner Group's ultimate goal is. Is it a coup of the entire country or just the military? it is not clear, and thus this posting was premature. Masem (t) 15:34, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Even a coup of just the military would be newsworthy enough, methinks. starship.paint (exalt) 15:38, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Most others coups or equivalent actions we have posted have been after either after the coup was successfully completed or was successfully quashed. Masem (t) 15:48, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
All of these answers are interesting but it's all rumours and crystal-ballery. In keeping with my principles that post-pull-post is a bad way to operate, I'll accede to the consensus but will note I would have opposed this item. It's a bit like if, during World War 2, we would have reported on the July 20th bombing but didn't actually confirm whether Hitler was alive or dead. The confirmation of an outcome is a vital part of the story, because right now, we don't know what is going to happen and whether this is even a big deal or not. (Yes, I just invoked Godwin's Law for something almost completely unrelated.) Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 15:49, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
We cannnot know what the ramifications of this will be. The news is the mutiny/rebellion, and it's a significant event whether it succeeds in toppling Putin or not, whether it results in the replacement of Shoigu and Gerasimov or not, whether it impacts the invasion of Ukraine or not. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:48, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Then really, shouldn't it be an ongoing item if we are going to post it, and not a blurb? Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 15:50, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Possibly? We also cannot know how long it will be until this resolves. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:00, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This is another flaw in ITN that tends to get lost when we're discussing the many, many other flaws. By it's very nature, Wikipedia is a lagging indicator of notability. Content shouldn't be added to Wikipedia until after it's been demonstrated that it's WP:NOTABLE and/or WP:DUE (depending on where you add it). ITN creates a perverse incentive to add content before significance can be demonstrated and then posts this content of questionable significance to the main page. WP:RECENTISM is a bad thing. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 16:38, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Although I also do not feel this item has demonstrated why it is significant for ITN's purposes, I have to take umbrage with the premises of your argument once again, as I feel it is contrary to how Wikipedia works.
Per WP:RAPID, as there is no deadline, it is recommended to delay the nomination for a few days to avoid the deletion debate dealing with a moving target and to allow time for a clearer picture of the notability of the event to emerge, which may make a deletion nomination unnecessary. That same page also notes that many articles on events are indeed created as they are breaking, in anticipation of notability. The way you say things should be is just now how consensus operates on Wikipedia. There is nothing wrong with creating an article only to delete it later once it turns out the anticipated notability has not come to pass. Yes, we are not a newspaper, but as facts become more readily available about a story, we should trust in our editors to be appropriate stewards to make those decisions as to whether to keep or delete.
I also disagree with the idea that ITN incentivizes unfinished content. We still have guidelines for entry that need to be met before an item can be posted, just as WP:NEVENTS has guidelines as to what merits a notable topic. We should understand that the guidelines are there for a reason, and that taking the stance of a total stonewall against developing news is unproductive and restrictive to our principles of being a living encyclopedia. Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 17:32, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Also, if this is true [7] (that Wagner has stopped its advance as as a de-escalation deal has been made), then this was a flash in the pan incident and wouldn't have been on ITN in the first place. Masem (t) 17:41, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Even if they deescalate, this is still an item of significant interest that we should be posting. Our armchair analysis of what is a "flash in the pan" and what isn't is inappropriate, I believe. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:53, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
We are never in any rush to post news, which actually gives us time to understand if an event is just a flash in the pan. That's the point of those wait !votes, to make sure this was actually something that seriously altered the direction of the war that was already covered by ongoing. Masem (t) 18:12, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's a serious event regardless of what happens next and we overinflate our importance and intelligence in claiming that we know what is "significant" and what is not. We're a bunch of Wikipedia editors. We have no geopolitical experts here (I assume). – Muboshgu (talk) 21:44, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't say that articles about current events aren't allowed to be created. I didn't say that we should immediate nominate them for deletion in violation of WP:RAPID. I also didn't say anything about "unfinished content" (all content on Wikipedia is unfinished). The only argument I'm making here is that WP:DELAY is best practice. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 22:19, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No - in my skim I saw your bold request at the end, and what a counter-ITN outlook. You asked people to speculate on possible future implications and their potential impact as a barrier to posting. Judge an item on its own - present - merits. Next time just say "oppose without prejudice to supporting if more comes of it" or "wait until more develops", please. Kingsif (talk) 22:05, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Speculating on possible future implications and their potential impact is basically how we decide significance at ITN. If this speculation isn't allowed, then WP:DELAY/WP:TOOSOON would apply to most current events content. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 22:24, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It isn't, or it shouldn't be if that's what you do. WP:CRYSTALBALL is mentioned in enough discussions that should be known by now. If based on present known facts you can't decide if something is (not will be) notable, !vote wait. Kingsif (talk) 23:00, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, this is the approach I'd like to see more often. I'll typically !vote "oppose" or "wait" if present facts don't indicate significance (with the understanding that I'd switch to support once those facts became clear), but I get the impression that a lot of editors !vote support based on speculation that an event will be significant before the facts are clear. Not out of bad faith, of course, but because there's no real guidance at ITN. Just look at how this discussion has developed below when things changed and the significance got called into question after being posted. It shouldn't be how we decide these things, but it often is. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 23:44, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting strong support This potentially has implications far beyond the invasion of Ukraine. 70.181.1.68 (talk) 16:49, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I wrote the above before the advance on Moscow was halted, or at least before I became aware of that development. But I stand by my support for posting. It's highly relevant world news that lots of people in many countries were/are following closely, and which likely has lasting implications even if the coup were to end completely right now. As far as I know, Wagner still holds the territory of Rostov, which in itself is pretty significant. As for future developments, who knows. I would support updating the blurb, of course.

