Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates

This page provides a place to discuss new items for inclusion on In the news (ITN), a protected template on the Main Page (see past items in the ITN archives). Do not report errors in ITN items that are already on the Main Page here— discuss those at the relevant section of WP:ERRORS.

This candidates page is integrated with the daily pages of Portal:Current events. A light green header appears under each daily section – it includes transcluded Portal:Current events items for that day. You can discuss ITN candidates under the header.

Typhoon Yagi over the South China Sea Typhoon Yagi (satellite image shown) leaves at least 85 people dead in China, Vietnam, and the Philippines. An attempted jailbreak at Makala Central Prison in Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo, leaves 129 people dead. A Mil Mi-8 helicopter crashes in Kamchatka, Russia, killing all 22 people on board. The Summer Paralympics close in Paris, France. Ongoing: Israel–Hamas war timeline Russian invasion of Ukraine timeline Sudanese civil war timeline Recent deaths: Pete Wade Cathy Merrick Rich Homie Quan Rebecca Cheptegei Hvaldimir Linda Deutsch view — page history — related changes — edit

Glossary Blurbs are one-sentence summaries of the news story. Altblurbs, labelled alt1, alt2, etc., are alternative suggestions to cover the same story. A target article, bolded in text, is the focus of the story. Each blurb must have at least one such article, but you may also link non-target articles. Articles in the Ongoing line describe events getting continuous coverage. The Recent deaths (RD) line includes any living thing whose death was recently announced. Consensus may decide to create a blurb for a recent death. All articles linked in the ITN template must pass our standards of review. They should be up-to-date, demonstrate relevance via good sourcing and have at least an acceptable quality. Nomination steps Make sure the item you want to nominate has an article that meets our minimum requirements and contains reliable coverage of a current event you want to create a blurb about. We will not post about events described in an article that fails our quality standards. Find the correct section below for the date of the event (not the date nominated). Do not add sections for new dates manually – a bot does that for us each day at midnight (UTC). Create a level 4 header with the article name (==== Your article here ====). Add (RD) or (Ongoing) if appropriate. Then paste the {{ITN candidate}} template with its parameters and fill them in. The news source should be reliable, support your nomination and be in the article. Write your blurb in simple present tense. Below the template, briefly explain why we should post that event. After that, save your edit. Your nomination is ready! You may add {{ITN note}} to the target article's talk page to let editors know about your nomination. The better your article's quality, the better it covers the event and the wider its perceived significance (see WP:ITNSIGNIF for details), the better your chances of getting the blurb posted. Headers When the article is ready, updated and there is consensus to post, you can mark the item as (Ready). Remove that wording if you feel the article fails any of these necessary criteria. Admins should always separately verify whether these criteria are met before posting blurbs marked (Ready). For more guidance, check WP:ITN/A. If satisfied, change the header to (Posted). Where there is no consensus, or the article's quality remains poor, change the header to (Closed) or (Not posted). Sometimes, editors ask to retract an already-posted nomination because of a fundamental error or because consensus changed. If you feel the community supports this, remove the item and mark the item as (Pulled). Voicing an opinion on an item Format your comment to contain "support" or "oppose", and include a rationale for your choice. In particular, address the notability of the event, the quality of the article, and whether it has been updated. Please do... Pick an older item to review near the bottom of this page, before the eligibility runs out and the item scrolls off the page and gets abandoned in the archive, unused and forgotten. Review an item even if it has already been reviewed by another user. You may be the first to spot a problem, or the first to confirm that an identified problem was fixed. Piling on the list of "support!" votes will help administrators see what is ready to be posted on the Main Page. Tell about problems in articles if you see them. Be bold and fix them yourself if you know how, or tell others if it's not possible. Please do not... Add simple "support!" or "oppose!" votes without including your reasons. Similarly, curt replies such as "who?", "meh", or "duh!" are not helpful. A vote without reasoning means little for us, please elaborate yourself. Oppose an item just because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. We post a lot of such content, so these comments are generally unproductive. Accuse other editors of supporting, opposing or nominating due to a personal bias (such as ethnocentrism). We at ITN do not handle conflicts of interest. Comment on a story without first reading the relevant article(s). Oppose a recurring item here because you disagree with the recurring items criteria. Discuss them here. Use ITN as a forum for your own political or personal beliefs. Such comments are irrelevant to the outcome and are potentially disruptive. Suggesting updates There are two places where you can request corrections to posted items: Anything that does not change the intent of the blurb (spelling, grammar, markup issues, updating death tolls etc.) should be discussed at WP:Errors. Discuss major changes in the blurb's intent or very complex updates as part of the current ITNC nomination.

September 17

Portal:Current events/2022 September 17

September 17, 2022 (2022-09-17) (Saturday) Armed conflicts and attacks September 2022 Damascus airstrikes Five Syrian soldiers are killed in missile strikes launched by the Israeli Air Force near Damascus. (Haaretz) Arts and culture COVID-19 pandemic, Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on tourism, Tourism in Germany The annual Oktoberfest in Munich, Germany, opens after not being held for two years due to the COVID-19 pandemic. (BR) Business and economy Poland opens the Vistula Spit canal connecting the Vistula Lagoon and Gdańsk Bay after three years of construction. (Al Arabiya) Disasters and accidents 2022 Pacific typhoon season The Japan Meteorological Agency urges residents to evacuate southern parts of the island of Kyushu as super Typhoon Nanmadol approaches. An official for the agency warns that Nanmadol can bring "unprecedented" storms and rain to the area. (Reuters) Twenty-two people are killed and 10 others are injured by a landslide in Achham, Nepal. (Reuters) Nine people are killed and 55 others are rescued after a bus crashes in Alajuela Province, Costa Rica, during heavy rains. (Reuters) Politics and elections Politics of the Philippines Vic Rodriguez steps down as Executive Secretary and will continue to be Bongbong Marcos chief of staff. (Inquirer)

---

September 16

Portal:Current events/2022 September 16

September 16, 2022 (2022-09-16) (Friday) Armed conflicts and attacks Russo-Ukrainian War 2022 Western Russia attacks A civilian is killed and two others are injured by Ukrainian shelling on Valuyki, Belgorod Oblast, according to Governor Vyacheslav Gladkov. (UrduPoint) (MSN) Internal conflict in Myanmar 2021–2022 Myanmar insurgency Myanmar Army helicopters attack a school in Sagaing Region, Myanmar, killing six children and injuring 17 people. Military officials say that the school was being used as a base by anti-coup insurgents. (The Jerusalem Post) 2022 Kyrgyzstan–Tajikistan clashes According to Kyrgyzstan, Tajik forces again open fire on its outposts and clashes occur along the border with Tajik forces using armored vehicles and mortars. Tajikistan accuses Kyrgyz forces of shelling one of its outposts and several villages. (Reuters) (Al Jazeera) Arts and culture Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the performing arts The Phantom of the Opera, currently the longest-running show in Broadway history, announces that it will end production in February 2023, stating that a decline in attendance caused by the COVID-19 pandemic has made it unable to recoup the weekly costs of running the show. (The New York Times) Business and economy American computer hardware company EVGA terminates its partnership with fellow hardware manufacturer Nvidia and withdraws completely from the graphics card market, alleging that the latter forced them to sell their cards at a loss and would refuse to disclose important information, such as sales numbers. (The Verge) Disasters and accidents 2022–23 European windstorm season Ten people are killed, 50 others are injured, and three people are reported missing as floods hit Ancona, Marche, Italy. (Reuters) 2022 South Asian floods Twelve people are killed by heavy rains in Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India, with nine of the people killed when a wall collapsed. (AP) Health and environment 2022 monkeypox outbreak 2022 monkeypox outbreak in Asia Bahrain confirms its first case of monkeypox. (Reuters) Law and crime Killing of Mahsa Amini Widespread protests occur in Iran after a woman is detained and allegedly beaten to death in Tehran by officers from Iran's religious police system for not properly wearing her hijab. (The Guardian) Politics and elections 2024 Salvadoran general election Incumbent President Nayib Bukele announces that he will run for re-election in 2024, one year after the Supreme Court ruled that he was eligible to do so despite a constitutional ban on presidential re-election. (Al Jazeera) (Reuters)

---

RD: Shelby Jordan

Article: Shelby Jordan (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Fox News
Credits:

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

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

Nominator's comments: Died September 9, announced today – Muboshgu (talk) 21:03, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support - article seems to meet requirements. - Indefensible (talk) 21:52, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Izium massacre

Article: Izium mass graves (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Numerous mass graves are uncovered in Izium, Ukraine, evidencing further Russian war crimes. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Over 445 bodies are unearthed from mass graves in Izium, Ukraine, evidencing further Russian war crimes.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Over 445 bodies are found buried in Izium, Ukraine, after its reconquest from Russian forces.
News source(s): The Guardian, AP, BBC, Reuters, Kyiv Post
Credits:

• Created and nominated by Abcmaxx (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: Just started the article, but already likely even larger scale than the Bucha massacre. If someone can get this some level of protection like other topic-related articles too that would be great. Abcmaxx (talk) 11:35, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

• Comment – Quite widely covered. UN to investigate, says AlJazeera. Not another incremental report on the fighting. – Sca (talk) 12:17, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
  • Added this to article, thank you! Abcmaxx (talk) 12:40, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support on principle We posted the Bucha massacre as well. This isn't your average war progress update, but the article needs expansion. The Kip (talk) 14:04, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose covered in ongoing. Really shouldn't be arbitrary about this. If we apply "covered in ongoing" logic to the many developments in the war, we should apply it here too. Banedon (talk) 16:23, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
• Conditional Support if the article is expanded. This isnt a typical war development. Noah^Talk 16:43, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support per Sca, if the article is expanded adequately. --BorgQueen (talk) 16:51, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support per all above. Alexcalamaro (talk) 17:26, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
• Weak Support - Not quite Katyn massacre, but this might just be the tip of the iceberg.--🌈WaltCip-(talk) 18:09, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support ... pending careful development of article. Favor Alt2, offered above. (Note that a police spokesman said some apparently killed by artillery fire or bombing.) – Sca (talk) 19:01, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose There's a claim this is a Russian war crime, but that's not yet proven out in international court, so all that we can say is that mass graves were found. This is covered by ongoing to that point. --Masem (t) 19:14, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

  Which is why I said careful development, and restricted Alt2 to saying bodies were found. -- Sca (talk) 19:27, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

  Alt2's mention about the reconquest from Russian forces implies they (Russians) put the bodies there. I mean, there's Occam's razer that Russia was very likely behind it, but we should not be trying to point fingers even if the media is rushing to make the claim. Masem (t) 19:30, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

  Maybe they all committed suicide – after being tortured [1] [2]. – Sca (talk) 22:29, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support' significant event, unfortunately Bumbubookworm (talk) 20:11, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support - Notable event. Nythar^T.C 20:28, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support this is a major revelation in the war similar in scope to the notable Mỹ Lai massacre, not a run-of-the-mill territorial update. CJ-Moki (talk) 21:21, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support per nomination and Sca. Similar scale to the Bucha massacre, which was featured in the main page, and good article quality. --NoonIcarus (talk) 21:55, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
• Wait - there is a move nomination for the article which is likely to be approved which changes the subject from "mass graves" to "massacre" so the blurb should reflect accordingly. - Indefensible (talk) 22:49, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

It did initially, and that's what I called the article when I created it, but someone unilaterally moved it so I amended the nomination. Abcmaxx (talk) 23:03, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Wait - seconding this. CJ-Moki (talk) 23:42, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose covered by ongoing. Posting the Bucha massacre was a mistake as well. YD407OTZ (talk) 23:44, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support either original or Alt 1. These are Russian warcrimes, it's plainly obvious to all. We can call a spade a spade here. --Rockstone^{Send me a message!} 23:59, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

September 15

Portal:Current events/2022 September 15

September 15, 2022 (2022-09-15) (Thursday) Armed conflicts and attacks Russo-Ukrainian War 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine 2022 Ukrainian Kharkiv counteroffensive War crimes in the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine Izium mass graves Ukrainian police say that a mass grave containing more than 440 bodies has been discovered in the recently recaptured city of Izium. (Reuters) Disasters and accidents Nine people are killed and 20 others are injured during a stampede at a concert in Quetzaltenango, Guatemala. (AP) Law and crime Iguala mass kidnapping Authorities in Mexico confirm the arrest of a retired military general for his alleged role in the kidnapping of 43 students in the state of Guerrero in 2014. (Reuters) Politics and elections Armenia–United States relations U.S. House speaker Nancy Pelosi announces a visit to the Armenian capital Yerevan as a show of support for Armenia amid renewed clashes between Armenia and Azerbaijan over the past week. (Politico) Science and technology Ethereum, the second largest cryptocurrency, changes its consensus mechanism from proof of work to proof of stake, ceasing all mining and reducing its energy consumption by over 99.9% (CNBC)

---

RD: Maanu Paul

Article: Maanu Paul (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Waatea News
Credits:

• Nominated by Indefensible (talk · give credit)
• Created by Ballofstring (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Paora (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: Māori leader - Indefensible (talk) 21:38, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

