Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates

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.

Donald Trump Donald Trump (pictured) wins the United States presidential election. Maia Sandu is re-elected President of Moldova. In baseball, the Yokohama DeNA BayStars defeat the Fukuoka SoftBank Hawks to win the Japan Series. A canopy collapse at Serbia's Novi Sad railway station kills fourteen people. The ruins of a Maya city, dubbed Valeriana, are discovered in Campeche, Mexico. Ongoing: Israel–Hamas war Israel–Hezbollah conflict Russian invasion of Ukraine timeline Sudanese civil war timeline Recent deaths: Teri Garr Paul Stephenson Peanut Dub Jones Janey Godley Edzard Reuter 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. 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... 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. 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. 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... 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. 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. 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. Comment on a story without first reading the relevant article(s). Oppose a recurring item here because you disagree with the recurring items criteria. Discuss them here. 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.

July 1

Portal:Current events/2023 July 1

July 1, 2023 (2023-07-01) (Saturday) Armed conflicts and attacks Nahel Merzouk protests Riots continue across France. More than 1,300 people have been arrested, and 79 police officers have been injured. (BBC News) Looters raid a gun shop in Marseille, stealing eight hunting rifles and ammunition before police intervene. (Sky News) President Emmanuel Macron cancels a state visit to Germany, which would have been the first state visit in 23 years. (CBS News) Disasters and accidents 2023 Western North America heat wave Authorities announce that more than 100 people have died across Mexico as a result of two weeks of heat waves in the country. (Reuters) 2023 Buldhana bus accident At least 25 people are killed when a wedding bus crashes and catches fire in Buldhana district, Maharashtra, India. (CNN) Eight people are killed after a fire breaks out in an under-repair nightclub in Phnom Penh, Cambodia. (Shine) Law and crime Four people are injured in a mass shooting in Mississauga, Ontario, Canada. (Global News) Politics and elections 2023 East Timorese parliamentary election Xanana Gusmão is sworn in as prime minister of East Timor. (AP) Science and technology European Space Agency Science Programme The European Space Agency successfully launches the Euclid space telescope to study dark matter and dark energy at the second Lagrange point, 1.5 million kilometers from Earth. (AFP via ABS-CBN News)

---

June 30

Portal:Current events/2023 June 30

June 30, 2023 (2023-06-30) (Friday) Armed conflicts and attacks 2023 Chișinău International Airport shooting Two people are killed and another is injured after a man opens fire at the Chișinău International Airport in Chișinău, Moldova. The perpetrator is injured and detained. (BBC News) Mali War The United Nations Security Council votes unanimously to end MINUSMA, its peacekeeping mission in Mali. (MSN) Killing of Nahel Merzouk Rioters set fire to the main public library in Marseille as civil unrest continues across France. More than 900 people have been arrested and Interior Minister Gérald Darmanin deploys an additional 45,000 police officers to the streets. (Freepress Journal) (BBC News) Business and economy List of mass media in Austria Wiener Zeitung, one of the oldest newspapers still published in the world, ends its daily print after 320 years. (The Associated Press via ABC News) The initial phase of the Skyline light metro rail formally opens to the public in Honolulu, Hawaii, U.S. (Hawaii News Now) (Railway Age) Disasters and accidents 2023 Kericho truck crash Fifty-two people are killed and 30 more injured in a multiple-vehicle collision involving a truck on a highway between Kericho and Nakuru in Kenya. (Al Jazeera) One person is killed and two others are injured by a 5.8 magnitude earthquake in Bambanglipuro, Special Region of Yogyakarta, Indonesia. (Jawapos) Seven people are killed and nine others are injured after a building collapses in Abidjan, Ivory Coast. (Reuters) International relations Romania–Russia relations Around 40 Russian diplomatic staff members leave Bucharest amid worsening relations between the two countries. (Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty) Law and crime Biden v. Nebraska In a 6–3 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court rules that the Secretary of Education does not have the power to waive student loans under the HEROES Act. (AP) In a 5–2 vote, the Superior Electoral Court of Brazil rules to ban former president Jair Bolsonaro from holding public office for eight years due to his conduct during last year's election. (Reuters) Science and technology IceCube Collaboration, a detector operating at the Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station, detects evidence of high-energy neutrino emission from the Milky Way galaxy. (Science) The Australian Space Agency cancels its AU$1.2 billion (US$770 million) satellite program launched last year, citing budgetary adjustments amid a financial crisis. (AFP via The Manila Times)

---

Bolsonaro barred from running for political office

Articles: 2023 Brazilian Congress attack (talk · history · tag) and Jair Bolsonaro (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In Brazil, the Supreme Federal Court bars former president Jair Bolsonaro (pictured) pictured from running for political office for eight years over his role in the attack on the Praça dos Três Poderes. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In Brazil, the Supreme Federal Court bars former president Jair Bolsonaro (pictured) pictured from running for political office for eight years over his role in the attack on the Brazilian congress.
Alternative blurb II: ​ In Brazil, the Supreme Federal Court finds former president Jair Bolsonaro (pictured) guilty of abusing his power and bars him from public office until 2030.
News source(s): Reuters - AP - Al Jazeera - France24 - NYT - Financial Times - CBC - SCMP
Credits:

• Nominated by Knightoftheswords281 (talk · give credit)
• Created by Francoisealey (talk · give credit)

Both articles need updating

Nominator's comments: Another supreme court case - however, this time, its from Brazil. The court barred Bolsonaro from participating in political office for his actions during the congressional attack in January. This is big news in Brazil, as it effectively removes Lula's big rival and leaves Bolsonaro side of Brazilian politics with no leader; Bolsonaro will almost certainly never regain power now. It's also somewhat historic. Considering we've posted the Trump impeachment after Jan 6, I think this is the perfect opportunity for the more anti-US-centrism portions of ITN to combat our systemic bias. - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 18:27, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support largely due to the significance of barring a former president from public office, and given Bolsonaro's status as the main opposition figure in Brazil. However, saying Bolsonaro will not reattain his position in the future is CRYSTAL (and could have been suggested of Lula himself when he was previously embattled), and the magnitude of this ruling really does go well beyond the Trump impeachment. DarkSide830 (talk) 18:39, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose Even if this ruling sticks, it would still enable Bolsonaro to run again in 8 years. He'd be 76 then, which is younger than Biden. And Brazil has other ways of arriving at a government too. It's all speculation with no immediate practical effect. Andrew🐉(talk) 19:18, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  Are you saying that we shouldn't post him being barred from political office because he could just install himself as dictator instead? DecafPotato (talk) 02:42, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

• Support per DarkSide. The Kip (talk) 19:45, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose - I was going to support, as obviously a final ruling on this should be ITN - but the only source in the article says that he's "expected to appeal the ruling to Brazil's Supreme Court". Too soon. Also, there's no mention of this in the article itself - only in the lead; so some improvement is necessary. Nfitz (talk) 20:04, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Neutral — I agree with Nfitz, but the precedent set by Donald Trump's first indictment does not support the argument that contentions to indictments bar a mention from ITN. I, however, do not agree with the statement that Bolsonaro will almost certainly never regain power now. In any case, prudence suggests that ITN should wait for the Supreme Federal Court's decision. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 20:11, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Wait -- post when and if it becomes final. --Rockstone^{Send me a message!} 20:56, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Comment - the idea that we should wait until X variable becomes apparent often times is just a way to set an exceptionally high standard for posting. Vanamonde93 (talk · contribs) brilliantly pointed out once that there's always somewhat of a catch 22 with this; the first nom gets opposed because "its too soon" and then the second one gets opposed because "its stale" or "we should have posted it when the first X occured." The noms for the Ohio train derailment (1 and 2) are an excellent example. - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 21:42, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support – per DarkSide. ArionEstar (talk) 23:53, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

(Closed) Biden v. Nebraska

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: Biden v. Nebraska (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In the United States, in a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court blocks the Biden administrations's student loan forgiveness plan. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In the United States, in a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court blocks the Biden administrations's student loan forgiveness plan. citing the HEROES act.
News source(s): The Guardian - BBC - Le Monde - Reuters - [WaPo] - CNN - WSJ
Credits:

• Nominated by Knightoftheswords281 (talk · give credit)
• Created by JocularJellyfish (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Masem (talk · give credit), Family27390 (talk · give credit) and KiharaNoukan (talk · give credit)

Article updated

Nominator's comments: SCOTUS has just nixed Biden's student loan program. This is important given how much of an issue student loans are in this country and will have wide-reaching ramifications affecting tens of millions of people. For the people who will reflexively oppose stating "this wouldn't be posted if it was in another country," go nominate that foreign equivalent then. Systemic bias is about giving more to other parts of the world, not culling our part. Also, looking at these sources, I see Black Kite (talk · contribs) is getting that international coverage he's been clamoring for. - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 15:57, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose These ridiculous US-centric nominations need to stop. Now we are into local school funding policy? Perhaps we should be restricting blurb nominations to one a week per user or something. This feels very WP:POINTy to me, given the lack of consensus below about the Supreme Court ruling to increase the number of white people at Harvard. Nfitz (talk) 16:04, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  Perhaps we should be restricting blurb nominations to one a week per user or something.

  Perhaps we should add on to that by forcing everyone to make at least one nom per week so that we don't create a class of serial voters who just complain and gripe all day about trivial nonsense and contributing to the decline of ITN? Again, read WP:ITNCUSA. If you want more global coverage, nominate stories from outside the United States. Again, systemic bias shall not be used as an excuse to limit coverage from the west. By the way, at the risk of crossing into WP:NOTFORUM territory, the AA-case would result in more AAs going to Harvard. - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 16:17, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  Perhaps you should read WP:ITNCUSA - all it does is to point right back here, User:Knightoftheswords281; can you check these links before you type them from memory - as this isn't the first error (and no, I don't actually know what you meant to link). I fail to understand how having more Asian Americans has any impact on student loans. Are you implying there's a racial bias to loan distributions - I don't see this in the article. Nfitz (talk) 16:37, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  WP:ITNCUSA was supposed to link to the location portion of WP:ITNCDONT (but the anchors got removed), i.e:

  Please do not oppose an item solely because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. This applies to a high percentage of the content we post and is generally unproductive.

  As for this:

  I fail to understand how having more Asian Americans has any impact on student loans. Are you implying there's a racial bias to loan distributions

  This was in reference to the affirmative action case, not the student loan case. - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 16:40, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  The idea that contributors to Wikipedia should be restricted and sanctions for the horrible crime of...contributing to ITN too much, and having differing views on what should be posted..?

  I can understand why people dislike the recent influx of US-centric nominations, and I do think there is some truth to it. But I don't think Knight is being in any way disruptive here. Good, important debates on the role of ITN and the role that America-centric politics have on it are being held, we should not shut that down. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 17:33, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose — Per Nfitz. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 16:13, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose There's plenty of financial news in other countries -- interest rates in the UK, Turkish currency woes, etc -- and this is more of the same. What I'm not understanding is why there's a flurry of US supreme court rulings just lately. Are they clearing their desk before summer vacation or what? Andrew🐉(talk) 16:25, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  The court is in recess typically by the start of July, so they tend to make a number of final decisions as June winds down. So in effect, yes. - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 16:28, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  Thanks for the explanation. A bundled blurb for the big decisions would work for me but I'm not sure if the coverage is there to support a particular selection. The relevant article seems to be 2022 term opinions of the Supreme Court of the United States but that has over 50 cases so far and the term doesn't finish until October. Andrew🐉(talk) 16:40, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  They seem to like to time many final decisions of big cases for the big break. If it's time-sensitive i.e. 1/20/2001 inauguration they rush though. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 17:07, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Weak Support As per my comment just now under the other nomination, I don’t think we have been overly US centric recently. This here was the top news in The Guardian (online) when it came out (they even had a live ticker!). Personally, I find the other ruling more noteworthy, but fine with this one too, or, even better, maybe a combined blurb with this, the Harvard ruling, and the Colorado ruling? Khuft (talk) 16:42, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose, affects a tiny sliver of the people in one country, the only reason anyone has heard of it is that tiny sliver seems to be omnipresent in internet political discussions. Anyway, it only re-instates the situation as it has existed for decades, it doesn't break any new ground. Danthemankhan 17:09, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose, the only way this should be posted is as a part of the other SCOTUS case on affirmative action, since both deal with US college programs. But alone, this was a 99% expected result and not really that significant. --Masem (t) 17:12, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose - the decision sucks, but it was expected and doesn’t really change anything significant, considering this was a program being piloted versus upending years of precedent. Approaching the point of a WP:SNOW close here as well. The Kip (talk) 17:25, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support. Other developed countries thinking that such abuse of the judiciary could never happen to them would do well to pay attention. Connor Behan (talk) 17:28, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Mixed - On one hand I dislike the argument of "America-centric" nominations. I think that there is naturally a WP:DUEWEIGHT on American affairs and politics due to a. The tremendous global influence that the USA has, where even minor local politics can affect geopolitics, and b. The fact that this is the English Wikipedia, and that there is naturally going to be an inclination to the largest source of news in English, American news (not that we should strive to be biased though).

On the other hand, I don't think we should post every major Supreme Court decision, especially ones like this that really only affect a short-term policy pushed by the Biden administration. In contrast, Affirmative Action is a highly contentious and controversial issue that has been at the forefront of American political debate since the 1960s, whetheras student loan forgiveness is a relatively recent development in the political landscape.

So yeah, I could go either way, but I'm leaning more to vote oppose. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 17:29, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose This was a dumb ruling, as typical of the current Supreme Court, but there isn't any real international significance given the program was fairly limited in scope. If it completely eliminated student loans, then I would have supported since student loans are one the biggest sources of debt in the U.S. And this is coming from someone who though the affirmative action ruling should have been posted. Mount Patagonia (talk • contributions) 17:45, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose no way. No one really cares about this outside US. I learn more about SCOTUS decisions from Wikipedia than from the news. Something is wrong. _-_Alsor (talk)

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.

(Closed) Honolulu Skyline opens

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: Skyline (Honolulu) (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In the United States, the Honolulu Skyline (train pictured) opens, the first new American metro rail system in over 30 years. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In the United States, a metro system opens in Honolulu, Hawaii, the first new urban rail system in over 30 years.
Credits:

• Nominated by PrecariousWorlds (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: Okay okay okay okay, hear me out on this one. I know that a lot of people are going to instantly dismiss this for ITN, but I do think it should be honestly considered for nomination. First of all, this is the first new American metro system to open in the last 30 years (if you don't count the Tren Urbano in San Juan, Puerto Rico, which still opened 20 years ago). Second, it is the only rail system in the entire history of Hawaii. Honestly, I think we have posted blurbs for news events a lot less significant than this. Even if this doesn't meet the bar neccesary to be posted, I still think that new infrastructure megaprojects should be posted. As an example, a new American high speed rail line, the opening of High Speed 2 in the UK, or the brand new intercity rail system constructed in El Salvador. Possibly even the Grand Paris Express. Maybe not though. If this isn't what ITN is for then I'll be on my merry way! PrecariousWorlds (talk) 15:52, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support in principle, but wait until it opens, and article is updated. A significant advance, and lots of international coverage of this stalled project over the years. Nfitz (talk) 16:06, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Support - firstly, this is a great chance to get a GA on ITN. Secondly, I'd say this is a pretty big landmark in America's embracement of public transport (like you said, the first new metro in the U.S in three decades). Thirdly, and I hate to invoke OTHERSTUFFEXISTS-esque arguments, but I'd say that this frankly affects a lot more people than say the barbeque restaurant story that's been on ITN for the past week (still number two btw despite that); this is mainly directed against anyone denouncing this as "too regional." - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 16:11, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose I'm willing to consider this but it has to be in-the-news. However no sources are listed in the nomination and I'm not seeing much mainstream news coverage. Andrew🐉(talk) 16:31, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Huh, support. I follow the rationale of PrecariousWorlds, bein' a first system to be opened in dozens of years and all, but this is hardly world news... heck, I wouldn't have known about this if it weren't for ITN/C! --Ouro (blah blah) 16:56, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose for multiple reasons. Firstly, this is a rapid transit system in a city with barely one million people in its metropolitan area. Three other systems were opened this year, including the Lagos Metro that serves the largest city in Africa, and six others are planned to begin operation this year (of all ten, only Gebze has lower population). Secondly, it’s true that we post large infrastructure projects from time to time. For instance, last year we posted the opening of the 1915 Çanakkale Bridge, which is the longest suspension bridge in the world and connects two continents. Thirdly, as pointed out by Andrew above, this news doesn’t really receive mainstream coverage.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 16:58, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  The Lagos metro hasn't even opened yet and is suffering yet another delay, being pushed back to August 2023. [1] - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 17:04, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  Not a big deal. Even if we rule that out, we’re left with a total of eight other metro systems to begin operation this year, with seven of them serving larger cities. I fail to get what’s the posting rationale here. What makes Honolulu a more important city?--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 17:15, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  I haven't looked at the Ankara metro article, but the topic has certainly received enough coverage here for well over a decade. If they ever do open it, I can see it might be blurbable. Looking at Gebze Metro the article is but a stub, for quite a tiny system with only 4,800 riders a day projected (less than your average short urban bus route), and no future work beyond the initial section . The Honolulu system has a second stage under construction since 2016, with commitments for further sections, and a projected ridership of 85,000; that's almost 20 times larger than Gebze. What are the other 6 metros that have opened (though I'd argue that if planned opening of the Réseau express métropolitain in Montreal, for the first phase of a 67-km, 26-station line projected for 190,000 a day (the entire line is already under construction). Nfitz (talk) 18:01, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  Quito and Karaj have already begun operation, whereas Riyadh, Konya, Navi Mumbai, Ahvaz and Kermanshah are planned to open later this year (see List of metro systems for more details). Note that Riyadh Metro is expected to begin with 6 lines. There’s absolutely no way that Skyline is the most significant metro system to be inaugurated this year in any sense.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:23, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  Looking at Quito Metro, they did some limited testing during rush hours for a few days in May 2023 (who the heck does trial running with paying passengers?). [https://www.elcomercio.com/actualidad/quito/operacion-metro-quito-diciembre-2023.html sources in the article say that it won't open until (at least) December 2023. I can't find any information about Karaj and your link is a redirect. Looking at Karaj Metro Station, Karaj is part of the Tehran Metro. I haven't, User:Kiril Simeonovski, looked at the ones that you say aren't opened yet. Perhaps we should discuss those at the appropriate time Nfitz (talk) 19:14, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose it’s a nomination made in good faith, but I don’t see how it’s more relevant than the Turkmenistan nomination below that’s being shot down at this moment. Any tertiary Chinese city has a similar MRT system running by now, and we didn’t post any of them. Khuft (talk) 17:15, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose per Kiril. While likely a boon to Hawaii residents, this is not a novel transit design or the like. And the lack of coverage is a bit worrisome. --Masem (t) 17:17, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose per Kiril and Andrew. No sources effectively kills the nom. The Kip (talk) 17:23, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose and SNOW Of little importance even on a national level, which is supported by the absolutely paltry amount of news coverage. I'm all for posting big infrastructure projects, but this isn't even close. -- Kicking222 (talk) 18:37, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose per Kiril. Another "interesting" piece of news, but that's not the focus of ITN. Go take it up with DYK perhaps. DarkSide830 (talk) 18:41, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Poor nom, with no sources and such low confidence in the nom's comments itself, this is a no starter. Gotitbro (talk) 18:45, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose Opening of train lines is not significant enough to warrant ITN posting, especially when the country in which the train line was opened has other train lines in existence. Chrisclear (talk) 19:38, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose and close per all above. _-_Alsor (talk) 23:45, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

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: Alan Arkin

Article: Alan Arkin (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Reuters
Credits:

• Nominated by SchroCat (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: The usual problems with an actor's biog means we'll have to do some work on citations etc to get it up to speed before it can go up. (Addendum: This is for an RD only: I oppose a blurb, despite the fact I'd love to see one). - SchroCat (talk) 14:19, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Support. Such a loss. Article looks good (very quick glance). How about a blurb? --Ouro (blah blah) 14:32, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Not sure he's in the field for a blurb. Lovely actor, but not a major changer of the artform. - SchroCat (talk) 14:38, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

I would agree - well-known Hollywood actor, highly-awarded but did not do much to have a legacy or impact outside the works he was in. (I do worry we are going to get the Carrie Fisher/Betty White rush of "support blurbs" based on the popularity and famousness of the person and best to establish now what we would need to see for a blurb). Masem (t) 15:01, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

You are the one who mentioned them, Arkin is more famous and more awarded than both of them. Kirill C1 (talk) 15:19, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

But we don't use number of awards or films as any standard for a RD blurb. We need demonstration of their greatness, impact, and legacy on their field, which doesn't come directly from awards or role-count. Masem (t) 15:26, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose massive lack of citations throughout. Gonna need work for RD. --Masem (t) 15:02, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support blurb. No-brainer for blurb - Oscar winner, six decades career, Hollywood legend, been in classic films such as Catch-22, and they, and he, are in world film history. After winning sort of career Oscar in 2006, he did not stop and made great many films, for some of which he may be remembered mostly, and reaped awards too. Kirill C1 (talk) 15:07, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  Where's the legacy or impact, then? Having a huge filmography is not a reason for a blurb. RD Blurbs are supposed to be exceptional, and there are many other living actors that have had far more an impact on the field than Arkin. Masem (t) 15:10, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose blurb I enjoyed his work, especially in Little Miss Sunshine and Argo, but just because he's more of a household name than many recent deaths doesn't mean he should have a blurb. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:25, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support RD on principle, oppose blurb. Article needs a bit of sourcing work. Regarding the blurb, Arkin was an accomplished actor but was not exceptionally impactful. Mooonswimmer 15:30, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose blurb, needs ref improvement. - Indefensible (talk) 15:48, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose blurb - There's a lot of more widely known actors who haven't been blurbed. Arkin is hardly a household name, even in most English-speaking countries. (support RD of course - and looks ready - why wait?) Nfitz (talk) 16:09, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  Then we should have blurbed them.