    We posted the 2021 US Capitol riots which really only lasted for one day, involved one building, and weren't organized by a paramilitary force (and it was a good move to post it); I would argue that this is perhaps even more significant. This would be like if a US militia or renegade military group took over a major city (say, Philadelphia), shot down military helicopters, and then started a march on DC, and I'm sure we would post that even if it fizzled out. 70.181.1.68 (talk) 19:36, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    To be fair though, the US is a much more stable country than Russia is. See the Fragile State Index --RockstoneSend me a message! 20:36, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Over already? Selfstudier (talk) 18:01, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    There you go, that's why I wasn't satisfied with the answers to my question... Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 18:12, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull — Premature to post and now less than significant for the Russian invasion of Ukraine itself. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 18:04, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The significance is mostly as its own event - the largest country in the world just went through a military rebellion, and it's hard to overstate what happened. The developments relative to the invasion of Ukraine are covered by the Ongoing item, but what happened inside Russia itself is definitely notable. Looking at the significance through the lens of Ukraine is how we got into this irrelevant debate of subsuming it into a tangentially relevant "Ongoing" news item. Chaotic Enby (talk) 22:59, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • After reading back over how the consensus was gathered for this item, I now have to agree that pulling is the only appropriate course of action, for the blurb in the ITN template is now incorrect in the face of recent developments. --Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 18:18, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Actually the blurb needs to be changed. But this is still a major event. BabbaQ (talk) 18:23, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Again I ask: What are the impact and consequences of this event? That question needs to be answered in order to justify its significance. The blurb mentions an attempted mutiny but it's not the regular army, and it never seemed that Moscow or Putin was under any direct threat. As long as we are exploring crystal-ball possibilities: Considering that the negotiation came an hour after Ukraine decided to counter-attack in the Donbas region, I'm actually starting to consider the possibility that this was a ruse de guerre. Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 18:27, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Also it is not a coup attempt. I am still not sure why "government" has not been changed to "military" in the blurb. Mellk (talk) 18:39, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull. I'm not going to debate the notability of this schism, but it's very clear that we still don't know the full extent of these events and that we should have simply waited before posting. The variety of blurb choices reflects this. If as is said this is a notable event, then we should not be afraid of news coverage not being sustained and as such this mutiny will remain eligible for posting. DarkSide830 (talk) 18:25, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Pull This is still a massive story which is dominating major media like the BBC and NYT. The armistice which has been agreed means that suspense will continue and all eyes will be on further developments. Reverting to make the Chinese restaurant the top story again would be absurd as that was more of a flash in the pan which has already fallen out of the news cycle and is now getting no attention from the media or our readers. Andrew🐉(talk) 18:37, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do not pull Obviously relevant enough for a blurb. --Bedivere (talk) 18:40, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agree with do not pull. Since we've already collectively jizzed our pants. www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/wagner-chief-prigozhin-says-hes-accepted-truce-brokered-by-belarus/ar-AA1cZ4yU — hako9 (talk) 19:16, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting support. Huge development and definitely not going away within the next day or so. OhanaUnitedTalk page 19:18, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull Over already. Seriously? Little to no active significance now. If we absolutely cannot pull under any circumstances (like us jizzing ourselves, as brilliantly stated by Halo9), then at least change blurb.Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 20:29, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Pull - we already posted what is the largest story in the world at the moment. Why would we pull it? --RockstoneSend me a message! 20:33, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Not a real !vote because I really don't know where I stand on this. Rephrasing the blurb is fine, but I don't think I'd go as far as to agree that this is no longer a notable or consequential story. I was initially inclined to support pulling it when I heard Wagner stood down, but the counterarguments from Muboshgu and Andrew are convincing. It may be true that this could have been a ruse de guerre, but this does not make it unimportant or inconsequential; we can't see through the fog of war what's going to happen next, but we know that something did happen and is happening, and that something was and continues to be major news being closely monitored by major outlets. We may have been collectively duped by Wagner here, but the highly unusual nature of this story contributes to its notability rather than diminishes it. But at the same time, a story being a confusing spectacle doesn't make it important in the long-term, it just makes it interesting. Was it premature to post this? Maybe. But would it right that wrong to pull it now? I don't know if I completely agree with that. Will this be remembered as one of the more unusual moments in the Russo-Ukrainian war in the history books, or will this be forgotten by tomorrow? We don't know, nor should we play armchair strategist and pretend to. I say we just follow the sources. If all the major news outlets are still following this story tomorrow and the day after, then we should leave the story up tomorrow and the day after. If it falls off immediately, that'll be our indication that it was just a blip. I guess you could consider this a keep for now !vote. (got into a whole lot of edit conflicts writing this one up)  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 20:47, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Pulling now does not really really serve a purpose. But let this strongly remind us that "Ongoing" was created for a purpose and that media sensationalism and hype should be carefully dissected before any ITN postings. I could not post my comment in time which would have stated that anything below a credible coup/coup attempt should be off-limits to be severed from Ongoing at ITN. This is the third-time I am seeing that we have given in to media bias regarding this war: Putin indictment, the dam explosion and now this.
Also, wait comments are not supports, they are an analysis that further significance needs to be proven, as such they should be taken as neutral or negative votes (between this and the dam posting, it appears these votes were factored in as support votes which is incorrect).
Lastly, I would like to ask are we giving in to systematic bias? This is the most covered war/news item on ITN by far despite a prominent Ongoing listing. We did not even fractionally cover the worldwide COVID-19 pandemic as compared to this. Gotitbro (talk) 21:05, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support and Oppose Pull - I just can't fathom how people don't think this wasn't significant. Nor in the news. Good grief, if two years ago, he'd shot down one Russian plane or helicopter this would be ITN. There's reports they shot down 6 to 12. Nfitz (talk) 22:19, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose pull per Rockstone35. we already posted what is the largest story in the world at the moment. Why would we pull it? –Novem Linguae (talk) 22:27, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting support per Rockstone35. That the coup attempt/mutiny/whatever you want to call it appears to have failed doesn't mean that this isn't still a significant event with international importance. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 22:31, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull, obviously Posted wayyyyyy too prematurely (what, 6 hours at ITN/C?). No consensus to post it, either. Meanwhile, User:GreatCaesarsGhost was absolutely right in their posting above which User:Novem Linguae has felt it necessary to collapse. Do the same to this, if you want; it won't make either comment less true. Black Kite (talk) 23:18, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    GreatCaesarsGhost didn't say anything that could be construed as either supporting or opposing pulling, all they said was "lol it'll be really funny when ITN gets shut down forever". That's not constructive. That's disruptive and doesn't belong here. You should be thanking Novem Linguae for improving the overall quality of ITN by shutting down the types of comments that make this a worse environment to edit in.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 00:06, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull. Looks like a small spat that the Kremlin has caved into. I agree with the comment that it was posted “'wayyyyyy too prematurely”.- SchroCat (talk) 00:26, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose pull In hindsight we probably wouldn't have posted it, and I do think it was posted a tad too early (should have waited a day). But the story itself still is in the news and as such still qualifies in my view. If you look at the media coverage, it received (and still is receiving) significant media coverage. Gust Justice (talk) 01:17, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Strong post-posting support - largest story in the world, will and definitely have major ramifications even if you entertain the idea of it being a ruse de war. The largest country in the world just experienced a major revolt (which contrary to WaltCip (talk · contribs) stated, did indeed threaten Moscow; they were practically at the gates), leaving Putin humiliates, and definately affecting the course of the war, and yet in classic ITN fashion, we like to pretend that were somehow so much smarter than "the common rabble who are so stupid that they think this is important." I ought to ask, where is the WP:CRYSTAL crowd that has emerged out of the woodwork here anywhere else on ITN? When are y'all this pedantic anytime else? Who's to say that we should be posting the majority of items on ITN considering they are often based upon "this will have historic ramifications and x y and z?" This is the news; things are not automatically clear, that's just the truth. If y'all want ITN to shift into being super timid about posting until everything was %100 clear, than please, open a centralized WP:Village Pump poll and close it down because you don't have an In the news section of the project, you have Last month's yearly herald. Besides, whose to say that the opposition, who're already cumming at the opportunity to pull (as Fake and Hako have stated on the other side), aren't violating WP:CRYSTAL themselves by claiming there won't be any long term impact?
Additionally, can we please stop immediately insinuating that any admin decision that you didn't like is automatically a supervote? Consensus on this project is determined by the quality of your arguments; maybe its not the admin/closer's being malicious and instead you made weak arguments. Stop acting like petulant children and actually evaluate the discussion before casting wild aspirations; WP:PONY applies here. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 01:32, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
First, you were the nominator so it's assumed you would support. Second, could you maybe trim the length of your posts a bit? If your !vote is longer than one paragraph, consider whether it's too long. Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 01:35, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Consider striking cumming at the opportunity to pull too. The atmosphere around here could use some work. –Novem Linguae (talk) 01:55, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Will strike that out, though that also means that @Fakescientist8000 and @Hako9 should strike their comments about jizzing as well, which was where the idea behind the above excerpt came from. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 02:44, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Strong post-posting support - Just because it's over doesn't mean it never happened. It's the biggest story in the world today. Just update the blurb (there's already another proposal for this) and it will be fine. Johndavies837 (talk) 03:20, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Post-posting support This has been a major news story & reportedly had important consequences for Prigozhin & the Wagner Group. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 07:05, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Change blurb Paradise Chronicle (talk) 11:49, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull in full - shouting into the void at this point in the discussion but this should not have been posted so quickly. Now that it's over, we can rectify our mistake and take it off the main page. It's an important event (not in doubt), but it's covered by ongoing. Anarchyte (talk) 12:07, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Looking good This was clearly the major, dominant story yesterday and we don't seem to have a fresher one yet. By running this, ITN looks like it's on the ball. If it were to remove all mention of the matter and just lead with a stale and minor story like the Chinese restaurant, it would give the impression that ITN is controlled by Russian censors (who shut down Google News during this crisis). That would not be a good look. Andrew🐉(talk) 12:23, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose pull. This is a major development that deserves a mention outside of ongoing as it reveals internal tensions and popular anti-support. Yes it may have been posted prematurely, but that doesn't mean we need to pull it now. Aaron Liu (talk) 14:30, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above 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.