RD: Jörg Faerber

Article: Jörg Faerber (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): SWR, Stimme.de
Credits:

• Updated and nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk · give credit)
• Created by Dr. Blofeld (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: Founder, artistic director and CEO of the Württemberg Chamber Orchestra Heilbronn, leading them to international fame with well-known soloists, making more than 500 recordings. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:16, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support - article seems to meet requirements. Also my bad for nominating this again, not sure what happened but I may have been looking at an old version of the page. - Indefensible (talk) 21:33, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

  No worries. No harm done. :-) --PFHLai (talk) 21:38, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

RD: John Stearns

Article: John Stearns (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ESPN
Credits:

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

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

 – Muboshgu (talk) 16:45, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

RD: Fritz Pleitgen

Article: Fritz Pleitgen (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Der Spiegel
Credits:

• Updated and nominated by Grimes2 (talk · give credit)
• Created by Miojkle (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: German journalist Grimes2 (talk) 12:43, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for updating! Can you give him a bit of a lead, please. WDR - East Berlin - WDR, quite a story! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:00, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support - article seems to meet requirements. - Indefensible (talk) 21:43, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

RD: Eddie Butler (rugby union)

Article: Eddie Butler (rugby union) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

• Nominated by Dumelow (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Bcp67 (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: Welsh rugby player and commentator. Article's not bad but a bit light on his playing career. Will take a look at it - Dumelow (talk) 07:03, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

RD: Asad Rauf

Article: Asad Rauf (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ESPN; Associated Press; International Cricket Council
Credits:

• Nominated by Oriental Aristocrat (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Bloom6132 (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: A bit of help required to source some text and it will be good to go. Oriental Aristocrat (talk) 13:40, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support – article is well-referenced and meets minimum depth of coverage for ITN. —Bloom6132 (talk) 13:29, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

(Closed) Roger Federer retirement

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: Roger Federer (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Swiss tennis player Roger Federer retires from professional tennis. (Post)
News source(s): https://www.ft.com/content/15c35803-d550-467d-a87e-c7eaf6eb2c40
Credits:

• Nominated by Ixtal (talk · give credit)

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Seems worth placing ITN as ostensibly one of, if not the, best players in tennis history — Ixtal ^{( T / C )} ⁂ Non nobis solum. 14:37, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Was unsure of who to name as updaters, feel free to suggest. — Ixtal ^{( T / C )} ⁂ Non nobis solum. 14:38, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

• Weak oppose I'm less opposed to sports retirements than most editors, but after the Brady incident we should probably hold off on posting any. The Kip (talk) 14:41, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose. I was against retirement blurbs for Tom Brady and Serena Williams, and am against them still today, even for legitimate GOAT contenders. When Federer (or Nadal or Djokovic) passes away, in many decades time, I shall probably support a blurb then, if I'm still around on the planet myself!  — Amakuru (talk) 14:43, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
• Weak oppose. Much like The Kip above, I'm concerned that these sorts of retirements don't end up lasting forever, and I doubt we want to run a blurb announcing their return to the sport. Anarchyte (talk) 14:45, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
• Strong oppose per growing consensus that the sporting retirements we did post were a mistake. – Muboshgu (talk) 14:47, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

  Serena Williams' retirement was a SNOW close less than two weeks ago. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:36, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

• Weak oppose - Oh, I so badly want to support this one! This guy is damn near top of his field in an internationally-played sport. Unfortunately, as stated above, sports retirements are very easily reversible.--🌈WaltCip-(talk) 15:03, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
• oppose he was hardly playing lately. Had he retired after winning a notable tournament, why not, but like this I oppose.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 15:08, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose has hardly been playing the past few years, and sports retirements in general seem to be too prone to changes to post. AryKun (talk) 15:35, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose Think we've all quietly agreed sports retirements, whomever the GOAT, aren't worth posting. Kingsif (talk) 16:03, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
• Wait he announced that the retirement will take place next week. Wait until the retirement actually occurs before nominating/posting. NorthernFalcon (talk) 16:06, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

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

September 14

Portal:Current events/2022 September 14

September 14, 2022 (2022-09-14) (Wednesday) Armed conflicts and attacks Russo-Ukrainian war 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine Russian forces launch eight cruise missiles at the dam of the Karachunivske reservoir causing extensive flooding in Kryvyi Rih and a 2.5 metres (8 ft 2 in) increase of water level in the Inhulets River. (The Guardian) Nagorno-Karabakh conflict September 2022 Armenia–Azerbaijan clashes Armenia formally triggers article 4 of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) after accusing Azerbaijan of launching an invasion. Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan says that "we asked support from CSTO, including military support to restore Armenia's territorial integrity and ensure the withdrawal of the Azerbaijani Armed Forces from the territory of Armenia". (Armenpress) Israeli–Palestinian conflict One al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigade member and an Israeli soldier are killed during a shootout at a checkpoint in Jenin, in the occupied West Bank. (Al Jazeera) Aftermath of the 2021 Kyrgyzstan–Tajikistan clashes Two Tajik border guards are killed and two others are injured during clashes with Kyrgyz guards, who accuse Tajikistan of taking positions at a demarcated area. (Reuters) Tigray War Ten people are killed when Ethiopian airstrikes hit a residential area in Mekelle, Tigray Region. (AP) Disasters and accidents 2022 Pacific typhoon season Typhoon Muifa makes landfall in eastern China with the maximum wind speed near its centre reaching 42 metres per second (150 kilometres per hour (93 mph)). (Bloomberg) (Reuters) Fourteen people are killed and 25 others are injured in a three vehicle collision in Kyaukpadaung, Myanmar. (AP) Eleven people are killed and 29 others are injured when a bus falls into a gorge in Poonch district, Jammu and Kashmir, India. (AP) Law and crime Iceland v Iceland Foods Ltd The British supermarket chain Iceland launches an appeal to the EUIPO against the country of Iceland in a 20-year-long legal process over the use and trademark of the name "Iceland". (The Pembrokeshire Herald) Two Thai military personnel are killed and another is injured after a gunman opens fire at a military facility in Bangkok. The gunman is later arrested. (CNA)

---

RD: Robert P. Maginnis

Article: Robert P. Maginnis (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CatholicPhilly.com
Credits:

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

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

Nominator's comments: American catholic prelate. I've added a short paragraph on his death - Dumelow (talk) 09:38, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Rommy Hunt Revson

Article: Rommy Hunt Revson (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): New York Times
Credits:

• Nominated by Dumelow (talk · give credit)
• Created by Cbl62 (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: American inventor of the scrunchie. Died 7 September, but first reported 14 September as far as I can see - Dumelow (talk) 08:12, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support - article seems to meet requirements. - Indefensible (talk) 21:47, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
• Posted --PFHLai (talk) 01:03, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

RD: John Gamble (baseball)

Article: John Gamble (baseball) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Nevada Sports Network
Credits:

• Updated and nominated by Bloom6132 (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: First reported today (September 14); died on September 1. —Bloom6132 (talk) 07:40, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

• Weak support Sourcing is not great, most citations to B-Ref rather than newspapers, but SABR bios are thorough and this is good enough. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:29, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Earl J. Silbert

Article: Earl J. Silbert (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Washington Post
Credits:

• Updated and nominated by Bloom6132 (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: First reported today (September 14); died on September 6. —Bloom6132 (talk) 21:54, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support - article seems to meet requirements. - Indefensible (talk) 04:19, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support, Article is fine. Alex-h (talk) 15:01, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
• Posted Good enough. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:31, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

RD: Harry Landis

Article: Harry Landis (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Argus Evening Standard
Credits:

• Nominated by TrottieTrue (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: British actor with long career and numerous credits TrottieTrue (talk) 20:57, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose on quality, needs ref improvement per banner. - Indefensible (talk) 04:20, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support actor from a number of well-known roles across a many decades Denham331 (talk) 19:01, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

  Denham331, as per the template, 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) 19:03, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Irene Papas

Article: Irene Papas (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): iEdidiseis (in Greek)
Credits:

• Nominated by Dumelow (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: Greek actress and singer, a Good Article - Dumelow (talk) 09:05, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support article seems good to go. _-_Alsor (talk)
• Posting, excellent article. --Tone 09:53, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• I remember discussion on Vangelis, I think, here where it was said that she fits the threshold for blurb more. Now that id posted, propose blurb. Golden Lion Award, Berlin International Film Festival win, starred in Zorba the Greek film. [3] Kirill C1 (talk) 10:58, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  All I said was she's near his fame level. A bigger star than the president, PM or sex tape drummer. Quite good actress. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:44, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

• Old Woman Dies, end of story. If she's a true household name, it'll draw its own attention in RD. No objection to a photo, if that's the main goal. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:48, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Kazakhstan re-names capital city to Astana

Article: Astana (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Kazakhstan announces change to name of capital from Nur-sultan back to Astana (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Kazakhstan announces the changing of their capital city's name from Nur-Sultan to its former name of Astana.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Kazakhstan renames its capital city from Nur-Sultan back to Astana.
News source(s): The Guardian
Credits:

• Nominated by Abcmaxx (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Romeowth (talk · give credit) and Rosguill (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: This is unique and I believe encyclopedic (as well as political). The last I can think of such an event is St Petersburg > Leningrad > St Petersburg and took over decades rather than 3 years. Abcmaxx (talk) 09:01, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

• I would support posting but the update is one-sentence. Changing the name of the capital is a rare event, and yes, there is a political backstory. --Tone 09:58, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support on significance, oppose on quality; the update needs to be more significant first. BilledMammal (talk) 10:01, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support Country capital information has been all encyclopedias' hottest selling point for generations and I think the entire article now repeating "Astana" instead of "Nur-sultan" is enough of an update to hammer the idea home, geographically. InedibleHulk (talk) 11:05, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Wait – Developing. – Sca (talk) 12:25, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Noting that this is not a unique event in the history of this city; this is the sixth time a name change has happened here, all in just the last sixty years. Gotitbro (talk) 14:06, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support Countries don't exactly change their national capitals' names all that often. Article needs some work however. The Kip (talk) 15:51, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose Ineresting trivia, but 1) there's no actual geopolitical importance, 2) this is the fourth time they've changed the name just since Kazakhstan became independent, and 3) the article update is completely insufficient for a main page posting. -- Kicking222 (talk) 16:58, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose just trivia. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 17:02, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Weak Support upon Quality Improvement it's interesting and encyclopedic, but currently the article includes no rationale why the name was changed again besides the trivial statement that some members of parliament requested it. If there were to be more (sourced) informations e.g. relating to how the current president of Kazhakstan Kassym-Jomart Tokayev is striving to erase the symbols of former president Nursultan Nazarbayev, then I'd be more enclined to support. In any case, this could alternatively also feature on DYK? Khuft (talk) 17:40, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support on the one hand, this city was last renamed in 2019, and that wasn't that long ago. On the other hand, this is encyclopedic information that is important and relevant for our readers. I think the second point trumps the first, so I support. NorthernFalcon (talk) 19:38, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Comment The article is back at Nur-Sultan now... Khuft (talk) 20:23, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

It's back now to Astana with a WP:MOVP protection. Abcmaxx (talk) 21:58, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose We didn't post the name change in 2019 and, as it hasn't stuck, it's easiest to pass over their transitory mistake. Name changes are a headache for Wikipedia and so we shouldn't encourage them. Andrew🐉(talk) 22:17, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
  • Do you really think people are worried about moving articles around on Wikipedia when they're considering a major geopolitical change? 174.113.161.1 (talk) 12:34, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose – I'm unimpressed by our coverage of this temporary namechange. I do agree that the initial namechange in 2019 was probably the more significant event; this seems to merely be a return to 'normalcy.' The three-year namechange is an interesting subject, and if it had a high-quality article on its own I might've supported a blurb. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 09:18, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose – Per TRM, Andrew. Devoid of impactfulness. – Sca (talk) 12:52, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support on notability, not ready on quality. I supported posting when Astana was renamed to Nur-Sultan in 2019, and I find it interesting that the complicated political situation in Kazakhstan where Nursultan Nazarbayev has waning yet lasting importance resulted in the capital dropping his name after just 3 short years. The arguments against posting 3 years ago pointing to how frequently the city's name changed were very unconvincing, as most of the name changes were from when the city was being renamed by the Russians and Soviets from the 1800s to the 1950s, not by the independent Kazakhstan. However, I agree with other editors who've stated that there should be more prose explaining why the city's name was changed before posting.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 17:45, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

  How about going back to Akmolinsk just to keep things interesting? – Sca (talk) 19:08, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

  I like the sound of Akmola more, personally. I'd go back to it if I could, but unfortunately I am not the president of Kazakhstan.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 19:55, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

