Jump to content

Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 43: Line 43:


:'''Oppose blurb''' old man dies. [[User:JM2023|JM]] ([[User talk:JM2023|talk]]) 16:23, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
:'''Oppose blurb''' old man dies. [[User:JM2023|JM]] ([[User talk:JM2023|talk]]) 16:23, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
:* Technically true [[User:Iamstillqw3rty|'''<span style="color:#ff6ae4">q</span><span style="color:#dc79e9">w</span><span style="color:#b987ef">3</span><span style="color:#9696f4">r</span><span style="color:#73a4fa">t</span><span style="color:#50b3ff">y</span>''']] 17:45, 6 January 2024 (UTC)


==== RD: Joseph Lelyveld ====
==== RD: Joseph Lelyveld ====

Revision as of 17:46, 6 January 2024

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.

Boeing Starliner launch
Boeing Starliner launch

Glossary

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

All articles linked in the ITN template must pass our standards of review. They should be up-to-date, demonstrate relevance via good sourcing and have at least an acceptable quality.

Nomination steps

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

The better your article's quality, the better it covers the event and the wider its perceived significance (see WP:ITNSIGNIF for details), the better your chances of getting the blurb posted.

Purge this page to update the cache

Headers

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

Voicing an opinion on an item

Format your comment to contain "support" or "oppose", and include a rationale for your choice. In particular, address the notability of the event, the quality of the article, and whether it has been updated.

Please do...

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

Please do not...

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

Suggesting updates

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

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

Archives

January 6

Armed conflicts and attacks

Politics and elections


January 5

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections


RD/Blurb: Mário Zagallo

Article: Mário Zagallo (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  Brazilian footballer, coordinator and manager Mário Zagallo, who won a record four FIFA World Cups, dies at the age of 92. (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

World Cup winner.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 10:30, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support blurb as he was definitely a football legend and one of the most influential people in the history of the sport. He won a record four World Cups both as a player and manager, he managed the Brazilian squad to win the 1970 World Cup, which is considered the most dominant team ever, and he played a decisive role in reviving Brazilian dominance in the 1990s and early 2000s. Furthermore, his death receives front-page coverage with extensive obituaries.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 11:35, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb once ready per Kiril. - CDE34RFV (talk) 11:40, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb Article is a bit thin but big enough. Needs some work to get up to the required standard. Personally I don't see him as a big enough name for the blurb. Nigej (talk) 11:51, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • On the fence. I feel like if anyone led England to four world cup wins, they'd be blutbed before I'd even finished my apple crumble with custard. Alf Ramsey won one, and while he was pre-Wikipedia, I can't imagine we'd have not blurbed him. But maybe Brazil winning is more of a run of the mill thing, they're expected to win it. And don't want to open the floodgates too much. Quality needs sorting anyway.  — Amakuru (talk) 12:23, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb This article is way too short if we're supposed to consider him one of the best players or managers in the world. I would expect a significant amount of legacy and the like to be discussed, in addition to a more lengthy bio. Oppose RD at this time as I see unsourced paragraphs in it. --Masem (t) 15:14, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb The proposed blurb is vague/misleading and unsourced. A casual observer might assume that he "won" four World Cups as a player, however he only played in two of those wins. The article claims that the fourth "win" was as an "Assistant Manager", whatever that means. (If someone is a waterboy for a team that wins four world cups, does that count as "winning" four world cups?) Furthermore, the claim that he was assistant manager in 1994 is unsourced. The claim that "winning four world cups" is a record is also unsourced. Separate to all of the above, I don't think this person is sufficiently significant to warrant a blurb. He's not Pelé or Maradona or Madonna. Chrisclear (talk) 16:09, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are plenty of reliable sources saying that he won four World Cups. See this as an example.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 16:19, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • That source was not in the article when I read it before posting my comment above. And at the time of writing this comment, the 1994 "assistant manager" claim is still unsourced. Chrisclear (talk) 16:43, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • If something is not in the article, it doesn’t mean it’s not true.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 17:02, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It may be true, but if you want this as a blurbed RD, the article better be of the quality needed to show that. When nominating an RD for a blurb, simple hand-waving "oh, this is important" without reflection in the article won't cut it. Masem (t) 17:24, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose blurb old man dies. JM (talk) 16:23, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Technically true qw3rty 17:45, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Joseph Lelyveld

Article: Joseph Lelyveld (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NY Times
Credits:

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

The executive editor of The New York Times from 1994 to 2001. Pulitzer Prize winner. Thriley (talk) 07:46, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Laukkai

Article: Battle of Laukkai (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Anti-junta forces capture Laukkai, the capital of the Kokang Self-Administered Zone in northeastern Myanmar, during the Myanmar civil war. (Post)
News source(s): AP, The Guardian
Credits:

Recent development of the completed capture, new article I created (~27000 chars). I expect more updates/changes as the situation/aftermath comes out on reliable sources and gets confirmed. First time, so apologies if new articles don't meet ITN standards. EmeraldRange (talk/contribs) 05:28, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose This is already covered in ongoing. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 07:00, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose covered by ongoing Setarip (talk) 10:19, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose ongoing JM (talk) 16:25, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Derek Draper

Article: Derek Draper (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC, The Guardian
Credits:

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

147.192.103.42 (talk) 16:23, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support One CN tag that needs attention, but overall the article is in good shape. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:16, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: David Soul

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

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

Article may need some editing, but David Soul was best known as Hutch on Starsky and Hutch on TV, and one of the rare actors with a Billboard number one with Don't Give Up on Us, in 1977. TheCorriynial (talk) 15:37, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ongoing: 2024 Sea of Japan earthquake aftermath

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: 2024 Sea of Japan earthquake (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
News source(s): CNA AP
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Earthquake aftermath is still receiving local and international coverage. Death toll is being updated at least once or twice a day; the same going on for the number of missing. Search and rescue for the very high number of people missing in proportion to confirmed deaths is still ongoing. People are still being rescued and death toll expected to rise further. Dora the Axe-plorer (explore) 11:32, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, the earthquake isn’t ongoing and there’ll always be a slow increase in casualties as the clean up happens. Stephen 12:07, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support – The earthquake rolled off so suddenly, while the article is still actively being updated every day. A very reasonable ongoing request, though it would be an extremely short one. I expect the edits will have slowed down a lot in just a week from now. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 12:09, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Barring extraordinary conditions, we usually do not have natural disasters or the long tail of recovery and restoration in ongoing. The Japan quake clearly was notable but it was far from a catastrophe that it could have been for a quake that size, and only a few hundred missing is not a scale that would be considered necessary to keep track of. --Masem (t) 12:39, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - the ongoing rescue efforts are quite significant with both the death toll and missing account rising by the day. The same logic can basically be applied with the 2023 Turkey-Syria earthquake. Moctiwiki (talk) 13:14, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That earthquake had tolls in the 100,000s, where the Japan quake at most will come out to around 1000, most of those injured. Very significant difference. Masem (t) 13:27, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I don't think this is suitable for ongoing. The earthquake itself is not ongoing and daily updates about the death toll aren't enough. Maybe if this was one of the major earthquakes, like Turkey-Syria last year or Japan in 2011, it would be on a different level. Johndavies837 (talk) 13:29, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The earthquake isn't ongoing and although it might be significant, it is not usual for one to post such in Ongoing. Editor 5426387 (talk) 14:38, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per above. An item shouldn't be ongoing if it isn't currently occurring. And yes, the aftermath is, but the aftermath of any event comes after it ends. DarkSide830 (talk) 22:01, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per all above. _-_Alsor (talk) 22:22, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above JM (talk) 23:27, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The earthquake was already posted. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 02:13, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

January 4

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

Politics and elections


RD: Glynis Johns

Article: Glynis Johns (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ABC7
Credits:

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

Article seems in good shape. Connormah (talk) 19:26, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Support very good article. Setarip (talk) 20:16, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have added citations for all the entries in this table. Aoba47 (talk) 01:51, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Up to standard and well-written too. Nigej (talk) 10:14, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - meets our standards Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 10:35, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Glynis Johns § Filmography and discography has no citations, but a cursory random sample shows the items sourced in the page's earlier prose. While the section is a summary of the main article Glynis Johns filmography and discography, WP:CIRCULAR says: Do not use articles from Wikipedia (whether English Wikipedia or Wikipedias in other languages) as sources...Content from a Wikipedia article is not considered reliable unless it is backed up by citing reliable sources. Confirm that these sources support the content, then use them directly I have no opinion on posting this or not.—Bagumba (talk) 13:53, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Jeffrey Epstein's associates list

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Proposed image
Article: Jeffrey Epstein's associates list (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Hundreds of pages of unsealed documents containing the names of 187 people connected to sex-trafficker Jeffrey Epstein (pictured) are revealed. (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian - The Independent - El Pais - CNN - NYT
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Major news across the world (with even some international coverage being made as seen in the sources section above). Let me remind y'all that this has verifiably occurred - documents were published that included the names of individuals - WP:BLP only applies in accusing anyone of anything for a supposed crime that they didn't commit, which hasn't happened yet. — Knightoftheswords 01:57, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait, Leaning Support, Event is recent and there hasn't been any updates/reactions and I would wait until there are further responses globally before posting. Article could also be expanded on as it's only start-class, I would also really like to see this article expanded on with reactions and developments from people related to this event. ~~mAyLiNgOeEd (Talk to me!) (My contributions to Wikipedia📜) 02:13, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Oppose As the sources on this have clearly stated, this is only people that have had some type of connection to Epstein, and there are some that are not being investigated with any part of Epstein's crimes. While we can document the list, we should be aware that there's going to be a flurry of news of people on this list trying to distance themselves from it, and thus we should keep BLPCRIME in mind, since no one yet has been convicted or arrested on these charges. --Masem (t) 02:27, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    What charges? All we're saying is Michael Jackson is somewhat connected to the guy. That's not illegal. It's also not that important. Certainly could get "messy", among the living. Maybe living royalty and presidents, too, but they're used to it. Tough call. Strong Neutral. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:43, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It's not about whether any of these people have done illegal actions, or maybe none are just connected to Epstein, but it is about that as an encyclopedia, we should not engage in gossipmongering particularly when there may be potential crimes involved. Again, we can document the list, but we should not be so over the moon about it as to make it an ITN item, because that feeds this gossipmongering aspect. Masem (t) 02:51, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Fair enough. For the record, I in no way meant to suggest Michael Jackson was ever connected to underage girls. Not through Epstein or anyone. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:58, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Masem, BLPCRIME, and BLPGOSSIP. Some people seem to think that this is a list of people who Epstein connected with underage girls. It is not. The incorrect implication is a major BLP issue. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:44, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Oppose good faith nom per Masem and Muboshgu. There are huge BLP issues here. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:52, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose What they said. It's (ultimately) a bunch of documents showing that a dead criminal knew high-profile people. It passes GNG based on immense coverage, but it's only news for gossip, not actual news. (And FWIW, our article is not of a standard for MP inclusion by a long shot) Kingsif (talk) 03:13, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on BLP concerns, and also on article quality. Natg 19 (talk) 04:04, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per above. The Kip 05:18, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait, tending towards support, per Maylingoed. Given the high-profile nature of some of the names, I think we should wait a bit to expand the article further. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 05:33, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Oppose This is not a client list or anything even close to that. The fact that a rich financier (who is now one of the most notorious criminals) had contact with high-profile people at some point in the past is not notable in itself or evidence of a link to Epstein's sex crimes. The documents also include hearsay, most of the accusations have been known for years and no one has been charged. Not suitable for ITN and I'm not even sure if it should have its own article, it should be merged with Epstein's article. Johndavies837 (talk) 05:44, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for concerns about BLP and GOSSIP; willing to reconsider if something more notable occures on the back of it though This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 08:08, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

January 3

Armed conflicts and attacks

Law and crime

Politics and elections


(Posted) 2024 PDC World Darts Championship

Proposed image
Article: 2024 PDC World Darts Championship (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In darts, Luke Humphries (pictured) wins the PDC World Championship. (Post)
News source(s): BBC The Guardian
Credits:

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

ITNR article, updated to include final information. OZOO (t) (c) 22:50, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Conditional Support (once orange tags are removed) -- it appears this is posted every year; some sections may need additional refs Kcmastrpc (talk) 22:59, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    it appears this is posted every year... @Kcmastrpc: It's an WP:ITNR item, so posting is a given once consensus is that quality is met. —Bagumba (talk) 03:53, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality apart from the citation needed tags listed on there, the semi-final and particularly the final sections need more sources to verify all content. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:52, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Quality now seems fine - there are referenced prose summaries of every round, including three paragraphs on the final. The text is jargon-heavy but I think it's good enough to post. Modest Genius talk 15:00, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality and principle per above on point 1 but also I really don't think darts is a sport with enough notability for front page This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 21:57, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Orbitalbuzzsaw: If you want darts off WP:ITNR, take it to WT:ITN, not here. BangJan1999 17:26, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Quality is there and it is covered by WP:ITNR. Arguments about whether darts articles are suitable is a discussion for another place. Nigej (talk) 09:52, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Stephen 10:14, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment mentioned on Errors also, but the image of Humphries is low quality. Is there a different picture of him that we can use? Or should we just use a different picture for ITN? Natg 19 (talk) 20:42, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Tetris broken

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Proposed image
Articles: Tetris (talk · history · tag) and Tetris (NES video game) (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The videogame Tetris (pictured) is broken by a human for the first time, when they reached level 157 (Post)
News source(s): BBC, IGN, NBC, NYT
Credits:
Article updated
I can't see an update for this yet and I suppose some authentication may be required. But the mainstream media seem to be taking it seriously. Andrew🐉(talk) 18:57, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Updates have been made to the NES article and I've added these details. This seems to be the version used for the Classic Tetris World Championship and so has some credence as a recognised format. Andrew🐉(talk) 21:29, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, I don't think it's really ITN worthy, especially because it is only the NES version of tetris. Also, article doesn't appear to have this in it. Vetrenarisisum (talk) 19:18, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - This specifically relates to Tetris (NES video game) and not to Tetris as a whole. This seems to be receiving widespread media attention, although saying it was "broken for the first time" is an unusual way to word the blurb. No opinion on whether or not this is ITN worthy. Probably makes for a better video game related ITN blurb than whatever industry backpatting awards usually show up. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 19:19, 3 January 2024 (UTC)HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 19:22, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • As I understand it, there's no in-game endpoint and so the achievement is pushing the game to the point that the software can't cope any more. The feat seems fairly well understood but has only been achieved by AI previously. Andrew🐉(talk) 19:28, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

*Wait until article is updated, Leaning Support: This story will likely further develop, Article needs to be updated to accommodate this event. This is notable as Tetris is a very popular game worldwide, not to mention that it took 34 years until someone has beaten it. ~~mAyLiNgOeEd (Talk to me!)

  • Oppose More trivia than anything else. ChaotıċEnby(t · c) 19:23, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per both Enby and Vetrenarisisum. DarkSide830 (talk) 19:41, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Suggestions "Videogame" should be two words, "broken" should be "beaten", "they" should be "he", "reached" should be "reaches" and the picture should be an NES screenshot. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:45, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose absolutely not. Natg 19 (talk) 19:48, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per above. It was just one version of Tetris, and more to do with a coding glitch than anything else. I think the media are kind of getting the wrong end of the stick here. Not ITN-worthy.  — Amakuru (talk) 20:08, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose This seems to be moreso a technical limitation of the 8-bit NES. 20:10, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
  • Oppose while I'd want to see more video game stories on the main page, thus is just a technicality due to limitations of the NES hardware as others have pointed out. --Masem (t) 21:10, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Tetris is my favorite game, but this is way too trivial for ITN. (And as others have said, is only relevant to one version and due to a glitch.) Funcrunch (talk) 21:20, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose A teenager "beating" a 40 year old game by using a technical limitation is not news qw3rty 21:22, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • The fact that a teenager is playing a 40-year-old game seems remarkable in itself. How many other classics have such a timeless following? Andrew🐉(talk) 21:32, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Posted) Kerman bombings