Welkom mining explosion

Article: Welkom mining explosion (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In South Africa, the government reveals that at least 31 people in a mine in Welkom are estimated to have been killed from a methane gas explosion in May. (Post)
News source(s): WaPo - Fox News - Al Jazeera - ABC (Australia) - Reuters - Seattle Times
Credits:

Nominator's comments: The South African government just revealed that 31 people are estimated to have been killed last month in a mine from a methane gas explosion. The article may need additional expansion, but seems to be fine otherwise. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 01:09, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Needs to be noted that I do not see any initial reports circa one month ago about this explosion, which would make this the first reporting and not stale. Masem (t) 01:17, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, hence he government reveals part; part of the news is that this was just confirmed by the South African government. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 01:29, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • comment: i should note that it does not seem to be currently clear whether or not the miners died in a gas explosion. this notice that the south african government published seems to have deliberately avoided mentioning how they died, and a number of other reliable sources seem to also be similarly uncertain. for example, agence france-presse (via bangkok post) states that "the cause remains unknown". deutsche welle has reported that an explosion occurred, but only states that "[a]t least 31 people are believed to have died in a methane explosion". as there currently is a gas explosion that killed 31 people featured on itn, it is easy to conclude that these miners were also killed in a gas explosion, and although i would presume that it is likely that they did actually die in either such an explosion or its aftermath, i would hesitate to make such an assertion on the main page at this time.
    please note that the page was moved without discussion by Jim 2 Michael. i had originally titled it "2023 South Africa mining disaster", and am unsure if it should be called "Welkom mining explosion" while it is on the main page. i have started a discussion on this issue here. (i have also removed Jim 2 Michael from the credits as Jim 2 Michael only moved the article and changed the name used in the infobox; Family27390 at least added an infobox and a couple of categories. anyone who believes that Jim 2 Michael's contribution to the article is deserving of credit is welcome to revert my removal.) dying (talk) 04:47, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support because the death toll makes it notable enough & the article is good enough. It's eligible here because although the explosion happened 5 weeks ago, it was first reported yesterday. Jim 2 Michael (talk) 14:54, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Fails WP:GNG and WP:EVENTCRIT. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 15:56, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality, needs expansion. - Indefensible (talk) 02:28, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