September 13

Portal:Current events/2022 September 13

September 13, 2022 (2022-09-13) (Tuesday) Armed conflicts and attacks Russo-Ukrainian War 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine 2022 Ukrainian Kharkiv counteroffensive The Ukrainian military says that it has shot down an Iranian HESA Shahed 136 combat drone operated by Russia near Kupiansk, Kharkiv Oblast. An inscription on the drone identified it as an "M214 Geran-2", which did not immediately correspond to known Russian weaponry. (ABC News) Afghanistan conflict Republican insurgency in Afghanistan Taliban authorities say that they have killed 40 National Resistance Front fighters in the Panjshir Province of Afghanistan, including four commanders. (Reuters) Nagorno-Karabakh conflict September 2022 Armenia–Azerbaijan clashes Armenian prime minister Nikol Pashinyan says that 49 soldiers were killed during overnight clashes with Azerbaijan after it shelled villages yesterday and that fighting was ongoing. (Reuters) Insurgency in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa A roadside bombing in Swat District, Pakistan, kills eight people, including a local tribal leader known for his opposition to the Pakistani Taliban. (Reuters) Tigray War Ethiopian airstrikes hit Mekelle University's business campus and a Dimtsi Weyane radio station. (The Jerusalem Post) The Tigray People's Liberation Front says that Eritrea has taken the town of Sheraro. (Al Jazeera) Business and economy 2021–2022 inflation surge Following the release of the Bureau of Labor Statistics consumer price index for the month of August, all 30 stocks in the Dow Jones Industrial Average decrease in value, resulting in a 3.9% drop in the index. (The Week) Disasters and accidents European migrant crisis Six people are killed and five people are missing after a boat carrying migrants sinks off the coast of Turkey. (Reuters) Five people are killed and 14 others are injured after a building collapsed in Amman, Jordan, 10 people are reported missing. (Al Jazeera) Seventeen people are injured after a fuel tanker explodes in Sabha, Libya. (Reuters) Law and crime A possible improvised explosive device explodes at Northeastern University in Boston, Massachusetts, United States, injuring one person. (CNN) (Archived Copy) Politics and elections Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev agrees to change the name of Kazakhstan's capital from "Nur-Sultan" back to "Astana". He had previously changed the capital's name in 2019 to honor his predecessor Nursultan Nazarbayev. (The Guardian)

---

(Posted) RD: Fred Callaghan

Article: Fred Callaghan (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Fulham FC
Credits:

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

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

Nominator's comments: English footballer Dumelow (talk) 09:15, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support article is fine and referenced, however would be great if there was an expansion on his non-league football managerial career and the years were added of his time at Enfield both as player and manager. Abcmaxx (talk) 10:45, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support, Article is fine. Alex-h (talk) 15:10, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 05:12, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Susan L. Solomon

Article: Susan L. Solomon (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times
Credits:

• Updated and nominated by Bloom6132 (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: First reported today (September 13); died on September 8. —Bloom6132 (talk) 02:24, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support Referenced, depth appropriate. Marking ready. Spencer^T•C 04:59, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
• Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 09:22, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Ken Starr

Article: Ken Starr (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): KWTX
Credits:

• Updated and nominated by Muboshgu (talk · give credit)
• Updated by TDKR Chicago 101 (talk · give credit)

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

 – Muboshgu (talk) 20:30, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support RD - probably not blurb worthy though. nableezy - 21:34, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
  • No, certainly no blurb here. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:56, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support well sourced, thorough, better than most wikibios we post. Old man dies who had some household name recognition decades ago, yeah, sounds like the reference case for RD for me, really can't imagine supporting a blurb for an individual in that case. --LaserLegs (talk) 23:01, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Posted Stephen 01:44, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

(Closed again) Blue Origin NS-23 mission failure

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: Blue Origin NS-23 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The 23rd flight of Blue Origin's New Shepard spacecraft results in complete mission failure following a booster failure (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The 23rd flight of Blue Origin's New Shepard spacecraft results in a booster failure and a successful execution of its launch escape system
News source(s): CNN, The Guardian SpaceNews
Credits:

• Nominated by BilledMammal (talk · give credit)
• Created by Liljimbo (talk · give credit)

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

 BilledMammal (talk) 14:57, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

• Comment Oppose – A non-event. – Sca (talk) 15:56, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Comment Article almost exclusively is about the failure of the mission and only briefly mentions mission objectives. I think if we are going to post this, ITN/R or not, there must be more information in the article about the potential impacts. All we have currently is that the booster was destroyed and the mission presumably delayed. What are the the impacts of this failure that have this rise to a ITN level of concern? I do believe most readers would question the exact significance of the failure of a non-crewed sub-orbital flight such as this one. DarkSide830 (talk) 16:06, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

  Added some additional information, but significance is presumed through ITNR. It is also the first time that a New Shepard rocket has had complete mission failure. BilledMammal (talk) 16:34, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose Perhaps if it was manned or the first mission, but neither, so unimportant. The Kip (talk) 16:06, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

  The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. BilledMammal (talk) 16:08, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

  WP:IAR -- Sca (talk) 16:44, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

  IAR should only be in exceptional circumstances, where the PAG can't reasonably have accounted for the circumstances; The Kip's position appears to reject the majority of stories that would be posting under this part of ITNR, which means the circumstances aren't exceptional and IAR doesn't apply. BilledMammal (talk) 16:49, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

  Thank you for affirming your faithful adherence to the sacred ITN Catechism. – Sca (talk) 17:49, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

  If we want to be able to reject ITNR, we should note that they are subject to some discussion about significance - otherwise, the instructions are clear that Items listed there are considered exempt from having to prove their notability through discussion on the candidates page. BilledMammal (talk) 22:42, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose - I think this is a rare instance in which the encyclopedia is not best served by inclusion of this story.--🌈WaltCip-(talk) 17:52, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

  @WaltCip: Previously, you said I think this needs to be codified somewhere: ITN/R is not a guideline and there are no exceptions. Any attempts to treat it as such by opposing an ITN/R item based on notability, usually with the accompanying argument of WP:IAR, should itself be ignored. Has your opinion changed? BilledMammal (talk) 22:55, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

  I'm never too old to learn, and in this case, I got a clue and determined that my previous opinion was wrong. 🌈WaltCip-(talk) 11:19, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose - one thing to keep in mind here, is that it was a sub-orbital rocket, not designed or planned to orbit the earth. Looking at other launch failures that were featured; Soyuz MS-10 in 2018 had a crew on board, that survived ballistic re-entry, and were recovered over 400 km from the pad. The Falcon 9 carrying AMOS-6 (satellite) in 2016 blew up on the pad in a massive explosion, all but destroying LC-40 and was felt over 60 km away! In this case we have only a sub-orbital rocket, no large explosion, and the capsule landed safe and intact. The booster didn't land successfully - but the article doesn't really say much as to it's fate, other than it hit the ground; elsewhere I've seen reports that it was providing telemetry until it's unsuccessful landing. So no humans, not orbital, payload survived, no damage to the launch pad, and no information about the booster landing zone. Nfitz (talk) 19:03, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Reluctant Regrettable Support I have no idea what an unknown number of people were thinking when they agreed every launch failure with enough details to update an article is automatically good enough, but they did and the article's updated, so let's just get this subjectively bad idea over with. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:59, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support -- it's ITNR. Maybe it shouldn't be, but it is, so it needs to be posted, otherwise the point of ITNR is moot. --Rockstone^{Send me a message!} 00:03, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  ITNC entries that are based on ITNR can still be debated if that specific entry is important enough to post, just we don't want people rehashing the "is the ITNR appropriate?" here on ITNC. Masem (t) 00:33, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  I don't follow. The phrase "each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post" seems to preclude any discussion about whether the event is important enough to post. --Rockstone^{Send me a message!} 00:49, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  Yes, Items which are listed on this page are considered to have already satisfied the 'importance' criterion for inclusion on ITN, every time they occur. Not every second time, not every other time, just every time. All anyone who doesn't like it but wants to follow the rules can hope to accomplish is to convince the room the article isn't "appropriately" updated (whatever that means). InedibleHulk (talk) 00:59, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  We have, in the past, skipped posting ITNR items for various reasons that were beyond quality issues. The point that we have this allowance to skip a singular ITNR instance, as long as we aren't wasting the effort about the base ITNR criteria. Major crashes of spacecraft can be significant, but you can see by the way the news is covering this that this crash of an unmanned commercial rocket wasn't really a major event. Masem (t) 03:31, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  Neither are plenty of R things. They don't need to be, they just need to recur and constitute an appropriate update to a nominated article without orangetags. If you can think of a good reason unrelated to importance to skip this one, I'd love to get on board, seriously. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:21, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  If it is true that we have skipped posting ITNR items for various reasons unrelated to quality or whether it actually satisfies ITNR criteria, then there's something wrong, and we should change our policies. If ITNR criteria can simply be discarded because we don't like it or think it's appropriate, then we might as well just get rid of ITNR entirely. This being said, I'd support updating ITNR criteria for launches to require that the failure occur with a manned launch. -- Rockstone^{Send me a message!} 04:25, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  WP:ITN/R is a guideline not a rigid rule. Right at the top it says "it is best treated with common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply". Andrew🐉(talk) 09:54, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  Then the wording needs to be changed, as that is not what it currently says. BilledMammal (talk) 09:55, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support per ITN/R and marked ready. Update is sufficient. --LaserLegs (talk) 01:35, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  I'm removing the ready tag, it may be technically ready to post but there isn't even a remote degree of consensus to do so. There's a grand total of six votes overall, and it's 50/50 between oppose and support. The Kip (talk) 02:39, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  57/43. You can assume the nominator supports. In addition, consensus is ascertained by the quality of the arguments given on the various sides of an issue, as viewed through the lens of Wikipedia policy. BilledMammal (talk) 02:43, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  Opposes which disregard the WP:ITNR guidelines are invalid. --LaserLegs (talk) 16:06, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  Adding it back. There's no need to form consensus for notability, since it's ITN/R. I've yet to see anyone oppose on the basis that the article is not in an acceptable state. -- Rockstone^{Send me a message!} 03:10, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

• Can this really be described as "complete mission failure" if most of the payload was recoverable? - Indefensible (talk) 06:33, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose on quality and also notability. Quality-wise, per DarkSide830, it lacks information on the mission beyond the details of its failure. Also oppose on notability per those above. ITN/R is not a suicide pact, and there is no part of the project where IAR doesn't apply (it's even one of the five pillars). Per above, this is one of those rare cases where something that's ITN/R nonetheless fails to reach the significance bar. It's a relatively insignificant story that won't materially affect that company's programme or anything else in the longterm, and our readers wouldn't particularly be well served by its inclusion at ITN.  — Amakuru (talk) 08:56, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose. I also think that ITNR is not a must. This was a failure of a rather routine mission that did not carry crew (luckily) or some particularly important equipment, like JW telescope (also luckily). We should probably amend ITNR criteria. I suggest this is sent to DYK instead, the article is decent enough. --Tone 08:59, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose - I don't think this falls under WP:ITNR; launch failures are listed under the "space exploration" heading but this was a suborbital launch, and thus it's dubious to what degree this counts as "space exploration". Including this only begs the question of where the line is drawn. Would a failed weather balloon launch count? I agree with the sentiment that this item would be better suited to DYK. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 09:17, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  I'll buy that, this was space trucking, Oppose. InedibleHulk (talk) 09:28, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  If the launch hadn't failed it terminates above Kármán line, which means that it is space exploration; weather balloons don't go anywhere near that high. BilledMammal (talk) 09:52, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  Altitude aside, cargo can't explore, especially when only going somewhere its shipping company has gone 22 times before. InedibleHulk (talk) 10:10, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  The cargo was experiments, intended to be run in space. Such experiments are part of space exploration. In addition, look at our article on space exploration. Reaching the Kármán line is considered part of it. BilledMammal (talk) 10:15, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  Such experiments are part of space research, no doubt, which I guess might pass for exploration in an inner intellectual sense. And maybe that T-2 Mission Arroway could have felt some base rush of actual firsthand pioneering. Tough to say, my furred friend, but I'm not flipping twice on this. InedibleHulk (talk) 10:31, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  Just as a note, the original discussion which led to the space rules in their present form is here, from 2011. This was a reduction in scope from a much broader "any space flight" that was there before, but it actually looks like the version that was written as a result of that discussion is not quite the one that had consensus in the discussion. The initial suggestion at the discussion was for "Orbital launch failures where sufficient details are available to update the article" (emphasis mine), with one or two users also saying that all launch failures should be left to ITN/C. Nobody suggested automatically including all launch failures, including those that weren't orbital, but that's what was inserted. I'd suggest revisiting this ASAP to be honest.  — Amakuru (talk) 10:54, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose The WP:ITN/R entry is "Launch failures where sufficient details are available to update the article". This is poorly drafted as all nominations obviously require such sufficient details. And so the only meaningful bit is "launch failures". But these are commonplace – the repeated launch failures of Artemis 1 are a fresh example. We therefore have to discuss whether a particular failure is significant or not and so this shouldn't be ITN/R. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:40, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  Same response as to sca above; if we want to be able to reject ITNR, we should note that they are subject to some discussion about significance - otherwise, the instructions are clear that Items listed there are considered exempt from having to prove their notability through discussion on the candidates page. BilledMammal (talk) 09:52, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  WP:ITN/R is a guideline not a rigid rule. It says "it is best treated with common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply". The only way we can use our common sense and establish whether this is an exception is to discuss the details of the case. That's what we're doing here. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:02, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  Except it is very unambiguous. If it is not a rigid rule, then it shouldn't say Items listed there are considered exempt from having to prove their notability through discussion on the candidates page and Items which are listed on this page are considered to have already satisfied the 'importance' criterion for inclusion on ITN, every time they occur. BilledMammal (talk) 10:05, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  But that applies to any guideline (or indeed policy) anywhere on the project. Most such "rules" are worded in clear language that would appear at first sight to discount exceptions, yet IAR applies if appropriate nonetheless. And the idea that IAR would be a principle applied right across the project, covering almost all of our content and conduct conventions, but somehow not apply in one single hallowed corner of the Wiki known as ITN/R, seems a bit ludicrous when you think about it. For most purposes ITN/R is a "rigid rule", but occasional exceptions apply. The bottom line is that if enough editors feel that there are special reasons why a particular item should be IARed, as appears to be the case here, then a consensus doesn't form and it doesn't get posted.  — Amakuru (talk) 10:23, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  Most other guidelines aren't written with the same strength of language. In addition, IAR should only be in exceptional circumstances, where the PAG can't reasonably have accounted for the circumstances. Given that the reasons for rejecting this launch failure would apply to most launch failures, IAR can't apply. BilledMammal (talk) 10:29, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  WP:NOTLAW explains that "...it is not governed by statute ... the written rules themselves do not set accepted practice. Rather, they document already-existing community consensus regarding what should be accepted and what should be rejected. ... Do not follow an overly strict interpretation of the letter of policies without consideration for their principles. If the rules truly prevent you from improving the encyclopedia, ignore them. Disagreements are resolved through consensus-based discussion, not by tightly sticking to rules and procedures. Furthermore, policies and guidelines themselves may be changed to reflect evolving consensus." So, what we have here is an evolving consensus and WP:ITN/R seems to require further adjustment to reflect this. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:38, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  Lets see how this closes, but if it does close against posting then you are right; ITNR (and Wikipedia:In the news#Sports and other recurring events, and the template above) would need adjustment. BilledMammal (talk) 10:40, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  I would argue a discussion here is not sufficient enough to override ITN/R. Per WP:CONLEVEL, this wouldn't be sufficient because the stability and consistency of guidelines are important. Any change must be made conservatively and slowly while seeking the input of others. A driveby discussion on a matter such as this is not sufficient to change the ITN/R guideline. Noah^Talk 11:14, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support It's ITN/R... It has been said before. If you don't like it being on ITN/R, then start a discussion on the talkpage to remove or amend the topic. Notability is assumed for anything on the ITN/R list and thus it's notability is not a question here. The only issue we can debate on an ITN/R topic is quality, which the article meets since it has been updated. I will note that the ITN/R guideline has a broader level of consensus then any discussion here so we can't just override it. Drive by discussions are not sufficient to change the ITN/R guideline itself. Therefore, this must be posted whether we like it or not.