Article: Kerman bombings (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ 103 people are killed in bombings in Kerman, Iran, during a ceremony commemorating the assassination of Qasem Soleimani. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Over 103 people are killed and dozens more injured in bombings in Kerman, Iran, during a ceremony commemorating the assassination of Qasem Soleimani.
Alternative blurb II: ​ In Iran, Islamic State kill 84 people in a double bombing in Kerman.
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

Article updated

Major bombing, believed to be a terrorist attack. Current death count of 73 103, at least 150 injured. Improvements to the blurb are welcome. ChaotıċEnby(t · c) 13:32, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support upon article expansion. One of the deadliest attacks in Iran in decades. 69.156.166.201 (talk) 13:57, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Very notable due to large casualties, unusual for Iran and one of the most deadly attacks in Iran in recent times. Editor 5426387 (talk) 14:14, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Article could be expanded slightly more but apart from that, it's very notable due to the high death toll. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 14:26, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, Very notable event, deadly bombing that happened in Iran. Could wait a bit longer before posting to monitor any recent developments. ~~mAyLiNgOeEd (Talk to me!) (My contributions to Wikipedia📜) 14:31, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Big attack on Iran. Seems ready for posting.BabbaQ (talk) 14:38, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Support But it says at least 103 people killed, and the blurb says 73. Might have to wait for correct casualties or change blurb. Setarip (talk) 14:45, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, updated! ChaotıċEnby(t · c) 14:48, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support It is a notable event but wait until it is clear whether this is a terrorist attack or not , even though deputy governor said so , wait for ministry of interior to say so. Harvici 14:45, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support but suggest waiting a few more hours for details to emerge and settle down before posting. Article is sufficiently sourced. — Masem (t) 15:01, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Due to impact, update hook when motives are known. Bremps... 15:03, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per above ❤HistoryTheorist❤ 15:09, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait/Support Article is still coalescing information. I assume it'll be ready in a few hours. Kcmastrpc (talk) 15:12, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Posted. El_C 15:17, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Not sure how notable or true this is but i am seeing news articles suggesting this was done by Israel, so the question will arise over whether this deserves its own blurb or should just be treated as part of the Israel Hamas war ongoing. Not sure if I have a position on the matter, and I certainly don't care to contribute to a discussion on it, other than to bring it to y'all's attention. QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 15:38, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That has no bearing on it being worthy of a blurb. El_C 15:43, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Death count increased to 211+ (source) ChaotıċEnby(t · c) 19:36, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Chaotic Enby: i24 is not a good enough source to base that claim on—even hours later now, gold-standard news outlets are still reporting that there were "at least 103". Ed [talk] [OMT] 22:37, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Probably worth wikilinking "assassination" to Assassination of Qasem Soleimani, it's an impressive-looking article. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 08:47, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Agree with this. ChaotıċEnby(t · c) 20:28, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Added Stephen 23:08, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Daesh has claimed responsibility and nobody's disputed it; should we add that to the blurb? The Kip 22:56, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that's very important. I've written alt2 to include that. Mentioning the ceremony takes up a lot of space & the fact that the bombings were committed by IS is very important, especially because there has been a lot of speculation as well as false accusations. X2023X (talk) 00:16, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ISIS mention  Done. El_C 09:02, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just a suggestion - the blurb now reads as if Daesh claiming responsibility is the story, rather than the bombings themselves. My personal suggestion would be something like:
"In Iran, at least 84 people are killed by an Islamic State bombing during a ceremony commemorating the assassination of Qasem Soleimani."
The Kip 09:42, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed and  Done. El_C 10:19, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

January 2

Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime


RD: Matisyahu Salomon

Article: Matisyahu Salomon (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://hamodia.com/2024/01/02/bde-harav-matisyahu-chaim-salomon/ https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/general/2250855/baruch-dayan-haemes-bmg-mashgiach-rav-mattisyahu-salomon-ztl.html
Credits:
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

One of the world's foremost mashgiach ruchanis operating out of the largest yeshiva in the western hemisphere. StonyBrook babble 22:39, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Citations look good and article seems balanced 68.192.102.58 (talk) 00:05, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Claudine Gay

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: Claudine Gay (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Claudine Gay, the first black female President of Harvard University resigns amid allegations of anti-semitism and plagiarism. (Post)
News source(s): https://apnews.com/article/harvard-president-plagiarism-claudine-gay-3b048da1f2ee17b5edec3680b5828e8f
Credits:

Article updated
Prestigious university president who was appointed by the university with much fanfare resigns after being accused of anti-semitism and plagiarism. Making international headline news, shortest tenure in the role in the nearly 400 year history of the school 24.125.98.89 (talk) 12:09, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with you suggestion in spirit, but please moderate your language, particularly insofar as it cannot be verified with sources compliant with WP:BLP FortunateSons (talk) 12:19, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
fixed --24.125.98.89 (talk) 12:20, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Looks a lot better, thank you FortunateSons (talk) 12:24, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
who? this is not worthy of itn, shitty ass blurb gtfo 2601:58A:8E7E:C300:1411:DF33:5D74:9A03 (talk) 17:48, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, tempest in a teapot, university presidents are nothin' but cheerleaders and fundraisers, and I don't see how somebody getting fired is ITN-level material. Abductive (reasoning) 12:31, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support significant media attention, political and academic backlash, and it is reported by many news sites, including many national and international reliable sources. FortunateSons (talk) 12:39, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, just a university, not a geopolitical authority or anything. Small impact. QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 13:01, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree, it is one of the best ranked universities in the world. FortunateSons (talk) 13:08, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Technically, tied to the situation in the Gaza strip, but also typically we would not post the resignation or retirement or other departure of the top person in a company or institution, unless there were serious ramifications that would come with that. --Masem (t) 13:13, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose trivial. _-_Alsor (talk) 13:40, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - National story with little or zero impact outside its own jurisdiction.BabbaQ (talk) 14:41, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I was reading the instructions above Wikipedia:ITNCDONT and it says "Oppose an item just because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one." so I guess your comment is invalid. --24.125.98.89 (talk) 15:14, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The comment mentioned the jurisdiction, not the entire US. You can't just decide that replies opposing your proposal are invalid, that's bad form. ChaotıċEnby(t · c) 15:37, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support We don't know what the ramifications are going to be, and any speculation here within is pure WP:CRYSTAL. This story is making headlines worldwide and is currently the subject of many emerging editorials and opinion pieces. Kcmastrpc (talk) 14:45, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • ITN does not consider whether the story us headline news or not or widely it is being reported. And if there are no clear immediate ramifications reported as part of the story, then it is CRYSTAL to suggest there will be any. — Masem (t) 17:00, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Someone gets fired at a prestigious university, not ITN-worthy. ChaotıċEnby(t · c) 15:35, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose this unworthy event. Not important at all for the world. Setarip (talk) 16:32, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

RD: Zvi Zamir

Article: Zvi Zamir (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Times of Israel
Credits:
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Former director of Mossad. 240D:1A:4B5:2800:51E3:903B:140B:3B5E (talk) 10:15, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Sartaj Aziz

Article: Sartaj Aziz (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Business Recorder
Credits:

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

Former finance minister of Pakistan, orange tag to fix but that should be doable. ChaotıċEnby(t · c) 17:57, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Ken Bowman

Article: Ken Bowman (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [1]
Credits:

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

– Muboshgu (talk) 17:30, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose We dont even know whether or not he died in 2024 Setarip (talk) 19:00, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Setarip, his death was reported today. Irrelevant of what day it was, this is eligible. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:01, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Apparently he died on Dec 27. But Muboshgu is right. His death was announced today, thus this is RD eligible. Natg 19 (talk) 01:37, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted as RD) RD/blurb?: Saleh al-Arouri

Article: Saleh al-Arouri (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  In Beirut, Lebanon, senior Hamas leader Saleh al-Arouri is assassinated by an Israeli airstrike (Post)
News source(s): [2]
Credits:

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

Was a leader in Hamas. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:15, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Article quality is pretty good. Setarip (talk) 18:58, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Setarip: Thoughts on it being a blurb? --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 17:22, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Support Blurb An important figure from Hamas, his assassination article is good quality as well. Setarip (talk) 17:44, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can we blurb it? We blurbed assassination of ISIS leader. And it is the first major figure from Hamas who was taken out by Israel. Kirill C1 (talk) 23:26, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was mulling with the idea of a blurb as well. We did blurb Qasem Soleimani's death. Plus the Assassination of Saleh al-Arouri article doesn't look that bad as well. I'd support blurb TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 07:42, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Blurb. Qasem Soleimani was the head of the IRGC while Saleh is merely the second-in-command of Hamas's political branch, which relatively speaking isn't that significant. It was a similar deal with ISIS since Kirili CT brought it up; we posted when Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi was killed, but not when his many deputies were drone striked. When the actual head gets assassinated, then it should be posted Mount Patagonia (talkcontributions) 09:56, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support on blurbing Assassination of Saleh al-Arouri. It's an appropriate level of detail for an ITN feature, though not the most impressive subject as per Mount Patagonia above. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 10:01, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb. Important figure within Hamas - afterall he was the Deputy Chairman of the Political Bureau, and the founding commander of one Hamas' military wing. He is more than just the "second in command" of Hamas. TwistedAxe [contact] 15:10, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb not a key leader of Hamas, no practical effect on the Gaza strip conflict. --Masem (t)
  • Oppose blurb on account of not knowing what actual effect al-Arouri's death with have on the conflict. DarkSide830 (talk) 17:45, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb per Masem/Mount Patagonia. The Kip 19:12, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb. Not just the deputy political leader of Hamas, but a founder of its military wing. —M3ATH (See · Say) 07:39, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Qaiser Rashid Khan

Article: Qaiser Rashid Khan (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Jang
Credits:

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

Ainty Painty (talk) 16:03, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose Article is a stub and has not been updated to reflect his death. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 18:46, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Now updated. Ainty Painty (talk) 03:19, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Carmen Valero

Article: Carmen Valero (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): EFE, El País, El Periódico, Diario AS, Marca, Relevo
Credits:

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

Valero became the first woman to ever represent Spain at the Summer Olympics in 1976, and won two consecutive IAAF World Cross Country Championships in 1976 and 1977. Oltrepier (talk) 11:58, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I'm currently working on the article to "de-stub" it and bring it to a good level. Oltrepier (talk) 14:44, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support I'll be damned. Great job at expanding the article. Looks solid. Gonna be bold and marking it as ready. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 20:36, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Article looks great. Congrats for the job Oltrepier. _-_Alsor (talk) 08:51, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • PostedBagumba (talk) 15:36, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Japan Airlines Flight 516

Proposed image
Article: Japan Airlines Flight 516 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Five people are killed after Japan Airlines Flight 516 (aircraft involved pictured) collides with a Japan Coast Guard aircraft while landing at Tokyo's Haneda Airport. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ A Japan Airlines Airbus A350 (aircraft pictured) collides with a Japan Coast Guard aircraft at Japan's Haneda Airport, resulting in the death of five people on board the JCG aircraft.
Alternative blurb II: ​ At Tokyo's Haneda Airport, Japan Airlines Flight 516, (aircraft involved pictured) carrying 367 passengers collides with a Japan Coast Guard aircraft, killing 5 people and leaving several injured.
Alternative blurb III: Japan Airlines Flight 516 (aircraft involved pictured) collides with a Japan Coast Guard aircraft while landing at Tokyo's Haneda Airport. Five out of six people are killed on board the JCG aircraft.
News source(s): CNN, BBC
Credits:

A Japan Airlines Airbus A350 aircraft collided with a Japan Coast Guard Dash 8 aircraft while landing at Tokyo Haneda Airport. Everyone on the A350 survived (some are injured), while 5 out of 6 people on the Coast Guard plane died. Both planes are reportedly destroyed and this is JAL's first fatal accident since 1985. It was also widely reported by almost every major news sources. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 10:09, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose on quality concerns. We still need a flight/accident section. Otherwise I’m feeling OK for support. S5A-0043Talk 10:14, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, since reports suggest a collosion with a SDF plane, I say we wait until that’s confirmed before we go ahead with ITN. S5A-0043Talk 10:22, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for now The article will be ready to go on In The News when it is a bit more fleshed out. Bremps... 10:24, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: If we eventually find significant consensus to post the blurb, I'd suggest to edit the final part to avoid confusion: according to the latest reports, all of the passengers and staff members had been evacuated before the plane caught fire, whereas the only casualties were registered within the crew of the Japan Coast Guard aircraft. Oltrepier (talk) 11:46, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose It is now known that all of the passanger on the larger plane survived - it is the 5-to-6 crew of the coast guard plane that are dead or yet accounted for. This could have been a lot worse but in terms of what actually happened it was a close call. --Masem (t) 13:18, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support hull loss of a large passenger jet of a major airline makes this notable. 2A02:908:676:E640:A968:92D3:DBA4:F952 (talk) 13:39, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - runway/mid-air collision, double hull loss. Article in good enough state to post. Mjroots (talk) 13:42, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Yes, it could have been a lot worse but thankfully it wasn't. However, it is worldwide news top story. Collision involving a full passenger airline leading to fatalities and two complete hull loss. -- KTC (talk) 13:59, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support as per above, but I stand on my previous comment: we need to avoid confusion in the blurb. Oltrepier (talk) 14:08, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Oltrepier, I've rewritten Alt Blurb and made Alt Blurb III mention the deaths are specifically from the JCG aircraft. How about that? 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 14:45, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Midori No Sora: That's better, well done! Oltrepier (talk) 15:04, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Top news around the world, most significant aviation accident in Japan for nearly a decade, most significant aviation incident involving a civilian wide-body airliner since at least 2022. This is unquestionably notable and the article is in good enough shape for posting. Thryduulf (talk) 14:17, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support - WP:MINIMUMDEATHS is not a policy. This is getting a massive amount of coverage. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 15:14, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on notability: Historic accident for Japan Airlines, currently making international headlines globally. However, article could be significantly improved on before posting. ~~mAyLiNgOeEd (Talk to me!) (My contributions to Wikipedia📜)
    • What specifically do you think could be improved? Is there something in particular that is missing? Thryduulf (talk) 16:20, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: Per above, a serious aviation incident that surpasses the bar for inclusion on ITN. There is no death count requirement here. Kcmastrpc (talk) 16:24, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted. I tweaked alt 3 to try to avoid repetition. Please feel free to improve it further. Ed [talk] [OMT] 17:02, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I hate to be nitpicky but there was an update to the picture of JA13XJ (the Japan Airlines aircraft involved in the crash) on the article page, may i suggest to use this here aswell? TrainSimFan (talk) 17:20, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm questioning if that photo was acceptable to upload here. That photo was taken from the "Jetphotos" website and wonder if it's copyrighted or not. From what I searched, Jetphotos does not license any of the the aircraft images under the Creative Commons policy. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 17:27, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That photo is indeed a copyright violation, I've nominated it for speedy deletion on Commons. Someone else beat me to removing it from the article. Thryduulf (talk) 18:15, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Stabbing of Lee Jae-myung

Proposed image
Article: Stabbing of Lee Jae-myung (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ South Korean opposition leader Lee Jae-myung is stabbed in Busan. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Lee Jae-myung, the leader of the South Korean opposition, is stabbed in Busan.
Alternative blurb II: Lee Jae-myung, the leader of the South Korean opposition, is stabbed in Busan, but survives the attack.
Alternative blurb III: Lee Jae-myung, the leader of the South Korean opposition, is hospitalized following a stabbing attack in Busan
News source(s): New York Times
Credits:

Bremps... 03:45, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Wait, leaning towards oppose — Reporting from The Chosun Ilbo suggests Lee will survive the attack. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 03:48, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @ElijahPepe: The article has been expanded with the info available. While it appears that Lee will survive the attack, I believe it's worth blurbing per Chrisclear and that this event is making headlines. Also an assassination attempt like this on a high-profile figure is rare (no matter if it's successful or not). TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 12:10, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Concur. Hard to imagine someone making this argument if something similar happened to Trump. Or even Ron DeSantis. Bremps... 12:14, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait as per elijahpepe. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 03:55, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @MtPenguinMonster: Thoughts now? Article has been expanded and it looks like Lee survived the attack. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 10:57, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Support. The article seems to be in good quality now, and we have the update. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 11:41, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This is the leader of the opposition party of a country, and the presumptive candidate in the next presidential election. Whether or not Lee Jae-Myung survives the attack (and I hope he does) is irrelevant. Presumably if Hillary Clinton had been stabbed in the neck in 2016, or Mitt Romney had been stabbed in the neck in 2012, those incidents would be overwhelmingly supported for a blurb by a large number of (American) editors. The only difference is that this incident took place in South Korea to a South Korean politician, and not in the US to an American. Chrisclear (talk) 06:22, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait, pending article expansion. Leaning support. Anarchyte (talk) 06:46, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Anarchyte: Expanded article with the current info available. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 10:55, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support, this is najor news. Kirill C1 (talk) 07:08, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support altblurb II (which ive added), it's certainly in the news but I think it's important to clarify that he survived the attack, which it looks like he's doing. Unknown-Tree🌲? (talk) 07:21, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It looks he will, but there's never any guarantees. We can put "hospitalized" or something similar that implies he is still being treated. Bremps... 08:57, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, though article needs expansion. Notable whether he survives or not. A major politician gets stabbed in the neck is big news. Natg 19 (talk) 07:48, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article is rather short and barebones. We're not really telling our readers much of anything. Perhaps wait until more is known. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 08:36, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Maplestrip: Expanded article with info available. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 11:37, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support A high-ranking political figure being, let's face it, the target of an assassination attempt is blurb worthy in my mind. Article is rather short, but I'm positive it'll be expanded once more info is known. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 10:27, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality the article is barely more than a stub. I imagine that in the next 12-24 hours more information will be known, and so this article can then be properly expanded to make it a front page-worthy article. Once that's done, consider this a support vote. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:30, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Joseph2302: Expanded article with the current info available. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 10:55, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Support now good expansion, thanks. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:11, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on notability and quality, article looks good enough now. AryKun (talk) 12:04, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - quality looks good enough. Notable. BabbaQ (talk) 13:08, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Quality and notability are both there to me. S5A-0043Talk 14:02, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Alternative blurb III quality is good enough to me Setarip (talk) 14:07, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

January 1

Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime


RD: Niklaus Wirth

Article: Niklaus Wirth (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): WinFuture, Bertrand Meyer tweet
Credits:

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

gobonobo + c 20:45, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Basdeo Panday

Article: Basdeo Panday (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ABC News
Credits:

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

Former Trinidad and Tobago PM. Ktin (talk) 09:01, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Frank Ryan

Article: Frank Ryan (American football) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [3]
Credits:

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

1960s American football player. Needs work. Natg 19 (talk) 01:30, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Israeli judicial reform struck down

Article: 2023 Israeli judicial reform (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Supreme Court of Israel strikes down a controversial judicial reform bill previously passed by the Knesset. (Post)
News source(s): (BBC News), (Times of Israel)
Credits:

Article updated

I can see arguments both for posting (sheer notoriety of the reform attempt and protests, was blurbed (I think?)/ongoing-d before) and against (short article update, internal political matter). Figured I'd float it here nonetheless. The Kip 23:04, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • If this is to be blurbed, I feel like it should succintly specify what made the bill so controversial in the first place. Does anyone here disagree? Kurtis (talk) 03:52, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • If this case really is that notable, it should have it's own article rather than just occupy one section in a different article. Edge3 (talk) 06:52, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support individually notable resolution of one of the biggest political/legal stories of the past year. DarkSide830 (talk) 17:48, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, the bill (and the large protests against it) have been extensively covered globally. Unknown-Tree🌲? (talk) 19:38, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The usual gridlock that you get when different branches of a government are dominated by opposing parties. As the judges' opinions were quite individual and varied and the overall result was close (8-7), this seems unlikely to settle the power struggle between the Knesset and the Court. Andrew🐉(talk) 21:04, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support with a better blurb While it may not change internal disputes in practice as much as would seem ITN-worthy, the fact that it got such global ongoing news coverage despite [everything else] makes it notable on public interest grounds. Also in the item's favour is that it's slightly less stark than death and disaster, which is all the box is at the moment (this is not a reason in itself, just a comment). As has been mentioned above, the blurb needs some context to convey this, or users could use it as precedent for nominating every internal bill decision. Kingsif (talk) 21:42, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Sidney M. Wolfe

Article: Sidney M. Wolfe (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Washington Post
Credits:

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

American physician and the co-founder and director of Public Citizen's Health Research Group, a consumer and health advocacy lobbying organization. Thriley (talk) 06:49, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose Orange-tagged for citation issues. The Kip 22:22, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Peter Magubane

Article: Peter Magubane (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NY Times
Credits:

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

South African photographer and anti-apartheid activist. Thriley (talk) 04:54, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose Some cn tags and lead could be expanded to reflect more of his work/how they had an impact. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 18:49, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ethiopia–Somaliland relations

Article: Ethiopia–Somaliland relations (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In East Africa, Ethiopia and the breakaway state of Somaliland announce an agreement allowing Ethiopia to use the port city of Berbera in exchange for eventual recognition of Somaliland. (Post)
News source(s): VOA - France24 - BBC - WaPo - The Guardian - Reuters
Credits:

Article needs updating

Nominator's comments: Major news in East Africa; Ethiopia will be the first country to recognize the Republic of Somaliland. This agreement also comes with Ethiopian usage of Somalilander ports, thus giving the country greater naval access, which is notable amidst a rise in tensions between Ethiopia and Eritrea. This will also likely affect Somali-Ethiopian relations as well and possibly trigger a domino affect regarding the recognition (Western countries don't like recognizing separatist countries in Africa since there is a policy of respecting colonial borders and so they usually delegate recognition first to African countries). — Knightoftheswords 22:17, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support – The first recognition of a country by a UN member state is huge news. DecafPotato (talk) 23:21, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait until formal recognition is granted, which is the bigger story here imo. For now, it’s just an agreement to do so, but assuming it happens the first formal recognition of a state by a UN member is front page-worthy. The Kip 23:37, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree with The Kip; let's wait until official recognition is granted, at which point I will support. If nothing else, it'll have pretty seismic ramifications for Ethiopian-Somali relations. Kurtis (talk) 01:15, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, Wait, Comment In theory, Ethiopia can now use the port of Berbera, not the whole port city. And other ports, too, along 20km of coastline. This could be way bigger for the state most of us already recognize as arguably landlocked than the one which still unquestionably sounds like a land of Somalia's. That's the thing, though. Could be big for both. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:10, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, major development for Ethiopian influence in the region, and down the line recognition for Somaliland. ChaotıċEnby(t · c) 02:11, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose This doesn't seem like a major change but a small step towards recognition of Somalia. Not the type of country-country relation we'd post. --Masem (t) 02:13, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It’s not recognition of Somalia (an already-recognized UN member state), it’s recognition of Somaliland (an as-yet-unrecognized breakaway state). The Kip 02:24, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I also don't think you fully grasp how many more countries a country can "have relations" with if granted access to even the surface of the world's interconnected oceans. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:34, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I think the whole Somaliland recognition thing buries the lead here. Yeah sure, this could lead to recognition of Somaliland eventually. Or it could not. We really have to wait and see with that. I think the bigger story here is that Ethiopia is getting direct unrestricted port access for the first time since Eritrean independence in the 1990s, completely bypassing the Port of Djibouti and its heavy fees. I think this carries major implications for the whole Horn of Africa region beyond the surface-level political aspect. Curbon7 (talk) 07:08, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Since Eritrea broke away, the landlocked status of Ethiopia has been a massive issue in the region. East Africa is becoming a geopolitical hotspot, this is a very notable development in that. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 15:11, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait until recognition, which would be a huge change as Ethiopia would be the first UN member to formally recognise the country; that's the main story here, not the port usage. Unknown-Tree🌲? (talk) 07:26, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Unknown-Tree, can you please elaborate on why you think Ethiopia getting port access is not a major aspect of this story? Curbon7 (talk) 07:59, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not ready – Significant, but the relations article is extremely barebones and only got a single-line update. If we had a few paragraphs on this agreement, then we'd have something good to show to our readers. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 08:39, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support - Pretty big news, this will have major effects on African geopolitics. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 15:10, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait - I would strongly support putting this up if formal recognition materializes as a result of this deal. Indeed, we need to wait and see whether the deal involves some sort of true sovereign lease (cf. Guantanamo Bay), which would be ITN-worthy in its own right, or is simply an agreement for Ethiopian participation in a port project and an overseas base, which would be more prosaic. --Varavour (talk) 21:35, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, already as is this development has been massive in relation to both Somaliland's external affairs, Ethiopia's trade and Ethiopia-Somalia relations, which in turn makes it very relevant to the entire Horn of Africa region. It's already geopolitically significant enough to blurb. Devonian Wombat (talk) 06:15, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait It's something that has not happened yet. When Somaliland actually does gain recognition from Ethiopia, then post. Bremps... 06:44, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose one sentence is not enough for ITN. JM (talk) 23:31, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) 2024 Japan earthquake