  I think he is. Kirill C1 (talk) 16:48, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support RD or Blurb - Great actor, great legacy.2001:BB6:4E52:7D00:60EB:B0F5:B4CA:DFC4 (talk) 16:49, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose blurb so, we don’t post Nobel or Pulitzer Prize winning novelists, but any random actor is worthy of a blurb? Are we becoming Vogue? Sarcasm aside: how has he transformed cinema, since that’s the yardstick we would use for actors? I fail to see it.Khuft (talk) 17:05, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose blurb Subject was not at a level that would justify one. I note that we declined to blurb far more consequential figures in the field (Kirk Douglas and Olivia de Havilland). Not Ready for RD. Article is in rough shape for referencing and is going to need a lot of work before it can be posted. I have orange tagged the article because adding CNs would basically involve carpet bombing the page. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:13, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose RD on quality as there’s still citation work to be done. Oppose blurb - he was a great actor, but simply not transformative enough. The Kip (talk) 17:22, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Oppose blurb, support RD - Again, I don't think giving a recent death a blurb should be some award for a notable individual. Recent deaths should only be blurbed if they cause a widespread international reaction with tangible long-term effect, or if they're tired to a conventional news story (like the Titanic sub disaster). PrecariousWorlds (talk) 17:37, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose blurb Agreeing with Ad Orientem, if Douglas and de Havilland did not get blurbed this clearly does not pass muster. Also what is with the rush to add blurbs for RDs even where the noms are not for them (or against them) especially when quality issues exist. Gotitbro (talk) 18:53, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose blurb Only a couple of weeks ago, we did not post Glenda Jackson who won the Best Actress Oscar twice, whereas Arkin has one Oscar for a supporting role. Not posting Jackson has set a bar here, and posting Arkin would be nonsensical. Black Kite (talk) 19:04, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Comment I have removed the blurb nom as it had considerable and unanimous opposition besides the proposer. Curbon7 (talk) 19:11, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Discovery of Neutrinos within the Milky Way

Articles: Neutrino (talk · history · tag) and IceCube Neutrino Observatory (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The IceCube Neutrino Observatory (pictured) in the South pole detects neutrinos from the Milky Way Galaxy for the first time. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The IceCube Neutrino Observatory (pictured), a neutrino detector in the Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station, detects neutrinos from the Milky Way for the first time.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Scientists at the IceCube Neutrino Observatory (pictured) in the South pole are able to map the Milky Way using neutrinos instead of light for the first time.
News source(s): NYT - Reuters - NPR - The Independent - Scientific American - Science - El Pais
Credits:

• Nominated by Knightoftheswords281 (talk · give credit)
• Created by 68.21.182.144 (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: Another scientific discovery. This one regards neutrinos, small, so-called "ghost particles" at the subatomic level. They're called ghostly because they're so small that even though Earth gets bombarded by them, we haven't been able to detect them - until now. The detection of neutrinos is major because it allows us for the first time to view and understand the Milky Way in something other than light. They've even produced images of the whole thing that you can see in the above sources and is being hailed as the start of neutrino astronomy. - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 03:04, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose if the 2nd blurb is correct, this is a good accomplishment but it is definitely not that a certain observatory discovering nuetrinos for the first time (there are several other places on earth created to do that too, that I even remember from Cosmos [2])). And just by checking google scholar, this is continuous from other nuetrino observatories to understand the formation of galaxies and the universe. --Masem (t) 04:06, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose, naturally occurring neutrinos have been detected since the 1960s. Stephen 04:10, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

COMMENT - none of the blurbs state that this is the first discovery of neutrinos ever; just the first detection of them within our galaxies, which hadn't occurred before. All prior neutrino discoveries were of ones outside our galaxy. - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 04:46, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• You wrote “we haven't been able to detect them - until now” in your nom statement. Stephen 07:33, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support Alt Blurb 2, the news is not about the detection of neutrinos but of the mapping of our galaxy with them. A scientist called the achievement "an entirely new view of our galaxy—one that had only been hinted at before". Alexcalamaro (talk) 05:42, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  Looking at the Science article, there's been no mapping outside of identifying that a higher proportion of neutrinos are emitted by the center of the Milky Way. It implies mapping could be done, but they have not created an actual map in this sense. Masem (t) 13:02, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  Well, I could agree with you that calling the lower image a map is, maybe, an optimistic view of the facts. Alexcalamaro (talk) 16:24, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support The idea of using glacial ice to detect neutrinos is cool! As ice is disappearing, it's good to make the most of it. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:28, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose neutrinos were first detected decades ago, and it's inevitable that some of those neutrinos originate from the Milky Way given how many neutrinos there are (heck, some of those neutrinos originate from the lab, see beta decay). What appears to be new here is that ICECUBE researchers have mapped the neutrinos of the Milky Way, which is interesting for neutrino astronomers, but not immediately impactful for everyone else (including other astronomers). Banedon (talk) 08:13, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support neutrinos!! Hawkeye7 (discuss) 08:17, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support alt blurb 2, as the other two are inaccurate. And to clarify, they're mostly non-interacting not because they're smol (photons are lighter), but because they're neutral, as foretold by their name. Folly Mox (talk) 13:48, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Support - Big news! Will lead to very interesting revelations about the nature of Lactea Galactica! PrecariousWorlds (talk) 15:39, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose per Stephen and Masem. DarkSide830 (talk) 15:39, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Neutrino-detection's HARD, that should count for something. ~100,000/nanosecond fly thru a man but median distance till interaction is 6,000,000,000,000 miles of solid lead! The only reason neutrino astronomy started in '87 is a star exploded so strongly there was more energy/m² @.4 lightyears than hugging an H-bomb and 99% of the megatons went into spamming ~10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 high-energy neutrinos. Even in '87 only 1 neutrino interacting was enough to detect yet no other exploding star has been detected by neutrinos. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 16:50, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

We're not saying its hard, just that this is not the first time it has happened or the like. That there seems to be a larger amount of neutrons from the galactic center is interesting but I dont think the astrophysics breakthrough of note. Masem (t) 17:14, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

It's a sign of improving human ability to detect such things. In order to detect this it took $279 million of South Pole infrastructure made of 1+ cubic kilometers of detectors (thousands of them) up to kilometers deep and watching since 2005-10 (it took over 5 years to build). Which adds a little interest along with making the first galaxy "map" in one of the final frontiers of wave/particle detection hardness. So much of ~postwar astronomy has been trying to see what's behind galactic dust (most of the galaxy's stars are blocked by it), first with the lowest tech non-visible light to astroimage then progressively harder and less interacting rays/waves. Cosmic ray telescopes were also invented to learn more but they're deflected by not being electromagnetically neutral so we don't know their emission direction and even the ghostly cosmic gravitational wave background was detected before this (the pulsar timing thing nominated below). The cosmic neutrino background is even more of a "final frontier of hard-to-see" but it's so low energy it's almost hopeless, there's no point waiting for that one. However if neutrino telescopes don't get significantly bigger that galaxy pic would get sharper so slowly there isn't really a point where it becomes news. I think they only fly the hard drives out of the South Pole once a year so every year there could be an ever so slightly improved version. That pixel has a neutrino now. Add another blob!!! Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 17:19, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose per above. The Kip (talk) 17:18, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Comment maybe I'm too stupid to read, but is this news reflected in any of the bolded articles? Can't find it referenced under IceCube Neutrino Observatory at all, and only with one sentence under neutrino. If more info was provided in these articles - more than a sentence, ideally a paragraph explaining what has been discovered and why it is significant - I could support, but right now I'm at a loss at understanding what the news actually means. Khuft (talk) 20:47, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Also that section says "The galactic core of the Milky Way is fully obscured by dense gas and numerous bright objects. Neutrinos produced in the galactic core might be measurable by Earth-based neutrino telescopes" and "Neutrinos are also useful for probing astrophysical sources beyond the Solar System because they are the only known particles that are not significantly attenuated by their travel through the interstellar medium" but true it's only about a sentence of new info. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 00:46, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

RD: Hipólito Mora

Article: Hipólito Mora (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): AP - The Guardian - Telemundo - BBC - El Pais
Credits:

• Nominated by Knightoftheswords281 (talk · give credit)
• Created by Ixtal (talk · give credit)
• Updated by JTtheOG (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: This Mexican politician just got assassinated today. The article was freshly created (though he had enough coverage to have an article beforehand), and need serious expansion. - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 00:54, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• This article is a stub currently, not appropriate for posting. - Indefensible (talk) 15:51, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose as it’s a stub. Needs expansion to be considered further. The Kip (talk) 17:19, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose As the article contains exactly 89 words. That is not of substantial quality for ITNRD. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 22:03, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

(Closed) Turkmenistan inaugurates its first smart city

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: Arkadag (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In Turkmenistan, the city of Arkadag, the country's first smart city and named after former president Gurbanguly Berdimuhamedow, is inaugurated. (Post)
News source(s): ABC (Australia) - Reuters - AP
Credits:

• Nominated by Knightoftheswords281 (talk · give credit)
• Created by Amustard (talk · give credit)
• Updated by 94.252.29.253 (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: Turkmenistan just inaugurated their first smart city, in honor of their former president, who amassed a cult of personality during his reign. The project costed nearly US$8 billion. Its not every day that you see a city of close to 70 thousand open.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Knightoftheswords281 (talk • contribs) 00:32, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose There have been other smart cities before, including Copenhagen. --Masem (t) 00:39, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose per above, does not meet notability standard. - Indefensible (talk) 01:39, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose Good faith nom, but not notable enough for ITNR. The Kip (talk) 03:59, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support It's in the news but the "smart city" hype should be dropped from the blurb as its advanced technology seems to be elevators (lifts) and traffic lights which are long familiar elsewhere. I like that all the apartment blocks have seven floors because that's lucky. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:36, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  "Smart City" is more than just installing lifts and lights - it is about the interconnectiveness of all those devices with central computers to monitor and manage every aspect of the city (eg Internet of Things, etc.) That is the advanced technology that is at the center of the discussion here. Masem (t) 15:04, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  The article doesn't indicate that this city has anything especially advanced. The features listed such as audible traffic lights and textured pedestrian tiles have been standard here in London for years. Andrew🐉(talk) 16:52, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  Searching a bit I found this [3] from the Turkmenistan government that explains more. Having had to learn up on Copenhagen's smart city in the past, Arkadag is definitely not as overwhelming as a smart city as Copenhagen's, but that's not so say that its just streetlights and the like. The news articles covering this are a bit weak in the extensiveness of the program. Masem (t) 17:21, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  That government article boasts that "A new 123 Service has also been put into operation in the city of Arkadag for the first time. This is a single call number for the relevant operational services, including gas and fire safety, ambulance. Thus, the activity of the 123 Service is aimed at the prompt provision of necessary assistance and prevention of emergency situations." London pioneered this idea in 1937. The US adopted their equivalent in 1968. Andrew🐉(talk) 22:10, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Comment - I'm actually struggling to find a list of "smart cities" based on the article definition. Maybe someone could provide some context for that? --Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 12:23, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• You can't really have a city without technological infrastructure to support the concentration of people. For example, ancient Rome had apartments, aquaducts, baths, roads and more. I get the impression that Turkmenistan is just catching up. And don't get me started on "smart motorways"... Andrew🐉(talk) 12:39, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

If you know what "smart homes" are, a "smart city" extends that to all operations of a city. Power, communications, traffic, etc., all monitored, and where appropriate, controlled by advanced computer systems to react quickly to changes. But as I've discussed above, there's degrees to how much this can be implemented. Masem (t) 17:25, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose Obviously not notable enough for most news media, much less ITN. This could be SNOWed. -- Kicking222 (talk) 12:33, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose Surely we've lost the lead here. "Smart City" is completely BS obviously - given many of the aspects discussed have been routine for some time with large new urban developments. Looking at the details, this isn't so much a city, as a suburb of Ashgabat, built adjacent and attached to existing urbanized areas. I'd have thought the key story would have been that the Arkadag was made the new capital of Ahal Region - but that happened last year, by which point people were already living there; it was also named last year. Nfitz (talk) 14:55, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose Not notable enough, just because some city got inaugurated, doesn't mean it is ITN material, and "Smart City" has nothing to do with this, there has been a lot of Smart cities before. Editor 5426387 (talk) 21:11, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

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.

(Closed) Canadian wildfire smoke resurgence

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 Canadian wildfires (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Smoke caused by wildfires in Canada ressurges across the Eastern U.S sparking air quality alerts and warnings (Post)
News source(s): CBS Vox BBC CNN
Credits:

• Nominated by 2601:183:4081:FEA0:D1CE:9FD9:3FEC:E0BC (talk · give credit)
• Created by NYMan6 (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: As I’ve put above a CNN source, it clearly states the notability of the topic, over 120-130 million Americans or any people in general are under air quality alerts across the U.S which have effected several huge cities including the country’s own capital, and has stretched from Illinois and New York down to Florida and Georgia.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:183:4081:FEA0:D1CE:9FD9:3FEC:E0BC (talk • contribs) 04:48, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Comment Unfortunately, this has the distinct look of US-centrism. Presumably the fires have been affecting Canada and Canadians for many weeks non-stop, but only now that they are sending smoke to the US again does it get nominated. Even now, the impact on Canada isn't mentioned at all! HiLo48 (talk) 05:21, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  Were 120 million people reported affected before?[4] —Bagumba (talk) 05:27, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  I have no idea, but you seem to have missed my core point. HiLo48 (talk) 05:34, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  I understand your point of view, I’m fully opened to an addition! 2601:183:4081:FEA0:D1CE:9FD9:3FEC:E0BC (talk) 05:42, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  Adding to my claim, Canadian wildfires have caused smoke in Ontario and Quebec, wildfires have spread several miles etc, they are heavily know across the area. But it’s rare to see a third of a country which is not only massive but with large population have such an outbreak of air deterioration and affect on the population for weeks and possibly years to come. 2601:183:4081:FEA0:D1CE:9FD9:3FEC:E0BC (talk) 05:45, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose Air quality issues are common in many parts of the world – see haze. This seems to be a new normal for some parts of North America but so it goes. It's called climate change and is ongoing everywhere. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:41, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose Smoke is being given an importance that it does not have. If there is fire, there is smoke. No victims nor major incidents reported. And per Andrew, he’s totally right. _-_Alsor (talk) 09:42, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose precisely per Andrew. --Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 12:24, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose I don't understand this nomination. The smoke never went away - and the fires have been continuously heavily reported. All that's changed is the wind direction such that it's blowing over a specific over-represented country. Perhaps the wildfires (not the smoke) should be ongoing. Nfitz (talk) 14:17, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

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.