Noah^Talk 11:19, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

• Discussions at ITN/R seem to get less attention than discussions here and it's usually a subset of the same editors. For example, we've been here before with Proton M. That nomination failed to launch so there was then a discussion at ITN/R. That fizzled too. Andrew🐉(talk) 11:32, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

I remind you of WP:NOTBURO. Also: Do you yourself believe that this story would be significant for posting on ITN, regardless of whether or not it's a recurring item? 🌈WaltCip-(talk) 12:46, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose on significance, noting Amakurus point about this not being an orbital launch. Polyamorph (talk) 11:49, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Comment – A day later, 3:1 consensus appears to have formed against posting. – Sca (talk) 14:25, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
  • Opposes which disregard the guidelines are invalid --LaserLegs (talk) 16:06, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Comment in addition to being WP:ITNR there is a "please do not" above which reads "oppose a recurring item here because you disagree with the recurring items criteria. The criteria can be discussed at the relevant talk page.". Not posting this at this point is anarchy. Either the guidelines exist or they do not. --LaserLegs (talk) 16:09, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  Consensus is trending away from posting unmanned launch failures on WT:ITN. Even if this item were "ready" as you keep insisting that it is, it would be pulled almost immediately after posting. 🌈WaltCip-(talk) 16:12, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose I think you could argue whether or not this qualifies as ITNR; if it is, then ITNR rules (again) need to be redone in regards to spaceflight. Either way, this is a non-event in which an unmanned ship wasn't destroyed and didn't hurt anyone. -- Kicking222 (talk) 17:05, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Ready this item is ready and currently an ITN/R item. The opposes above are invalid as a result. There is discussion about the inclusion of this category at WT:ITN but as it stands, at the time of nomination, the item was listed. It simply needs to be posted, and it can push out the nothingburger weeks old earthquake story. --LaserLegs (talk) 18:02, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  No it's not. Consensus against, for obvious reasons. -- Sca (talk) 19:12, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  Even if what you say about ignoring the opposition is true (which it isn't, because there's a significant consensus to IAR here), the article still doesn't satisfy the quality criterion, per the issues raised by DarkSide830 and myself regarding completeness. There is almost no discussion on the purpose and objectives of the mission.  — Amakuru (talk) 18:26, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  Does it really meet ITN User:Kicking222? I don't think most anticipated that rule to be used for non-orbital launches, or used when the capsule landed safely. What's next - sounding rockets? Also, there seems to be a growing consensus at WT:ITN/R to remove it. Nfitz (talk) 19:08, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose we should follow the spirit of the guideline and not blindly obey the letter of it. As it's worded at the moment some kid's science project rocket could make ITN if it didn't work properly. I'd say it's fairly clear the guideline is meant to apply to satellite launches and exploration missions, applying it to an uncrewed suborbital launch is clearly not what was intended. 2A02:C7F:2CE3:4700:C9F4:ECC4:7875:7876 (talk) 18:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose Yet another reason why ITN/R needs to die. It can only be used to suppress consensus, as is being attempted here. GreatCaesarsGhost 18:23, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  Comment I personally believe ITN/R needs to stick around, as certain bad-faith editors have fought tooth and nail to prevent some common-sense news items from being posted; that said, considering this would normally fall under it, perhaps it does need to be pruned a bit. The Kip (talk) 22:05, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

• Weak oppose It being significant enough for ITNR brings me in, but IAR is a thing and this should involve some common sense. ITNR shouldn’t always be automatically on, and I agree ITNR discussions tend to fizzle out. 74.101.118.197 (talk) 19:50, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Comment - Four admins have weighed in with oppose !votes for this ITNR candidate. At least two of them can be said to be 'posting admins' in that they have assessed consensus for at least one item on ITN/C; Tone, in particular, is a regular participant in this space. At any time they could have chosen to close the discussion and posted this item. If this is a candidate that we "post whether we like it or not", then why are our entrusted admins not posting it whether we like it or not? The answer lies in our five pillars, and it's the reason we entrust them to make decisions.--🌈WaltCip-(talk) 20:13, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

• Comment -- this is ITNR, so it should be posted, and I have no idea why it hasn't yet, beyond simple I don't like it. This being said, the criteria should change so that only failures of beyond sub-orbital or crewed missions should be posted. That'd solve this problem. --Rockstone^{Send me a message!} 22:31, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  There are a bunch of discussions on the talk page about this and ITN/R right now, it would not be right to post this because of ITN/R and then change ITN/R so that this nom would no longer qualify under ITN/R. Better to wait rather than rush and immediately have a posting that is no longer supported by an outdated guideline. - Indefensible (talk) 22:39, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

• Remind me of this ITN/R ambivalence for the next singing contest or soccer tournament nomination plz. But also, this doesnt merit being posted as ITN. nableezy - 23:34, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  I don't disagree with taking a look at some of these awards ceremonies for axing next. Seems less and less people care about them anymore and they certainly aren't as impactful as natural disasters, elections, or the deaths of globally important individuals. DarkSide830 (talk) 01:35, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

• Weak support – The article looks solid, so we have nothing to lose in featuring this. I agree with the sentiment that the ITN/R item is poorly constructed and I would like to see it amended. This launch being a sub-orbital flight with on-board science cargo makes it more comparable to an unmanned zero-gravity flight. But hey, we got a proper crash here and it's of wider interest, so I don't mind seeing it featured. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 09:52, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
• Ready this ITN/R item is ready to be posted. The notability opposes are invalid. Removal of the ready tag is vandalism. Post it already. --LaserLegs (talk) 10:32, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

  Several ITN active admins disagree with you. Please stop. WP:IAR. 47.16.96.33 (talk) 10:35, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Post-closure edit: Striking comment of a now blocked sock. Elijahandskip (talk) 19:38, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

• Perhaps you should try Wikipedia:Understanding IAR instead of just bandying it about to get your way. --LaserLegs (talk) 10:44, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

  At the related discussion to either remove this from ITNR completely, or to reword the ITNR rule to exclude failures like this, there are at the moment 14 people wanting to change ITNR so this no longer would be included, vs. 1 person wanting to keep this in ITNR: and that one person happens to be you. It looks to me as if there is much more reason to see your repeated "ready" claims as WP:POINT disruption, than there is to claim that the removal of the "ready" is actual vandalism. Fram (talk) 10:45, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

  Come on, we don't want to escalate this to ANI. But this is the direction we're going if you can't let it go. 🌈WaltCip-(talk) 12:13, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

• Ready item was listed as ITN/R when nominated, and is sufficiently updated. Opposes which disregard WP:ITNR are invalid, as such removing the ready tag and premature closing are vandalism. It needs to be posted. --LaserLegs (talk) 13:24, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

  This is literally the fourth time you've marked it ready in spite of consensus being otherwise and an ongoing discussion on ITNR trending toward removing unmanned launches. Let it go, if anything it's you committing the vandalism. The Kip (talk) 13:35, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

  Nah, I'm literally just following the actual guidelines as written. That's it. --LaserLegs (talk) 13:39, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

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

(Re-posted as blurb) Blurb/RD: Jean-Luc Godard

Article: Jean-Luc Godard (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  French filmmaker Jean-Luc Godard (pictured) dies at the age of 91. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ French filmmaker Jean-Luc Godard (pictured) commits assisted suicide at the age of 91.
News source(s): Reuters
Credits:

• Nominated by Mooonswimmer (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: Pioneering filmmaker. Quite a few references missing, as there are completely unsourced sections. Filmography page poorly sourced. Mooonswimmer 09:43, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

• Comment The issues mentioned in the nom exist and need to be fixed, though the filmography page's condition should not hold this back it should be brought upto par as well. Support when the issues are resolved and also support blurb here, with the extraordinary influence in cinema that Godard has had. Gotitbro (talk) 10:37, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

  Support Tried to fix the most glaring issues and main tags. Also support due to the nature of the death which was not apparent when it was first reported. Gotitbro (talk) 01:02, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

• Comment – Widely covered by Eng. RS sites. – Sca (talk) 11:42, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support blurb/photo RD - passes Mandela/Thatcher test, post as blurb/photo RD if article quality is sufficient for posting. 130.75.182.245 (talk) 12:30, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

  He is not even remotely close to the "Mandela/Thatcher test". I hadn't even heard of this guy prior to seeing this nomination. Which obviously doesn't prove anything in itself, but it does strongly suggest to me that he's not a Thatcher or Mandela. Surprising as it may seem, I'd heard of those guys by the time of their deaths.  — Amakuru (talk) 16:19, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  He was as transformative in his field as Mandela or Thatcher, probably more so. We've posted far more insignificant film celebrities before (e.g. Connery, Fisher). He was acclaimed as one of the most influential filmmakers ever by several academic and popular sources. There was no such commentary for the other names I mentioned (in their sub-field of acting). If your "standards" are based solely on your personal opinion, I'd say that's no standard at all. 130.75.182.245 (talk) 19:48, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support RD Article is of decent enough quality, death does not require additional explanation that a blurb would provide, so RD is sufficient. --Jayron32 12:40, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

  Except that a blurb would provide the extra information that it was an assisted suicide.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 20:12, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

• I would be open to seeing this blurbed if everything in the article was properly cited. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 12:46, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support blurb - incredibly important filmmaker, and bottom two blurbs on homepage are over a week old, so no issue pushing one of them out. ‡ El cid, el campeador ^talk 14:55, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support blurb Article needs ref work in three big sections of the article. Once the issues have been addressed, I'd support a blurb. Article now in good shape. Definitely influential enough for blurb. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 16:05, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support blurb One of the most important filmmakers of all time. The Kip (talk) 16:08, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support blurb on quality fixes I would recommend fleshing out the legacy section which should be easy with the long form obits coming in. Masem (t) 17:28, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support blurb Definitely not in the same class as Tarkovsky but still a significant and highly influential filmmaker. I’d like to see more death blurbs for film directors.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:39, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose Blurb no where near the impact of Gorbachev or the recognition of Elizabeth II no media circus absolutely no reason at all to bump a blurb out of the box for this. 100% what RD is for. --LaserLegs (talk) 19:53, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