June 23

June 23, 2023 (2023-06-23) (Friday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

RD: Bev Risman

Article: Bev Risman (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Sky Sports
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: English rugby player - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 19:56, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Sheldon Harnick

Article: Sheldon Harnick (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NYT
Credits:

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 lyricist and songwriter. The stage productions and parts of the honors and awards sections need additional citations. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 19:52, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sunshineisles2, do you think you could find a source for this statement: Beginning in 1964, this award "established to bring a declaration of appreciation to an individual each year that has made a significant contribution to the world of music and helped to create a climate in which our talents may find valid expression."? Please, and thanks. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 15:56, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It appears that the quote is from the citation in the sentence before. I have moved the citation after the second sentence to show where the quote is coming from. Sunshineisles2 (talk) 16:09, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much. Will change my !vote to support. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 16:11, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

June 22

June 22, 2023 (2023-06-22) (Thursday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

Law and crime

Sports

(Posted) RD: Mohammad Masduki

Article: Mohammad Masduki (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://megapolitan.kompas.com/read/2023/06/22/15401241/mantan-wakil-gubernur-banten-hm-masduki-meninggal-dunia-karena-lever?page=all
Credits:

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: Indonesian politician and former deputy governor. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 04:25, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: P. Sabanayagam

Article: P. Sabanayagam (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Hindu
Credits:

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 civil servant. Article looks to meet basic hygiene expectations for homepage. Ktin (talk) 19:30, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Stevanus Vreeke Runtu

Article: Stevanus Vreeke Runtu (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://manadopost.jawapos.com/berita-utama/281273394/breaking-newsmantan-bupati-minahasa-stefanus-vreeke-runtu-meninggal-dunia
Credits:

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: Indonesian politician Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 16:49, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Proposal: add article links to the passengers of the Titan per WP:ITNRDBLURB

WITHDRAWN - WP:SNOW CLOSURE
Consensus is against any of the new proposals and it is unlikely that the pendulum will swing. Feel free to reopen if you want to support. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 23:38, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Article: 2023 Titan submersible incident (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  Five people, including Stockton Rush, Paul-Henri Nargeolet, Hamish Harding, and Shahzada Dawood, die in a submersible implosion in the North Atlantic near the wreck of the Titanic. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Five people die in a submersible implosion in the North Atlantic near the wreck of the Titanic.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Five people die in a submersible implosion in the North Atlantic near the wreck of the Titanic. (Current blurb)
Alternative blurb III: ​ Recent Deaths: Stockton Rush, Hamish Harding, Paul-Henri Nargeolet, Shahzada Dawood (proposal by User talk:2A02:C7F:2CC5:5A00:B064:64CD:A973:5545)
Credits:

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: Considering that four of the five passengers have articles of their own, I'm WP:BOLDLY proposing that we alter the blurb to include them per WP:ITNRDBLURB and the "death as the main story" clause. There are three options; one that lists all notable individuals, one that links "five people" to the section of the article including everyone that was onboard, and the current blurb. EDIT: I've just realized that somehow I overwrote the exact same nomination by an IP, so I've combined their proposal as well. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 21:26, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Going by past, that plane crash that killed several notable members of a football team, we shouldn't include multiple names, since they can easily be found through the link. Masem (t) 22:00, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • The blurb is fine as it is, per Masem. And I would IAR oppose the articles being placed in RD as the persons in question, as they were just created and likely would not have been had they not bee victims of the ITN item that is already posted. I guess Harding would be a reasonable RD nom, but really only him. DarkSide830 (talk) 22:09, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I once worried a day like this would come, mostly the "football team paradox" where there is a plane crash killing 150 people and an entire football team of, say, Liverpool F.C. perishes in a blaze. What is there to do? But in this case, given that these articles were just recently created, I agree with DarkSide830 that these are not eligible for RD. Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 22:17, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I also think it would be excessive to list the people in the blurb. I suppose you could separately nominate Harding and Nargeolet for RD. I assume all four are included in a "victims of the Titan implosion" sub-list at Deaths in 2023, which is really the most suitable. Good faith nom, but suggest close. Kingsif (talk) 22:27, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    A way to look at this...all four with articles are primarily notable with their association with this disaster. Readers are more likely to know of the disaster than the individuals, so the disaster link serves well to cover all. Now if for some reason Bill Gates was a passenger, his name goes far beyond the disaster and that would be a case we'd highlight since readers would be likely searching on both. Masem (t) 22:35, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Besides the teenager, one could argue that all four were notable in their fields, but most people hadn't heard of them. But I think we can all agree there's a snowball's chance in hell they're getting blurbed either individually or added to the Titan blurb. Kingsif (talk) 22:43, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above 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.