June 29

Portal:Current events/2023 June 29

June 29, 2023 (2023-06-29) (Thursday) Armed conflicts and attacks Myanmar civil war The Tatmadaw carries out an air strike in the Sagaing Region, Myanmar killing at least ten civilians and injuring more than a dozen others, according to local officials and eyewitnesses. Thirteen homes are also destroyed according to officials. (CNN) Disasters and accidents 2023 Canadian wildfires Smoke from the 2023 Canadian wildfires Smoke from the ongoing Canadian wildfires is reported to have entered the U.S. states of Connecticut, Massachusetts, New York, Georgia, Vermont, South Carolina, Arkansas and even small parts of Florida and Mississippi. (CT Insider) (ABC News) Smoke from the Canadian wildfires is confirmed by satellite data to have reached the United Kingdom, according to the Met Office. (BBC News) Seven people are killed and seven others are missing after floods, followed by a tornado, in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa, strike Durban. (Al Jazeera) International relations Foreign involvement in the Syrian civil war The United Nations General Assembly approves the creation of an independent body to investigate Syrian civil war-related missing persons. (AFP via France 24) 2023 Chinese balloon incident The United States Department of Defense says it has assessed that the Chinese balloon spotted over the United States and alleged to be a spy balloon did not collect information over the United States. (The Guardian) Burkina Faso bans French news channel La Chaîne Info for three months for allegedly disseminating fake news. (AFP via The Manila Times) Law and crime Killing of Nahel Merzouk Rioters set fires across several neighborhoods in Cayenne, French Guiana, and a government employee is killed by a stray bullet. Prefect Thierry Queffelec announces the suspension of the city's public transportation system and a temporary ban on the sale of gasoline at night. (ABC News) Rioting continues for a third night across France with at least 100 people being arrested as 40,000 police officers are deployed to tackle the unrest. A town hall is set on fire in Clichy-sous-Bois, while supermarkets and other shops are looted by gangs in Nantes and Montreuil, Seine-Saint-Denis. (BBC News) Islamic scarf controversy in France France's top administrative court upholds a ban on female footballers wearing Islamic headscarves. (AFP via France 24) Rwanda asylum plan The Court of Appeal rejects the British government's plan to fly asylum seekers to Rwanda, deeming the plan to be unlawful. (The New York Times) (The Guardian) Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard In a 6–3 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court rules that race can no longer be considered a factor in university admissions, effectively ending affirmative action in higher learning. However, the court also rules that race considerations are still permitted for military academy admissions. (CBS News) Protests against Quran desecration in Sweden Dozens of people storm the compound of the Swedish embassy in Baghdad, Iraq, after an Iraqi living in Sweden sets fire to a copy of the Quran. (BBC News) Politics and elections Turkmenistan inaugurates its first smart city, Arkadag, named after former president Gurbanguly "Arkadag" Berdimuhamedow. (AFP via The Manila Times) Science and technology Billionaire space race American spaceflight company Virgin Galactic successfully launches Galactic 01, its first private spaceflight, from Spaceport America in New Mexico, United States. (AFP via SCMP) The NANOGrav consortium announces detection of a cosmic gravitational wave background in the signals from pulsars. (Scientific American)

---

RD: Marvin Kitman

Article: Marvin Kitman (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Newsday, NYTimes, Yahoo
Credits:

• Updated and nominated by Indefensible (talk · give credit)
• Created by Wasted Time R (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: American TV critic, author. - Indefensible (talk) 21:56, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Weak oppose on quality Could we get some ISBNs or citations for the bibliography at the end of the article? Support Article's quality is well in regards to sourcing and length. Well done to Indefensible to fixing the issues brought up quickly. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 22:06, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  Done. - Indefensible (talk) 22:09, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

RD: Christine King Farris

Article: Christine King Farris (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [5]
Credits:

• Nominated by Muboshgu (talk · give credit)

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

 – Muboshgu (talk) 20:03, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support - article seems to meet requirements. - Indefensible (talk) 21:37, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support Article's quality is fine enough for ITNRD. Interesting note that was missed in a potential nomcmt is that this woman was the older sister of MLK Jr. Just a thought. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 22:10, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

RD: Shakeel

Article: Shakeel (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Geo.tv
Credits:

• Nominated by Rushtheeditor (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: . Rushtheeditor (talk) 23:17, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Oppose, not very informative and lots of uncited films. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 23:22, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

U.S. Supreme Court strikes down affirmative action

Articles: Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard (talk · history · tag) and Affirmative action in the United States (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In a 6–3 decision, the United States Supreme Court declares that the use of affirmative action in university admissions is unlawful. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In a 6–3 decision, the United States Supreme Court declares that the use of affirmative action in university admissions is unlawful, overturning Grutter v. Bollinger.
Alternative blurb II: ​ The Supreme Court of the United States (justices pictured) determines that affirmative action in college admissions is unconstitutional, overturning Grutter v. Bollinger.
Alternative blurb III: ​ The Supreme Court of the United States (justices pictured) determines that favoring minorities in college admissions is unconstitutional, overturning Grutter v. Bollinger.
Alternative blurb IV: ​ The Supreme Court of the United States (justices pictured) determines that considering race in college admissions is unconstitutional, overturning Grutter v. Bollinger.
News source(s): NYT, CNN, WaPo, BBC
Credits:

• Nominated by Davey2116 (talk · give credit)

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Another end of term, another landmark bad decision. Davey2116 (talk) 14:39, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

• Weak support — I reluctantly support this nomination, but solely on the basis that universities in the United States are attended by students around the world, thus meeting an international impact. I am not entirely sold. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 14:49, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Support - beat me to it. Reminder of WP:NOTFORUM though. Considering how fraught this issue is, and how as ElijahPepe (talk · contribs) brilliantly pointed out, how international U.S universities are, I don't see how this is not ITN material. - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 14:52, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

+1 on NOTFORUM. @Davey2116, lots of us have opinions about the ruling, but it's not helpful to provide them here. What's relevant is the significance of the decision, not the merit or lack thereof. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 16:21, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Expect more of these WP:NOTFORUM violations as we get closer to the 2024 election and more controversial topics like this are brought up. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 21:12, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

There was recently a discussion about discretionary sanctions for ITN, and it was determined that aspects already covered by sanctions (such as post-1992 American Politics) are covered here as well. So any uninvolved admin can issue a sanction (like a week-long page ban, for example) to anyone that engages in forum-like behavior here. Obviously I'd rather if this didn't happen, but it is an option if it gets bad. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 00:49, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

I think we shouldn't be too harsh. I've seen a lot of people acting in Good Faith but just not realising the purpose of these pages.

For example, 'Talk' pages on Wikipedia articles are often mistaken for forums to discuss said articles. We should be a little lenient, but yeah I wouldn't like anyone to insert their personal beliefs into ITN, or even let their politics influence their votes. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 15:42, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Comment. First of all, this is not "striking down affirmative action". This case applies simply to how affirmative action applies to college admissions. Just a point of mention is all. DarkSide830 (talk) 15:07, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
• Comment 6-2, not 6-3 - one justice recused. BilledMammal (talk) 15:28, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

  I believe that's just for the Harvard portion of the case? {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 16:18, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

• Comment an explanation on what affirmative action actually means might be helpful to the blurb. One can also understand it in the way that gender equality has won a case.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 16:02, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Support - Affirmative Action is an incredibly contentious issue that has been at the forefront of American public debate since the 1960s (as evident by the comments below). Having it overturned is a pretty big deal. I also find it likely that this will significantly impact American politics in the future. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 21:09, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Support - per comments, like those by @ElijahPepe, noting that this impacts major universities that are attended by students from around the world. Definitely meets the criteria for inclusion on the home page. Glman99 (talk) 01:07, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Collapsing an egregious WP:NOTFORUM violation; also incoherent and TL;DR. I would have removed it if people had not responded already. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:48, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

It means that if a Black or Brown person and an Asian or White person are applying to a university and are so similar it's the most astounding coincidence in the history of Earth (all four parents came from the same country, the applicants have same sex, gender, age, orientation, religion, cis or trans status, dietary habits, criminal record, socioeconomic class and need for a full or partial scholarship to pay, whether they need THEIR scholarship or already have what they need, disability and medical condition status i.e. none or both diabetic, same personality, hobbies, interests, languages spoken and fluency levels thereof, similar biographies, same level of essay-writing skill and interest in sports and which ones, same gaming the system skill in both applications, visits, interviews etc, both took SAT and no other test, same number of siblings and birth order and skill at each sport and musical instrument, have the same school/club/job/volunteering and awards history for everything, same chess rating; same average, skew, peakiness and standard deviation of their face and body hotness in a scale from 1 to 10 (I don't know if it still happens but the finger on the scale has been the lady making the decisions thinking he's cute), same language(s) spoken and fluency levels, same citizenship(s) and nationalit(ies) held, similar lives, both born and grew up in Park Slope neighborhood of Brooklyn (NYC) to carbon copy parents, similar places on the spectrums for extroversion-introversion, conscientiousness, open to exprerienceness, agreeableness, neuroticism, autisticness and politics spectrums, both want to double major in paleontology and anthropology with a concentration in dinosaurs and minor in the most obscure thing they have, both families have never been to college, heck have their teachers be exactly the same since preschool but the White or Asian has slightly higher grades and test scores (a Scholastic Admission test of 2150 while the other person has a score of 2100) then the White or Asian probably won't get into Harvard and definitely won't if only one of them got in. Unless the Black or Brown person is from war-torn impoverished Sri Lanka then she won't get in for sure if she and her parents changed their names to Smith and put race as Asian (as is usual for Subcontinent-Americans) and didn't send their photos or let them know or suspect in any other way that they're "more minorityish" than the other girl cause she has the lower scores and grades. And if the White person is Jewish and doesn't otherwise have more minorityness than the other person they won't get in even though Harvard and other good schools all have a long history of discrimination against Jewish people. Like explicit quotas till about the 1960s. You can get into Harvard with as little as about an 1800 by being Black and not too boring or similar to any other person who'll attend at the same time as you. Also by being better at football, basketball or rowing than the weakest player on the team, 1800 and willing to play 4 seasons, you don't even have to be any kind of minority or avoid being unlucky enough to have too similar of a personality to too many other students or have any other hobby, award etc to make you more interesting. Possibly even just being better than the weakest player on any one of their many sports teams and >1800 test score and wanting to play 4 seasons and not being convicted felon is guaranteed entry. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 17:21, 29 June 2023 (UTC) I don't think you needed to list that many qualities. In summary, it means that minorities have more opportunities: a higher chance of getting into college in this context. Since part of ITN's purpose is to promote good (as in quality, not the rating) articles and a link is provided, I don't think explaining it would be needed. Aaron Liu (talk) 17:31, 29 June 2023 (UTC) Emphasize what's different by listing too many similarities and going into ones of little to no admission odds effect. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 17:47, 29 June 2023 (UTC) This is ITN, not political debate. Additionally things should be comfortable to read. Aaron Liu (talk) 17:49, 29 June 2023 (UTC) And sure, better to not explain what it is in the blurb. Would also make the blurb long. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 18:03, 29 June 2023 (UTC) I know what it means because non-american outlets translate it into protection for minorities or something similar. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 17:34, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support Landmark decision which is extremely likely to have significant socio-economic consequences. Ppt91^talk 16:10, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support. Although the impact of the decision will be acute mainly at elite institutions, those institutions are important given their role in society. The U.S. is a large country, so for an event of this significance, I would not buy opposition arguments based on lack of international impact. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 16:24, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support. This decision will have significant consequences regarding race relations in America. X-Editor (talk) 16:42, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose this was 100% the expected result once these cases hit the Supreme Court. Masem (t) 16:59, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Also the UNC case artucle needs to be brought into this one as it was decided by the same slip opinion. The only reason the two cases are not consolidated is due to Jackson's refusal on the Harvard case. So there is an article quality issue too.

Also also, I would challenge the claims re I ternational students at these schools. AA was always about American residents and the biases of those races. Schools are still limited in how many international students via visa counts. So I really don't think that angle makes sense here. Masem (t) 17:27, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Just that it's expected doesn't mean it's not news. I'm not sure how we could bring that into this one. Aaron Liu (talk) 19:44, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support Universities in the United States were usually attended by students around the world, and given the landmark change, this would warrant ITN due to its effect on students worldwide. Editor 5426387 (talk) 17:05, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support alt 2 since 1. there were two decisions, one of them (the case linked, actually) 6–2 and 2. it feels a lot more direct. Aaron Liu (talk) 17:29, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
• Comment alt3 is wrong. The ruling basically says using race as part of admissions is unconstitional, not about favoring minorities (though that is the practical effect of AA). Just change "favoring minorities" to "using race-based stanards". --Masem (t) 18:01, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

  Yeah I also thought it was the wrong one, but affirmative action can mean anything and much more than favoring minorities. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 18:16, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

• Question Does this apply to cases in which students, who don’t have enough preparation, are admitted just because their parents have donated the university buildings?--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:07, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

  The two cases substantially prohibit racial discrimination in college admissions. That's it. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:34, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support when article looks good alternative blurb i'd like to propose:

In a 6–3 decision, the United States Supreme Court (justices pictured) determines considering race in college admissions is unconstitutional.

Note not using the phrase "affirmative action", using the phrase "in college admissions". I decided to exclude "overturning Grutter v Bollinger' but you may want to keep it in, your call. QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 18:49, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Oops, In a 6–3 decision, the United States Supreme Court (justices pictured) determines that considering race in college admissions is unconstitutional.QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 18:50, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support with comment: The court didn't explicitly overturn Grutter, therefore the blurb should not mention Grutter at all. Edge3 (talk) 18:54, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose I am really sure that not each and every SCOTUS resolution deserves our attention. In fact, their overall interest and impact is usually minimal, with very few exceptions. In this case, it is another particularly specific issue that affects only a part of the American population. Oh, European, Asian, Latin American, African and Oceanic universities are also attended by students from all over the world. I think that was pretty obvious. _-_Alsor (talk) 18:55, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

  European et al universities don't have major news right now. Aaron Liu (talk) 18:57, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

  Because they do not need to and don’t overdramatize the events that take place there. _-_Alsor (talk) 19:01, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

  You don't need drama to be on ITN. I don't get what you mean by "they do not need to". Aaron Liu (talk) 19:11, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support Article in good shape and this has major ramifications towards the educational landscape of the country. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 19:04, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support ALT4 Case is of significance both domestically (obvious) and internationally (given the many international students in US institutions), and far more so than the independent state legislature case the other day. The Kip (talk) 19:40, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

  How, User:The Kip are international students effected? I don't see any indication of this in the references. Nfitz (talk) 20:30, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

• Just as another wrench, tomorrow is 99.99% certain we will know the result of the challenge on student loan forgiveness, which is a more immediate issue to many. I would think ahead that we might be able to have one blurb support both, since all the cases are dealing with college issues. But I would wait to see what happens tomorrow. --Masem (t) 19:50, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose This is really local. And not particularly relevant as few universities, even in that country, still use such systems; few colleges too I'd think. Roe vs Wade is certainly big, as would be something like tossing out the 2nd amendment, or the 13th amendment. I really don't see such nominations for most countries (the UK being the exception), other than the very biggest cases - even in very large countries. Nfitz (talk) 20:27, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

  or the 13th amendment Have things really gotten to the point where this is now the bar for a SCOTUS decision being posted? Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 00:30, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  It's hard to argue with the best minds in the country. Anarchyte (talk) 06:03, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  Clear cut examples, User:WaltCip are not bars. Not even for the bar, when barring minorities! :) Nfitz (talk) 15:24, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose Per Masem and Nfitz (cf. the Moore v. Harper section below too). - SchroCat (talk) 21:00, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose Yes, it's a major court decision in the US. But major court decisions are handed down all the time all over the world. We almost never post them. FWIW, I supported the overturning of Roe being posted. But I think that was on a much higher level of significance. -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:23, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose as well even though I suggested blurb 3 and 4.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 23:10, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support. As per the above: this decision will have significant consequences regarding race relations in the US, and it is also of international significance due to the US leading role and international students. The article is fine too. --TadejM ^{my talk} 00:10, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  I asked above User:TadejM, but no one answered. How does this effect international students? I see no mention of international students that in the ruling, though it does mention Webster's Third New International Dictionary, which Gorsuch believes is some kind of precedent for constitutional law. Perhaps this would be suitable for a "Did you know that a USA supreme court justice believes that a dictionary is a legal text?". Nfitz (talk) 15:24, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

You did not address the question to me. Some info may be found here. --TadejM ^{my talk} 15:28, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose internal to the US, and furthermore does not look like something that affects everyone in the country. Banedon (talk) 00:47, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Please do not... Oppose an item solely because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. This applies to a high percentage of the content we post and is generally unproductive. -- Rockstone^{Send me a message!} 03:42, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Wrong article. This blurb should link to Students for Fair Admissions v. University of North Carolina instead since that is the "main" case where all 9 justices participated. The Harvard case simply follows the decision of the UNC case with Jackson not able to participate. So either the UNC article should be linked or both cases should be treated with at least equal weight. 18.29.64.10 (talk) 02:05, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  The Supreme Court considers the Harvard case as the leading one, the UNC folded up within it. That's not our decision to change. Its why we shouldn't try to get into the details of the vote in this blurb because its complex. Masem (t) 04:09, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Comment Refs 1 and 2 point to a non-existent target. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:30, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose I simply cannot imagine this getting any support at all if it happened in any other country. HiLo48 (talk) 02:55, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• What other country do you think this could happen in? Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:32, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  Don't make me tap the sign...

  Please do not... Oppose an item solely because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. This applies to a high percentage of the content we post and is generally unproductive. The Kip (talk) 04:02, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  You clearly cannot read!!!! My opposition is NOT because the event is only relating to a single country. It's because it's about one PARTICULAR country, the USA!!!! I simply cannot imagine this getting any support at all if it happened in any other country. It's pure and blatant US-centrism. Would you support a similar event in Australia? HiLo48 (talk) 04:23, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  Sure if this really happened in Australia. Also, please calm down. Aaron Liu (talk) 11:59, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  Maybe. It's hard to provide any context unless someone nominates a similar event in another country. Someone's lack of nominating events doesn't justify the screaming and shouting and exclamation marks, however entertaining they may be. Sometimes I wonder if we need WP:RFCU back. Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 12:28, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  WaltCip Pardon my ignorance, but what was RFCU? A user-specific request for comment? Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 15:37, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  I think they were referring to RFC/U, which according to the dab page was some sort of RfC on user conduct without any consequences. Aaron Liu (talk) 15:41, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  My opposition is NOT because the event is only relating to a single country. It's because it's about one PARTICULAR country, the USA!!!!

  Is that not the same thing? - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 15:31, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  I think they mean specifically the USA. Which is probably also covered by the criterion. Aaron Liu (talk) 15:41, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  Indeed it is; I’m not exactly sure what they were attempting to say there. The Kip (talk) 17:20, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  Their opposition is because they are anti-American, not because it only relates to one county. Which seems much worse. -- Rockstone^{Send me a message!} 17:53, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  That is clearly an example of assuming bad faith. My simple point is that I wouldn't waste my time nominating an equivalent event in my country, or almost any other country, for one reason. It would get no support. That's being realistic, not anti-American. HiLo48 (talk) 22:52, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  My apologies. There have been people posting here who have outright said that they do not want to see American stories on ITN and that they have an anti-American bias. I should not have assumed that you were one of them. -- Rockstone^{Send me a message!} 01:25, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

  If people read my position carefully, they will see that I am actually asking for the US to be treated the same as every other country. HiLo48 (talk) 01:35, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

• If they indeed have the exact same opinion as Chrisclear below, then they meant that they believe the only chance this story can succeed comes from the fact that it's from the USA. Which I still need to see some more evidence to believe (that this wouldn't pass if it wasn't from the USA). Aaron Liu (talk) 23:48, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  Please prove examples of equivalent items from other countries that HAVE been posted. HiLo48 (talk) 00:52, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

  I will try, but I don't have to as the burden of proof is on you per Burden of proof (philosophy). (Wikipedia has accepted it as a policy on articles at WP:BURDEN, so the philosophy applies) Aaron Liu (talk) 01:24, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

  I cannot prove a negative. Simple logic says that I cannot prove that I have not nominated equivalent items from my country. That's a silly demand. I admit my claim is a little speculative, but you could easily disprove it by listing all the examples where equivalent items from other countries HAVE been posted. HiLo48 (talk) 01:33, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

  You don't have to nominate them, as long as you know a couple blurbs that didn't get posted it would count. I've not been around so I don't know, and if I don't know evidence proving it I should be safe to assume that it does not exist. However, I'd like to know how you came to form that thought. Aaron Liu (talk) 01:49, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

  You are missing my point. I don't nominate such things because, firstly, I believe it's inappropriate to do so, and secondly, they would have no chance of being posted. I suspect most non-Americans feel the same way. HiLo48 (talk) 01:55, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

  And my point is that you should show evidence to prove that they are widely opposed. Aaron Liu (talk) 02:04, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

• However, we also don't want to be US Justical System centric. That's a systematic bias of the media sourcing we have. That part of ITN has to be used in balance. Masem (t) 04:07, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  And that's so, but I think it's still okay to nominate these types of stories. There's nothing wrong with a discussion, and if U.S. media centrism is a factor, that should be weighed in. In my opinion, the fact that this affects a lot of young or college-age people in the country (remember that the "minority" races actually represent a large cross-section of the population) means that it is at least worth a discussion. Is it ultimately notable? It's hard to say yet... that's the problem with these types of cases. Sometimes they merely open the door to noteworthy events in the future. Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 12:32, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  And that's so, but I think it's still okay to nominate these types of stories.