• It is a widely covered and reported death, media circus and bumping other blurbs should not be a criterion. Besides the unnatural reason for the death making the act itself further notable. Gotitbro (talk) 01:02, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  Bumping blurbs out of the box and looking like an obit was the whole reason RD was created so it is in fact a most critical criteria --LaserLegs (talk) 01:15, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  We cannot control when two rather significant and influential people die, just as we can't control when disasters happen back to back. That's the nature of news. Masem (t) 01:21, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support blurb. A hugely influential director, certainly one of the most important in post-war Europe. —Brigade Piron (talk) 20:29, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support blurb once issues are addressed. This is somebody highly influential and who was absolutely at the top of their field. You could even argue the death itself is notable as Godard may be the most high-profile person yet to die by assisted suicide. I would suggest "dies by assisted suicide" as the wording rather than "commits", though, as that wording is contentious. Humbledaisy (talk) 22:41, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

  Both wordings are contentious. That's the whole reason people continually pit one against the other, instead of going with a third option. To me, he "kills himself". InedibleHulk (talk) 23:20, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

  I think "dies by" is a better option here to avoid any contention. Gotitbro (talk) 01:02, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  If "dies by" is supposed to avoid contention, why would Googling "died by suicide" bring up far more stories about the contest itself than stories about particular suicides? InedibleHulk (talk) 01:23, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  I supported that option as quite a few dicts do not recommend the usage (e.g. [4], [5]), MOS:SUICIDE also provides for the alternative usage. Personally I am not opposed to either. Gotitbro (talk) 01:57, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  Pardon the expression, but I got it, bro. There are two sides to this either/or issue. Anyone on either has valid reasons to me, but don't tell me it's not worth fighting for! From the outside, everyone knows that much is "true enough", eh? InedibleHulk (talk) 02:18, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

• Photo RD There's almost no story here, it's an honour. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:14, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose on quality, oppose blurb--definitely not meeting the blurb threshold in my opinion. - Indefensible (talk) 23:39, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Think it's good to go now. Fixed the glaring referencing issues (also a more recent image would be preferable but the latest on Commons is a grainy one from more than a decade ago, if someone can provide one that would be great). There should be more detail on the assisted suicide itself but don't think much has been reported on the fact as of now. Gotitbro (talk) 01:02, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  Between you and me, it's a drug overdose, a lethal injection of a sodium pentobarbitol solution, but good luck finding an entertainment journalist with "the right words" for that, especially if they're writing for an audience which associates public death administration, killer drugs and even the term "Suicide Solution" with a depraved sort of criminality unbefitting this beloved artist-turned-legend. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:07, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  Given that assisted suicide is legal (to a degree) in Switzerland, we should not be trying to make that a political point in the blurb. He died regardless of the means, there's no need to go into the why. (Outside of assassinations or unnatural causes, we never otherwise put the blurb in about the means of death, and that helps us to stay neutral on issues like this). Masem (t) 02:13, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  It's not about politics, it's about mixing medical terms with lay terms. "Drug overdose" reads like an accident to Joe, Jane or Jimmy Average, and "lethal injection" suggests a homicide (ergo, to some, murder most foul). This was not a natural death at all, this was a suicide, caused by drugs and to which many issues plausibly significantly contributed. It sounds worse than it is. So yeah, the less we share or care to know, the better, this time. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:31, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support blurb provided any quality issues are addressed - One of the most significant film makers of all time. Obvious major story. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 09:27, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support blurb, Notable person and article is fine. Alex-h (talk) 15:05, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose blurb - not even remotely of the calibre at which we blurb an RD. Come on, the standards haven't changed this much.  — Amakuru (talk) 16:17, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose blurb - We don't blurb really good filmmakers.--🌈WaltCip-(talk) 16:44, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Posted to RD I'm not sure there's sufficient support to blurb nor sufficient opposition to close the nomination, but the article is in fine shape, so RD is certainly acceptable. -- Kicking222 (talk) 17:14, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support blurb - he was the most influential film maker alive. 2A02:908:675:8D00:F4B8:EC9B:6EA2:29A9 (talk) 17:41, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support blurb Article is fine, and this news is clearly significant. Godard is obviously notable and has had massive and far-reaching influence on the medium of film. He is not simply a "really good filmmaker", if that were all he was he wouldn't have an article or sources covering his death in the first place. ostensibly singular userpage (inquire within) 20:00, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Re-posted as blurb. There's a fairly reasonable consensus (12-4 at the closest, probably more) to do so, therefore I have posted it as a blurb. Black Kite (talk) 20:02, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Post-posting support Godard is a major and transformative person in his field. Qualifies for blub under the "major figures" section in my opinion. Rhino131 (talk) 20:18, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Post-posting support It doesn't get more canonized in cinema than Godard. He basically reinvented the entire art form in the 1960s. To those who think he's not up to blurb standards, which directors WOULD you support? (I remember Spielberg/Scorsese were thrown out as examples in an old-ish discussion.) Nohomersryan (talk) 20:29, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  Basically none, by giving him a blurb we are putting him on the same level as Queen Elizabeth II. What makes Godard more worthy of a blurb than Ken Starr? - Indefensible (talk) 20:48, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  I don't agree with you, but I can respect the consistency. As for Starr, I highly doubt anyone outside of the US really cares who he is. And he's a generally ephemeral figure here anyway. Nohomersryan (talk) 21:05, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  Funny enough, WP:VITAL already puts Lizzy and Jean-Luc on the same level, since they're both Level 4 people. (Disclaimer: this is not me saying that vital article lists should be used to determine who should be blurbed.) ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 21:10, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  Fair enough, still probably not right in my opinion but I guess that's something. - Indefensible (talk) 21:52, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  While I wouldn’t put Godard on the same level as someone like Gorbachev, I’d put him on the same level as someone like Queen Elizabeth II, who was a figurehead. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 21:52, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support blurb I saw a full length piece on him on PBS Newshour, al-Jazeera, DW and other 1-hour TV news programs outside of France and all of them explained his new philosophies/methods in detail Bumbubookworm (talk) 21:17, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose on quality seeing some quite widespread sourcing problems. My eye was drawn to the uncited "The Little Soldier and Les Carabiniers" section. Checking the sources for the following two sections showed much of the information wasn't there (the source primarily provides box office stats). I've tagged sentences that aren't sourced so far, but won't have time to check the whole article - Dumelow (talk) 21:28, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Post-posting support per Rhino131 and others. Jusdafax (talk) 21:34, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Pulled - given the concerns raised by Dumelow and the now large number of citation-needed tags in the article, it clearly wasn't ready yet. Once these are fixed, the blurb can be re-posted (much as I objected to it above...)  — Amakuru (talk) 21:43, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support blurb once the quality is good enough I wouldn’t put Godard on the same level as someone like Gorbachev, but I’d put him on the same level as someone like Queen Elizabeth II, who was a figurehead. The articles I’ve read make it clear that he was a transformative director. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 21:54, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support blurb once quality is fixed I'll see if there's any citations I can help with if any remains when I have time tomorrow afternoon. ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 23:24, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

• As a remark on current quality status, since I am not sure where that was when it was pulled: there are 4 failed verification tags, 4 citation needed tags, 1 page needed tag. Plus filmography. ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 17:38, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

  For reference, there were 4 outstanding citation needed tags at both the time of RD and blurb posting. —Bagumba (talk) 23:22, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

• @Amakuru: & @Black Kite: Regardless of the circumstances of when this blurb was pulled, I have cited the areas where citations were needed and replaced sources in areas where 'failed verification' appeared. I cannot see anymore reasons for this blurb not to be posted soon. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 01:51, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
• Unsourced filmography This was mentioned in the nominatation itself and as recently as 15 Sept by TenTonParasol. I've tagged the section.—Bagumba (talk) 06:01, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

• @Bagumba:, @Amakuru: & @Black Kite:: Looks like the article looks good now. Great work to all the editors who brought this article up to good shape. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 16:00, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

• Reposted as blurb. Kudos to the efforts of editors with this over the past two days, it looks to me like everything's resolved so I've reposted. Notifying @Dumelow: too, who first raised issues, hopefully this is satisfactory for you.  — Amakuru (talk) 16:37, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Not got any more time now but I've tagged a couple more paragraphs. The article suffered from whole chunks of opinion sourced to "boxofficemojo" which was little more than a earnings list. Seems some good work has been done on the other tagged sections so hopefully this can be resolved quickly. If someone has time it's worth casting an eye over looking for similar paragraphs. There's a lot of paragraphs cited entirely to Brody (2008) that I can't do much more than take on good faith as I don't have the source - Dumelow (talk) 16:50, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

How long will the blurb last now? Not that I don't think Godard was important in his field but the headlines of his death have left the front pages of all news sites, even film-centric ones, and we're not Filmopedia. DigitalIceAge (talk) 17:11, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

• @Dumelow: Looks like most of the box office sources have been removed OR have a backup source which does verify the claims made. Article’s been improving by the day. Again kudos to the editors. TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 17:16, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Jack Charles (actor)

Article: Jack Charles (actor) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ABC
Credits:

• Updated and nominated by Dumelow (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Laterthanyouthink (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: Australian Aboriginal actor. I've done a pass through to add missing refs - Dumelow (talk) 06:43, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support - Article looks good.--SitcomyFan (talk) 08:18, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support Article is in good shape and made big news in Australia because of his involvement in social issues Bumbubookworm (talk) 21:15, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 05:10, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Emmys

Article: 74th Primetime Emmy Awards (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In television, Ted Lasso wins best comedy and Succession wins best drama at the Emmy Awards. (Post)
News source(s): NBC News
Credits:

• Nominated by Masem (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: There still need to be a few parts about the ceremony (In Memorandum) that needs to be updated but there is prose. Also probably a few firsts to document as well. Masem (t) 03:25, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose Lots of incorrect tense, talking about the event in the future. And the details seem rather dated and tired as we had Ted Lasso last year too, which wasn't posted. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:21, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

  We cannot control if a show wins twice in a year, just as we cannot control if two major events in the same country happen back to back. Masem (t) 12:10, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

  And to add, the issue on last's years was the lack of any prose supporting the article at the time of nomination. That's not the case here outside things that may become clear in 24hr+ after the event. This one still needs ceremony details like presenters, it is definitely not yet ready, but its far better than last year. Masem (t) 12:15, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

  Only to add that the details I was mentioned above have since been added, so this appears to be reasonably prose complete. Masem (t) 00:38, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support Looks good to me, and I'm glad to see some prose in these awards articles for once. Whatever tense problems were in the article have been corrected. Agree with Masem that the fact that something won an award in two consecutive years doesn't seem relevant to whether an award show should be blurbed or not. Doc Strange^MailboxLogbook 17:17, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support Article looks in good shape, pleasant surprise to see some prose instead of just tables.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 20:02, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support It looks like the article’s good enough to post. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 02:40, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Ready lets see if this ITN/R item is posted --LaserLegs (talk) 00:08, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
• Comment: WP:ITNR notes that the winner is the target article. Why isn't that the case here? Anarchyte (talk) 14:35, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

  I don't see where it explicitly says that, and I don't believe it has been the practice either. —Bagumba (talk) 23:58, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

  Under Awards: "Unless otherwise noted, the winner of the prize is normally the target article". Anarchyte (talk) 02:37, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

  Thanks. Then perhaps that was the rationale for the note "year's award article" next to the Emmy's ITNR entry. —Bagumba (talk) 02:45, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose Lacks sourced prose about the winners for best drama and best comedy. This is a regular expectation in sports events that merely list a table of winners. Past posted Emmys seem to have some minimal sourced text as well on the winners.—Bagumba (talk) 23:49, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

  That's never been a requirement. There is an expectation that information about the ceremony itself be added instead of just relying on the award tables, just as we expect for a sports game championship, but not anything else that goes beyond that. Masem (t) 03:19, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

  94th Academy Awards#Winners and nominees has some meaningful prose on the best picture winner beyond a mere table listing. The ceremony is just pageantry, and its minutiae is not a substitute for relevant content on the blurbed winner or competition. Televison awards do not get an exemption. —Bagumba (talk) 05:14, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) Armenia - Azerbaijan war

Articles: 2021–2022 Armenia–Azerbaijan border crisis (talk · history · tag) and September 2022 Armenian-Azerbaijani clashes (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Large-scale conflict breaks out between between Armenia and Azerbaijan (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Large-scale clashes erupt after an uneasy ceasefire and tensions regarding an ongoing conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Large-scale clashes along the Armenia and Azerbaijan border kill 99 people.
Alternative blurb III: ​ At least 99 soldiers die from renewed fighting in the border crisis between Armenia and Azerbaijan.
News source(s): Gulf News, Reuters, Israel National News, Daily Sabah, Malay Mail Jerusalem Post, DW
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Probably too early to tell if this is full on war or should we be ready to create 2022 Nagorno-Karabakh war article but certainly a huge escalation. Updated at 2021–2022 Armenia–Azerbaijan border crisis#September 2022 with multiple references there for now. Abcmaxx (talk) 00:58, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