(Posted) RD: Winnie Ewing

Article: Winnie Ewing (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC - The Guardian
Credits:

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: Former SNP MP - a prominent fiugure and an icon of the Scottish independence movement Drchriswilliams (talk) 19:36, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Those statements in political career section are now all referenced. Drchriswilliams (talk) 16:53, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Yinchuan explosion

Article: 2023 Yinchuan gas explosion (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ An explosion at a barbecue restaurant kills 31 people and injures seven others in Yinchuan, China. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In China, an explosion at a Yinchuan barbecue restaurant kills 31 people and injures 7.
Alternative blurb II: ​ In China, an explosion at a restaurant in Yinchuan kills 31 people.
News source(s): CNN, The Guardian, Reuters
Credits:

 Ainty Painty (talk) 05:35, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This claim is especially ludicrous as we have the Paris gas explosion refused just below. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:51, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If I am not mistaken (I tend to frequently misread text online) most of those opposes in the Paris explosion are because there were no deaths confirmed. If there were a gas explosion that killed 30 Parisians, that would definitely be posted (though probably not "immediately"). Tube·of·Light 10:29, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It was a similar explosion and a similar number of people got hurt. The exact death toll should not be a major factor in this as we're not here simply to count deaths in some mechanical way. If we followed policy WP:NOTNEWS and WP:NEWSEVENT then none of these events would be getting articles and attention. The encyclopedic topic is gas explosion not every instance of same. Andrew🐉(talk) 11:35, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A death toll of over 30 is very different to zero. If the Paris explosion had killed 30 people, it'd be a major world news story; likewise if an explosion due to any cause had killed that many people anywhere in the developed world. Jim 2 Michael (talk) 11:43, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would actually support stronger adherence to NOTNEWS and NEVENT here - this is not like the 2020 Beirut explosion in terms of impact and scale - sadly, an accident took the lives of 30-some people, but in the long term this event will have almost no long-term impact, while the Beirut explosion is still a prime example of many hazards. Masem (t) 12:10, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It should be an easy problem to fix. Inform anyone who cites "death toll" or "casualties" in a discussion that their !vote will be ignored for being baseless as far as policy is concerned, and then delete or (preferably) merge any event article that can't affirmatively demonstrate that it meets the requirements of WP:PERSISTENCE, WP:LASTING, or WP:GEOSCOPE. Unfortunately, there are too many editors arguing "it's flashy and it saw news coverage, therefore it's an encyclopedic topic" and there are too few closers willing to weigh !votes based on policy like they're supposed to. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 15:24, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Why do you claim that death toll has no relevance to notability? Many articles are notable due to death tolls & many are posted to ITN because of that. For example, had the death toll of the Robb Elementary School shooting been 2 instead of 22, there's no chance that it'd have been posted. Jim 2 Michael (talk) 09:39, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Robb Elementary School shooting is notable because it caused the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act (meeting WP:LASTING) and still receives retrospective coverage after there were no more breaking updates (meeting WP:SUSTAINED). I say death toll has no relevance to notability because there is no notability guideline that says "events with at least 20 deaths are presumed notable". If you think that should be a factor, then open up an RfC to add that language to a notability guideline. Until then, it's irrelevant. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 14:30, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It'd still be highly notable without that law having been passed. It was quickly posted here well before then. Jim 2 Michael (talk) 16:48, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lean support. As opposed to the previous nomination, this one caused significant damage and casualties. However, it fails in quality; would require cleanup before further action can be taken; and please, don't reignite baseless accusations of sinophobia. Cheers, gavre (al. PenangLion) (talk) 08:32, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • support, Such a death toll for a restaurant makes the news. Alex-h (talk) 14:27, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, per other comments, this event caused significant casualties and damage. It needs some work, but many articles on emerging events do - especially those on the other side of the globe. Glman99 (talk) 14:38, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose We should not play favourites contrary to NPOV by reporting one city but not the other. Note that there was also a recent gas explosion in Kiev. Perhaps a combination blurb might be posted? Andrew🐉(talk) 15:02, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Now in Andrew's defense, before some of y'all violate him, this doesn't seem to have anything to do with the war, per the source and other coverage of the incident ([8][9]). In fact, the actual reason why this is a dopey point is that the explosion killed 3 people; a mere 10th of the amount killed at the Yichuan barbeque restaurant. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 15:06, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The Kyiv explosion doesn't have an article, so it's not eligible to be nominated. The Paris explosion discussion has been rejected because it didn't kill anyone. The 3 explosions are unconnected, so it doesn't make sense for there to be a combined blurb. Jim 2 Michael (talk) 15:24, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Revisiting this today, it doesn't appear that there's any detailed follow-up in the media. It's a wire story that went round the world once but that's all. And checking for more gas explosions, I find a report of another one of similar scale in South Africa. Such accidents seem commonplace. Andrew🐉(talk) 12:35, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The Welkom mining explosion happened during illegal mining at a closed mine; the victims were taking an obviously huge risk. This explosion was at a restaurant, which makes it very different. Jim 2 Michael (talk) 14:12, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, it's much the same and so we now have a nomination for that too. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:32, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Illegal mining is obviously very dangerous; eating at a restaurant isn't. Jim 2 Michael (talk) 16:00, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support - high casualty, rare in China, and also IMO also has the twist of occuring in a barbeque restaurant. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 15:08, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"the twist of occuring in a barbeque restaurant"? That fact raises its significance? GreatCaesarsGhost 15:45, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, that just makes it a little more interesting to me. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 18:02, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Agree with Thebiguglyalien regarding WP:EVENTCRIT. It could not more closely match this guidance "Routine kinds of news events (including most crimes, accidents, deaths, celebrity or political news, "shock" news, stories lacking lasting value such as "water cooler stories," and viral phenomena) – whether or not tragic or widely reported at the time – are usually not notable unless something further gives them additional enduring significance." GreatCaesarsGhost 15:45, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You're sure that over 30 people being killed by an explosion in a restaurant is routine?! Jim 2 Michael (talk) 18:59, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This is ITN, not an events calendar. That's like saying we should post 'it's Christmas' instead of anything that happens on that day. Johndavies837 (talk) 18:30, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's like we should not blurb the winner of a tournament but the brawl that occurred during the tournament. The world has also nice things to report in which millions participate on not only tragedies that concern a few people. If you google 20< deaths you'll find all the time find something. What moves the world? Some deaths or 100< Millions people celebrating? Paradise Chronicle (talk) 01:38, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. I hate playing this card, but we absolutely would have posted an accident with 31 deaths in the West (we posted the Canada highway accident with only half). Why is this one not significant? DarkSide830 (talk) 16:28, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I will say that by WP:EVENTCRIT, the Carberry highway collision (which i'd personally support deleting), the Canary Islands migrant boat disaster, and the Támara prison riot could probably all be deleted since they aren't really causing other notable events to occur or have a significant impact over a wide area. Onegreatjoke (talk) 16:33, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Though, if we're talking about deaths specifically than I would say Support for the main page. Onegreatjoke (talk) 18:19, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per DarkSide830. I also feel there’s a pro-Western bias here. We’ve posted similar incidents with much lower death toll in the past. Why is this not significant?--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 17:04, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Unusual disaster with a high death toll. Don’t get the people saying it fails EVENTCRIT. The Kip (talk) 18:17, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Unusual, a high death toll and in a public place. No doubt it would get posted if it occurred in the west. It's not at all comparable to Paris and Kyiv. Johndavies837 (talk) 18:28, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Unusual event, and one with such a high death toll would surely be posted if it happened in a western country. Systemic bias. Davey2116 (talk) 19:04, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support as per the arguments of the previous supporters. 30 dead is a high number; if the Paris gas explosion had resulted in 30 dead, wouldn't we have posted it? You know we would have. For those who say "this has no long-term impact" - well, that's a pure "Crystal Ball" statement... I would on the contrary expect that such a major incident will lead to a tightening of restaurant and gas-related regulations in China. Sadly, it may even have more impact than the 500 presumed dead in the Greek migrant ship disaster. Khuft (talk) 19:32, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Have any of the Supporters read the article? GreatCaesarsGhost 19:39, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I supported on the basis that the quality would be deemed adequate by the community. It's fine for me, but I know others are probably a bit more stringent in terms of quality than I would be. Khuft (talk) 19:45, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I realise I didn't add the quality aspect to my post previously - but anyway, to be clear: Support assuming quality is deemed acceptable. Khuft (talk) 19:47, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I think they've made it quite clear that their stance is "multiple people died so it's obviously notable and significant". Fortunately, consensus on Wikipedia is held to a higher standard, so arguments to this effect and WP:WHATABOUTX arguments won't be seriously considered in any fair close. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 19:50, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Respectfully, you've cited EVENTCRIT how many times recently? If you believe these items not sufficient to have pages, then why haven't you pursued their deletion? DarkSide830 (talk) 20:37, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Because I'd like to take the least disruptive approach possible in addressing issues like this; nominating an article for deletion while it's under active discussion at ITN is not the way to go. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 20:40, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't see the point of fearing being disruptive if you believe you are in the right on this. DarkSide830 (talk) 22:11, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    In the past, when WaltCip (talk · contribs) made the exact same point as you (not taking ITN noms to AFDs), you responded by stating that if something fails to meet our notability guidelines, then it should be nominated for deletion and it should not be posted to RD or ITN. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 02:46, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Events that occur routinely in a place might be considered ineligible for ITN (routine gun violence in a place rife with it, terrorist attacks in conflict ridden zones etc). Highly destructive explosions in restaurants in China are not a usual occurence and with the article being upto par this should not be held up. If its felt that the article is not encyclopedically notable for enwiki's purpose then AfD exists but that is not within the purview of ITN (an AfD nom would immediately hold this up from posting, so anyone proposing that should pursue it there). Gotitbro (talk) 10:09, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Regardless of the growing support to post, this article is by no means ready. It's more or less 8-12 disjointed sentences. Needs work before posting can be considered. Anarchyte (talk) 10:29, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't describe the writing as disjointed, though I can see the case for saying the article should be improved before posting. The problem is its lack of editors. Many millions of people find five people being killed in the Atlantic to be very interesting & important, but a comparatively tiny number are interested in incidents in which over 30 people were killed in China, over 40 in Uganda & over 40 in Honduras. Jim 2 Michael (talk) 11:25, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with posting this, but why is the type of restaurant and number of injured important enough for the blurb? Jim 2 Michael (talk) 23:29, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've adjusted the blurb to the alternate. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 02:37, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Ingenuity (talk · contribs), welcome to ITN and congratulations on you're recent RFA, but in the future, when posting an item, please remember to mark the header with (Posted) (and failed discussions as (Closed) and withdrawn as (Withdrawn) and so forth). Thanks! - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 01:31, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Adding to this, @Ingenuity, please give both Ainty Painty and I credit using the “give credit” button. It ain’t much, but it means a lot (at least to me). Thanks! Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 02:26, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, @Knightoftheswords281 and @Fakescientist8000 -- I've given credit now. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 02:30, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, and welcome! Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 02:31, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No problem! - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 02:40, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If we wanted to maximise page views, we'd have posted the Will Smith–Chris Rock slapping incident, Depp v. Heard, Anne Heche's car crash & death days later, updates in the case against Andrew Tate & his brother as well as various things happening in the personal lives of celebrities. Jim 2 Michael (talk) 10:37, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

June 21

June 21, 2023 (2023-06-21) (Wednesday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

(Posted) RD: Brison Manor

Article: Brison Manor (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Denver Broncos
Credits:

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 June 20, seems to have been first reported on June 21. BeanieFan11 (talk) 23:49, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Paris gas explosion

Consensus to post is unlikely to develop.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 05:58, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Article: 2023 Paris gas explosion (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A suspected gas explosion in central Paris injures at least 29 people. (Post)
News source(s): https://edition.cnn.com/2023/06/21/europe/paris-explosion-intl/index.html
Credits:
 Actualcpscm (talk) 20:12, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - No deaths and no real impact. Onegreatjoke (talk) 03:51, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above 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.