  Bingo. Systemic bias is about uplifting the rest of the world, not culling our part of the world. - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 15:32, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  What do you mean by uplifting, and "our part of the world", User talk:Knightoftheswords281. It seems wrong to me, and perhaps WP:NOTFORUM and WP:POINTy to be pointing out how backwards the USA is compared to other advanced democracies. Perhaps I'm missing something. Nfitz (talk) 16:40, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  Systemic bias is combated on ITN by posting more stories from other parts of the world, not opposing more stories from the west. Also, ironically enough, your entire comment is a WP:NOTFORUM vio. - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 18:31, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  I'm still wondering what you mean by uplift and "our part of the world". Uplift is a rarely used word, and has many meanings. Also, I don't see opposing the stories from the west in particular - I've opposed stories from Europe and Asia as well. I assumed that by UPLIFT, you are trying to bring stuff up to the USA's level; which on one hand may be an AGF issue - but your pronoun use is concerning as it appears that you keep using "we" to refer to the USA - and not the normal meaning of us here. And your commment the other day while nominating yet another quickly-closed USA supreme court ITN, was that we should ignore USA-centrism concerns because "considering how much of the global system is determined by America and these days its incumbent federal government, I'd say that this is somewhat relevant"; which if was about ending democracy would be valid - but it was about some very wonkish legal disagreement about election management. I'm not sure how any of this is WP:NOTFORUM - I don't see us chatting about the pros and cons of affirmative action (which I'd think would we'd be clearer and more universal term positive discrimination, lest it be confused with some religious group). Nfitz (talk) 20:36, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose all hooks. Firstly, not a 6-3 decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, which is the linked article; Jackson was recused from that case, so it was 6-2 with respect to that case with Jackson abstaining. It's very specifically about race-based preferences, so "affirmative action" is a bit too broad (it doesn't ban other sorts of affirmative action., such as income-based). It also didn't overturn prior decisions explicitly, so... we can't use that in a hook. I'm on the fence notability-wise. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 03:17, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support as it has wide-ranging impacts across the United States. For those saying that it's internal to the US, that is irrelevant, as ITN's rules clearly preclude using that as a reason. Please come up with a better argument than that. --Rockstone^{Send me a message!} 03:41, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  You are misrepresenting the rule. The problem here, as at least two of us have already clearly pointed out, is that such a change in any other country would NOT even be nominated here. HiLo48 (talk) 10:23, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  I don't see reasons to believe that. Aaron Liu (talk) 12:00, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  There are countless examples that can give you the reasons to believe it. _-_Alsor (talk) 13:41, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  Such as? Aaron Liu (talk) 13:52, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose as the scope of this decision seems to cover only race, while positive discrimination may be based on many other factors (e.g. gender, nationality, wealth etc.). I agree that race-based discrimination is an important topic in the United States, but this won't solve the problem that rich children can be easily admitted because their parents have donated the university buildings (wealth-based discrimination).--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 07:20, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  Just that it didn't solve that problem doesn't mean it's not a very notable event. Aaron Liu (talk) 12:01, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  It's notable for sure but not enough to go on the main page because of the limited scope. I planned to support the original nomination because it referred to positive discrimination in general, but the further discussion revealed that it only relates to a specific form.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 12:29, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose This would be a good recommendation for Ameripedia, but this is a global encyclopaedia. I highly doubt this story would be published in ITN if it related to universities in New Zealand. Therefore for the sake of consistency and to avoid such bias, this story should not be published. Chrisclear (talk) 09:57, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  If you want a Kiwi-equivalent court case to go on ITN, then nominate it. Why are people so frightened about standing up and nominating and instead cower under the fear of "it won't be posted!" Make an effort. Like I stated above, Systemic bias is about uplifting the rest of the world, not culling our part of the world. We ought to combat our systemic bias via raising the undercovered world to our level, not destroying ourselves to bring us to their level. In this case, doing that would just mean ITN would have bi-yearly updates. - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 15:36, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  But I don't want to nominate a Kiwi court case, because there isn't one worthy of ITN publication for a global audience, just as this one is not worthy for a global audience. Chrisclear (talk) 19:32, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  So what you're actually saying is you believe that this story only has its chance to succeed because it's from the USA? Like above I need some examples to believe that. Aaron Liu (talk) 23:46, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  Yes, it's highly dubious that a similar story relating to New Zealand would be published. Regarding examples, as HiLo48 said above (1) I cannot prove a negative, (2) I (and probably other editors outside the US as well) don't nominate stories like this one that are inappropriate for a global audience and (3) Even if I did nominate a similar item that was inappropriate for a global audience, it would have close to zero chance of being posted. Chrisclear (talk) 02:06, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

  While I disagree that just because something is relatively local means that it is inappropriate for a global audience, what I am asking for you to prove is (3). Aaron Liu (talk) 02:11, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

  IT CANNOT BE PROVEN!!!!!! You have been told why. You are asking for the impossible. You are proving nothing with that demand. Read what others say carefully please, think about it, then bugger off!!! HiLo48 (talk) 03:26, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose This is nowhere near the significance of the Roe vs Wade decision. Its effect does not rise to the level of ITN-worthy IMO, regardless of how many column inches it's getting locally. Internationally, it's not on the UK BBC News page at all, and it's only the second story (after the Parkland security guard) even if you navigate to "US News". Black Kite (talk) 10:17, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

It certainly will have greater effect than an administrative change in South Korea cited below. --TadejM ^{my talk} 14:17, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Which also isn't getting posted, User:TadejM. I'm not even sure if this is the most significant (or bigoted) ruling to come out of the USA Supreme Court this week. Nfitz (talk) 15:24, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Seems like there is a slight consensus to post that story. Also, again, reminder of WP:NOTFORUM. - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 15:40, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

I don't think so, purely based on the !votes they seem pretty divided. Aaron Liu (talk) 15:44, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

It was on the verge of getting posted, but in the past hours opposition has been voiced to that. --TadejM ^{my talk} 15:32, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose after some reflection, based on the fact that the impact from this, although potentially very large, is yet to be seen. Furthermore, I agree with above calls to keep the NOTFORUM violations out of here; contentious topics policies still apply to ITN as much as any other page on Wikipedia. --Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 14:17, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Comment Only because I mentioned this before, SCOTUS as expected ruled against the student debt forgiveness program today, thus if there is still any clear support to post this, I strongly urge that also to be combined with the student debt case. However, I see that there's a lower chance of this being posted based on current !votes. --Masem (t) 15:06, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

I agree that the blurb could be more comprehensive. --TadejM ^{my talk} 15:49, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support I’m an European and I don’t think we have been overly US centric in our postings recently. This made it to the top of Der Spiegel and The Guardian (online versions), so there’s definitely been interest also outside the US. Featuring this would actually make it easier for non-US people to find out about affirmative action, or how the US Supreme Court works. I would also support a blurb combining this with the student loans ruling (and potentially the Colorado LGBTQ ruling). Khuft (talk) 16:38, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose generally due to the scope comments above. I'm not really sure they would be rectified by the loans ruling, but I still believe I would support a combo blurb of the two. DarkSide830 (talk) 18:47, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Comment — Several have proposed combining rulings. The notability is solely inherent to Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard. Combining rulings will create a blurb that equivocates Harvard and Biden v. Nebraska, when Nebraska has no global significance. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 20:16, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  The affirmation action one also doesn't have global significance because it primarily affects American citizens, not those internationally who have to get into these colleges with visas (itself a whole different selection process). Masem (t) 20:28, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  If having "global significance" would be our criterion, we wouldn't post anything. None of the currently posted blurbs has global significance if you take a very stringent definition of it. The restaurant explosion in China, the prison drama in Honduras, the sinking of the Titan, Prigozhin's mutiny and the US Golf Open: all of these could be constructed as being of local or regional significance. So should we post nothing? Of course not. Global notability should be measured on the basis of whether a news item is being picked up by media in more than one country or region. All of these do, as does the SCOTUS ruling on affirmative action. Khuft (talk) 20:38, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  We've had at least three nominations for court rulings from the USA this week alone (and I'm not sure the most shocking and significant ruling of international interest this week was even nominated). If were to start posting such humdrum top court rulings from around the world it would quickly exceed what is pragmatic to post in a day. Nfitz (talk) 20:54, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  That is a fair point, but that's not what Masem was arguing about. We anyway shouldn't post "humdrum top court rulings from around the world", but only consider those that attain international notoriety as per the various media we typically refer to. In pratice, this will mean a handful of rulings by the US Supreme Court, the ECJ and possibly one or the other ruling by another court if it's a major case (such as whenever the Brazilian Supreme Court rules on the above-mentioned Bolsonaro case). Thus I don't really see the issue here. Khuft (talk) 21:05, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  Where's the international notoriety from this then? Of the four references provided, 3 are from US sources, and the 4th is BBC News - which might as well be a US source, as they have huge resources in the USA, and maintain a LOT of US news on their website; they do this because they can advertise and profit from Americans reading news - which of course they can't do in the UK. Many English-speaking papers will plaster their websites with Reuters and AP wire reports - few making it to their printed editions; much more telling would be articles that are not in English. Nfitz (talk) 21:57, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  ...This is the English Wikipedia. I would argue that English sources are the only ones that are relevant. -- Rockstone^{Send me a message!} 22:26, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  That is a major misstatement. En.wiki has no problem with foreign-language sources as long as we know the source is reliable and that we have a reasonable translation. (if the material is contentious, we better have a language-expert translation, but for basic facts, a run through Google translate is usually ok). This does apply to ITN as well. Masem (t) 22:30, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  As mentioned in my earlier post, this was featured on Der Spiegel [6] and The Guardian [7]. I just checked, and Le Monde [8] featured it as well. Khuft (talk) 22:48, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  The Guardian, like the BBC, has major resources in the USA, which it monetizes not only through their website, but also through a weekly print edition primarily aimed at the USA, and available at US newsstands. I'm not sure what spiegel says, as it's behind a paywall here - can you describe it? Le Monde is good, that I agree, and they do seem to have further coverage. Nfitz (talk) 23:56, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  I'm not sure, but the title suggests it's an entire article. (Der Spiegel) Aaron Liu (talk) 00:09, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

  Also, searching Der Spiegel's title produces a lot more German coverage such as Deutsche Welle. Aaron Liu (talk) 00:11, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

  Deutsche Welle is also an excellent source (and their English-language TV news channel is great too - and often free). Nfitz (talk) 01:47, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

RD: Corazon Nuñez Malanyaon

Article: Corazon Nuñez Malanyaon (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.gmanetwork.com/news/topstories/regions/874272/davao-oriental-governor-corazon-malanyaon-passes-away/story/
Credits:

• Updated and nominated by Jollibinay (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: Filipino politician, twice member of the House of Representatives and in her second stint as Governor of Davao Oriental at the time of her death. Jollibinay (talk) 09:41, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support. Well sourced and not a stub. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 01:07, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support Article's quality is fine for ITNRD. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 04:15, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Cosmic gravitational wave background

Pulsars rotate precisely so minute variations in their signals show the effect of gravity waves

Article: Gravitational wave background (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The NANOGrav consortium announces detection of a cosmic gravitational wave background in the signals from pulsars (pictured). (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The NANOGrav consortium announces evidence for the existence of a cosmic gravitational wave background in the signals from pulsars (pictured).
News source(s): Scientific American, Science, Al Jazeera, NYT, BBC
Credits:

• Nominated by Andrew Davidson (talk · give credit)
• Updated by XOR'easter (talk · give credit) and Thuiop (talk · give credit)

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Gravitational waves are hard to detect but this ingenious technique seems fairly solid with a group of papers being published by an international consortium. We have work to do improving our coverage but a start has been made. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:25, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support This is excellent ITN material of high encyclopedic value.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:35, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
• This is a great science story, however, the article needs some work. The cosmological sources part is completely unsourced. --Tone 10:02, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support but article needs work. This is a big moment. The SA article does wonders to explain it all in simple terms, however I currently lack the time to do justice to the article. --Ouro (blah blah) 11:19, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support (presuming quality improvements occur) but not as currently written. The blurb should clarify what this actually means, as should the article. Had to go to the Washington Post to figure out why this is important. Anarchyte (talk) 11:24, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Support - Per @Anarchyte PrecariousWorlds (talk) 11:30, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

• Neutral, leaning support - the NYT article does indicate that the findings are shy of the five sigma level that would be required in order to state with any certainty that this is a discovery and not just a random fluctuation. It wouldn't be the first time that we'd post a major scientific discovery (like the Higgs boson supposedly being found in 2012) only for it to be found out later that it was just a random glitch. Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 11:49, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, the Science article refers to 3.5 to 4 sigma level. Maybe, it's too low for a ITN post. Alexcalamaro (talk) 13:06, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose on quality - lack of sources. --Masem (t) 12:01, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
• Leaning support but request some more sources as two paras are unsourced.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 12:50, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Conditional support - major scientific discovery that can provide serious insight into how the fabric of reality operates. However, needs additional citations for verifications; two whole sections lack sources. - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 13:11, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support once the two tagged sections are addressed. Davey2116 (talk) 14:27, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

temp oppose on quality - article does not explain the theoretical mechanism, no equations or theoretical predictions either, etc. we need a good description of what the grav wave background is or is predicted to be. eg. compare to CMBR article - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_microwave_background, theres a chart comparing theoretical vs observed. I also want to see more indications that this is notable - it seems to me that this is just providign further evidence of gravitational waves existing and being pervasive, using pulsars as the medium of investigation (to prove that grav waves are pervasive). Quote sciam:

"...radio astronomers have tuned into the slowly undulating swells in spacetime thought to arise from pairs of supermassive black holes (SMBHs) that are about to collide.... five separate international teams... found evidence for these gravitational waves. They are far longer than the waves first captured .. in 2015, which emanate from collisions of star-size objects."

Are we going to post every single gravitational wave observation at this point? We have now observed grav waves from mergers between two black holes (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_observation_of_gravitational_waves, that was the first observation and definitely deserves a blurb); but since then also a pair of neutron stars (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GW170817, GW190425). We can't just be posting every time a new gw is observed between two different objects, can we?

It's not clear to me that this is a significant discovery, in terms of addition of knowledge. (Certainly the methodology is significant, but that alone is not enough to merit a blurb?) QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 15:29, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, that was the quote from Science mag, not Sci Am. The biggest issue with this is that the authors are not claiming a discovery. Quote Sci am (for real this time!): "So for now, scientist... are modestly claiming “evidence for” the gravitational-wave background... But they’re confident that milestone will come with additional observations." Emphasis added. This feels to me like a clear WP: Crystal Ball issue and definitely means to me it does not merit a blurb. QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 15:44, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

As of now, article quality is still lacking. QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 11:49, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose solely on article quality. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:15, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support based on merit, major scientific discovery, article will need to be fixed though. Editor 5426387 (talk) 17:07, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose on quality, both as far as sources go but also not giving appropriate context for why this is significant. The lead needs to be rewritten, too. Schwede66 19:38, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support. Conclusive evidence for the background of GW due to supermassive back hole mergers. This will shed light on the final-parsec problem. Count Iblis (talk) 19:57, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose. Due to the article's quality and because the authors are not claiming a discovery (as per Sci Am cited above). Everything is still tentative. --TadejM ^{my talk} 23:45, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
• Lean to oppose, big news indeed. But, apart that the article could be improved, my main concern is that the NANOgrav study had still a low statistical confidence : 3 sigmas (Bayesian) and 3.5-4 sigmas (frequentist) (source). Not enough to announce a discovery. Anyway, I have added an AltBlurb to reflect this. Alexcalamaro (talk) 01:32, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
  • The number of sigmas has to be considered in the context of the sort of research that has been done. In particle physics where you are doing a large number of experiments, a p value of 10^(-4) is not good enough because there are many experiments that are done. It would require a follow up study by an independent group to confirm such a result. In this case there was one big experiment that was run for 15 years. Another thing is that at large sigmas the p-value will deviate from the Gaussian behavior and will decay slower, see large deviations theory. So, it's not really true that 5 sigmas is enormously better than 3 sigmas, the context matters a lot. In particle physics you want to have 5 sigmas for many good reasons, most of which don't apply to the case at hand. Count Iblis (talk) 09:09, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

June 28

Portal:Current events/2023 June 28

June 28, 2023 (2023-06-28) (Wednesday) Armed conflicts and attacks 2023 Sudan conflict Battle of Khartoum Airstrikes are reported in the Sudanese capital Khartoum, while heavy fighting takes place in Omdurman despite a ceasefire declared by both sides for the Islamic holiday Eid al-Adha. (Al Jazeera) Nagorno-Karabakh conflict Four Armenian soldiers are killed by Azerbaijani forces in the separatist region of Artsakh. (AFP via France 24) Two students and a professor are stabbed and injured in a gender-studies classroom at the University of Waterloo in Waterloo, Ontario, Canada. The suspect, a recent university graduate, has been arrested and charged. The attack is believed to be motivated by hatred related to "gender expression and gender identity." (CBC News) (CTV News) A man opens fire near the United States consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, killing a security guard, before being shot dead during a shootout. (Arab News) Disasters and accidents Titan submersible implosion Debris from the submersible Titan has been returned to land after the submersible experienced a fatal implosion during its voyage to the wreck of the Titanic last week. (BBC News) Health and environment 2023 Canadian wildfires Smoke from the wildfires in Canada reaches the U.S. states of West Virginia, Tennessee, Delaware, Maryland, North Carolina, Iowa, Missouri, Minnesota, South Dakota, Pennsylvania, Kentucky, and New Jersey, with the smoke also reaching the capital, Washington, D.C. (WUSA-TV) (KCRG-TV) (ABC News) (WHTM-TV) (WYMT-TV) Smoke from the wildfires in Canada reaches Portugal and Spain. (Hoy) International relations Canada–Iran relations Iran brings charges against Canada at the International Court of Justice for allegedly violating Iran's state immunity by designating it a sponsor of terrorism. (AFP via France 24) Mexico–Peru relations Chile assumes a temporary presidency of the Pacific Alliance from Mexico amid a diplomatic conflict which saw Mexico refusing to hand over the presidency to Peru due to the removal of president Pedro Castillo in December 2022. (Reuters) Law and crime Killing of Nahel Merzouk Riots occur in several French towns following the killing of a teenager by a police officer in Nanterre, Hauts-de-Seine, Île-de-France. At least 31 people are arrested, 25 police officers are injured, and 40 vehicles are destroyed in arson attacks. (Al Jazeera) LGBT rights in Nepal The Supreme Court of Nepal provisionally approves same-sex marriage, pending a final ruling. (AFP via SCMP) The Swedish Police Authority authorizes a protest involving the burning of a Quran outside the Stockholm Mosque on the first day of Eid al-Adha, aligning with a court of appeal ruling that deemed security concerns insufficient grounds for denying the request. (AFP via The Manila Times) The Criminal Court of Thailand acquits a student activist and four others of obstructing Queen Suthida's motorcade during the 2020 pro-democracy protests in Bangkok. The group faced a potential sentence of up to 16 years in prison or execution under Thailand's lèse-majesté laws. (AFP via The Manila Times) Sports 2023 NHL Entry Draft The NHL Draft is held in Nashville, Tennessee with the Chicago Blackhawks drafting Connor Bedard with the first overall pick. (Chicago Tribune) (Audacy) 2023 MLB season Domingo Germán of the New York Yankees throws the 24th perfect game in Major League Baseball history. (CBS Sports)

---

RD: Sue Johanson

Article: Sue Johanson (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CBC News, The Guardian
Credits:

• Nominated by Ornithoptera (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Handoto (talk · give credit), Sxg169 (talk · give credit) and Ornithoptera (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: Canadian sex educator, TV and radio host, Order of Canada recipient Ornithoptera (talk) 21:27, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

• Article needs some ref improvement. - Indefensible (talk) 21:45, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support. Long enough and well cited, though I'd prefer if some of the shorter sections were expanded or combined. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 01:06, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support. Revolutionary sex educator. RIP。Hcoder3104 (💬) 03:04, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose The Talk Sex statements need additional sourcing. Expansion would be helpful but not necessary. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 04:14, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

  That unsourced half-paragraph on Talk Sex with Sue Johanson has been removed. -- PFHLai (talk) 10:11, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

(Closed) Domingo Germán perfect game

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: Domingo Germán's perfect game (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In baseball, Domingo Germán pitches the 24th perfect game in Major League Baseball history. (Post)
News source(s): [9]
Credits:

• Nominated by Natg 19 (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Muboshgu (talk · give credit) and SounderBruce (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: 24th perfect game in the history of MLB; last one was in 2012. Article is still in progress, but topic should be worthy of ITN. Natg 19 (talk) 16:48, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Oppose we don't post the xth achievement in an area, where x is 2 or greater. That is if it were the first perfect game ever, that would be itn worthy. The 24th is not. Masem (t) 17:20, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

• Awesome achievement that I watched highlights of this morning, and not something that would or should ever be posted on ITN. I love baseball, but a one-day regular-season achievement that doesn't break a significant record is not worthy of the Main Page. -- Kicking222 (talk) 19:22, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

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: Robert Sherman (music critic)

Article: Robert Sherman (music critic) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): WFUV
Credits:

• Nominated by Thriley (talk · give credit)

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

 Thriley (talk) 14:44, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support. Sufficient length and mostly sourced. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 01:05, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support per the usual reasons (good sourcing + length). Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 04:12, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Rudolf Pardede

Article: Rudolf Pardede (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Antara News
Credits:

• Updated and nominated by Jeromi Mikhael (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: Indonesian politician, former senator and governor of North Sumatra. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 17:31, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support Article's sourcing and length looks good. Fine for ITNRD. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 23:51, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
• Posted Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 02:31, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Lowell Weicker

Article: Lowell Weicker (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NY Times, CT Mirror
Credits:

• Updated and nominated by Sunshineisles2 (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Drewsky1211 (talk · give credit) and Curbon7 (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: American politician, former U.S. Senator and governor of Connecticut. Sunshineisles2 (talk) 17:00, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

• Weak oppose Few cn tags. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 19:06, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support I fixed up all the remaining CN tags, so the article looks good to go. The NYTimes obit is really in-depth if anyone wants to try getting this to GA. Curbon7 (talk) 19:34, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
• How was he a board member of Compuware until 2023 if the company became defunct in 2020? - Indefensible (talk) 23:44, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

  Any end date for his time on the Compuware board is not supported by the source, so I've rewritten that sentence to remove the claim. Sunshineisles2 (talk) 00:51, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support Article's sourcing and length are good enough for ITNRD. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 23:49, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
• Posted Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 02:31, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Killing of Nahel M.