Infobox says that this has been going on for a year and four months. What about the recent "escalation" merits posting? That proposed blurb is uninformative. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:16, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

The scale, not just skirmishes this is full on shelling and combat. It's breaking news so I didn't know whether to start a new article or just add it to an existing one. Abcmaxx (talk) 08:01, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

• Comment From what I've read, in the recent skirmish only Armenian side disclosed its casualties (reportedly 49). Hard to assess without Azerbaijani casualties. Ceasefire has been reached by now anyway. Brandmeister^talk 10:07, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
  • Support altblurbs II or III Azerbaijani casualties are out, article appears to be ok now. Brandmeister^talk 06:28, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• If an article or extensive section specifically about this escalation is written, then it definitely has a good chance of being featured here. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 10:16, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Wait looking at the current statements, Azerbaijan is painting it as “local countermeasures” while Armenia is giving “incursions into its territory”. At a glance, looks like border clashes to me, but I’ll hold my vote to see how the situation develops. Does not seem to be an all-out war in the making though. Juxlos (talk) 10:25, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Wait – Murky, developing. – Sca (talk) 11:44, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Bulletin Is article now. InedibleHulk (talk) 11:54, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

• Nice work! Article still needs a lot of work of course ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 12:14, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

• Wait until we see whether this stays as clashes or turns into another war. The Kip (talk) 13:39, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Amended nomination to reflect new article.Abcmaxx (talk) 14:13, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose as written there isn't nearly enough detail for "large scale clashes" --LaserLegs (talk) 14:44, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose – New article is a 120-word stub. – Sca (talk) 16:01, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Wait It is uncertain whether this escalation will bring about full-scale war, and the clashes have been occurring for some time now. Let's circle back to this later if war does break back out. DarkSide830 (talk) 16:45, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support on principal, oppose on quality yesterday's clashes represent a significant escalation over what has taken place in the past year or two, and have forced an international response, which is beginning to trickle its way into international headlines. I find that significant enough. However, the article does not currently pass on quality. NorthernFalcon (talk) 20:41, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Time to reevaluate. The article is longer now and the casualties are substantial. Alt3? --Tone 06:31, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
  • I'm fine with Alt3. Target linking could be narrowed to "renewed fighting". Brandmeister^talk 07:30, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Comment – Wednesday coverage agrees on toll of 99. AP, BBC, DW But article doesn't mention this, and despite its 900 words seems rather sparse, with over one-third devoted to 'reactions.' – Sca (talk) 12:45, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support - Great development in article. Ready for ITN. Prodrummer619 (talk) 16:56, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support It looks like the article’s good enough to post, but I’d note that it says at least 155 soldiers have died. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 19:07, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Posting. --Tone 06:28, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
• Pull This conflict has been ongoing since 1988 and the latest flare-up has been happening since May 2021. It doesn't seem to be getting much attention in the news and it's quite a minor entry in our long list of ongoing armed conflicts. That lists six ongoing major wars with thousands of deaths this year while this one is buried deep in the minor conflicts which is two levels lower. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:14, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

• I would be very supportive when someone nominates a high-quality updated article on a current major conflict that isn't seeing quite as much news coverage as this. You're sadly right that a lot of major wars are hardly reported upon. However, such an otherstuffexists argument is unconvincing to me here. This too is a war with hundreds of deaths, and when someone writes a solid up-to-date article about it, we'll feature it. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 09:28, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

• That particular article is not at all special or unusual. For example, I drilled down on another minor conflict – Anglophone Crisis. That seems quite similar in scale and we have a detailed timeline for 2022, with daily updates this month. These all have sources and one can easily find more. But such conflicts rumble on for years and so, if we cover them at all, they should be in Ongoing.

But another issue with such conflicts is that the information about them is far from reliable because it usually comes from the warring parties and so is distorted by fog of war and deliberate disinformation. For example, the recent Ukraine success was due to misleading reports about their southern offensive, which was designed to distract the other side. See disinformation in the 2021–2022 Russo-Ukrainian crisis for much more. So, as we're an encyclopedia with a historical perspective we should be waiting until the dust has settled and the truth emerges. See also WP:NOTNEWS.

Andrew🐉(talk) 10:44, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

I would absolutely love to be able to feature Anglophone Crisis on the front page. It's a solid article on a major current event. If a particularly noteworthy clash happens this month, the article gets expanded significantly, that would be a great inclusion for ITN in my opinion. But I recognize the issue of misinformation and lack of reporting. There's definitely issues with our setup. You may also notice that I'm not entirely ideologically aligned with other commenters here on ITN/C, so this might be a better topic for discussion on the general talk page. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 11:23, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

• Post-posting support – article is looking very nice, good job! I hope we can keep it updated as the ceasefire continues. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 09:28, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
• Post-posting comment – Another cease-fire announced. [6] [7] [8] – Sca (talk) 12:57, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

September 12

Portal:Current events/2022 September 12

September 12, 2022 (2022-09-12) (Monday) Armed conflicts and attacks Russo-Ukrainian War 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine 2022 Ukrainian Kharkiv counteroffensive Ukrainian forces continue to recapture Russian-occupied territory in Kharkiv Oblast, saying that they have seized 20 more settlements in the last 24 hours, including Dvorichna, and also claim to have captured many Russian prisoners of war. (AP) Battle of Donbas The Ukrainian general staff reports that Russian troops abandoned the city of Svatove in Luhansk Oblast as Ukrainian forces advanced. (Reuters) 2022 Western Russia attacks Multiple explosions are reported near the city of Taganrog in Rostov Oblast, Russia. (Meduza) (HalkTV) More than 30 municipal deputies of Russian cities sign a petition calling for Russian President Vladimir Putin's resignation amid substantial Ukrainian advances in the war. (The Hill) Kurdish–Turkish conflict Operation Claw-Lock Four Turkish soldiers are killed in clashes with PKK insurgents in Iraqi Kurdistan, according to the Turkish Defense Ministry. (Al Jazeera) 2022 Armenian-Azerbaijani clashes Azerbaijan shells Armenian villages in the eastern region of the country. (The Jerusalem Post) Five people are killed during an attack on a senator's convoy in Anambra, Nigeria. (Reuters) Arts and culture A 1500 year old ancient Mayan settlement is uncovered in central Belize by archaeologists from the Belize Archaeological Institute and UIUC, dating from between 250 to 600 AD. (Heritage Daily) (Onet.pl) Law and crime A gunman kills two people, including a Toronto Police constable, and injures three others in Mississauga and Milton, Ontario, Canada, before police shoot him dead in Hamilton Cemetery. (CTV News) Science and technology The James Webb Space Telescope reveals its first photos of the Orion Nebula, which is located in the Orion constellation. (Phys.org)

---

RD: Michael DeGroote

Article: Michael DeGroote (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Globe & Mail, 3 Down Nation
Credits:

• Updated by Artegia (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: Canadian businessman and philanthropist. Wikibio very much under-sourced but has potential. --PFHLai (talk) 11:01, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Lowry Mays

Article: Lowry Mays (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Associated Press; San Antonio Express-News; Texas A&M University
Credits:

• Updated and nominated by Bloom6132 (talk · give credit)

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

 Bloom6132 (talk) 07:58, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

• More than long enough with 800+ words of prose. Formatting looks fine. Footnotes can be found at expected spots. Earwig has found no troubles. This wikibio is READY for RD. --PFHLai (talk) 07:45, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
• Posted to RD. Spencer^T•C 09:10, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Ramsey Lewis

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

• Nominated by Mooonswimmer (talk · give credit)
• Updated by TDKR Chicago 101 (talk · give credit) and Doc Strange (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: Prolific musician. Article isn't in bad shape, but needs plenty references. Mooonswimmer 00:57, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support I was just coming here to add this myself. Big name with a remarkable career. Article isn't perfect but has enough cites now to be passable. Vladimir.copic (talk) 01:07, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support Article looks good but needs a few citations. --SitcomyFan (talk) 08:17, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support, tentative on a few more citations. I've just added a few citations to the article where they were needed. Article is almost there apart from the discography. Doc Strange^MailboxLogbook 17:39, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support - per Doc Strange. Jusdafax (talk) 22:09, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support Article looks good enough. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 22:37, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 13:19, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: PnB Rock

Article: PnB Rock (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): LA Times
Credits:

• Nominated by Mooonswimmer (talk · give credit)
• Updated by PCN02WPS (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: American rapper. Career section missing some references. Mooonswimmer 00:31, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support I have added sourcing to the career section, I believe everything is sourced. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 03:56, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support Everything looks to be sourced, seems like it's good to go. Doc Strange^MailboxLogbook 18:32, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Comment is this one ready to go? If there are outstanding issues I'll help to resolve them but it's been sitting at 2 supports and no other !votes for nearly a day. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 16:53, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support Looks good to go. Pawnkingthree (talk) 22:48, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support Well sourced, ready. RIP PNB DrewieStewie (talk) 03:36, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
• Posted Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 03:40, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

RD: William Klein

Article: William Klein (photographer) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NYT
Credits:

• Nominated by Mooonswimmer (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: Died Sep. 10th, reported on today. Article needs some work. Mooonswimmer 18:41, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

• Wait: page move discussion in progress. In addition oppose on quality: lots of unreferenced prose, and a large part of the article consists of untidy looking bullet points regarding his work, as well as cannot see any references in those sections either. Abcmaxx (talk) 22:33, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

Strike my oppose out of respect to nominator; did mention article needs work. Abcmaxx (talk) 22:48, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

• Comment – His bio lacks examples of his work. – Sca (talk) 11:46, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Gwyneth Powell

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

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

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

Nominator's comments: English actress Cowmilla (talk) 13:43, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support no reason to oppose, the only thing I can think of is that there's no reference for the school she went to. Abcmaxx (talk) 18:16, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
• Posted to RD. Ref added. Spencer^T•C 13:19, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

(Ready) 2022 Swedish general election

Article: 2022 Swedish general election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The 2022 Swedish general election results in no overall majority (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The Social Democrats gain the most votes in the 2022 Swedish general election but their left-wing bloc lose majority to a right-wing Sweden Democrats-Moderate-Christian Democrats-Liberals bloc.
Alternative blurb II: ​ The Social Democrats gain the most votes in the 2022 Swedish general election but no party or coalition gains an overall majority.
Alternative blurb III: ​ The right-wing opposition wins a majority of seats in the 2022 Swedish general election.
News source(s): The Guardian
Credits:

• Nominated by Abcmaxx (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Vacant0 (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: 94% votes counted, it's pretty much all even, question is whether the other right wing parties will continue to/form a new electoral pact with the very controversial Swedish Democrats party. Abcmaxx (talk) 23:51, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

• Comment. The source cited in the nom (The Guardian) says something different: The current headline of that Guardian article is "Rightwing bloc heading to victory in Swedish election, 90% of vote count suggests". In the text of the article itself it says: "With 90% of the vote counted, the right bloc of four parties had a share of the vote corresponding to a majority of three in the 349-seat parliament." Similarly, WaPo says that the right bloc appears to have won a narrow majority of seats. Nsk92 (talk) 00:04, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

Yes but that bloc is yet to form an official alliance. Technically Social Democrats won with the most votes but nowhere near enough to form government. Even when 100% is counted it will be by the narrowest of margins and if Swedish Democrats turn out to provide the PM as the biggest right-bloc party I can guarantee you there'll be a huge uproar.Abcmaxx (talk) 00:11, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

That's an explicitly WP:OR argument. If and when we do post something to the ITN, the blurb should correspond to what WP:RS say. And right now most sources say that the the right bloc appears to have won the majority of seats. Nsk92 (talk) 00:17, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

Wait. The blurb is very much unhelpful. Most media reports group M, SD, KD and L together, and by the current count they do indeed have a majority. Such a blurb would be much better. Second, the count is still ongoing. It's not confirmed who will win before the remaining votes are counted. As such, posting a blurb at this moment is absolutely premature. Gust Justice (talk) 00:02, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

The Social Democrats will win a pyrrhic victory. Those 6% left will not change that. Abcmaxx (talk) 00:11, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

It's not a win at all for the Social Democrats. Sure they are the largest party, but that doesn't mean anything in the Swedish parliamentary system, where a majority in parliament must elect the Prime Minister. I don't think the outcome will change once the last votes are counted, but we need reliable sources to say so, not conclude it ourselves. Gust Justice (talk) 00:14, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

The last votes remaining to be counted are the postal votes not the in-person votes. They may sway a different way albeit only slightly. Haris920 (talk) 04:59, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

Oppose. If we are going by that blurb, it clearly is against the WP:RS which therefore should not be posted. If the blurb reflects WP:RS, i’m for it but this nomination is too early and is all in all wrong.[9] BastianMAT (talk) 00:29, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

Wait. I agree with Abcmaxx on this - the blurb can't be posted as is. If nothing else it may be worth waiting until we hear about coalitions or such, and if this does not come to pass we could at least say that the Social Democrats won the most seats (which may not tell the whole story but tells a bit more). DarkSide830 (talk) 00:59, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

• Wait This election is very close although the right-wing bloc currently has a slight majority of 175 seats. Vote counting is still ongoing and will continue until Wednesday. Social Democrats have been the largest party for the past 100 years and it should be noted that Sweden Democrats are now the second-largest party. I'd recommend to change the blurb.