Article: 2024 Sea of Japan earthquake (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: An earthquake strikes Japan. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ A magnitude-7.5 earthquake strikes the Sea of Japan
News source(s): AlJazeera The Guardian BBC The Japan Times
Credits:

Two major Tsunami warnings issued. It is getting significant international coverage. PrinceofPunjab (talk) 09:32, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support - Biggest earthquake since Fukushima. Really bad news.s PrecariousWorlds (talk) 09:51, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait – No indication of significant impact yet besides tsunami warnings across the Japan Sea Dora the Axe-plorer (explore) 10:12, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait, leaning towards support This is already the headline of several news agencies around the world, but I think we should wait for further reports to get a clearer picture (with regards to the scale of this event). Vida0007 (talk) 10:17, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait We need reports about the impact of the Tsunamis first, before we can make any assessment of the importance of this event. Nigej (talk) 10:39, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support on notability. I've proposed an altblurb. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 11:17, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Lean support, wait for now Blurb is too general, altblurb could be worked on a bit more. Impact of earthquake and tsunami has not been fully accessed as of now, but is worth a post due to the significance. Tofusaurus (talk) 11:23, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait Casualty and damage reports seem to be nonexistent or relatively minor at the moment, and the tsunami has been relatively weak. While geologically interesting I would say we have to wait and see if any further reports of damage comes up - a 7.5 has less than 1% of the energy of the Fukushima quake, after all. Juxlos (talk) 12:02, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support - A 7.5 magnitude earthquake is considered a major earthquake. However, blurb is too general. Setarip (talk) 12:24, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support - One of the biggest news to possibly come out in 2024. Kampolama (talk) 12:52, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Quality is there, and while the number of fatalities and casualties are low for how big this was, it was unusual to have occurred in the Sea of Japan (rather than from the Pacific Ocean), where the country is not as well set up for tsunamis or the like. --Masem (t) 14:49, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Conditional support but wait until more info regarding fatalities and the like is received. qw3rty 15:55, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait/Oppose, obviously. Can we actually wait for impact reports to come in before we demand a blurb for a natural disaster be posted? And as of right now, we have all of three fatalities reported, so as things stand that;s a no from me. This probably will rise to a higher fatality level, but as things stand we should not be posting. DarkSide830 (talk) 17:41, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support regardless of whether this is a comparative blip or Fukushima II: SOJ Boogaloo; definitionally a major earthquake. — Knightoftheswords 18:36, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per above. Davey2116 (talk) 19:18, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support major earthquake, and ITN has been really slow over the holiday season as the oldest entry is from December 18th. (Unironically, that entry is an earthquake.) Kcmastrpc (talk) 19:26, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Good article on a natural disaster, in the news around the world, there is no "minimum death" requirement that needs to be met. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:28, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Congo elections

Proposed image
Article: 2023 Democratic Republic of the Congo general election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Félix Tshisekedi (pictured) is re-elected as President of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. (Post)
News source(s): Al Jazeera, BBC, The Economist, France24, NYT, Washington Post
Credits:

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

The election seems to have been significantly chaotic and disputed but such opposition is more democratic than none at all. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:05, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose on quality as the article is a long way off from front page-level. The Kip 08:12, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Significant improvements in article quality would be needed to make this front-page-worthy. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 11:19, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Article quality needs to be improved Setarip (talk) 16:02, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

BRICS Expansion

Article: BRICS (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates join BRICS. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates join BRICS. Argentina was invited to join BRICS, but declined.
News source(s): BBC The Economist
Credits:

BRICS expands on January 1st. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 06:49, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose Not significant and not in the news. That a hapless state like Argentina can't see any point in joining this overblown acronym seems quite telling. The article is a bloated and disorganised mess too. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:50, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    What are you talking about?Wait until,January 1 when it takes effect and besides ,this was extensively covered in the news when this was announced during the latest BRICS summit 5.193.27.221 (talk) 13:47, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Huh? It's being covered by several major news outlets, and I would consider the expansion of an intergovernmental organization by a factor of 2 pretty significant. qw3rty 15:32, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Just Andrew being contrarian. The Kip 06:45, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Being covered pretty heavily in the news, and is significant in and of itself. qw3rty 15:32, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Article is nowhere close to being ready to post. No comment yet on the significance, but the article must be improved first. --Masem (t) 16:02, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on significance, expansion of a major international organisation, no comment on article state. ChaotıċEnby(t · c) 17:23, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose what is in the news is Argentina not joining, which seems hardly notable. The quality of the article is also not there. 2A02:908:676:E640:7830:DBEE:B63:525E (talk) 18:06, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The others who are joining has been covered extensively before and was advised to post this on the 1st of January when this actually takes effect 2001:8F8:1473:923D:6862:3256:F94F:6E4E (talk) 08:04, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support If we can regularly post the expansion of NATO, then we should most definitely post the expansion of BRICS.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:33, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    NATO expansion has far greater geopolitical impact and receives far greater coverage. BilledMammal (talk) 06:48, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support due to how extensively it is being covered in the news Lukt64 (talk) 18:41, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment other than the participation in an annual summit, does this membership mean anything? BRICS does not have an equivalent to NATO's Article Five mutual defense pact. 217.180.228.138 (talk) 19:32, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • The bank is rather separate now as it has non-BRICS countries as members, such as Bangladesh, while Russia's participation is currently limited due to "sound banking principles". Andrew🐉(talk) 20:38, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • The bank is fully operated by BRICS, so it’s certainly an affiliated institution. It’s just that they allowed non-BRICS members to join.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 21:13, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, that bank is not operated by BRICS because BRICS doesn't seem to have a permanent staff or secretariat. The bank is a separate institution with its own staff while the BRICS countries are its main shareholders. So, BRICS seems to be modelled on the G7 and G20 which likewise started in an informal way and whose main focus is the summits which are organised by member countries in rotation. These associations are thus different in structure from institutions like the EU, UN and Commonwealth who do have a permanent staff and secretariat. Andrew🐉(talk) 21:52, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • It’s a separate institution, but it’s controlled by the BRICS countries, which have voting power and appoint its president on a rotational basis. UN organisations operate in the exactly same way. IMF Executive Board is not elected by the UN General Assembly, but it doesn’t mean the IMF is not a UN organisation.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 22:39, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on notability, oppose on quality per above. The Kip 06:44, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strongest possible support - As I promised 126 days ago. BRICS is a highly notable international organisation, especially in times like these. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 10:04, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality Very little in the article about the actual expansion. Nigej (talk) 10:44, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Setarip (talk) 16:01, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support – Though I also think we should consider a blurb that mentions Argentina's rejection of membership, as it seems to be a key part of this BRICS expansion. DecafPotato (talk) 21:29, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I've added an altblurb which mentions Argentina declining to join BRICS. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 00:18, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Whether a rejection of membership or declining to join, it seems clear to me that Argentina has no part in this BRICS expansion. The other five clearly do, for the exact opposite reason. Anyway, it doesn't need a new sentence and unique tense; adding , and Argentina declines. is enough, if anything must be said of the non-factor. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:01, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, not a serious organization. Abductive (reasoning) 06:36, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - A look at the article shows me that it needs work, as noted above, but that fact is not a deal-breaker, and that the BRICS expansion is clearly notable and In-the-News-worthy. Im OK with either blurb. Jusdafax (talk) 17:00, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose if anyone on this planet thinks that an organization where India and China have to work together to do anything will ever do anything, I have several bridges I'd like to sell them. AryKun (talk) 19:05, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Theoretically support, but oppose due to quality issues This seems important enough to post, but the article's quality isn't good enough to post it. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 23:32, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Steamboat Willie in the public domain