Article: Killing of Nahel Merzouk (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In France, riots erupt across the country after a 17-year-old boy is fatally shot by police in Paris. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In France, over 150 people are arrested and 25 police officers injured after riots grip the country following the shooting of 17-year-old Nahel M. by police in Nanterre.
News source(s): Al Jazeera - Reuters - AP - France24 - Euronews - The Independent - NYT
Credits:

• Created and nominated by Knightoftheswords281 (talk · give credit)
• Updated by AgisdeSparte (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: The French are again rioting; this time over the killing of 17-year-old Nael M. by police in Paris after a traffic stop. The riots are receiving widespread, international coverage, with many outlets running multiple stories on the incident. In many ways, this is somewhat full circle for me since my first nom on ITN was over another police killing: Tyre Nichols. That didn't get posted because people alleged that police shootings in America were too frequent. Regardless of how true that was, I believe France does have less of these (though not as little as you may expect). - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 16:20, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose on Quality. The article lacks way too much information at the moment. It needs to be improved before we can even start discussing significance. DarkSide830 (talk) 16:23, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose per DarkSide830. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:30, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose First off, given that we didn't post the last time France had a riot, I don't see why we should post this time, Secondly, Per DarkSide830, Third, people die in Police shooting all the time, this is not new, and some protests, maybe riots, occur as a result all the time in America, so I don't see why this is any more important in France. Editor 5426387 (talk) 16:33, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

  We did post the French riots as an ongoing item. Additionally, many die in police shootings, but few provoke such vitriol as this has. And I'm not a huge fan of the front that will support because this isn't in the US; in fact, again, I nominated the Tyre Nichols situation and still believe that should have been posted. - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 16:40, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Wait This feels like a situation that we gave a better understanding in 12 or 24 hr of a news cycle. Maybe these riots disperse quickly, I dunno. But the article clearly needs expansion before any posting can be made. Masem (t) 17:04, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose on quality as the article's currently a disaster. Wait on notability - more than likely this doesn't lead to much, but we'll see. The Kip (talk) 17:19, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
  • Changing vote to Support, article's in good shape and the protests/riots are continuing to escalate. The Kip (talk) 00:39, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose because the article (which is awaiting a merge with Killing of Nahel M.) isn't good enough. Also because it & the reaction to it aren't important enough. Jim 2 Michael (talk) 20:23, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
• Wait Exactly the kind of item that needs a wider view. Kingsif (talk) 22:32, 28 June 2023 (UTC)Updated below for chronology
• Oppose - I suppose the bar is whether we would post this if it happened in another liberal democracy. The answer is "no". I wouldn't oppose putting this in ongoing if the unrest continues, though. --Rockstone^{Send me a message!} 00:49, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support. We're now at 150+ arrests and very widespread unrests. This is worldwide frond page news. Sandstein 07:54, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
• Wait a day or so and then judge it. Note that Nael M. riots now exists that can replace the wl to riot. Anarchyte (talk) 10:09, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

  Separating the riots from the killing makes no sense. Unless the riots go on for months (ala the George Floyd protests), the riots are an immediate result of the killing that should stay with the details of the killing for the time being. Masem (t) 12:03, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Adding article - while I agree with Masem (talk · contribs) that such an article is likely a premature content fork, with the widespread coverage this is receiving, I think we should just wait and see. - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 14:27, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose on quality, though it might be worth posting once a merge takes place. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 01:04, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Support - article quality looks fine, although could be expanded a bit more (the Killing article). I have seen shorter articles posted to blurb! Definitely significant - has been going on for a few days now I think? QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 11:55, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support on principle - the riots have intensified in the last 48 hrs - however, I will stand on the fact that there is no reason for the unrest article to have be split off from the killing article at this time, for purposes of ITN posting. Obviously, if the unrest continues as it has been for more than a week, the split may start to make sense, but the split now is not proper per NEVENT. --Masem (t) 12:58, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support - I've boldly merged the two articles, that didn't need to be split (yet at least). Nfitz (talk) 16:29, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Comment I brought up on the talk page that the page has been unilaterally moved to an alleged surname with no sources to back that up. I can find no references for the alleged surname on Google News or on French Wikipedia - where it's also been moved. I don't know if there's a policy for sorting that out before an article goes on the front page of Wikipedia with a potentially inaccurate title. Unknown Temptation (talk) 20:10, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Yes, I would now support on notability given the scale of the riots and government response, but the article cannot be posted to main page with such a BLP and V issue. Kingsif (talk) 20:20, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

CNN, NRK News and the Evening Standard have all reported the name Nahel Merzouk. :3 F4U (they/it) 21:48, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

• Strong support - This is front page news worldwide and the scale of the riots has reached every major city within France and are almost certainly unlikely to end during the weekend, it seems silly to oppose on that basis (though granted most of the comments here were from two days ago). For what it is worth (little), during the 2005 riots we featured (in the archives) it on the front page, though 6 days in seemingly. Tweedle (talk) 22:11, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Comment. Removed the second article, which was merged into the first. DarkSide830 (talk) 22:47, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support Now the scale of the response is known, as it is major national rioting for several days. Kingsif (talk) 03:23, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

RD: David Ogilvy, 13th Earl of Airlie

Article: David Ogilvy, 13th Earl of Airlie (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Telegraph (subscription required), Daily Mail
Credits:

• Nominated by TheCorriynial (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: Was Lord Chamberlain from 1984–1997, close friend of the Late Queen, last living person to have attended the Coronation of George VI and Elizabeth, and via marriage of his brother, related to Princess Alexandra, The Honourable Lady Ogilvy of the Royal Family. Article may need some work. TheCorriynial (talk) 16:12, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

• Not Ready Referencing (as usual). Also is a bit lacking on family and succession. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:26, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose Lack of citations in the Arms and In popular culture sections. Expansion on family (and sourcing as well) would be helpful not not necessarily necessary. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 00:16, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
• Comment It appears the CN tag has been dropped. @Ad Orientem and the Fakescientist8000 you may want to look it over. TheCorriynial (talk) 15:54, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

  Still has an entire section that is unreferenced. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:13, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

2023 Sierra Leonean general election

Articles: 2023 Sierra Leonean general election (talk · history · tag) and Julius Maada Bio (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Julius Maada Bio (pictured) of the Sierra Leone People's Party is re-elected president. (Post)
News source(s): AP - AL Jazeera - The Guardian - Africa News
Credits:

• Nominated by Knightoftheswords281 (talk · give credit)
• Created by Moondragon21 (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Number 57 (talk · give credit), Aréat (talk · give credit) and VosleCap (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: Although the opposition is denying the results (which affects some people's support of general elections), he's already been sworn in, so it seems moot. Needs a lot of work (also surprisingly, there's very little coverage of the election results, even though the lead up did for the crackdown on the opposition). - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 07:41, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose on quality per nom comments. Article needs major expansion. The Kip (talk) 15:56, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose for two reasons, one for each bolded article. 1), the Bio article needs some restructuring, especially as a lot of the content in the lead (which is supposed to be a summary of the article) is not represented later on. 2), the election article needs a lot of expanding upon. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 00:43, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose, Article needs work. Alex-h (talk) 15:14, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose I suggest that the bio is less work to get ready. Schwede66 21:06, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

All South Koreans become younger

Article: East Asian age reckoning (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ South Korea switches from the Korean age system to the system used by most other countries in the world. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ South Korea has standardised age calculations for official purposes.
News source(s): The Guardian
Credits:

• Nominated by Abcmaxx (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: The population of an entire nation has become 1 or 2 years younger. This was an ITN nomination in December 2022 when it was first announced and (some of) consensus was to wait till it comes into force, which is today. Abcmaxx (talk) 08:42, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Support - big news in South Korea; a millenia old tradition has finally been abolished in favor for the standard format. I too actually just read your December nom a few days ago and for the folks dismissing this as administrative trivia, this is actually been a big issue within Korea; for example, their COVID vax policy was all over the place due to inconsistencies in age measuring and was what actually finally led to them switching. Arguments about this just being an administrative change not only aren't true (since this system was in common use amongst SK populace) seem to be setting an exceptionally and rather idiosyncratic standard for what should be posted here, and it also comes off as reeking of the WP:ITNCDONT clause of please do not oppose an item solely because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. This applies to a high percentage of the content we post and is generally unproductive, since I frankly doubt it would be considered "no big deal" if it occured in the US or UK. In fact, I wonder if this is considered "just an administrative change," how many of you would object to the US formally converting to the metric system being featured on ITN "because its just an administrative change?" - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 09:17, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Can you please please please shorten your !votes?? I know you can make a concise point without writing a vote longer than two paragraphs. But these long, ranty !votes aren't helpful at all. Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 12:36, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

They are bordering on disruptive, as they repeat the same arguments over and over, against the principles of WP:TE,too Masem (t) 13:37, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

After multiple calls from you and FakeScientist, I shortened my responses from a max of one or two. The in #(Posted) Wagner Group mutiny, you responded to one of my replies with 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. I haven't included a second paragraph since, and this paragraph was shorter than the bigger one from that reply. Now that's apparently not enough either? Are y'all doing this in a completely arbitrary manner or do y'all think this works best incrementally? I'm following what y'all stated. - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 15:25, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

It's just -- can you find a way to communicate your point in a concise fashion without railing against other users? This isn't just arbitrary technicalities. Anyone can identify your !votes by the fact that they're needlessly long and rambling, and you go on tirades against opposing arguments. Masem is right, it's disruptive, and this is not the first time it has been brought up. I'm not sure what's being missed here; maybe I need to provide diffs so you can see what's being referred to? Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 15:50, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Eh, I don't think they're really that disruptive. I think Knight makes some good points actually. I'd say that debating over the appropriate lengths that an ITN vote should be is equally as "disruptive" as the long votes themselves, but that's just my opinion. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 18:43, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your opinion. Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 19:41, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Agreed. I can almost always tell if a comment, !vote, or even a nomination is from you if the comment lengths exceeds that of 2 sentences. In my previous request, I said maybe 2 paragraphs at most is fair (assuming on the rare occasion), not every time you comment (and as mentioned by others, they always repeat the same exact points). Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 23:55, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Needlessly verbose, certainly, but this is not disruptive by any stretch of the imagination. AryKun (talk) 12:52, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

^ PrecariousWorlds (talk) 21:13, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose, a gimmick. nobody’s actually getting younger. Changing the way they count age in a way which affects nothing else in the world. Hyperbolick (talk) 09:23, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support, interesting, in the news, and significant if you live in Korea. BilledMammal (talk) 09:29, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support It's not a major story but the article update is ok and it's more in-the-news than several of the existing blurbs (for example, the US Open finished 10 days ago). The Titan submersible story should be considered newer as that didn't climax until 22 June – four days later – and is still getting attention. Andrew🐉(talk) 11:19, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:ITNCRIT:

  a five-sentence update (with at minimum three references, not counting duplicates) is generally more than sufficient, while a one-sentence update is highly questionable

  I don't see any updates since the announcement. What is the anticipation? What are the preparations? What is the expected impact?—Bagumba (talk) 11:50, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

  Struck oppose, per expansion (mentioned below).—Bagumba (talk) 06:16, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose both on the gimmicky nature of this (better for DYK as an interesting fact) and the lack of any significant update to explain the significance per Bagumba. --Masem (t) 12:03, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

  To those supporting thus, if it is that significant, there needs to be far more than a one sentence update to the article. We need to know what govt services and other facets of life are now changed in a significant manner. On the surface, this adjustment appears as a plain as when we have a leap year. Masem (t) 15:46, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose I agree that this is more suitable for DYK.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 12:22, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support I disagree with everyone who is suggesting this is only appropriate for DYK. I think this could be a perfect addition both for the ITN and DYK. It's a tradition that has been in Korea for like a thousand years now, and it has come to a halting end. Big news. TwistedAxe [contact] 13:14, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support on significance This is a drastic cultural change that has local ramifications. Easy support. DrewieStewie (talk) 14:21, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
• Adding my Support too. It's interesting and newsworthy.

  2001:BB6:4E52:7D00:2C39:AF7F:1A62:CA6F (talk) 14:35, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose. It's a bookkeeping move, plain and simple. If South Koreans want to celebrate their birthdays like they had in the past, they are not prevented from doing so, so the "cultural impact" here is dubious. DarkSide830 (talk) 16:14, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support. Significant, interesting, and has permanent ramifications. Article needs a touch-up though. There are some unresolved tags and a cite templates error. Folly Mox (talk) 16:17, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose - does not meet notability standard, this blurb entry is basically for a 1-sentence update in the article. - Indefensible (talk) 17:27, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose on quality as it's a one-sentence update. The Kip (talk) 17:40, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Support.

Is this gimmicky? Kinda. Is this internationally significant? No. But it is an interesting story, one that has quite significant impact in South Korea, is making some headlines, and I honestly do not see the harm in posting it. Perhaps I'm wrong though. I better stop writing before this becomes too long, otherwise I shall be labeled Tendentious! PrecariousWorlds (talk) 18:41, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Perhaps tendentious was the wrong word to use, but it's a valid complaint to make when you see nearly every other editor on this page concisely sum up their vote in 2-3 lines at most, except for one often leaving a 5-7 line paragraph. The Kip (talk) 19:07, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Well, quality over quantity, I do agree. But I think in this day an age a man should be judged not by the size of his comment, but by the content of his vote.

I don't think Knight is making his votes deliberately long or in bad faith, and I've seen him make some good points.

Regardless, it seems lessons have been learnt, so let us all move on. Cheers! PrecariousWorlds (talk) 11:29, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Unclear possibly significant, but i'm not sure just a sentence on the relevant article counts as enough prose to make this a good quality posting. Could it be spun off into a separate article or section? Idk just some ideas. QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 19:05, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

• Comment - this would be a good "Do You Know" item. Nfitz (talk) 19:33, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Comment - I've expanded the update to 6 sentences, above the minimal requirement for updated articles. - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 19:38, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support - if something of this magnitude were happening in (for example) the US, I'd support it. I don't see why this is any different. It is big news, and it's not like this is something that happens every day. See you in 1000 years. :-) --Rockstone^{Send me a message!} 21:38, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

• People who are saying this should be sent to DYK have no idea what DYK is for and should desist doing this on other articles that they don't think are important enough to be here. Howard the Duck (talk) 22:11, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

  Exactly, I was going to say this earlier. - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 22:31, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

• As a long-time DYK contributor, I can say that "DYK ... that, after 1000 years, all South Koreans became a year younger?" would actually be fantastic content over there. Sometimes, yes, the suggestion something belongs at DYK is a bad one, but here it's a genuine response to, particularly, the nomination comment. Also, no need to go all-bold text, please. Kingsif (talk) 22:39, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

  As a long-time DYK contributor, you should know that it's an uphill battle for this to be approved. The article is already pretty lengthy, so a 5x expansion is pretty much impossible. You can probably split the South Korean reckoning to a separate article; perhaps that's more plausible. This article, at its current state can be WP:GA, but that may take sometime, and once this is promoted to GA status, the newsworthiness of this event has subsided. Howard the Duck (talk) 22:47, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support blurb This is a unique event with ramifications on an entire culture. Article needs a bit more work though (sourcing wise). --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 22:19, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
• Weak oppose Calling it a gimmick is a bit too flippant, but there's a comparison above saying in principle there is little difference between this and a leap year that I agree with. I imagine if ITN had been around when leap years were introduced, we would have blurbed that news, or I would have !supported, at least - because the little difference is that leap years affect the whole world indefinitely. And this doesn't. Kingsif (talk) 22:39, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

• Comment this has consensus to post, both in strength of the arguments and in numbers alone (10 in support and 6 in opposition, once opposes based on the lack of an update are omitted). However, I'm leery to do so because there are multiple tags in that section, and there's a lot of reading to get through before a reader sees the update. Is it possible to create a new subsection specifically for this update? (Beyond the scope of this ITNC nomination, I'd also wonder if this article is ripe for splitting.) Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 02:19, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose purely on quality. No issue with the subject matter, but all other sections are poorly sourced. We're bolding an anchored section, but the rest of the article isn't in great nick. Anarchyte (talk) 10:13, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support blurb - The more I think about it, the more I kind of enjoy the nature of this story and how interesting it is, and the impact on an entire population is almost axiomatic! That said, I hope the quality can be brought up to par to permit for this. --Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 13:44, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support blurb per above. Very interesting and uncommon event. Davey2116 (talk) 14:25, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support., It is an interesting story and the article looks ok. Alex-h (talk) 15:11, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
• Weak support based on quality; I think it's juuuuust about what I think the baseline quality for a posted article should be. I support posting in general based partly on significance and partly because, honestly, i just like the story. It's interesting and different. Kicking222 (talk) 19:20, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose as a Korean. This is largely a gimmicky law that doesn't change anything of legal significance. :3 F4U (they/it) 22:52, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support per PrecariousWorlds and WaltCip. It's one of those difficult borderline cases, but in such cases I think it is appropriate to recognize the interesting/unique factor. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 01:00, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Marking as ready; seems to be consensus to post. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 03:14, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Comment The section relating to Korea appears to be fine, but the rest of the article is rough in terms of sourcing. The China section has three CN tags (two of which are on entire paragraphs), the Japan section has an OR and CN tag, and the Vietnam section is orange tagged for sources. I think there is also more unsourced content than meets the eye due to the lede; the lede, particularly the second paragraph that begins with Chinese age reckoning, has considerable content that does not appear to be found elsewhere in the article and is not cited. I'm doubtful this could be considered ready due to quality at the moment. Curbon7 (talk) 03:41, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose. The article's quality is lacking and it is a local administrative event of no international ramifications. It's interesting and uncommon, but only as a type of trivia. --TadejM ^{my talk} 14:30, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose is still a purely administrative change whose real impact is the change of some numbers (and the morale of some). A very interesting matter, that's for sure. _-_Alsor (talk) 15:15, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose as per User:Freedom4U. This is more of a Man bites dog story than significant news. Nfitz (talk) 16:17, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