Canary migrant boat disaster

Article: 2023 Canary Islands migrant boat disaster (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ About 40 people are missing after a migrant dinghy sinks off the coast of the Spanish Canary Islands in the Atlantic. (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian - Al Jazeera - Reuters - AP - WaPo
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Another week, another maritime disaster. This time, up to 40 people are feared dead after a dingy carrying migrants off the infamously fatal West Africa to Canaries route sunk. The article is for the most part decent, except the Aftermath section needs expansion. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 18:55, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

*Oppose While the disaster is tragic, it’s the fifth such event for which we have an article this year. Since it’s smuggling, the practice is illegal, boats are overloaded and they eventually sink. As long as there are no stricter controls in the Mediterranean Sea, this practice will continue and such disasters will likely happen.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 20:11, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This one was in the Atlantic, but yes. Kingsif (talk) 20:19, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Never mind. It’s the same story.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 05:09, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose It's tragic, but like mass shootings in the US, migrants ships sinking en route to Europe is a story we all know now. I'm not going to call it routine, it's not that level, but it's the same story with different specifics. Before anyone gets righteous about posting the Titanic submersible, when's the last time one of those disappeared? Also opposing on quality, with the article reading somewhat scare headline-y. Kingsif (talk) 20:19, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Kingsif. A tragic event, but unfortunately not an uncommon one. The Kip (talk) 20:34, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose tragic routine in Spanish waters. _-_Alsor (talk) 21:57, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Kingsif. -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:00, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dinghy No strong feelings about the event which seems similar to the other WP:NEWSEVENTS that we're running now. But just wanted to note the more usual spelling of dinghy. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:13, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - the idea that four rich people voluntarily going to the bottom of the ocean in a high school level science project and going missing should be featured but 40 migrants drowning should not be is one of the sillier things Ive seen on this page. nableezy - 12:40, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral, but not inherently opposed to posting. I'm of two minds: one, I agree with Kingsif in that migrant ships capsizing is an unfortunately all too common occurrence. However, the other thought is that not posting this could lead to a perception of undue weight on the main page: that we're willing to post a five man $250,000 per ticket submarine missing but not a human rights problem. I'm concerned that at least while we have Titan on the main page, we should be more open to posting other disappearances and crises before returning to regularly scheduled arguments of routine. Anarchyte (talk) 12:59, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose An unfortunately routine occurrence in Spain and its waters lowers this nomination's significance. Johannes Frederick-Gaitan (talk) 13:14, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, Incidents like this should never be considered routine. Alex-h (talk) 14:34, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per many others. And good point by Nableezy, but I wanted to pull that one as well.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 15:10, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    But thats not the world we live in, and what we have now is a pretty blatant example of the systemic bias of Wikipedia's editor base. nableezy - 15:22, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    While I wouldn't have posted the submersible based solely on the impact of the event (and, indeed, did not voice my support during the discussion), this has far, far more to do with the bias of the news media than the editor base. Many media outlets have a liveblog pushing out articles about the Titan, and that's not the case here. Kicking222 (talk) 15:56, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Many media outlets were likewise obsessed with the Will Smith–Chris Rock slapping incident, Depp v. Heard, Anne Heche's car crash & Andrew Tate - giving a string of articles & videos updating their many likewise-obsessed readers on the latest developments/reactions. If huge media coverage were enough to post, all of those would've been blurbed. Jim 2 Michael (talk) 19:40, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support but only ad hoc. My reasoning that such incidents are quite common still stands but, after noticing that the missing submersible with billionaires aboard is on the main page, this should be posted to balance the scales. I don’t like a world in which aircrafts, submarines and politicians are involved to save the lives of five rich people, whereas no-one cares about the lives of dozens of poor people who want to migrate to Europe for a better life.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 15:59, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. I get the argument that these events are relatively common, but I stull find it hard to justify us having posted the sub incident but not this when it involves 8x more people. DarkSide830 (talk) 16:26, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per above. I realize that the argument of "we posted X so we must post Y" usually isn't sufficient, but in this case it'd just be such a bad look if we posted the five wealthy people's $250k joyride and didn't post this. I would like the article to be more fleshed out though. Davey2116 (talk) 17:39, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd need to look at precedents to consider whether we'd post something like this absent the Titan, but if the comparison to that is the only reason to support, then I'd oppose per Kingsif. Our primary concern should be maintaining consistent standards, not optics. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 19:04, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    FWIW, I'd say you could comp to the Canada highway crash as well, which has less then half the casualties. DarkSide830 (talk) 20:42, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Just as we don't post every mass shooting in the US, we do post those that result in massive casualties. I think we should apply the same logic in this case - migrant boat disasters that result in massive casualties should be posted, assuming quality of the article holds up.Khuft (talk) 19:36, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment to expand on where I wrote Before anyone gets righteous about posting the Titanic submersible, when's the last time one of those disappeared? - if people think part of ITN's purpose is to make sure Wikipedia doesn't look like it dislikes migrants, someone can judge that argument. But if we're mostly pointing readers to articles they might like to read related to news, I don't think most people will be bothered with the article on this; it's the same story, is all. But I suppose there's already talk discussion on ITN's purpose... Kingsif (talk) 22:16, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Kingsif. This type of events have been happening multiple times annually for the past few years and there is no reason to believe that they will become less common anytime soon for many reasons. We should limit posting migrant boat disasters around Europe to ones with at least 50 people dead or missing, taking into account the ones we have posted before. StellarHalo (talk) 06:59, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. You know the drill. No lasting effect, no scope affecting entire regions of people, no sustained coverage? No reason to give it focus in an encyclopedia. And no, "it could have these some day" isn't good enough. No, neither is "but 40 people died". Thebiguglyalien (talk) 03:21, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Kingsif. The Titan's incident opened up a can of worms that revealed how unregulated and unsafe the industry was, while the world already knows these dangers on migrant boats. Aaron Liu (talk) 14:23, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Per Darkside830 and Nableezy Schwinnspeed (talk) 01:53, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