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: Steamboat Willie (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Steamboat Willie, the first appearance of Mickey Mouse, enters the public domain. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Steamboat Willie, the first appearance of Mickey Mouse, enters the public domain in the United States.
News source(s): The Guardian, CNN, AP
Credits:

Article needs updating

Obviously, this should not be posted until Jan 1 ticks over. The article does need sourcing improvement before it can be posted, but it does have a section dedicated to this copyright aspect, which has been one of those things that copyright experts have been anticipating for years and the fact Disney did not try to extend its copyright (though there's other protections around this). --Masem (t) 16:47, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Stand in line WP:TFP has been planning and working on this for some time and so should get first crack at it. Maybe ITN can blurb it after that. Andrew🐉(talk) 17:33, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • If TFP will be hosting this on Jan 1, then that absolutely makes sense to leave it there and not duplicate to ITN. — Masem (t) 20:27, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support once ready/once POTD is posted. I can't think of a film more historic and ground-breaking than this. The fact that Disney does not prevent this film from entering public domain is also pretty surprising, as normally, film studios try to keep their films copyrighted for as long as possible. Definitely an ITN event (also given that notable media talks about this) in my eyes. - CDE34RFV (talk) 17:37, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Let the POTD folks do it first. Afterwards, would be happy to support. qw3rty 18:23, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose This isn't "news" in the sense of what ITN posts. The update to the article in the copyright section is minimal. It is also unclear to me from that section whether or not Disney's use of Steamboat Willie as a logo is allowing them to extend copyright, or why they didn't try. POTD is perfect for this case (assuming it really does enter public domain). – Muboshgu (talk) 19:29, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • They remain to have the trademark on the Steamboat Willie version of Mickey, but they no longer have copyright after Jan. 1. This is very clear from the sources. — Masem (t) 20:26, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      I imagine I'm not the only person who is unclear on the difference between trademark and copyright, and SchroCat's point below further hardens my oppose. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:43, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. I think I’m right in saying that it’s not been in copyright in some other jurisdictions for a while, and it coming out in one territory is hardly news. - SchroCat (talk) 19:34, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose another "hook" news story. Every year a lot of stuff goes into the public domain in different countries. This specific example has been talked about a fair amount because of Disney's lobbying for the 1998 Copyright Term Extension Act. But it is not "news". 217.180.228.138 (talk) 20:56, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per all above. _-_Alsor (talk) 22:46, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose This isn't news. It's something that was always going to happen. HiLo48 (talk) 01:14, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    So are solar and lunar eclipses (which are ITNR) not newsworthy because it's something that was always going to happen. — Knightoftheswords 01:29, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Solar and lunar eclipses really aren't newsworthy, IMHO. HiLo48 (talk) 01:41, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Hear, hear. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:50, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Not news now, has been known for some time. We're already featuring it at POTD which is quite sufficient.  — Amakuru (talk) 02:14, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

December 31

Armed conflicts and attacks

Law and crime

Politics and elections


RD: Ana Ofelia Murguía

Article: Ana Ofelia Murguía (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times
Credits:

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

Mexican actress, best known for voicing Mamá Coco in Coco. --NoonIcarus (talk) 01:26, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Shecky Greene

Article: Shecky Greene (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Chicago Tribune
Credits:
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

American comedian. 240D:1A:4B5:2800:203B:1879:83D1:C29B (talk) 06:30, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose Decent chunk of unreferenced material and some poor sources as well. The Kip 07:07, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Support, sourcing has been cleaned up. The Kip 22:08, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Melissa Hoskins

Article: Melissa Hoskins (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-01-01/melissa-hoskins-rohan-dennis-crash-reaction/103276588
Credits:

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

Australian track and road racing cyclist, allegedly killed by her husband, Rohan Dennis, another Australian road racing cyclist. HiLo48 (talk) 03:37, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak oppose Results section needs more refs, but the rest of the article is in great shape. The Kip 07:02, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Benjamin Kiplagat

Article: Benjamin Kiplagat (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): AP
Credits:
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Ugandan olympian who was fatally stabbed today. — Knightoftheswords 21:01, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Blurb? Three times he represented Uganda on the world's greatest steeplechase stage, now he's stabbed to death in his brother's car while in Kenya. Who stabbed him? We don't know. Why was he in Kenya? We don't know. Did he not have his own car? Exactly. It's not much at the moment, informationwise. But investigationally, the game is clearly afoot (wait for it). Of course, I hear a certain subset of regulars out there, and yes, he was neither the next Nelson Mandela nor another Gordie Howe. Nobody's saying he was. Death itself is the end-of-year story here. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:24, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not Ready Article quality is quite poor. Oppose burb on merits. Subject's death is tragic but his significance is nowhere near the level that would justify a blurb. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:47, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Cale Yarborough

Article: Cale Yarborough (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times
Credits:

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

Longtime racing driver, particularly in NASCAR. Won three consecutive NASCAR Cup Series championships in the late 1970s, a feat that was seen as remarkable at the time. Cheers, and carpe diem! Nascar9919 (he/him • tc) 20:06, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support: It is one of the greats NASCAR drivers and a Hall of Famer in the sport Meganinja202 (talk) 02:19, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Needs work on citations.—Bagumba (talk) 02:38, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support:I see no issue with the article. Unless someone can be more definite than a vague "needs work on Citations", I say a person as notable as Yarborough definitely belongs on the front page. One section does only have one reference, but I don't know what other references they want for it. EEBuchanan (talk) 20:20, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Unless someone can be more definite than a vague 'needs work on Citations'... There's actual tags in the article.—Bagumba (talk) 08:14, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
THere were not when I was looking at it (some time before I actually made the comment). Someone has since added them, which is helpful.
EEBuchanan (talk) 11:29, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I added the tags by 02:37 1 Jan, before my "Needs work on citations" comment, which you quoted 18 hours later in your !vote at 20:20.—Bagumba (talk) 08:56, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Abdication of Margrethe II of Denmark

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.



Proposed image
Article: Margrethe II (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Margrethe II announces her upcoming abdication as Queen of Denmark on 14 January 2024. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Margrethe II (pictured) announces her upcoming abdication as Queen of Denmark on 14 January 2024 after 52 years of reigning.
Alternative blurb II: Margrethe II (pictured) announces her upcoming abdication as Queen of Denmark on 14 January 2024 after 52 years of reigning.
News source(s): NRK BBC
Credits:

Article updated
Abdication of a royal head of state. While the change itself (in two weeks) will also be newsworthy, the announcement was made today. ChaotıċEnby(t · c) 17:28, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Very historical event, and as far as I recall we usually do post royal abdications. The question is whether we post it now, or on 14 January 2024. I don't know what would be most correct. I have also changed the date format to be "14 January 2024" as this style is more common for international events. Gust Justice (talk) 17:48, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on article quality for the usual reason. Conditional on article improvement will support once the abdication becomes official. The succession is what we normally blurb. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:00, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Given how near the actual event will be, we can wait until that date, at which point a successor should be known. Add in the article quality issued discussed above. --Masem (t) 18:04, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Her successor is known since 1972. _-_Alsor (talk) 18:13, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support seems quite notable. 2A02:908:676:E640:7830:DBEE:B63:525E (talk) 18:07, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality, support on notability. Is a historic event for the country as it is also the first abdication of a Danish monarch since 1146. From a Queen who reigned for more than 50 years I look forward to reading a longer and more detailed article. In addition, there are unsourced paras and lines. I don't think we will have to wait until 14 January, because on that day we can blurb Frederik's accession to the throne in the same way as we did with Juan Carlos I of Spain and Prince Felipe in 2014. _-_Alsor (talk) 18:27, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait. Definitely notable enough (Margrethe's abdication would leave Europe without a female monarch in a damn long while), but it's in a mere 2 weeks time when Frederik becomes King. Posting it now would take unnecessary space in the ITN field and posting it twice would be even more senseless. As for quality, I also believe it needs some kind of refurbishment, though we could say that in every ITN candidate post, so it's nothing new. Add some more details, some sources, maybe more about the abdication, and we're good in my eyes. - CDE34RFV (talk) 18:30, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb. Very notable, change of longest reigning monarch in Europe. Kirill C1 (talk) 19:18, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support of course. Abdication of a monarch is very notable (not to mention that she’s been ruling for 52 years).--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:39, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per above TomMasterRealTALK 19:51, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Definitely for ITN. Historic announcement.BabbaQ (talk) 20:09, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait Until 14 January, then post. Curbon7 (talk) 20:24, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support for posting, neutral on whether to post it now or on the 14th. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 20:26, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Conditional support pending orange tag resolving. Better to post now than wait for successor when the news will be stale. Brandmeistertalk 21:00, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    This isn't a change in prime minister. We have known who her successor is for 52 years. There will be a royal succession in 14 days, hardly something that can be considered stale. Curbon7 (talk) 22:25, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support- If orange tag is dealt with. Thriley (talk) 22:20, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait until the date of her abdication, and include her successor as a combined blurb (change of head of state). Natg 19 (talk) 23:35, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait until the 14th when the actual change takes place. Canuck89 (Converse with me) or visit my user page 03:15, January 1, 2024 (UTC)
  • Support but Wait. Very notable but wait until that day happens. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁=☁=✈) 04:26, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • The update is currently two sentences in the lead and two substantially identical ones in the body (in their own section); and one of each of those is redundant to the blurb. That's insufficient. There's more information in this discussion than there is in the article. Waiting until the abdication's effective will give us time to get the article properly in shape. —Cryptic 04:42, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait until 1/14 when she officially abdicates, and post with the accession of (what will be) Frederik X. The Kip 06:46, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait until she actually abdicates. - Therealscorp1an (talk) 09:02, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait until the abdication occurs. --RockstoneSend me a message! 09:13, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support but Wait. Significant event, but wait till 14 January. – PrinceofPunjab (talk) 09:34, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support but wait until the 14th of January. Setarip (talk) 16:00, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb the change of the head of state, which will be ITN/R, when it occurs. No point in blurbing the mere announcement of something that will be ITN/R when it actually happens just two weeks later. JM (talk) 22:42, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Head of government is ITNR in Denmark, not head of state. —Cryptic 22:48, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Oh. Well, I still oppose blurbing the announcement. We should wait until it happens and blurb the actual change of head of state. JM (talk) 23:21, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Tentative oppose, then wait Still has the big ol' banner.
If the banner is removed, we can post the article when she actually steps down (as opposed to blurbing it twice, which would be bizarre, or blurbing only the announcement of an event rather than the actual event, which would be even more bizarre). Bremps... 06:37, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

RD: Eddie Bernice Johnson

Article: Eddie Bernice Johnson (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): MetroNews
Credits:

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

Member of the US House of Representatives. ChaotıċEnby(t · c) 16:53, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support once ready. Apart from a missing electoral history, the article looks good. - CDE34RFV (talk) 19:17, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Electoral history sections using {{Election box}} are optional, as theoretically it would be covered in the prose. Curbon7 (talk) 20:22, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: John Pilger

Article: John Pilger (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian
Credits:
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Australian journalist and documentary filmmaker. 240D:1A:4B5:2800:400C:3CCF:54FC:F39A (talk) 13:11, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support, very influential person in many social disciplines 15:36, 31 December 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oneequalsequalsone (talkcontribs)
  • Support - Sourced and ready.BabbaQ (talk) 16:29, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: Clean up tags remain in the "Views" section, and the "Documentaries and career" section include unsourced paragraphs. --NoonIcarus (talk) 20:15, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Sourcing is sufficient in my view. Jusdafax (talk) 01:45, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support (tentative) - I agree with Jusdafax that the sourcing is sufficient. The tag in the Views section is inappropriate, saying it’s using too many primary sources. But it has to to use Primary sources. Pilger is a journalist. How else can you source a section about Pilger’s views? But if there is a problem, it’s the Bibliography section. Should include ISBN’s for the publication list. And Pilger’s documentaries need a reference source. - Trauma Novitiate (talk) 15:32, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    But it has to to use Primary sources. Pilger is a journalist. How else can you source a section about Pilger’s views? Perhaps if secondary sources aren't covering and analyzing them, it's WP:UNDUE to mention them? Or secondary sources just need to be found. —Bagumba (talk) 09:14, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Well sourced. The tags are silly and should not prevent this from being posted. Thriley (talk) 06:28, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Echoing Trauma Novitiate's comment above, the Bilbiography (Works) section needs ISBNs or citations. Also, the primary source orange tags need to either be resolved or removed if not an issue.—Bagumba (talk) 09:07, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

December 30

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

Science and technology

  • Google settles a $5 billion privacy lawsuit alleging that it spied on users using "incognito" mode in its Chrome browser, misleading users by implying their internet activities would not be tracked, while advertising technologies continued to collect information. (ABC News)

RD: Bryan Ansell

Article: Bryan Ansell (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Polygon, IGN
Credits:

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

Co-creator of Warhammer 40,000. 147.192.103.42 (talk) 16:23, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Tom Wilkinson

Article: Tom Wilkinson (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

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

Highly acclaimed British actor of film, television, and stage. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 17:24, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Regrettable oppose On quality of course. Career section needs refs and his filmography needs additional sources.
Question. Can we have a photo RD? Kirill C1 (talk) 19:19, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No. Stephen 22:55, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support – article is well-referenced and meets minimum depth of coverage for ITN after my edits. —Bloom6132 (talk) 10:22, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 00:41, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Tony Hudgell

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: Tony Hudgell (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Nine-year-old Tony Hudgell becomes the youngest ever person to be awarded the British Empire Medal. (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

Article updated
Mjroots (talk) 09:15, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Tragic story and article is of good quality. 🔥Jalapeño🔥 Stupid stuff I did 09:42, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose These types of "firsts" are better covered by DYK, not ITN. --Masem (t) 13:01, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ineligible for DYK. Mjroots (talk) 13:15, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      • Unfortunately, that's true. This is why I think we should have DYK be open to nominations there of articles where something interesting has just happened that is reported in the news but not the type of story that is good for ITN. — Masem (t) 14:54, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
        • The article appeared on DYK on 28 August 2022. See talk page. JennyOz (talk) 15:16, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose not ITN-worthy. Anecdotal and not much more. _-_Alsor (talk) 14:19, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is this even the UK's highest civilian award? It shows up pretty low on Template:Orders, decorations, and medals of the United Kingdom, though the higher ones all seem to be military in nature. —Cryptic 17:47, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I note that this piece of trivia ("youngest ever") isn’t even mentioned in the article. Schwede66 17:56, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Now added. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:31, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Schwede66, the double amputation isn't trivial, is it? I suspect that an age of nine years makes Hudgell the youngest BEM recipient by a long way. But I'm not sure if that information has been published or how to check. It's not included at British Empire Medal. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:36, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Oppose the bolded article would have to be 2024 New Year Honours. Which happen every year and are never blurbed. This is a run-of-the-mill event, and not world-important news. The "hook" of "it's a nine-year-old amputee" is a "hook"; which is what DYK does and ITN does not do. 217.180.228.138 (talk) 20:54, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Ready) RD: Gil de Ferran

Article: Gil de Ferran (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Autoweek
Credits:
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

French-born Brazilian racing driver. 240D:1A:4B5:2800:6909:F19:8772:5F70 (talk) 03:54, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

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

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