June 27

Portal:Current events/2023 June 27

June 27, 2023 (2023-06-27) (Tuesday) Armed conflicts and attacks Russian invasion of Ukraine Attacks on civilians in the Russian invasion of Ukraine Kramatorsk restaurant attack A Russian missile strike on a restaurant in Kramatorsk, Donetsk Oblast, Ukraine, kills 13 civilians and injures 61 others. (The Guardian) (The Independent) Wagner Group rebellion Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko confirms that the head of the Wagner Group, Yevgeny Prigozhin, has arrived in Belarus in accordance with the agreement reached with the Russian government. (Reuters) Islamist insurgency in the Sahel Jihadist insurgency in Burkina Faso Suspected jihadists kill several Burkinabé soldiers and members of the Volunteers for the Defence of the Homeland in a series of attacks on troops in the village of Noaka, Pissila department, Sanmatenga Province, and in the Sahel Region. (AFP via VOA) Arts and culture Austrian painter Gustav Klimt's last completed oil painting, Lady with a Fan, sets a new European art auction record when an unnamed art dealer buys it for £85.3 million (US$108.4M), including the buyer's premium, at Sotheby's in London, UK. (AFP via The Straits Times) Disasters and accidents One person is injured and many buildings are damaged after a magnitude 5.1 earthquake strikes Muisne, Esmeraldas, Ecuador. (El Universo) At least four people are killed when landslides caused by flash floods hit Wenchuan County, Sichuan, China. (AP) Health and environment 2023 Canadian wildfires Smoke from the wildfires continues to blanket southern Ontario and the eastern and mid-western United States, including New York, Michigan, Illinois, Ohio, Indiana and Kentucky. (Yahoo! News) Law and crime Moore v. Harper In a 6–3 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court rules that the Elections Clause does not give state legislatures sole power over elections, rejecting the theory of independent state legislatures. (AP) Killing of Nahel Merzouk A 17-year-old boy is shot dead by a police officer after an attempted traffic stop in Nanterre, Hauts-de-Seine, Île-de-France. (France 24) Mexican drug war Fourteen police employees are kidnapped by armed men in Chiapas, Mexico, while travelling on the 190 motorway between Ocozocoautla and Tuxtla Gutiérrez. (AFP via Jamaica Observer) One park ranger is killed and another is injured in an attack by armed men near an illegal mine at the Okapi Wildlife Reserve in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. (AFP via The Manila Times) Politics and elections 2023 Sierra Leonean general election Julius Maada Bio is sworn in as president of Sierra Leone for a second consecutive term. His opponent, former Foreign Minister Samura Kamara, rejects the results and claims the election was rigged. (CNN) The National Assembly of Republika Srpska votes to suspend all decisions of Bosnia and Herzegovina's Constitutional Court, a move described as "legal secession" and a violation of the 1995 Dayton Agreement. The region's president, Milorad Dodik, had criticised the court for having foreign judges and an anti-Serb bias. (Reuters)

---

(Posted) RD: Ryan Mallett

Article: Ryan Mallett (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [10][11][12]
Credits:

• Updated and nominated by Fakescientist8000 (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Muboshgu (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: Former NFL quarterback and high school football coach. 35. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 22:29, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

• Weak oppose for a few missing citations, but close. The Kip (talk) 22:35, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
  • Support All CN tags resolved, props to the editors. The Kip (talk) 23:02, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

  @The Kip I've fixed the issues you've brought up. Mind double checking? Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 22:39, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

  Still seeing a few so I'll mark them, appreciate your work though. Article's mostly in good shape. The Kip (talk) 22:41, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

  Triple check this time? Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 22:59, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

  Looks good to me now, changing vote. The Kip (talk) 23:01, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

• Posted Stephen 04:22, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

(Closed, RD posted) RD/blurb Julian Sands

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: Julian Sands (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  In the United States, British actor Julian Sands (pictured) is found dead near Mount Baldy, California in the San Gabriel Mountains after a five-month long search. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In the United States, British actor Julian Sands (pictured) is found dead near Mount Baldy, California in the San Gabriel Mountains after a five-month long search.
News source(s): The Independent BBC [13]
Credits:

• Nominated by SchroCat (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: Needs a bit of work to sort out the usual problems. Sad case: missing on a hike five months ago, his remains have only just been found. (Addendum: Nominated for RD, not a blurb: I oppose the blurb, but support the RD once the article is sorted) SchroCat (talk) 21:18, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support - This isn't stale as, even though it sadly occurred many months ago, it was only discovered/confirmed. I agree it's a very sad case. Very accomplished actor. Article should be included in ITN.2001:BB6:4E52:7D00:D1BC:B9EE:FD2B:D5BD (talk) 21:40, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose for the usual reason, as the filmography is entirely uncited. That said, not stale as the remains were only confirmed as his today. The Kip (talk) 22:34, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

  Also, oppose blurb - are we really having this whole thing yet again??? The Kip (talk) 14:05, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose Filmography section is entirely unsourced. Fix, and this should be good to go. Support RD as the article's quality looks good. Oppose blurb as the death is not entirely notable in and of it's own right. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 22:53, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support blurb. It is often argued by users that we should blurb cases which are unusual, where death is the story. After sudden disappearance of renowned actor, it was the focus of top websites, akin to Titan disappearance. World famous actor wasn't found in digital age for almost half a year. Death is the story here, the search was covered in sources for several months, this was a major ongoing story and it concluded. Kirill C1 (talk) 04:40, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose - world famous? baloney. I don't think his absence has even been noted by most international media. There's been likely more coverage of Amelia Earhart's disappearance here than Sands'.Nfitz (talk) 06:43, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

  Aside of USA Today, numerous other outlets from USA and UK, there was worldwide coverage https://www.spiegel.de/panorama/julian-sands-schauspieler-beim-wandern-in-den-usa-verschollen-a-331f8a09-6869-4bc3-8e37-90623cdb99e1

  https://www.wort.lu/de/panorama/schauspieler-julian-sands-beim-wandern-in-usa-verschollen-63c8ee5bde135b92362ae8ef

  https://www.rtvi.com/news/britanskij-akter-dzhulian-sends-propal-v-gorah-v-kalifornii Kirill C1 (talk) 07:12, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

  The coverage is brief. It's a short-term human interest story about a B-list celebrity. Unlike the rebellion in Moscow - this will not be mentioned again in the media tomorrow. It's barely notable; let alone blurbable. Nfitz (talk) 19:31, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose blurb I agree that the significance should be put aside to post a blurb if the death happened under unusual circumstances, but we need a standalone article that documents those unusual circumstances that will be bolded in the blurb.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 07:36, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support blurb This is definitely getting lots of attention as it spiked 3 days ago and was the #2 top read article yesterday – more than Wagner Group, for example. Altogether, nigh on a million views so far. This demonstrates that the topic is prominent in the news and, for example, the BBC has it as a top story. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:15, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose blurb. Not a global household name. Sandstein 08:36, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose blurb per above.  — Amakuru (talk) 08:47, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Support - per WP:ITNRDBLURB, blurb RDs can be posted if it fits the following criterion:

Death as the main story: For deaths where the cause of death itself is a major story (such as the unexpected death of a prominent figure by homicide, suicide, or accident) or where the events surrounding the death merit additional explanation (such as ongoing investigations, major stories about memorial services or international reactions, etc.) a blurb may be merited to explain the death's relevance. In general, if a person's death is only notable for what they did while alive, it belongs as an RD link. If the person's death itself is newsworthy for either the manner of death or the newsworthy reaction to it, it may merit a blurb.

This is about as textbook of an example as it gets: a famous actor that contrary to @Nfitz's claims, has had widespread (CNN, The Guardian, Sky News, NPR, NBC, WaPo, NYT, Reuters) international (France24, Euronews, DW, Al Jazeera, El Pais, Le Monde) coverage of his disappearance. That fact that you personally never heard of it is not and shall never be a valid rationale (that's literally as WP:ORIGINAL RESEARCH AND WP:IDONTLIKEIT as it gets), nor should the fact that he's a dreaded "celebrity" (because based on how much fear mongering their is about ITN turning into a celebrity newsticker, there will likely be people who will reflexively oppose on that basis) disqualify him. Additionally, @Kiril Simeonovski, I don't understand this idea that I've seen where events nominated her have to have a standalone article; hell, {{ITN candidate}} literally has a |update= parameter in part for non standalone articles. - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 09:00, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

If we're going to post a blurb, it'd be because the death is the main story, not that the person was notable. In that case, we require a standalone article that'd be bolded in the blurb. If we bold Julian Sands, it'd give undue weight on the person, who's not supposed to be the main target in the blurb.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:07, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

In that case, we require a standalone article that'd be bolded in the blurb.

Where in any of the ITN policy pages does it state that? In fact, considering the above excerpt is extracted from the Recent Deaths policy page, which solely focus on the article of the deceased individual, I'd say that it heavily implies the opposite; in the instance of a "death as primary story" blurb, you don't need a separate article. In fact, I don't understand the argument that by not having one, we're giving WP:UNDUE weight with a blurb considering the whole story literally revolves around him. - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 09:23, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

There's no specific policy stating when a standalone article should exist, but it's oftentimes mentioned as a principal requirement in ITN discussions. I've proposed an alternative blurb to illustrate why that standalone article is needed. Moreover, even having a standalone article may not be sufficient for a blurb. The disappearance of Emiliano Sala was top news in all media, and the story is well documented in 2019 English Channel Piper PA-46 crash, but it was posted only to RD.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:45, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

There's no specific policy stating when a standalone article should exist, but it's oftentimes mentioned as a principal requirement in ITN discussions.

Then those arguments should be disregarded for violating policy. For example, we've run blurbs about countries re-establishing diplomatic relations and we don't require a specific article for that; just a link to the article on their relations (e.g, France-Germany relations [btw, we didn't run a blurb on Germany and France establishing diplomatic ties, I'm just using that article as an example]). - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 19:19, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Indeed, planty of things are oft-mentioned at ITN without actual consensus. —Bagumba (talk) 09:54, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

This seems like comparing apples and oranges. Deaths are different from other news we post, and we even have different criteria for posting death blurbs. Whether a standalone article is necessary depends on common sense and experience, not on any kind of a policy or a rule written in stone, so disregarding arguments because of lacking policy depth is sort of rules-lawyering. In this particular case, the standalone article is required for a practical reason, that is, to document the notable death as argued by other editors in this discussion. I don't think the story about the disappearance and death make this person outstandingly notable. It's the disappearance and death that merits inclusion, and it needs to be evaluated separately.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 20:08, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

I disagree with Knightofthewords assessment that a"bout as textbook of an example as it gets". Looking at For deaths where the cause of death itself is a major story (such as the unexpected death of a prominent figure by homicide, suicide, or accident) or where the events surrounding the death merit additional explanation (such as ongoing investigations, major stories about memorial services or international reactions, etc.) a blurb may be merited to explain the death's relevance, we have neither ongoing investigations, memorial services, nor international reactions. And we are hard-pressed to even say prominent. I do agree though that this should be opposed because the death happened months ago. Nfitz (talk) 19:31, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

• Weak oppose blurb - It is true that WP:ITNRD says that a blurb may be merited when the death itself or the manner of death is newsworthy. However, I concur with Kiril that such types of situations -- being that the death is the main story -- would normally call for a standalone article. After all, if the death itself is extraordinarily unusual, that carries a sort of encyclopedic significance: see death of Jeffrey Epstein as an example. --Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 12:54, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support Blurb It certainly does not say in policy that a standalone aritcle is needed for a celebrity death story in ITN. Just because a standalone article isn't present doesnt make the circumstances of his death unusual and newsworthy; readership stats across websites have proven so, as indicated above. I find this blurbworthy. DrewieStewie (talk) 14:08, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose Blurb. Subject is not notable enough to merit a death blurb under normal circumstances, and the death itself is stale. DarkSide830 (talk) 16:17, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

  Per WP:ITNRD:

  "Recently died" means their death was announced within the last seven days.

  - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 19:14, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

  Well consider it IAR I guess, but we're talking about someone who has pretty clearly been dead for months now. DarkSide830 (talk) 03:58, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose Subject is not notable enough, and he died 5 months ago, so this is no longer RD. Editor 5426387 (talk) 16:37, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

  It's not considered stale/still considered RD as the remains found were only confirmed as him a day ago. Until then, he was legally a missing person, not dead. The Kip (talk) 17:22, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose - does not meet quality standard, needs referencing improvement. - Indefensible (talk) 17:33, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose blurb -- Wikipedia is not a celebrity gossip magazine. I would support adding him to Recent Death, though. --Rockstone^{Send me a message!} 21:36, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support RD, oppose blurb Good for RD but not notable enough for a blurb. Johndavies837 (talk) 23:59, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support RD, neutral blurb Quality is sufficient now. GreatCaesarsGhost 01:31, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
• Posted to RD, blurb discussion can continue. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 02:34, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
• RD pulled ~30 roles incorrectly cited to a page for only "Privates on Parade". There's also a handlful of Cns in body and unreliable WP:IMDB cited. @The ed17: Courtesy ping.—Bagumba (talk) 05:09, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
  • It appears everyone missed the Privates on Parade citations. I did take the citation neededs into consideration, as a few of them aren't a barrier to posting on ITN (let alone RD). See WP:ITNQUALITY. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 05:21, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
  • I've also tagged TV Guide cites that didn't support the particular role. This all seems to have been from this edit by 2001:bb6:4e52:7d00:2c39:af7f:1a62:ca6f (talk), whose edit summary reads: The BFI source will cover many of his film references and the TV Guide one will cover several of the film roles too and almost all, if not all, his TV roles. So the most efficient way to do this is to use these refs and when I or another editor has time to go through them all in more detail (I have already gone through many of them one by one) any that aren't on the list can be removed for a different citation to be added. That's misleading when it's cited to a specific role.—Bagumba (talk) 05:31, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
  • Also removed incorrect "Privates on Parade" links.—Bagumba (talk) 05:42, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
  • It turns out that four of the paragraphs at Julian Sands § Career had a lone source at the end of the paragraph, but it just supported the last sentence, and not the rest of the paragraph.—Bagumba (talk) 09:46, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
• I've cleared up pretty much everything I could see, so it may be okay, but it could do with a check to make sure I haven't missed anything. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 16:09, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

  Great job! It looks very good now. 2001:BB6:4E52:7D00:60EB:B0F5:B4CA:DFC4 (talk) 19:23, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support RD article looks good now. _-_Alsor (talk) 22:58, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
• RD reposted—Bagumba (talk) 05:23, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

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.

(Closed) Moore v. Harper

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: Moore v. Harper (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In the United States, in a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court rules that the Elections Clause of the U.S constitution does not grant state legislatures power over elections. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In the United States, in a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court rejects the independent state legislature theory, prohibiting state legislatures from interfering in elections.
News source(s): WaPo - PBS - Politico - MSNBC - Slate
Credits:

• Nominated by Knightoftheswords281 (talk · give credit)
• Created by JocularJellyfish (talk · give credit)
• Updated by DanzST (talk · give credit), Masem (talk · give credit) and Soibangla (talk · give credit)

Article updated

Nominator's comments: This is (and has been recognized as such by political analysts and legal scholars as) probably one of the most critical SCOTUS decisions in a hot minute. It essentially rejects this idea that American state legislatures have ultimate power over elections without ay checks and balances; effectively allowing them in practice to interfere with the electoral process. The decision in the case will have ramifications persisting for a while, and while you can argue that we just retained the status quo, this was a surprisingly up in the air and close ruling. Additionally, the ruling has raised concerns about interference within elections, but instead from states, from SCOTUS. Finally, for the people rushing to oppose due to accusations of U.S centrism (in violation of WP:ITNCUSA), considering how much of the global system is determined by America and these days its incumbent federal government, I'd say that this is somewhat relevant globally with the 2024 elections. - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 17:47, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Why is this under RD? Kevinishere15 (talk) 18:02, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

• Weak oppose Certainly relevant to the U.S. (as an American) but not sure it rises to the significance needed for ITN. If it gets significant international coverage a la Dobbs, I could be persuaded to support. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 18:10, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose I've looked at a number of heavyweight news sources outside the US, and the biggest US story from most of those is Trump babbling about state secrets (i.e. BBC. Indeed, this story isn't on the BBC's US page at all. I am guessing it will appear at some point (I note it's on Le Monde, but below the fold), but at the moment this doesn't seem to rise to the importance required for ITN. Black Kite (talk) 18:28, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose per Presidentman. Yes, opposing because “only one country” is against rules, but I’m not sure if this is generally notable enough to be blurbed. The Kip (talk) 18:53, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Wait - Thanks for bringing this to my attention Knight, it's a very interesting story indeed. I have to concur with the other editors here that this probably isn't notable, but as per @Presidentman, we shouldn't immediately oppose. Let's wait and see the international reaction!