June 20

June 20, 2023 (2023-06-20) (Tuesday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Health and environment

Law and crime

Politics and elections

(Posted) RD: Doris Stockhausen

Article: Doris Stockhausen (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): slippedisc.com
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: German music pedagogue, known as the first wife and muse of Karlheinz Stockhausen. I expressed may reservation for the source on the talk, but it it's good enough for her article, it should be good enough for the Main page. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:17, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: H. Lee Sarokin

Article: H. Lee Sarokin (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): New York Times
Credits:

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: . Rushtheeditor (talk) 19:01, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Sylvester da Cunha

Article: Sylvester da Cunha (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

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 advertising professional. Amul girl campaign. Ktin (talk) 05:08, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Phyllis Gomda Hsi

Article: Phyllis Gomda Hsi (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://focustaiwan.tw/culture/202306220013
Credits:

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: Taiwanese vocalist. Article looks alright Onegreatjoke (talk) 02:00, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Honduras prison riot

Article: Támara prison riot (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In Honduras, at least 46 inmates are killed in a riot in a women's prison near Tegucigalpa. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In Honduras, a riot between MS-13 and Barrio 18 gang members at a women's prison near Tegucigalpa kills at least 46 people.
News source(s): AP - Reuters - The Guardian - CBS - DW
Credits:

Nominator's comments: 41 people were killed in a women's prison in Honduras. Most were burned to death. The article is in need of serious expansion (in fact, I literally just created it), but should be significant to post. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 21:56, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

While it's been somewhat expanded since, this is becoming a recurring issue. The Kip (talk) 22:27, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Big Pokey

Article: Big Pokey (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): KHOU11 - CNN
Credits:

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: Someone from my area, Houston. Apparently, a big figure in this area's rap scene (never heard of him though). - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 19:12, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Same-sex marriage in Estonia

Consensus to post will not develop, especially as this law will not come into effect until....2024. That's WP:CRYSTAL for you. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 01:04, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Article: Recognition of same-sex unions in Estonia (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Estonia becomes first post-Soviet state to allow same-sex marriage (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Estonia becomes first Baltic state to allow same-sex marriage
News source(s): Reuters – Euronews – France24 – The Washington Post
Credits:
Nominator's comments: A pretty historic step for LGBTQ+ and Human Rights in general in Soviet sphere of influence. User:PrinceofPunjab 11:22 20 June 2023 (UTC) 
I have changed to it to Post-soviet state to better reflect the significance of this story.–PrinceofPunjab (talk) 12:39 20 June 2023 (UTC)
in which case the blurb should say "will become" Abcmaxx (talk) 15:51, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I and many others have previously nominated abolitions of the death penalty and decriminalisations of various nature, including same-sex marriages and they were all overwhelmingly rejected; therefore unless we choose to change precedent then I fail to see how this is any different, especially as nearly all European countries have movements striving for the same if they have not already done so. Abcmaxx (talk) 15:55, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose/wait until 2024, when it comes into effect. DecafPotato (talk) 17:10, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose because many countries have changed their laws in regard to LGBT issues & many other things regarding various demographic groups. Being the first country in the world to do something is often important enough, but being the first Baltic/Slavic/Mediterranean/C American/SE Asian/C African etc. doesn't make it important. If we posted all these sorts of law changes, they'd always be present on ITN. Jim 2 Michael (talk) 19:53, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support inasmuch as there is precedent, c.f. Costa Rica, Taiwan, et. al. This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 19:55, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Is “the first post Soviet state” or “the first Baltic state” really that important? I don’t think so. The former refers to a country that ceased to exist more than 30 years ago and the latter is a geographical area consisting of only three countries. Otherwise, it seems like a routine thing.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 21:27, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose While I'm happy this happened, there's a much higher bar on ITN to post such legalizations (ex. the first in a historically-hostile region such as the Middle East or East Africa); the first Baltic/post-Soviet state is a lower bar, especially when much of Europe has already done so. The Kip (talk) 21:47, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above 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.

(Posted) RD: Paxton Whitehead

Article: Paxton Whitehead (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Hollywood Reporter Deadline Yahoo
Credits:

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: Stage and Screen (Broadway, Film, and TV) Actor, Tony Award Nominee. B-Class article. 2001:BB6:4E52:7D00:28BA:F4D6:819F:68F6 (talk) 10:00, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose on quality Quite a few unsourced statements in the prose and the Stage productions section is entirely unsourced. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 17:53, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Update - The article, including the Work section, is now fully sourced. Several more citations have since been added and now the prose does not contain any unsourced statements. The list of early UK stage productions from 1949 on has been moved to the talk page and will only be moved back into the article if and when appropriate sourcing can be found. There are links to Broadway and Off-Broadway databases that list other productions he appeared in in the US and the Work section and Filmography are all now fully sourced. The article looks to be in good shape overall now and given its B-class, and with all the references, I think it's of high quality overall.2001:BB6:4E52:7D00:28BA:F4D6:819F:68F6 (talk) 23:11, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Have added a citation for the DOB; rest looked solid. Schwede66 09:16, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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:

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates&oldid=1162197252"