Vacant0 (talk) 09:21, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

Guardian now reports a one seat majority at 95% count. I agree with waiting. Regards SoWhy 12:39, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

• Update Social Democrats likely will win in terms of individual party performance, but right bloc may win by a small margin against the left-bloc.AP News Abcmaxx (talk) 11:18, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
• Added altblurb and withdrawn blurb per above comments. Abcmaxx (talk) 11:30, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
• Wait ... for official, final results. For obvious reasons. – Sca (talk) 11:55, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
• Wait. The final results will not be in for a few days yet. It is likely that the liberal-conservative-far right bloc will win a majority, and the left-green-liberal bloc will lose power. It is, however, not clear yet. Furthermore, while it is likely that the Moderates and the Christian Democrats, or the Moderates, the Christian Democrats and the Liberals, can form government if these parties together with the Sweden Democrats can form government, they have yet to actually agree, complicated by the fact that the Sweden Democrats are the biggest party among the four but the Liberals have stated they will not to agree to any government the Sweden Democrats are part of. In short, it's far too early to make any statements around where this will lead – we don't present the probable as fact. /Julle (talk) 12:17, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
• Comment on quality Whilst the consensus is to wait for the final results and what the coalitions will look like in terms of forming a majority government, I believe that so far the quality of the article of is very good; in terms of length, quality and referencing alike. If anyone disagrees please comment and/or improve the article. Abcmaxx (talk) 13:08, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
• It might be really nice if we had a stand-alone article on the conservative bloc/coalition. (But the current election article is easily looking good enough for blurbing of course!) ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 13:10, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

We don't know whether they will form an official one yet and what the composition will be to be fair. So far it has been an informal alliance on a local level. Having said that we may need an article on the left bloc coalition equally as well. Abcmaxx (talk) 13:13, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, it's likely we won't get all the parties involved together in a coalition government – it's a very uneasy alliance, with the Liberals agreeing to talk to the Sweden Democrats to negotiate a government but stating they will not support a government including the Sweden Democrats; likewise, in the opposite bloc, the Centre Party can't imagine forming government with the Left Party. We're looking at minority governments with reluctant support from parties who don't exactly like each other but consider the alternatives worse. I'm not sure we should create articles for these uneasy alliances unless there is very good sourcing to do so specifically. They are in no way as strong as for example Alliance (Sweden), which was a real coalition, used to be. /Julle (talk) 13:24, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

It's exactly why I had the initial blurb as it was; no-one won really. Also, worth adding that the Red-Greens have an article regarding the left bloc which may need updating and inclusion in the election article. It may even needs to be split as it technically refers to 2x coalitions. Abcmaxx (talk) 13:27, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

Added altblurb2 in case there is a minority government.Abcmaxx (talk) 13:35, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

@Julle: am I right in saying that there's a chance of a hung parliament and another election or are we likely to see another minority government? Abcmaxx (talk) 13:52, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

@Abcmaxx I think a hung parliament would be far too speculative for us. All sources assume someone will form government based on the result we'll see on Wednesday or Thursday. /Julle (talk) 14:00, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

• Wait, for final results. Alex-h (talk) 15:51, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
• Wait per the article, the results are not official because the election is close enough that mail in ballots could change the outcome of the election. Would support a fresh nomination once enough results have come in that we know the outcome. NorthernFalcon (talk) 00:56, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

• Wait As to Le Monde and several other news outlets votes will be counted until Wednesday due to the narrow outcome.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 05:51, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

  It is Wednesday and we still don't have a government to blurb on. The Socialists won, but the rightwing coalition appears to have won. I'd wait until the new Government assumes or on a new Government is agreed upon. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 15:48, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

• Comment I've added a third alternate blurb that more accurate reflects the reporting in Reliable Sources. As others have pointed out, I think a blurb in any case should only be posted once final results are available on Wednesday. Gust Justice (talk) 09:47, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Comment As of 99.63% of votes counted, the Social Democrats will remain the largest parliamentary party, although the SD–M–KD–L bloc won the election by two seats. It's time to post this now. --Vacant0 (talk) 16:35, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  Prime Minister Andersson conceded. Vacant0 (talk) 18:48, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

  She will resign tomorrow.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 21:37, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support al blurb 3 only. The other blurbs reflect a POV spin that does not correspond to how WP:RS are characterizing the election outcome. Nsk92 (talk) 12:57, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support blurb III. The preliminary results are 100% counted. Some mention of the leadership of the coalition would also be helpful, but as the Sweden Democrats have won more seats than the Moderates who nominally lead the coalition (and will likely form the next government), this is unclear. The news item for the 2018 Italian general election, where a similar thing happened, took the same approach as blurb III. JackWilfred (talk) 13:25, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
  • The national broadcaster, SVT, have just called the election. JackWilfred (talk) 13:49, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support blurb III We can't blurb a new government yet, but the elections won the right wing.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 14:44, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
• Comment I think the article meets all the hygiene for front page, but reading the aftermath section leaves me confused about what the ultimate outcome is. This may be the natural response to a very close election that doesn't have any clear winner (and thus is going to require some amount of sausage making to get a government out of). Rockphed (talk) 01:10, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

South African dam collapse

Article: 2022 Jagersfontein dam collapse (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A dam collapse in Jagersfontein, Free State, South Africa leaves thousands displaced and hundreds injured. (Post)
News source(s): Bloomberg, News24, Daily Maverick, Sowetan, Eyewitness News, eNCA (eNews Channel Africa), SABC News, Reuters
Credits:

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

 TapticInfo (talk) 18:01, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

• Comment the only information about the actual collapse is "the dam wall collapsed due to a structural failure". That's it, the rest is filler. Also you need to add a map to fully implement User:LaserLegs/Disasterstub --LaserLegs (talk) 18:52, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
• What does the Jagersfrontein Mine and the diamond rush in 1870 have to do with the dam collapse in 2022? How about the court case "related to historic dumps"? – Muboshgu (talk) 19:18, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
• Wait – Largely absent from main English RS sites as of 19:30 Monday. Reuters report says one killed, 40 injured. Presumably developing. – Sca (talk) 19:32, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

There's plenty in the sources tab? Abcmaxx (talk) 22:29, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

• Wait on article quality; this is basically a stub and most of the article is background taken from Jagersfontein. - Indefensible (talk) 05:16, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Comment – On Tuesday absent from primary Eng. RS sites. – Sca (talk) 11:49, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

September 11

Portal:Current events/2022 September 11

September 11, 2022 (2022-09-11) (Sunday) Armed conflicts and attacks Russo-Ukrainian War 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine 2022 Ukrainian Kharkiv counteroffensive Russian forces withdraw from most of the Kharkiv Oblast as the Russian occupation of Kharkiv Oblast collapses. Ukrainian soldiers retake Chkalovske and Velykyi Burluk. Governor of Belgorod Oblast Vyacheslav Gladkov says that "thousands" of civilians are fleeing across the border into the region. (Financial Post) (BBC News) Russia launches missile strikes with Kalibr cruise missiles on critical infrastructure objects, including Kharkiv TEC-5, causing a total blackout and water shutdown in Northeastern Ukraine and the Kharkiv and Donetsk Oblasts. Ukrainian officials confirm at least 40 electrical substations have been destroyed in the wave of missile strikes. (The New York Times) (Reuters) (Ukrinform) Disasters and accidents 2022 Papua New Guinea earthquake At least eight people are killed and 24 others are injured after a magnitude 7.6 earthquake strikes Morobe Province, Papua New Guinea. (Reuters) One person is killed and 40 others are injured after flooding causes a wall dam to collapse in Free State, South Africa. (Reuters) Three people are reported missing after a small plane fails to reach its destination in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. (Reuters) One person is killed and 39 others are injured after a firework explodes at a festival in Santiago Tianguistenco, Mexico. (AP News) Politics and elections 2022 Swedish general election Swedes head to the polls to elect members of the Riksdag. (DW) Proclamation of accession of Charles III Charles III is proclaimed Lord of Mann by Lieutenant Governor Sir John Lorimer at Government House, Isle of Man. (Manx Radio) Reactions to the death of Elizabeth II Prime Minister of Antigua and Barbuda Gaston Browne announces his intention to hold a referendum on transitioning the country into a republic. (BBC News)

---

(Posted) RD: Mavis Nicholson

Article: Mavis Nicholson (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Daily Telegraph; The Guardian; The Times
Credits:

• Updated and nominated by Bloom6132 (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: First reported today (September 11); died on September 8. —Bloom6132 (talk) 07:10, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support Appropriate depth of coverage, fully referenced. Marking ready. Spencer^T•C 13:11, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Posted Stephen 01:10, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Joyce Reynolds (classicist)

Article: Joyce Reynolds (classicist) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Newnham College, Telegraph
Credits:

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

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

Nominator's comments: Reynolds was a pioneering woman in the world of classical scholarship and a centenarian. Modussiccandi (talk) 13:36, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support. Still working before her death too. The quality of her article is of a standard similar to or better than the four most recent deaths listed (James L. Fisher, LaDeva Davis, Anthony Varvaro and James Polshek), she has a photograph (two of those don't) and she sounds like a more remarkable person than all four men combined. --Gaois (talk) 21:05, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

  That last part is completely unfounded. - Indefensible (talk) 21:41, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

  It was not intended disrespectfully towards the four. A 103-year-old pioneering academic who was still working towards the end of her life, a Kenyon Medal winner (it is only awarded every two years), a scholarship is named after her, she is the oldest recipient of a D.Litt. honorary degree from Cambridge... --Gaois (talk) 02:47, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

  Please be reminded that notability is not part of the consideration for RD nominations. Let's focus on article quality and MainPage readiness. Any wikibio with no glaring problems would be fine, as long as the subject is indeed recently deceased. -- PFHLai (talk) 02:58, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

  And I imagine Davis would not appreciate being misgendered. Plus, the article has an uncited paragraph that needs to be fixed, unlike those four aforementioned articles. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:46, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

  Apologies. 😧 Was the uncited paragraph that sentence about the book? I can't see anything else. There is a citation now. --Gaois (talk) 02:47, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

  That was the one. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:03, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support Looks ready. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:03, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support Interesting to read article.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 05:31, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 06:17, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) 2022 Papua New Guinea earthquake

Article: 2022 Papua New Guinea earthquake (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A magnitude 7.6 or 7.7 earthquake strikes Papua New Guinea, leaving at least seven people dead. (Post)
News source(s): Barrons, CBS, CNN, Reuters, Time
Credits:

• Nominated by Indefensible (talk · give credit)
• Created by Dora the Axe-plorer (talk · give credit)

Nominator's comments: Greater magnitude than recent Sichuan earthquake which is currently blurbed, fewer casualties. - Indefensible (talk) 22:35, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

• Comment List of earthquakes in Papua New Guinea --LaserLegs (talk) 22:42, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

  Not as many as I expected actually; this is only the 16th listed since Wikipedia was created, and 3rd most powerful among them it seems. - Indefensible (talk) 22:48, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

  Yeah so one every 18 months or so, seems an average number of fatalities. Need more details on what "widespread damage" means to really evaluate. --LaserLegs (talk) 23:54, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

• Comment Reports are coming in slow so may want to put this nomination on wait first. The region is currently in a total system outage so higher figures could come in days after the earthquake. Dora the Axe-plorer (explore) 00:50, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
• Commment We should link to the actual article rather than a list of all earthquakes in papua new guinea — Preceding unsigned comment added by Haris920 (talk • contribs) 05:02, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support – I think the article is already looking really solid! I think this is a really good subject to feature, though I'm of course looking forward to seeing the article expand more as more information flows in. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 07:58, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support. It's rare to have an earthquake of that magnitude therefore definitely a notable event. The article is long, detailed and sourced, despite it concerning a remote part of the world. Abcmaxx (talk) 08:06, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

  They had a 7.6 three years ago, a 7.9 six years ago and five 7.0 or higher in the last four years what exactly is "rare" here? --LaserLegs (talk) 09:05, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

Those are still almighty big earthquakes though, each notable in its own right. Abcmaxx (talk)

• Wait – A big shake, but so far few casualties reported. – Sca (talk) 11:57, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

Please let's not go down the rabbit hole of WP:MINIMUMDEATHS. Abcmaxx (talk) 13:48, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support Article is in good shape, topic is in the news. --Jayron32 13:06, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support, Article has enough information. Alex-h (talk) 15:46, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
• Posted – Muboshgu (talk) 00:07, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Comment - is it that unusual though? USGS lists 19 7+ earthquakes in 2021 and 11 in that area since 2010. 7.6 is on the high end of Magnitude 7 quakes, but the death toll seems minimal. There were 3 magnitude 8+ earthquakes worldwide in 2021. Nfitz (talk) 00:32, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Comment This does not seem like consensus at all. GreatCaesarsGhost 11:52, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Post-posting comment – Given the relatively low number of casualties, this seems somewhat UNDUE. Not widely covered Tues. – Sca (talk) 11:59, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

  UNDUE is not a policy that applies to posting items on the main page. --Jayron32 12:27, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

  Lives matter. -- Sca (talk) 12:41, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Anthony Varvaro

Article: Anthony Varvaro (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): AJC
Credits:

• Nominated by Muboshgu (talk · give credit)

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

 – Muboshgu (talk) 19:26, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support Looks fine to me. Black Kite (talk) 20:58, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support Looks good. --Vacant0 (talk) 22:23, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support: I see nothing in this article that would make me not want to recommend it for ITN posting; If anyone has any specific observations on problems with the article, please list them out here so that they can be addressed. KConWiki (talk) 02:54, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
• Posted to RD. Spencer^T•C 03:28, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Javier Marías

Article: Javier Marías (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian
Credits:

• Updated and nominated by SitcomyFan (talk · give credit)
• Updated by MichelCastagne (talk · give credit), Martin Petherbridge (talk · give credit), Paradise Chronicle (talk · give credit) and Gaois (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: Spanish novelist. Other updaters include: Jkaharper, Ira Leviton, Goszei, Asqueladd, Normantas Bataitis, Unknown artist, Alexcalamaro, and more. --SitcomyFan (talk) 17:34, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support Article appears to be in good shape, subject is notable enough. Rooves 13 (talk) 19:27, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose A number of uncited paragraphs and statements. Black Kite (talk) 20:57, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Subject is sure notable enough. Seems to have been quite a writer. But I agree with Black Kite that there are several unsourced phrases, to which I believe the sources can be found easily as I have come across a quite a good source on him. The literary mind/thought of Javier Marías is quite promising. I'll try to add some sources and come back with the result.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 21:26, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Ok, I am taking a break. For anyone interested to source the Kingdom of Redonda part, it's a fun section with Kings, Duchies and a a charming diplomatic spat with the Government of the United Kingdom.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 00:43, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support I can see no uncited paragraphs now. A member of Spain's Royal Academy, a professor of Spanish literature and translation at Oxford and in the United States. People might also be interested in this, calling him "Spain's most prestigious novelist of the past half century", the Spanish Prime Minister calling him "one of the greatest writers of our age", all of his international prizes. --Gaois (talk) 20:56, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support While I usually find something with what to expand the article, and there are sure still some uncited phrases like the few on his education and on his Translator, I'd AGF them.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 06:15, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support, the article seems ready to me. Alexcalamaro (talk) 07:17, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 12:48, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

(Closed) 2022 Ukrainian Kharkiv counteroffensive

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: 2022 Ukrainian Kharkiv counteroffensive (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Ukraine retakes the key logistical hubs of Izyum and Kupyansk, following a surprise counteroffensive in Kharkiv oblast (Post)
News source(s): Financial Times, The Guardian, Washington Post
Credits:

• Nominated by BilledMammal (talk · give credit)

Article updated

Nominator's comments: A significant event; the fall of the city and the surrounding area is a major strategic victory for Ukraine, and the biggest setback for Russia since they retreated from Kyiv; commenters have described it as a "stunning rout" that has the potential to change the course of the war. BilledMammal (talk) 09:26, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose we have it in ongoing Polyamorph (talk) 09:37, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

  Being in ongoing doesn't prevent us posting significant events, and I think Ukraine routing Russian forces in Kharkiv is one of those. BilledMammal (talk) 09:51, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

  Counteroffensives are expected in war. It is a significant liberation of territory, but still a long way to go and I think it's covered by the ongoing item. Polyamorph (talk) 09:59, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose While we do post big stories while the main ongoing event is going on, this is part of the normal flow of wars. --Masem (t) 13:15, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support Major development in the war. Article also looks good. Izium should be spelled as it is on its own page.Khuft (talk) 13:25, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

  same thing with Kupiansk. Khuft (talk) 13:37, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose — War's going to do its war thing. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 13:46, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
• Weak Oppose While I can see it's a new development, I don't see it as newsworthy yet. If they can actually hold on to it and "turn the tide", that's something; but if Russia were to push them back next week it would just be another development. I think the main article in ongoing suffices, for now. –LordPeterII (talk) 13:51, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support The major collapse of the Russian army we're seeing now is far from what was "expected", it is not a "normal" war thing but rather surprising and a defining, historic even, moment in this conflict that should be highlighted on ITN. Shanes (talk) 14:01, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

  I don't see the major collapse of the Russian army, yet. A major retreat in one region, but the war is not yet won and we don't have a crystal ball. Polyamorph (talk) 14:17, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

  It's been widely described as a sudden collapse of one of the war's principal front lines. The war is not yet won, but it is a significant event regardless of who wins. BilledMammal (talk) 14:51, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

  "One of the principle lines". Exactly. It is clearly a significant battle but the war is ongoing. Similar progress was also made by Russia earlier in the War. It is right that it is in ongoing. Polyamorph (talk) 15:31, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

  clearly a significant battle - a strong argument in favour of posting. The fact that the war isn't over shouldn't change that.

  Arguments like these, and those by other editors such as Sca, Paradise Chronicle, and LaserLegs, appear to be arguments against posting any blurbs about the war. This wouldn't align with ITN guidelines, which state that we should not oppose a story based on an assessment of the appropriateness of the topic, and would be detrimental to our readers, as one of our purposes is to help readers find and quickly access content they are likely to be searching for because an item is in the news. BilledMammal (talk) 16:22, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

  Err no, my argument is strongly against posting and it's why we have it as ongoing, we can't post every significant event in the war. Polyamorph (talk) 16:28, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

  Reliable sources are describing this as Ukraine's biggest victory, and most significant gains, since Russia retreated from Kyiv. You are right that we can't post every significant event of in the war, but we if we can't post the most significant event of the past five months what can we post? BilledMammal (talk) 17:53, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

  Here's a HYPOTHETICAL example of a postable blurb: "Putin resigns in controversy over Ukraine War." (Preceding purely imaginary.) -- Sca (talk) 19:01, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose we didn't post Russia taking major objectives we ought not post Ukraine doing so while this is still sitting in ongoing. Now if you're ready to crowbar this forever war out of the ongoing section I'm happy to support relevant blurbs. --LaserLegs (talk) 14:22, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

  The reason presented against posting Russia taking major objectives were that they weren't pivotal; they were normal events in the course of the war. A major counteroffensive, advancing at a rate unseen since the start of the war, does not meet that definition and should be considered on its own merits, rather than rejected because we didn't post other things. BilledMammal (talk) 15:02, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

  That's nice, but we didn't blurb the fall of Mariupol and we won't be blurbing this. I don't get hysterical over Ukranian agitprop and don't see anything here but another grim milestone in an 18 year long struggle. Thanks though. --LaserLegs (talk) 17:33, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

  Ukranian agitprop?

  And we didn't post the end of the siege of Mariupol for two reasons; it was nominated prematurely, three days before the end of the siege, and because it was considered inevitable. Neither of those reasons apply here. BilledMammal (talk) 17:39, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

  Did you even read the discussion? Consensus was "sufficiently covered by ongoing" --LaserLegs (talk) 19:39, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose would perhaps meet the requirements of a blurb if it wasn't covered by ongoing YD407OTZ (talk) 15:14, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose – There's reason for optimism on Ukraine's part: AP BBC Reuters France24 DW But taking the long view, this is another chapter in Russia's merciless war on Ukraine. It's not over. – Sca (talk) 15:41, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

  Another angle: "Russian nationalists rage." -- Sca (talk) 18:50, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose It's a campaign in an ongoing war which we already have posted as ongoing event.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 16:03, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose I'd have supported if not for the previous precedent of not posting any development in the war as long as it's in ongoing. Banedon (talk) 16:32, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

  @Banedon: We've posted several developments, including the Sinking of the Moskva and the Bucha massacre. BilledMammal (talk) 16:46, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose, ongoing events, we have to Waite for major developments. Alex-h (talk) 16:44, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

  @Alex-h: What would you consider a major development? BilledMammal (talk) 16:46, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose Ongoing exists for a reason. Gotitbro (talk) 18:01, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose Per Gotitbro, we don't need to post every development in this war, unless something massive (i.e. nuclear war, assassination) happens. Rooves 13 (talk) 19:07, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
• Comment – After 10 hours, it's 11-3 against posting. – Sca (talk) 19:10, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

• Now it’s 12-3. I’m opposing per all above. Already on ongoing. _-_Alsor (talk) 19:17, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose per Alsor. Jusdafax (talk) 19:20, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose as it is an ongoing event. OpSec is also important here. MarioJump83 (talk) 20:03, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

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

(Posted) RD: Margrith Bigler-Eggenberger

Article: Margrith Bigler-Eggenberger (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/switzerland-s-first-female-federal-judge-dies-aged-89/47890508
Credits:

• Created and nominated by Paradise Chronicle (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: She became the first women judge of the Federal Supreme Court of Switzerland, the supreme court on Switzerland in 1974. She died on the 10 September. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 10:27, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

• Long enough (500+ words of prose). Formatting looks fine. Footnotes can be found at expected spots, AGF'ing all non-English refs. Earwig found absolutely nothing to complain at all. This wikibio is READY for RD. --PFHLai (talk) 04:01, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
• Posted to RD. Spencer^T•C 13:08, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

September 10

Portal:Current events/2022 September 10

September 10, 2022 (2022-09-10) (Saturday) Armed conflicts and attacks Russo-Ukrainian War 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine 2022 Ukrainian Kharkiv counteroffensive Ukrainian troops retake the cities of Balakliia, Kupiansk, and Izium from Russian occupation. The Russian Defence Ministry confirms the withdrawal of troops from several towns in Kharkiv Oblast in order to allow its forces "to regroup" and reinforce the Donbas. (BBC News) (Mirror) Disasters and accidents Five people are killed when their boat is hit by a whale and capsizes near Kaikōura, New Zealand. (Reuters) Three people are killed and five others are injured when a Black Hawk helicopter crashes during a Taliban training exercise in Kabul, Afghanistan. (Reuters) Eighteen people are killed when a bus and a tanker truck collide and cause an explosion in Tamaulipas, Mexico. (AP) Health and environment The Kurdish administration in Syria, the Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria, requests help from the World Health Organization to contain a cholera outbreak which has killed three people in the region. (Al Arabiya) Politics and elections Proclamation of accession of Charles III Charles Philip Arthur George is proclaimed King of the United Kingdom as Charles III by the Accession Council at St James's Palace. (BBC News) Charles Philip Arthur George is proclaimed King of Canada as Charles III by the Chief Herald of Canada at Rideau Hall. (Globe and Mail) Charles Philip Arthur George is proclaimed King of Australia as Charles III by the Governor-General of Australia David Hurley at Government House in Canberra. (ABC News) Charles Philip Arthur George is proclaimed King of New Zealand as Charles III by the Herald of Arms at the New Zealand Parliament Buildings. (Radio New Zealand)

---

(Posted) RD: Jack Ging

Article: Jack Ging (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): KMIR-TV (NBC)
Credits:

• Updated and nominated by Bloom6132 (talk · give credit)

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

 Bloom6132 (talk) 07:24, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

• More than long enough with 700+ words of prose. Formatting looks fine. Footnotes can be found at expected spots. Earwig has found nothing wrong. This wikibio is READY for RD. --PFHLai (talk) 23:32, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
• Posted to RD. Spencer^T•C 13:07, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Kurt Gottfried

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

• Nominated by Thriley (talk · give credit)
• Updated by JerrieAtrix (talk · give credit) and Connormah (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: Austrian American physicist. co-founder of the Union of Concerned Scientists. NY Times obit published 10 September. Thriley (talk) 06:28, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support - article seems to meet requirements. - Indefensible (talk) 18:30, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
• Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 20:37, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Frank Cignetti Sr.

Article: Frank Cignetti Sr. (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
Credits:

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

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

 – Muboshgu (talk) 19:06, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support Referenced, adequate depth of coverage. Marking ready. Spencer^T•C 13:06, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
• Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 23:17, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

RD: B. B. Lal

Article: B. B. Lal (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Indian Express
Credits:

• Nominated by Dumelow (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Jkaharper (talk · give credit)

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

Nominator's comments: Indian archaeologist Dumelow (talk) 12:43, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

• Comment Lack of information on early life (schooling; even where he did bachelor's from; or the year for "master's degree in Sanskrit from Allahabad University"). Gotitbro (talk) 17:59, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
• Comment: List of publications needs an ISBN/ref. Not sure if Google Books links count as sufficient? Spencer^T•C 03:25, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Marsha Hunt

Article: Marsha_Hunt_(actress,_born_1917) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Hollywood Reporter article
Credits:

• Nominated by SitcomyFan (talk · give credit)
• Updated by Nohomersryan (talk · give credit) and TDKR Chicago 101 (talk · give credit)

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

 --SitcomyFan (talk) 09:29, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

• Comment – Interesting, long career by a person who lived to 104. – Sca (talk) 11:55, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support Article in good shape. RIP. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 18:43, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
• Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 00:54, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

References

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

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