"Moore v. Harper had been described as one of the highest-profile cases the Supreme Court has taken in recent years; former federal judge Michael Luttig called it the "single most important case on American democracy—and for American democracy—in the nation's history"." - A quote from the article. Seems pretty big! Let us all wait and see :) PrecariousWorlds (talk) 18:53, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose totally irrelevant outside US. Without international impact and interest. _-_Alsor (talk) 19:14, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

  This is not a valid reason to oppose an ITN/C nomination, as items do not need to have international impact. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:38, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose — ...considering how much of the global system is determined by America and these days its incumbent federal government is U.S. centrism. Not every story is ITN-worthy. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 19:31, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose Compared to Allen v. Milligan, this decision just doesn't seem significant even in the US; unlike Milligan, the court here is simply re-affirming the status quo against a crackpot theory. If the court decided in favor of the plaintiff, then we would likely be talking about a blurb because it would lead to a fundamental restructuring of the American political system, but the court did not. Curbon7 (talk) 19:37, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose as, while it's good news, it is a "status quo" result and this decision won't likely have too much impact, not as much as Milligan as Curbon says. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:40, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose - maybe this would have been notable if the decision had gone the other way, but this decision literally changes nothing because it's just reaffirming past precedent. I'm thankful for the outcome, but I think ITN requires more. --Rockstone^{Send me a message!} 19:52, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose Irrelevant outside the U.S, does not affect much of anything outside of America, and this really doesn't seen that important given that it changed nothing. Editor 5426387 (talk) 20:03, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

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: 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:

• Updated and nominated by Jeromi Mikhael (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: Balinese politician. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 14:44, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support - article seems to meet requirements. - Indefensible (talk) 01:28, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support Article looks good in regards to sourcing + length. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 04:01, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
• Posted Stephen 04:25, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

(Closed) Manipur violence

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

• Nominated by Ainty Painty (talk · give credit)

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)

• Oppose for the same issue as the last time this was nominated for ongoing, which is that it’s not receiving consistent updates. The page as a whole has only seven edits in the last 10 days and one of those was a bot. The Kip (talk) 04:07, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
• Mild oppose inasmuch as it's somewhat stale, but is still receiving ongoing updates This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 05:19, 27 June 2023 (UTC) to be continued by Tanecia
• Oppose, the only update since the 15th is a minor change to the number of death, done without changing the source[14]. Fram (talk) 11:19, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose No apparent significant event beyond just ongoing deaths to make this ongoing. --Masem (t) 12:10, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose Very little updates, seems to be stuck in somewhat of a stalemate for now except for spontaneous outbreaks every now and then resulting in a handful of deaths. TwistedAxe [contact] 12:23, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose no major update, no apparent significant events. Editor 5426387 (talk) 14:50, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

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: Carmen Sevilla

Article: Carmen Sevilla (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ABC, La Vanguardia, Europa Press
Credits:

• Updated and nominated by Alexcalamaro (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Asqueladd (talk · give credit) and Alsoriano97 (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: Very popular Spanish actress and TV presenter. Article seems ready to me. Alexcalamaro (talk) 16:05, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the nomination and the updatings. I'm in the process of expanding the content and sources, I hope to have it finished tonight. A true icon of Spain has passed away. _-_Alsor (talk) 16:11, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support - I had added this nom too as didn't see this one. So commenting to say I support it. Article looks to be in good shape. 2001:BB6:4E52:7D00:2C39:AF7F:1A62:CA6F (talk) 16:35, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support Article looks good. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 19:11, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
• Posted Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 02:30, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

June 26

Portal:Current events/2023 June 26

June 26, 2023 (2023-06-26) (Monday) Armed conflicts and attacks Russian invasion of Ukraine Military aid to Ukraine during the Russo-Ukrainian War Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese announces a AU$110 million military aid package to Ukraine. (The Guardian) Ukrainian forces recapture the uninhabited village of Rivnopil in Donetsk Oblast, according to Deputy Defence Minister Hanna Maliar, the ninth in the past month. (Reuters) 2023 Sudan conflict Battle of Khartoum The Rapid Support Forces take control of the main police base in Khartoum, seizing a large amount of military equipment and ammunition, including 160 pickup trucks, 75 armoured personnel carriers, and 27 tanks. (The Guardian) The Sudan People's Liberation Movement–North attacks the town of Kurmuk in Blue Nile, Sudan, prompting hundreds of civilians to flee across the border to Ethiopia. (Reuters) Business and economy Turkish economic crisis 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. (Reuters) Disasters and accidents 2023 Pakistan ration distribution stampedes Twenty-one people are injured in a stampede during the disbursement of funds for the Benazir Income Support Programme in Karachi, Sindh, Pakistan. (Pakistan Today) Ten people are killed by lightning strikes in Punjab, Pakistan. (AP) Seven people die from drinking bootleg alcohol in Tehran, Iran. (Iranwire) Ten people are killed, four others are injured, and an unknown number of people are trapped when a 14-story apartment building collapses in Alexandria, Egypt. (Al-Ahram) One person is killed and six others are injured after a fire breaks out in a nickel smelting factory in Central Sulawesi, Indonesia. (Reuters) Health and environment The Sri Lankan Department of Wildlife Conservation cancels plans to export about 100,000 endangered toque macaque Old World monkeys to China after several environmentalists initiated legal action in the Court of Appeal against the export. (AFP via ABS-CBN News) International relations Germany–Lithuania relations German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius announces that Germany will permanently station 4,000 troops in Lithuania in order to help secure NATO's eastern flank. (DW) Politics and elections 2023 Toronto mayoral by-election Former New Democratic Party Member of Parliament Olivia Chow is elected Mayor of Toronto, defeating former city councillor Ana Bailão, becoming the city's first non-White mayor. She replaces John Tory, who resigned in February after revealing he had an extra-marital affair with a staffer. (BBC News)

---

(Posted) RD: Tony Bouza

Article: Tony Bouza (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [15]
Credits:

• Nominated by Muboshgu (talk · give credit)

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

 – Muboshgu (talk) 22:12, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support Article looks well-sourced. The Kip (talk) 22:50, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support Article looks good. G2G. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 19:10, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
• Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 01:55, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

(Closed) Turkish economic crisis (2018–current)

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

• Nominated by Abcmaxx (talk · give credit)

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)

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)

• Oppose Turkey's economy has been declining for a while and hasn't caused any major catastrophe, deaths, humanitarian disaster or such. Also, very little to no updates and the situation is very stale at the moment. TwistedAxe [contact] 12:58, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose This has been happening since 2018, event been ongoing since 5 years ago, if we posted every ongoing event, there would be at least 10 ongoing blurbs. Editor 5426387 (talk) 14:52, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

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.

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:

• Nominated by Abcmaxx (talk · give credit)

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

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

• Oppose for now as there's no prose on the results/aftermath. Definitely post separate from the presidential election, though, as the runoff isn't for another two months. The Kip (talk) 22:21, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose for now There’s prose missing that explains what it all means. And there's a sourcing tag. Schwede66 20:45, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

(Re-opened) RD: Lew Palter

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

• Nominated by 2001:BB6:4E52:7D00:F10C:A57A:62DC:267A (talk · give credit)

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

• Oppose Article is, at present, too stubby for me to consider supporting. Please expand. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 23:45, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose as stale, IMO - while the Hollywood Reporter obit is from today, the CalArts obituary is from May 30, so I don't really think this fits as a "recent" death. Nohomersryan (talk) 00:40, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose as stale, per above This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 03:01, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose as stale per above. Died over a month ago and original obit is nearly a month old as well. The Kip (talk) 04:10, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
• WP:BOLDLY reopening due to the rather peculiar circumstances of his death's coverage; despite the original CalArts obit dropping last month, it was the only source to mention him dying for a month plus until The Hollywood Reporter aired their story. I searched on Google for him and filtered the results by date and until the Hollywood reporter article, there was no other mention of his death outside the rather obscure CalArts obituary; even the Reddit post that for whatever reason says May 31 was actually from yesterday. Hell, our own article didn't even mention his death until June 22 and wasn't reliably sourced until the 23rd (see history here). You can't argue that it's a Wikipedia sleuth either since according to THR, they were granted this info by his daughter, as opposed to CalArts sourcing the announcement from Travis Preston. Considering that the only coverage that makes this stale per WP:ITNRD is a single obscure blog essentially, with even Wikipedia, infamous for being swift on reporting deaths, not being aware of it until a couple days ago, I am IAR supporting conditionally. - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 20:07, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
  • I tipped THR of his obit when I updated the page, which is why they wrote the article now. Anyway I still oppose (he was a CalArts professor, I think if CalArts announces your death in that case, it's fair game) but I don't object to reopening. Nohomersryan (talk) 21:07, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

  A university website is not an "obscure blog" and it's not our job to make things right if nobody here noticed the obit for a month. I can't close this as I've already voted above, but calling on an admin to re-close. The Kip (talk) 22:20, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

  A university website is not an "obscure blog"

  In terms of traffic, it kind of is. Might I also add that this was a single story of many, and additionally was not from a university website - well, it kind of was, but that wording is a little misleading; it's from a specific department's blog. I mean, I would like to restate the fact that it took a month for us, famous for updating articles to mention their subject's death within minutes of the announcement, to update it, and roughly the same time for any other site to do too. - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 01:52, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

  Agreed. If the media didn't pick up on it at all (not a single publication) and eventually had to be tipped off about it, and a whole month later, and it also took that long for a single Wikipedia editor to update it, then it is quite obscure relatively speaking. 2001:BB6:4E52:7D00:2C39:AF7F:1A62:CA6F (talk) 07:48, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

  For now, I don't see an issue to seeing if IAR gains support from others or not. —Bagumba (talk) 11:59, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support IAR reopening of nom due to obscure coverage. I don't find this stale, owing to the unusual circumstances. I will conditionally support once CN tags are handled. DrewieStewie (talk) 14:14, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

  I had a go at filling in those CN tags, found some good sources, if you want to take another look. 2001:BB6:4E52:7D00:2C39:AF7F:1A62:CA6F (talk) 14:34, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

  Good work. DrewieStewie (talk) 15:24, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support re-opening and posting, given the circumstances. Article looks appropriately referenced now, so marking as ready. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 21:26, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
• Removed ready tag More input needed on whether IAR applies.—Bagumba (talk) 01:33, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
• Comment Page is currently 1449 B (243 words) of readable prose, what most would call a WP:STUB.—Bagumba (talk) 01:49, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
• Conditional support I’m happy to IAR but would like to see some expansion so that it’s clearly not a stub any longer. Schwede66 20:38, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Richard Ravitch

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

• Nominated by GhostStalker (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Wikidude10000 (talk · give credit) and TDKR Chicago 101 (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: 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)

• Comment Article prose needs to be updated with his death date; specific cause of death is not needed, especially considering he was a very old man. Otherwise, the article is well-cited and is very holistic, so consider this a support once updated. Curbon7 (talk) 21:53, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support Article in good shape, added info about death, g2g. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 22:18, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support Article is well cited, well sourced, and is good to go. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 23:44, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
• Procedural support Meets requirements. This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 05:20, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
• Posted Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 17:56, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

RD: David Bohrman

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

• Nominated by Knightoftheswords281 (talk · give credit)
• Created by Ab6301a (talk · give credit)
• Updated by CoryJosh (talk · give credit), Connormah (talk · give credit) and Sunshineisles2 (talk · give credit)

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

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

• Support One CN tag in the whole entirety of the article listed at the very bottom in the Awards section. Other than that, great article. TwistedAxe [contact] 21:22, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose There are quite a few uncited paras and awards. Just because they don't have a CN tag next to them doesn't mean they're all set. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 21:23, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose Article needs ref work. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 21:41, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
• Needs ref improvement, set updated to no. - Indefensible (talk) 21:50, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

RD: Raanan Gissin

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

• Nominated by Knightoftheswords281 (talk · give credit)
• Created by CltFn (talk · give credit)
• Updated by 62.219.247.113 (talk · give credit), Mohamad Darilin (talk · give credit) and Dominus Moravian (talk · give credit)

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

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

• Oppose Article needs lots and lots of citation work. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 20:31, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose Big orange citation tag at the top. Needs citation work before it's ready. TwistedAxe [contact] 21:25, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
• Needs improvement, set updated flag to no. - Indefensible (talk) 21:49, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

RD: Lloyd Erskine Sandiford

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

• Nominated by Knightoftheswords281 (talk · give credit)
• Created by Lesouris (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Tails Wx (talk · give credit), 65.166.242.63 (talk · give credit) and Painting17 (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: 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)

• Support Article looks ready to go. Enough sourcing + length in the article. Oppose orange tag and several CN tags have been added and must be addressed. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 20:32, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

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)

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)

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)

• Oppose Article has some sourcing issues. Support RD Article has been fixed. One cn tag shouldn't stop the article from posting. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 19:09, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support RD, no blurb I think we really have gone off the rails with RDB noms lately This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 03:02, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose RD at moment due to sourcing issues. Strong oppose blurb regardless of those issues- in no way do we need to blurb every world leader who dies, and the subject was in no way a hugely transformative figure on the world stage. -- Kicking222 (talk) 03:05, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose on Quality. Holy CN tags Batman! DarkSide830 (talk) 17:00, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose on quality as there's still a ton of CN tags. Strong oppose blurb, because really? The Kip (talk) 22:51, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support Knightoftheswords281, Fakescientist8000, TDKR Chicago 101, Kicking222, DarkSide830, The Kip, most sourcing issues have been resolved and only one {{citation needed}} tag remains. Feel free to ping me for any additional tags or issues! Tails Wx 18:48, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose Needs a little more information about his life, and it wouldn't hurt to resolve the cn tags. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 00:55, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

RD: James Crown

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

• Nominated by Knightoftheswords281 (talk · give credit)
• Created by Reflex Reaction (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Mechanic696 (talk · give credit), Spitfire8520 (talk · give credit) and Unknown artist (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: American 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)

• Support Article looks good, in all honesty. Good sourcing, though length could use a tiny bit of work. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 20:34, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
• Only 262 words? Anymore to write about? Anyway, there are 2 {cn} tags. --PFHLai (talk) 02:18, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

RD: Hugo Blanco (politician)

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

• Nominated by Knightoftheswords281 (talk · give credit)
• Created by Reginald Perrin (talk · give credit)
• Updated by 82.23.56.40 (talk · give credit), Artegia (talk · give credit) and RolandR (talk · give credit)

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

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

• Oppose Needs sourcing work. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 20:38, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
• Comment Four citation needed tags to go; should not be difficult to resolve. Schwede66 20:29, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

(Closed, RD posted): John B. Goodenough

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: 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:

• Nominated by TDKR Chicago 101 (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: Article updated and well sourced. Death announced today. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 15:05, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support Article is well cited and well sourced. Great name, btw. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 18:09, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
• 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)

• Support Goodenough is (more than) good enough for posting. Masem (t) 18:32, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
• Blurb - inventor of a highly pivotal technology that has had a remarkable effect on our modern lives; was very much a "top of his field" character. His death appeared on the news aggregate I use and is receiving coverage from large RSes (Reuters, The Verge, Forbes, and the NYT, plus an AP news wire). Aside from batteries, he also further propagated materials science in other aspects and was widely regarded as a leading figure within the field. - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 19:31, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

  I did consider a blurb for Goodenough. The blurb conversation will be interesting to read. While I nominated this as an RD and not blurb, I can get behind a support blurb. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 19:41, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

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)

• To add, he did not "invent" lithium batteries, but did help in a key findings of which materials to use to improve their capacity to reduce size and make them practical. Masem (t) 19:58, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

  I.e, lithium-ion batteries, which is what the blurb states he invented and what all coverage of his death states he invented. - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 20:07, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

  Per our articles, Whittingham was the inventory of lithium-ion batteries. Goodenough discovered a better material to use for the anodes to increase charge density, which was a significant step in the development of lithium-ion batteries, but wasn't the inventor of them. Masem (t) 21:36, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support blurb - Incredible scientific accomplishments that I think merit a distinction as being one of those sui generis transformative figures. --Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 20:11, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support Blurb. Slam dunk candidate here. Not much more needs to be said than what already has above. DarkSide830 (talk) 20:24, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support blurb Enough of a transformative career to merit one. His innovations are essential to modern life. The Kip (talk) 23:28, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose blurb - not a household name enough. I see it on BBC, NYtimes (a small box), but not on CNN or Al Jazeera. Transformative for sure but not more important than any of the articles we have on right now, I think. QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 01:54, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

  Certainly your argument as to whether or not he is a household name is a valid one, but generally we don't post items relative to whether or not they are more or less important than what's currently listed on the ITN template. Each item is assessed on its own merits. Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 14:06, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support Blurb Important figure in the Scientific fields, the Article is good to go. Editor 5426387 (talk) 02:02, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support Blurb Just read a substantial obituary in the NYT. Andrew🐉(talk) 02:46, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support Blurb Had an important effect on all our lives through his work on random access memory. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 03:42, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose blurb Of course he was a transformative figure, that's why he won the Nobel Prize. He and so many other people, and that's not why they had to be nominated for blurb. _-_Alsor (talk) 06:04, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
• Comment If the main reason for posting a death blurb is his work on the lithium-ion battery, which has a lot of merit, then we'll need to be consistent and secure a blurb for M. Stanley Whittingham and Akira Yoshino when they die because the three shared the Nobel Prize for their ground-breaking work.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 07:50, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
• Blurb !vote comment The blurb option was added 19:24, 26 June 2023. !votes prior to that were purely for RD.—Bagumba (talk) 08:53, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
• RD posted while blurb discussion continues.—Bagumba (talk) 10:50, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose blurb I think there does need to be some baseline level of "fame," for lack of a better word. Things like lithium-ion batteries and random-access memory don't really have one universally recognized "inventor." (Our article on random-access memory doesn't even mention him. M. Stanley Whittingham has been called the "founding father" of lithium-ion batteries.) Zagalejo (talk) 14:19, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

  What??? So now the going criteria for a blurb is not being transformative, but being "famous"? So now we have an even more nebulous criteria, but somehow being the driving force behind the creation of two of the most significant technologies for modern life doesn't make you "famous". DarkSide830 (talk) 16:51, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

  "Transformative" is no longer mentioned at Wikipedia:In the news/Recent deaths. The criteria are vague. Zagalejo (talk) 17:09, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

  I mean, yeah, the word "transformative" isn't there, but you know what I mean. DarkSide830 (talk) 19:35, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose blurb — Importance does not signify fame. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 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. – Muboshgu (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. NorthernFalcon (talk) 15:54, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

  No one is saying we should post all Nobel winners, nor should we. And if we are honest, I think there's a fairly easy arguemnt to suggest that Goodenough's contributions to the world are much more impactful to the average person then Goodall or Hawking. DarkSide830 (talk) 16:58, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose blurb. I do not think the name recognition or circumstances warrant a blurb in this case. This is perfectly fine as an RD. Nohomersryan (talk) 16:06, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose blurb. Not every person who has "done transformative work" is well known enough for a blurb. Death blurbs should be reserved for those who are both transformative and well known, imho. Natg 19 (talk) 22:43, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

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: Craig Brown

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

• Nominated by Black Kite (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Deacon of Pndapetzim (talk · give credit) and Jmorrison230582 (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: Longest-serving Scotland international football manager. Needs quite a bit of work. Black Kite (talk) 13:09, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

• Weak support Article looks good except for the expand section, however I don't think that should prevent this nom from posting. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 19:12, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
• Weak oppose Article is fine except for a CN tag and an orange tag. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 21:31, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support Overnight work has got this into shape: no more CN tags, no more section expansion tag. Think it's in a suitable state for RD. Buttons to Push Buttons (talk | contribs) 15:59, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
• Comment A couple of entries at Craig Brown (footballer, born 1940) § Managerial statistics failed verification.—Bagumba (talk) 05:02, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

• Fixed. Black Kite (talk) 10:04, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

• Posted Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 03:12, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

RD: Cameron Buchanan (politician)

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

• Nominated by Knightoftheswords281 (talk · give credit)
• Created by ToryScot (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Artegia (talk · give credit), 37.159.33.185 (talk · give credit) and Normantas Bataitis (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: Scottish politician. Needs expansion - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 01:30, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose Article is too stubby for ITNRD. 115 words in this wikibio is not enough. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 01:34, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
• Strong oppose To say that the biography is a catastrophe would be an understatement. Nowhere in the article does it refer to how or when he died. Article needs a ton of work before it's even ready. Also, very stubby article. TwistedAxe [contact] 12:40, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose A lot of info is needed, basically a stub. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 15:07, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose as a stub. The Kip (talk) 22:52, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose, Per above Alex-h (talk) 18:15, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

RD: José Antonio Sistiaga

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

• Nominated by Knightoftheswords281 (talk · give credit)
• Created by Eyecatcher (talk · give credit)
• Updated by 2001:8f8:1a65:249e:88a7:3861:75c9:7c4a (talk · give credit), Ali313korosh (talk · give credit) and Dominus Moravian (talk · give credit)

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

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

• Oppose Article's tone is not up to ITN quality (reads like a museum blurb written about him). Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 01:29, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
• Weak support Honestly, article isn't all that bad and it's of decent quality. However, the top of the article needs some work as it looks very messy. Other than that, should be ok to post. TwistedAxe [contact] 12:41, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose Article needs a lot of work. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 19:11, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
• Article needs improvement, set updated flag to no. - Indefensible (talk) 21:46, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

RD: Tapas Das

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

• Nominated by Knightoftheswords281 (talk · give credit)
• Created by Moheen (talk · give credit)
• Updated by 193.87.99.92 (talk · give credit), Normantas Bataitis (talk · give credit) and Itz.mas10 (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: Indian singer-songwriter, and guitarist. Needs some citation work. - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 01:21, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

• 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)

  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)

  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)

• Support when discography is sourced properly. TwistedAxe [contact] 12:43, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
• 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)

  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)

  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)

  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)

  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)

  Thank you for the context. — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 16:05, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

• 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)
• Comment Page is currently 1291 B (216 words) of readable prose.—Bagumba (talk) 08:25, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

RD: Robert "Say" McIntosh

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

• Nominated by Knightoftheswords281 (talk · give credit)
• Created by Shawn@garbett.org (talk · give credit)
• Updated by RapidsLurker15 (talk · give credit), Migfab008 (talk · give credit) and Normantas Bataitis (talk · give credit)

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

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

• Oppose Article is entirely unsourced. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 01:33, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
• Strong oppose How this even passed as an article without being deleted or such is a mystery. Needs a ton of citation work. TwistedAxe [contact] 12:45, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

  Twistedaxe. We usually only delete articles if they are not notable. Most other issues can be fixed with editing and incremental improvement. Wikipedia is a work in progress, and there are no deadlines. Please tone down your rhetoric. Calling articles "catastrophes" and acting shocked that an article hasn't been deleted is not helping the atmosphere here. Thanks. –Novem Linguae (talk) 12:58, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

  Apologies if my tone sounded harsh. TwistedAxe [contact] 13:01, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

  No problem. Anyway, I gave that article a good read, and I ended up deleting most of it since it was uncited and making some controversial claims. Someone may revert me though, we'll see if it sticks. –Novem Linguae (talk) 13:13, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

• Comment Now there's nothing to the article, and the lead is uncited, except for the one citation for his death, which doesn't even have an exact date. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 14:48, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
• Needs ref improvement. Set updated flag to no. User:Knightoftheswords281 you should use the updated flag when the article is ready to go, especially if you have multiple nominations of varying quality. - Indefensible (talk) 21:44, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

  There's a reason the parameter is |updated= and not |ready=; no where in Template:ITN candidate/doc does is state that the former should only be switched to yes if ready. The only definition of an update on ITN is a simple reflection of the newsworthy event; in this case, his death date. - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 22:01, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

  Well in any case the "article needs updating" which is the correct status currently, so using the updated flag will help reviewers know which nominations to prioritize. Articles which need significant work are not yet sufficiently updated for posting. - Indefensible (talk) 22:52, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose Article is a stub. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 22:16, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
• @Fakescientist8000, TwistedAxe, Indefensible, and TDKR Chicago 101: I've WP:TNT'd and rewritten this article from scratch if anyone would like to take another look. –Novem Linguae (talk) 20:23, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

  Twistedaxe. Fixed ping. –Novem Linguae (talk) 20:25, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

  Looks way better now, however still needs some ref work. 2 sources is very little and the article is still in a stubby position. Might change my opinion/view later on, but in it's current state it's still not enough for ITNRD. TwistedAxe [contact] 09:57, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

  Still oppose because the article is still a stub sadly, however the article has been improved. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 19:07, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

June 25

Portal:Current events/2023 June 25

June 25, 2023 (2023-06-25) (Sunday) Armed conflicts and attacks Syrian civil war Northwestern Syria clashes Nine people are killed and 30 others are injured by Russian airstrikes on a market in Jisr ash-Shughur, Idlib Governorate, Syria. (AP) Spillover of the Somali Civil War, Terrorism in Kenya Five people are killed, some by decapitation, by al-Shabaab jihadists across two villages in Lamu County, Kenya. (AFP via Al Arabiya) Disasters and accidents Twelve people are killed and seven others are injured in a head-on collision between two buses in Digapahandi, Odisha, India. (Times of India) Five people are killed and 34 others are injured in a crash between a government vehicle and a bus in Tiruchirappalli, Tamil Nadu, India. (NDTV) One person is killed and nine others are injured in a roller coaster accident at the Gröna Lund amusement park in Stockholm, Sweden. (Reuters) One person is killed after a tornado strikes Martin County, Indiana, United States. (NBC News) Law and crime Ecuadorian security crisis Eight people are killed and others are injured in a shootout outside a nightclub in La Concordia, Santo Domingo de los Tsáchilas, Ecuador. (AFP via The Punch) Two people are shot dead "due to a feud between criminal elements" in Nahf, Northern Israel. (Times of Israel) Politics and elections June 2023 Greek legislative election Greeks head to the polls for the second time this year to elect the 300 members of the Hellenic Parliament. (AP) New Democracy leader Kyriakos Mitsotakis regains an absolute majority of 158 seats and is expected to be sworn in as Prime Minister for a second term after previously handing his premiership to Ioannis Sarmas last month. (BBC News) 2023 Guatemalan general election Guatemalans head to the polls to elect officials in the presidential, congressional, Central American Parliament, and other local elections. Presidential candidates Sandra Torres and Bernardo Arévalo will face a run-off vote on 20 August. (AFP via Manila Standard) (The Guardian)

---

(Posted) RD: Wilhelm Büsing

Article: Wilhelm Büsing (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): St.Georg
Credits:

• Updated and nominated by BeanieFan11 (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: Olympic medalist, 102. Would appreciate if this is reviewed quickly (WikiCup). BeanieFan11 (talk) 01:22, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support. The baltic horse show reference is a dead link, but apart from that the article looks good to go. Wouldn't object to a blurb; the fact that he was one of the oldest living Olympians, the longest lived German Olympic medalist, and the oldest surviving male medalist from the 1952 Olympics makes this interesting and a welcome difference from the normal blurbs we post. BilledMammal (talk) 01:27, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
• Posted Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 03:17, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

(Posted) 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:

• Nominated by HiLo48 (talk · give credit)
• Updated by ITBF (talk · give credit), AusLondonder (talk · give credit), Hawkeye7 (talk · give credit) and JennyOz (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: Former Australian Labor Party leader HiLo48 (talk) 23:31, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose Quite a few unsourced statements and CN tags in the article. Must be fixed in order to be good enough for ITNRD. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 00:38, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support CN tags are all long gone. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 03:35, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support Updated and well-referenced. JennyOz (talk) 12:26, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
• Admin comment this is ready to post, but I'm holding off to let the six new RDs have a little time on the main page. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 03:23, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
• Posted Stephen 04:31, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Dean Smith (sprinter)

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

• Nominated by 2001:BB6:4E52:7D00:AD4D:4C49:94D1:E651 (talk · give credit)

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

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)

  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)

  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)

  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)

• Posted Stephen 04:27, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Greek snap election

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:

• Nominated by Knightoftheswords281 (talk · give credit)
• Created by Anamakr (talk · give credit)
• Updated by PLATEL (talk · give credit), Haris920 (talk · give credit) and Lidistat67 (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: 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)

• Oppose As per the usual election article reasons. Too much table, too little prose. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 23:06, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose as nothing outside the infobox has been updated yet. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 01:25, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

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) 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) 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) Racist to whom? The Greeks are not a race. They're an ethnicity. Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 16:15, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

• 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)
• 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)

  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)

• 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)
• Oppose I would want to see some prose in the results section. It must be explained what the data mean. Schwede66 20:20, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

RD: Yang Ti-liang

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

• Nominated by Knightoftheswords281 (talk · give credit)
• Created by 66.80.89.85 (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Artegia (talk · give credit), Mohamad Darilin (talk · give credit) and 86.126.238.93 (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: Hong Konger judge. Need more sources. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 02:06, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose for now. Many unsourced phrases Paradise Chronicle (talk) 11:51, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose Decade old yellow tag, handful of CN tags, and many unsourced statements and paragraphs make this article's quality ineligible for ITNRD. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 21:03, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Margaret McDonagh, Baroness McDonagh

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

• Nominated by Knightoftheswords281 (talk · give credit)
• Created by Mtiedemann (talk · give credit)
• Updated by 2a00:23ee:1660:162b:1007:b021:1c17:7872 (talk · give credit), Jkaharper (talk · give credit) and ThatRandomGuy1 (talk · give credit)

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

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

• Support Article's quality is good enough for ITNRD, in regards to sourcing + length. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 21:05, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
• Posted Stephen 02:19, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Dahrran Diedrick

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

• Nominated by Knightoftheswords281 (talk · give credit)
• Created by Chrisjnelson (talk · give credit)
• Updated by AHR13542 (talk · give credit), Cmm3 (talk · give credit) and Bagumba (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: Canadian football player. It actually looks ready to go thanks to the work of @Cmm3:. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 01:59, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support. Long enough, well-cited, and updated with his death. I'm not a fan of having several short sections, but that's a minor style quibble. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 15:18, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support Article quality is fine, even including the shorter sections. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 01:36, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support Sufficient breadth and sourcing. Marking ready.—Bagumba (talk) 06:50, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support per above. Ready to post. TwistedAxe [contact] 12:51, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
• Posted. I did not give ITN updating credit to User:AHR13542 because the "updating" edits got reverted for lack of sourcing. --PFHLai (talk) 23:07, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

RD: Claude Barzotti

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

• Nominated by Knightoftheswords281 (talk · give credit)
• Created by RyanGerbil10 (talk · give credit)
• Updated by 2001:861:3506:ed20:4c6:910b:6e02:fe1 (talk · give credit), Jkaharper (talk · give credit) and 79.244.59.17 (talk · give credit)

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

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

• Oppose Article's quality is far from ready. Too many unsourced statements, CN tags, and there's even an orange tag. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 21:06, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose Still a long way off from being ready. Schwede66 20:18, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

(Posted) Blurb Change: Wagner rebellion

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:

• Nominated by PrecariousWorlds (talk · give credit)

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)

• Wait until it's clear what's going on This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 22:52, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

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)

Thanks Knight! I am absolutely awful at adding images to blurbs. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 10:35, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support - #1 news story in the world for agencies Associated Press and Reuters. [16] [17] starship.paint (exalt) 03:56, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

  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)

• 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)
• Proposing & supporting alt blurb 3 It describes what happened & is based on the current blurb. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 07:17, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support blurb 3.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 11:47, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
• 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)
• 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)
• Support any of the above. Time to get the outdated version of the MP. - SchroCat (talk) 12:38, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
• Posted altblurb 3 -- Kicking222 (talk) 12:53, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
• 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)
• Pull - all the above, non-story of no real consequence. nableezy - 14:46, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

  Non-story of no real consequence that is still #1 story in Reuters [18] and Associated Press [19] Russian mercenaries’ short-lived revolt could have long-term consequences for Putin? starship.paint (exalt) 14:51, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

  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)

  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)

  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)

  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)

  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)

  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)

  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)

  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)

  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)

• 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)
• 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)
• 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)

  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)

  Blurb updates are regularly suggested at ERRORS. Pawnkingthree (talk) 21:16, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

  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)

  Indeed. Major blurb changes clearly go here, ERRORS is for either small tweaks or factual inaccuracies.  — Amakuru (talk) 10:52, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

  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)

  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)

  Yes, this is the "current ITNC nomination", given the technicality of the original being already closed. —Bagumba (talk) 13:29, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

June 24

Portal:Current events/2023 June 24

June 24, 2023 (2023-06-24) (Saturday) Armed conflicts and attacks Russo-Ukrainian War Russian invasion of Ukraine Wagner Group rebellion The Wagner Group seizes and occupies the cities of Rostov-on-Don and Voronezh as clashes occur across both oblasts. Wagner Group forces capture the Southern Military District headquarters in Rostov-on-Don. Rostov Governor Vasily Golubev asks residents to remain indoors. (9News) (Ukraine Today) (CNN) Yevgeny Prigozhin warns that his troops will march on Moscow unless Russian military leadership meet with him for talks. Russian president Vladimir Putin addresses the nation, saying that a coup d'état attempt is under way. (The New York Times) (AP) An Antonov An-26 transport plane is reportedly shot down over Voronezh Oblast, while Russian Air Force Ka-50 helicopters strike an oil refinery and depot in Voronezh, causing a large explosion and fire.(Defence Blog) (Hindustan Times) Authorities in Lipetsk Oblast tell residents to remain indoors, with the M4 highway closed off to traffic. Wagner forces later enter Lipetsk. (Live Mint) (Al Arabiya) (DNP India) The Wagner Group withdraws after Yevgeny Prigozhin, Vladimir Putin, and President of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko negotiate a deal to end the rebellion. (AP) 2022–2023 Russian strikes against Ukrainian infrastructure The debris of a Russian cruise missile shot down last night damages a 25-storey building in Kyiv, Ukraine, killing three civilians and injuring eight others. The Ukrainian military says that air defences destroyed 41 out of 51 cruise missiles launched by Russia, as well as two drones. (Reuters) Israeli–Palestinian conflict A Palestinian teenager is shot and killed at a checkpoint in Qalandiya after opening fire on Israeli security forces. (Al Jazeera) Insurgency in Balochistan One person is killed and five others are injured as a Balochistan Liberation Army suicide bomber blows herself up near a military convoy in Turbat, Balochistan, Pakistan. (AP) Moro conflict Two people, a rebel and a soldier, are killed, and fourteen others are injured in a shooting incident in Maimbung, Sulu, Philippines. (ABS-CBN News) Disasters and accidents 2023 Yellowstone River train derailment A bridge crossing the Yellowstone River in Stillwater County, Montana, United States, collapses, causing a freight train carrying hot asphalt and molten sulfur to derail. (AP) Law and crime Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 The Australian government imposes financial sanctions and travel bans on former GRU officer Sergey Dubinsky, Russian Armed Forces colonel Sergey Muchkaev, and Donbas separatist leader Leonid Kharchenko for their involvement in the incident, in which 38 Australians were killed. (AFP via TRT World) Gunmen open fire at a pool hall in Choloma, Honduras, killing at least 11 people and injuring several others. (El Heraldo) Politics and elections 2023 Sierra Leonean general election Sierra Leoneans head to the polls to elect a president and parliament. Incumbent president Julius Maada Bio is running for a second term in office. (AFP via Al Jazeera)

---

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

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

• Nominated by Ktin (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Solomon7968 (talk · give credit), Ktin (talk · give credit), Normantas Bataitis (talk · give credit) and Schwinnspeed (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: Indian 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)

• Support Added refs under 'Published works' where additional citations/cleanup was needed. Believe its in a suitable place for posting. Schwinnspeed (talk) 01:35, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support thanks to the work done by the updaters. Article quality looks good enough for ITNRD. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 01:38, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
• Posted—Bagumba (talk) 08:04, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

(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:

• Updated and nominated by Jeromi Mikhael (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: MP since 2009. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 17:14, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support Article quality looks good enough for ITNRD. Sourcing? Y Length? Y Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 01:40, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support Well written article, and well cited. TwistedAxe [contact] 12:52, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
• Posted Stephen 02:15, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

RD: Cédric Roussel

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

• Nominated by Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk · give credit)

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

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

• Weak support Could use some expansion on what he did outside of soccer, but it's whatever. Looks good enough either way. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 01:41, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
• Comment I placed three {{cn}} tags. Schwede66 20:17, 29 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)

Oppose - still receiving daily updates. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 14:58, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

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)

• Support This now seems to be just one of many ongoing armed conflicts. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:43, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

  That begs the question, should ITN just mention the page you linked as it's not possible to mention every one by name on the front page? Kcmastrpc (talk) 15:09, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

  I'd support that. Anarchyte (talk) 11:31, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

• Support. Article is receiving daily updates, yes, but not substantial ones. DarkSide830 (talk) 16:53, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support removal' Minimal significant new updates at 2023_Sudan_conflict#June. Spencer^T•C 15:06, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose Article seems to have had lots of activity over the last few days. Schwede66 20:14, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

(Posted) Wagner Group mutiny

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: 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:

• Nominated by Knightoftheswords281 (talk · give credit)
• Created by PLATEL (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Silveresc (talk · give credit), ElijahPepe (talk · give credit) and Super Dromaeosaurus (talk · give credit)

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)

• Wait the situation is too unclear for any blurb to be accurate. 217.180.228.188 (talk) 01:32, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
• 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)
• 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)

• 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)
• 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)

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)

• 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)
  • 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)
• 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)

Wait Definitely a major development but more details need to be known. Alrdead (talk) 02:16, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

• 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)
• 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)

  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)

  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)

  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)

  Ahem, you were saying? nableezy - 14:44, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

• 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)

  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)

So why does the blurb say "In the Russian invasion of Ukraine..."? HiLo48 (talk) 03:38, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

I keep saying the blurb need a rewrite. Nfitz (talk) 03:47, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

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)

• 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)
• 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)
• 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)
• 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)

  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)

• Leaning Support -the removal of Wagner from Bahkmut will have major consequences by itself. Schierbecker (talk) 04:02, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
• 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)
• 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)

  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)

• 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)
• Support blurb. The article should be improved though. --Bedivere (talk) 05:54, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
• 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)
• 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)

  Currently there are no clashes. Mellk (talk) 07:38, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

• Comment. Blurb is not even accurate. He is saying he will topple the military leadership, not the government.[20] 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)
• 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)

  I think that would be a better way to rephrase it. Mellk (talk) 08:10, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

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)

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)

• 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)
• Support - Historic event. Definitely for ITN.BabbaQ (talk) 12:21, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
• 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)

• 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)
• 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)

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)

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)

Even a coup of just the military would be newsworthy enough, methinks. starship.paint (exalt) 15:38, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

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)

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)

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)

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)

Possibly? We also cannot know how long it will be until this resolves. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:00, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

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)

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)

Also, if this is true [21] (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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

• 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)

  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)

  To be fair though, the US is a much more stable country than Russia is. See the Fragile State Index --Rockstone^{Send me a message!} 20:36, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

• Over already? Selfstudier (talk) 18:01, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

  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)

• 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)

  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)

• 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)

Actually the blurb needs to be changed. But this is still a major event. BabbaQ (talk) 18:23, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

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)

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)

• 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)
• 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)
• Do not pull Obviously relevant enough for a blurb. --Bedivere (talk) 18:40, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
• 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)
• Post-posting support. Huge development and definitely not going away within the next day or so. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 19:18, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
• 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)
• Oppose Pull - we already posted what is the largest story in the world at the moment. Why would we pull it? --Rockstone^{Send me a message!} 20:33, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
• 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)
• 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)

• 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)
• 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)
• 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)
• 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)

  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)

• 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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

Change blurb Paradise Chronicle (talk) 11:49, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

• 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)
• 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)
• 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)

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:

• Nominated by Knightoftheswords281 (talk · give credit)
• Created by Dying (talk · give credit)
• Updated by ‎Family27390 (talk · give credit)

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)

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)

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)

• 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)
• 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)
• Oppose. Fails WP:GNG and WP:EVENTCRIT. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 15:56, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
  • Thebiguglyalien These sorts of comments/votes are on the threshold of WP:POINT. Please test your interpretation of those policies by nominating the article for deletion. ITN is not a forum for debating an article's notability. Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 22:34, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

    It is not WP:POINTy to cite relevant policies and guidelines in a discussion. That's what you're supposed to do literally everywhere else on Wikipedia. What would be pointy is nominating an article for deletion because I oppose posting it. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 22:37, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

    I think we're beyond WP:POINT and approaching WP:IDHT, frankly. Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 22:58, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

    Again, you advocated for the exact opposite when WaltCip (talk · contribs) stated the exact same thing. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 01:34, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

    I assume you're talking about my comment starting with Just a few things to note? We disagreed on what warrants an AfD nomination. I entirely agree with his statement that nominating an article for AfD during the ITN discussion would be disruptive, which is why I've never done that, even if I personally believe that the article is non-notable. I try to avoid AfD as a "solution" in general, preferring to discuss issues at the Village Pump or at WT:ITN so a long term solution can be found. And both of those venues have generally turned up agreement that there is an issue to be solved here, otherwise I wouldn't give it any further thought. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 01:56, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose on quality, needs expansion. - Indefensible (talk) 02:28, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support on principle, weak oppose on quality The article is close, but it needs a little bit of expansion. NorthernFalcon (talk) 18:57, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose It's barely more than a stub. Schwede66 20:12, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

References

Nominators often include links to external websites and other references in discussions on this page. It is usually best to provide such links using the inline URL syntax [http://example.com] rather than using <ref></ref> tags, because that keeps all the relevant information in the same place as the nomination without having to jump to this section, and facilitates the archiving process.

For the times when <ref></ref> tags are being used, here are their contents: