Jump to content

Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Rentzepopoulos (talk | contribs) at 08:18, 1 March 2023 (→‎2023 Thessaly train collision). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

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.

Iberian lynx
Iberian lynx

Glossary

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

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

Nomination steps

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

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

Purge this page to update the cache

Headers

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

Voicing an opinion on an item

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

Please do...

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

Please do not...

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

Suggesting updates

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

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

Archives

March 1

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

  • Disappearance of Constance Marten and Mark Gordon
    • Constance Marten and Mark Gordon's baby's remains are found hidden in a shed two days after the couple were found and arrested. The couple are charged with gross negligence manslaughter. It is believed the baby was dead for some time before it was found. (BBC News)

Politics and elections

Science and technology


2023 Nigeria presidential election

Article: 2023 Nigerian presidential election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Bola Tinubu, of the ruling All Progressives Congress, is elected President of Nigeria. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Bola Tinubu, of the ruling All Progressives Congress, is declared President-elect of Nigeria in an election disputed by opposition parties.
News source(s): [1] [2] [3] [4]
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Election of a head of state/government is almost always blurbed, let alone in one of the most populous countries in the world --Estar8806 (talk) 03:40, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Wait The race hasn't formally been called, and considering both major opposition parties are calling for a rerun due to irregularities, it may be a little while before this is sorted out. The Kip (talk) 05:07, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @The Kip How exactly do you figure it hasn't been called yet? Almost every major news organization has already called the election. This article [5] from CNN even mentions that the source of the reports is the chair of Nigeria's electoral commission. Estar8806 (talk) 05:10, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    My bad, the BBC News piece I'd read used the phrasing "taken a commanding lead" vs elected. I'll strike that part, but I still advocate waiting. The Kip (talk) 05:12, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @The Kip It was a very recent development, so I'm unsurprised that articles from earlier might say commanding lead rather than declared victory. Estar8806 (talk) 05:13, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    A rerun is very unlikely to happen, due to APC control of all branches of the gvmt. Also, as sad as it is to say, I would be shocked if an election in Nigeria didn't have irregularities at this point, considering the country is coming apart at the seams. Curbon7 (talk) 05:18, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support - no one gets this technical when news outlets calls an election for a candidate in the U.S, despite the fact that the electoral votes aren't certified by the states and Congress until December and January respectively. The ageless man is now P-elect of Nigeria. Crusader1096 (message) 06:28, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'd be less concerned if it was solely the PDP or LP calling for a revote, but that the opposition as a whole is calling for one is what's giving me pause. The Kip (talk) 06:43, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Results are final and article is comprehensive. -- Jiaminglimjm (talk) 07:11, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

February 28

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Politics and elections

Science and technology


2023 Thessaly train collision

Article: 2023 Thessaly train collision (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ At least 32 dead after a train crash in Thessaly, Greece. (Post)
Alternative blurb: A train crash in Thessaly, Greece, kills at least 32 people.
News source(s): https://bnonews.com/index.php/2023/02/2-trains-collide-in-northern-greece-29-dead/
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Seems to be a deadly enough train crash to post on ITN. according to BNO, this is Greece's deadliest train crash since 1968. Onegreatjoke (talk) 02:28, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support when expanded -- right now it's too much of a stub. --RockstoneSend me a message! 02:35, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Conditional Support per Rockstone. Needs expansion but this kind of really serious transportation accident in Europe is exceedingly uncommon. -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:11, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Death toll has risen from 29 to 32 so I've updated the blurb accordingly. Onegreatjoke (talk) 04:49, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Conditional support per Rockstone. Unusual incident with notable death toll. The Kip (talk) 05:15, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Conditional support, it is well-sourced, though I think it could use some more expansion and as updates come in and the death toll rises, I think those could be added in as well throughout the night! Tails Wx 05:19, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support - expanded, I've seen articles linked on the main page that were shorter. Crusader1096 (message) 06:30, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support article is long enough and there are no referencing issues. Mjroots (talk) 06:55, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Good enough, has been expanded well. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 07:21, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support altblurb per all above. TheBestagon 08:12, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support article has many references and contains all critical information. Rentzepopoulos (talk) 08:18, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Ricou Browning

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

Nominator's comments: American film director, screenwriter, underwater cinematographer, and stuntman. Best known for playing the Gill-man in the underwater scenes in Creature from the Black Lagoon, as well as for co-creating Flipper. He was considered the last surviving Universal Monster actor for some time. —Matthew  / (talk) 21:17, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Irving Wardle

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

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

Nominator's comments: British theatre critic. Died on the 23rd, does not seem to have been reported anywhere until today. Sunshineisles2 (talk) 20:46, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Looks good enough for RD. --Vacant0 (talk) 20:51, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Erythritol use linked to blood clotting, stroke, heart attack and death

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: Erythritol (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Consumption of erythritol, a widely used zero-calorie sweetener, causes hyper activation of blood platelets, increasing the risk of heart attacks and strokes (Post)
News source(s): CNN
Credits:

Article updated
 Count Iblis (talk) 13:10, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I am 99% sure that at least once a week, if not more frequent, there is news of a consumer-available product that reports on its bad effects. This is but just one of them. Tell us when dihydrogen monoxide is determined to be fatally toxic and that might be something. --Masem (t) 13:17, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    New Study finds sustained oxygen breathing for 90 years on average correlates to death PrecariousWorlds (talk) 13:46, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose this is not ITN-worthy, for that this is not news, also, some report comes out like this basically every week. Editor 5426387 (talk) 13:19, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Interesting, sure, but not significant or unique enough for ITN. Courcelles (talk) 13:43, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I'm not seeing the level or depth of coverage that indicates this is a major news story. --Jayron32 13:44, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Interesting, but not a major news story. MarioJump83 (talk) 13:47, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Good faith nom, but oppose per @Masem PrecariousWorlds (talk) 13:47, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Consumption[how often?] of erythritol, a widely used[by whom?] zero-calorie sweetener, causes hyper activation[clarification needed] of blood platelets, increasing[by how much?] the risk of heart attacks and strokes[citation needed].--WaltClipper -(talk) 14:08, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Tbf, there's no way to properly condense all of this information into a short blurb. If you did answer all these questions, people would vote oppose for being too convoluted lol PrecariousWorlds (talk) 14:19, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    That's exactly my point. There's simply no way to convey a news story like this coherently in any sort of blurb. The blurb as it currently stands is farcically general. Any blurb that conveys the matter more precisely would be hopelessly bulky. There's really nothing doing with a health-scare story like this.--WaltClipper -(talk) 14:27, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

February 27

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime


RD: Maon Kurosaki

Article: Maon Kurosaki (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [6], [7]
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Japanese singer who mostly performed for anime series. Died on February 16 but death was only announced today (February 28). Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:39, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Looks good, it's up to date, and it's a GA. --Vacant0 (talk) 14:13, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - updated and ready.--BabbaQ (talk) 17:44, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Looks fleshed out and well sourced to me. Gotitbro (talk) 01:20, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Albie Pearson

Article: Albie Pearson (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [8]
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Death announced on Feb 27 – Muboshgu (talk) 05:25, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support I don't see any problems with the article. It's up to date, it has everything referenced, and it's a GA. Enough for RD. --Vacant0 (talk) 14:10, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - looks good to go.--BabbaQ (talk) 17:44, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Li Yining

Article: Li Yining (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): China Daily
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Chinese economist. - Indefensible (talk) 18:25, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) EU / UK trade deal for NI

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



Proposed image
Articles: Windsor Framework (talk · history · tag) and Northern Ireland Protocol (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A new framework is agreed for the Northern Ireland Protocol between the EU and UK. (Post)
News source(s): NYT; BBC; Euronews
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Lots of meetings and announcements by Rishi Sunak, King Charles, Ursula von der Leyen and so on. The details and articles may need more work but it seems that it's a done deal. As the location and title of the relevant articles is not obvious, ITN can assist navigation. Andrew🐉(talk) 17:45, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article is currently a stub, may have copyright violation per current banner. - Indefensible (talk) 17:55, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • The new article was started by an IP editor and Curb Safe Charmer has kindly been doing some work to clean-up and develop it. Perhaps there are more articles out there about this so it seemed sensible to start some discussion while the matter is in the headlines. Andrew🐉(talk) 17:58, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    We probably should wait until the deal is ratified and going into effect, this nomination is premature in my opinion. - Indefensible (talk) 21:26, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support - In The News, with plenty of coverage. Major deal on the future of two great powers. Unique story as well, to diversify our range. Looks good. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 18:13, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - I'm not willing to throw my support behind this until the article can be expanded into something more than a stub.--WaltClipper -(talk) 18:29, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The article does not pass muster, perhaps a hook to Brexit or similar might be better. Gotitbro (talk) 21:24, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality. I'm undecided on the significance, leaning towards yes but a better article and time for reliable source to examine the details should make it clearer either way. Thryduulf (talk) 21:32, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait this establishes terms of the deal but it appears as I read it, it still needs the individual govt bodies to approve it. Wait until that clears. --Masem (t) 22:13, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • oppose on all counts. Like the Croatia joins the euro story, this is, and has always been, a predictable outcome. Beyond that, the UK is certainly not a "great power", and it hasnt been during the entire lifespan of most of the editors and readers of the English Wikipedia. nableezy - 22:55, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    An expected outcome does not make a news item insignificant. Neither should an analysis of power politics take away from the fact that this is clearly an important development in the Brexit story. Gotitbro (talk) 06:41, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    We blurbed Brexit, that was the story. Probably blurbed multiple times at that. nableezy - 17:08, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    From the United Kingdom article:
    "In the 21st century, the UK remains a great power and has significant economic, cultural, military, scientific, technological and political influence internationally." PrecariousWorlds (talk) 07:40, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Ah thanks for proving Wikipedia is not a reliable source. This seems apt. nableezy - 16:28, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    We posted Croatia and the Euro. We even posted an election in Monaco and states don't get much smaller than that. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:56, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Croatia and the Euro shouldnt have been posted, that was silly. All new EU members are required to join the Euro, it was the opposite of news when what was expected to happen happened. Same here. nableezy - 16:28, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    It's funny how we almost instantly post any change of head of state, or tiny sports events, or any of the such, but when it comes to a major agreement like this which is quite literally In The News, everyone opposes PrecariousWorlds (talk) 09:37, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    No tiny sports events are posted, huge ones are snubbed, and any head of state change is ITN/R. nableezy - 16:28, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Changes in heads of state and sports competitions only get posted when there is consensus that the timing is right (new person takes office, conclusion of the competition) and the article is of sufficient quality. In this case there is a clear consensus the article quality is not yet good enough and no consensus that this is the the right point in the process to post the story (given we don't post the same story twice - we are not a news ticker). Even if there was consensus that this was the best time to post, article quality is the most important consideration. Thryduulf (talk) 13:51, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Fair enough. If I'm perfectly honest I was being rather hyperbolic. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 14:23, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait. Can't say I'm an expert on the economic machinations of Europe as a whole, but sorta playing off of Nableezy's comment here I'm not sure what exactly is the takeway here that is all that remarkable. The article doesn't really establish anything of the sort as of right now and is a little too heavy on "reactions", which are worth noting but it's not a good sign if a large chunk of the article is such. DarkSide830 (talk) 23:07, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in principle. Northern Ireland, albeit part of the UK and thus no longer a member of the EU Customs Union, still enforces the EU Customs Code, so an agreement pertaining to the application of foreign legislation on part of a county's territory is very significant.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 23:33, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose at the moment for want of more obvious immediate significance. The deal has been proposed, but the DUP has yet to decide whether to support it. --RockstoneSend me a message! 00:48, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose solely due to the fact that it ain't in stone yet. Crusader1096 (message) 01:15, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait I would support this, but the new framework needs to be ratified first. MarioJump83 (talk) 02:32, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - this deal has been several years in the making, and resolves major international tensions. It would be newsworthy whether or not it was ratified by the respective parliaments. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 09:43, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – Our article merely says that the agreement is "proposed," and though it lists that all parties seem to be feeling good about it, our article doesn't have clear language at all about whether relevant politicians have signed off on it or whether it will be ratified. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 10:31, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on significance, Oppose on quality and timing. Let's take the time prior to passage to flesh out the contents of the agreement. GreatCaesarsGhost 12:26, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support on Merit, Oppose on quality an event like this would be important, because this is a deal that resolved many tension between the U.K and the E.U, but the quality of the article is poor, and this is not yet official yet, so also Wait. Editor 5426387 (talk) 13:21, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait News coverage is showing that this is a significant enough story to expect it on ITN, but I agree that the ratification of the agreement is the best time to post. It will also give the article more time to develop. --Jayron32 13:49, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait Significant for Brexit, the kinks of the agreement finally being worked out, but probably should be ratified before going on ITN, as said by many before. TheBlueSkyClub (talk) 16:17, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in principle. This is essentially undoing the effects of Brexit on trade with Northern Ireland. There's plenty of media coverage, in multiple nations. The article is quite bare bones - it meets our minimum requirements but I would like to see more on the background and content of the agreement. It also doesn't mention the other issues that have been held up by this, such as membership of Horizon Europe. I'm happy with either posting now or waiting until it has been approved by parliament - it's seems highly unlikely to be rejected, given that both Tory and Labour parties will be whipping to support it (Stormont has suspended itself, so doesn't get a say). But perhaps that time could be spent on improving the article. Modest Genius talk 17:14, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Closed) Re-Add the Mahsa Amini protests to the ongoing section

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: Mahsa Amini protests (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
Credits:
Nominator's comments: As I saw on the Wikipedia article, it seems to still be going on, so the article is contradicting the main page. I'm not sure if this is on purpose so I'm just pointing it out. Palmtreegames
  • Oppose. There hasn't been updates since the first days of February. Even though it is ongoing, there has not been signficant updates to the protests for the past few days, or weeks. Tails Wx 16:13, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. There has only been one prominent protest in the last 40 days. If a 'second wave' of protest happens, we can consider putting this back up, but right now it appears the movement has been mostly surpressed by Iran. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 16:16, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Giving a quick read through the article, it's still not good enough to go on. At the moment, the last update on new events relating to the protests came in late January, and the month of February is mentioned only once in the article, right at the beginning, with no updates on what has happened in February. It was originally taken off because of a lack of recent updates, and that's still something that affects the article right now, sadly. TheBlueSkyClub (talk) 16:15, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose No recent substantial updates to the article. The Kip (talk) 19:06, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Not enough updates for reinstatement in ongoing. MarioJump83 (talk) 08:44, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Per above — Preceding unsigned comment added by Editor 5426387 (talkcontribs) 13:22, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Last substantive update to the article is dated to December, 2022. Updates should be more-or-less continuous to qualify as an ongoing link. If you would like to see this posted, first add information to the article so it has continuous updates, then nominate it. --Jayron32 14:16, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Posted) RD: Betty Boothroyd

Proposed image
Article: Betty Boothroyd (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC Sky News
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: First female Speaker of the House of Commons The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 12:33, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support seems like a proper RD candidate, basically, per below. Editor 5426387 (talk) 13:51, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support Can't see any super obvious reason to say something against it. Seems like a some easy RD candidate, hopefully. TheCorriynial (talk) 13:03, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support per above. But also note that "Honorary Degrees" section may require some refs/expansion before posting this to RD. MarioJump83 (talk) 13:17, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I have removed the tag after adding a source with her official bio that refers simply to "at least eight honorary degrees" (rather than listing them out). Think that's enough. Cielquiparle (talk) 13:22, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I think that, being such an important figure and treated as "legendary" even by journalists outside the UK, it would be interesting if it can be explained something more about her career both as an MP and as a Speaker. _-_Alsor (talk) 13:22, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Picture Seems pleasantly free of the axe-grinding which spoils Bernard Ingham, as noted below. And, as there's a good official portrait, we should please use it. Andrew🐉(talk) 13:33, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree with using the picture @Andrew Davidson:. I was going to suggest a full blurb but wasn't sure what impact she had on the rest of the world so went for the safe RD. But the picture would be fantastic if we can use it. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 13:44, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Andrew, stop adding pictures in every RD nomination. She is still a very local political woman in which the international impact is insufficient (natural of the position of any Speaker of any country). You have to make a comparison exercise with the blurbs that have been posted. _-_Alsor (talk) 14:12, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Seven days and counting. It's a landslide!
  • There's been a trend recently of snubbing successful women by not running their pictures -- Jacinda Ardern, Nicola Sturgeon, Raquel Welch. That's not a good look when the pictures that we are running are so stale. The current ITN picture (right) has been up for days now and its topic is no longer the top blurb. It's time for a change. Andrew🐉(talk) 14:18, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Your insinuations that other people are misogynistic because they don't follow your orders are inappropriate, and your daily and continuous drumbeat of casting aspersions against all people who do not think identically to you is growing wearisome to the point of being disruptive to the proper running of this board. This kind of poisoning the well needs to stop. Not everyone who disagrees with you is doing so because they are bigots, as you seem to be implying here. --Jayron32 14:19, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD, oppose Blurb. Per Alsor. As for Andrew's comment on 'snubbing successful women', in case of Jacinda and Nicola, both were resigning. As far as I can remember, we didn't run a blurb when BoJo stepped down, but we did run one when Truss took office. A PM (or lower post in Sturgeon's case) resigning is news, but not ITN worthy, successor taking office is (for PM, not a lower post). --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 14:53, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD. Oppose picture and blurb. Article quality is good enough for RD but she wasn't transformative enough for a blurb. For reasons repeatedly explained to Andrew, photo RDs are not and should not be a thing (and gender is irrelevant to all of this). Awkward42 (talk) [the alternate account of Thryduulf (talk)] 15:14, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD Definitely up there, pioneering woman in the political field of the UK. (I'll never forget the time she kicked William Ulsterman out of the Commons for his getting haughty over cheddar cheese and pineapple on a stick being unavailable.)--SinoDevonian (talk) 15:19, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Not opposed to images for RD entirely, but I think the precedent has moved away from that (can someone please remind me the last time it happened). I would not have been opposed to a blurb either, but we haven't blurbed speakers and moving away from that opens a new floodgate that should be best avoided. Gotitbro (talk) 15:35, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Gotitbro A photo RD has happened a couple of times, but always boldly and usually (if not always) removed fairly quickly. Discussions on the talk page about photos with RD have never reached a favourable consensus. Thryduulf (talk) 19:39, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted RD. -- KTC (talk) 15:59, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) New intelligence on COVID-19 cause

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


Proposed image
The Wuhan Institute of Virology near the site of the first outbreak
Article: COVID-19 lab leak theory (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The United States Department of Energy uses new intelligence to conclude that the COVID-19 pandemic was likely caused by a laboratory leak. (Post)
News source(s): NYT; Al Jazeera; South China Morning Post; Guardian.
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: This topic has always been a peculiar mix of blame game, politics and science but it's interesting that the story is still making headlines and that different US agencies have their own separate official positions. The late Paul Berg warned of the importance of such science so it's disturbing that it's taking so long to settle it. -Andrew🐉(talk) 09:10, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reluctant oppose. Several issues with this: 1) as per sources, the report was made with "low confidence 2) per Guardian, the "updated findings run counter to reports by four other US intelligence agencies that concluded the epidemic started as the result of natural transmission from an infected animal" and "there are a “variety of views” within US intelligence agencies on the issue". 3) it's unclear why Department of Energy handles this rather than, for example, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention or other relevant body. Brandmeistertalk 09:52, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I suppose it's mostly Parkinson's Law but the DoE includes the Office of Science which does it all including an extensive program of Biological and Environmental Research. It's a bit more puzzling that other agencies, such as the FBI, have a position on this too. But as the pandemic has caused many millions of deaths and is still counting, it's not surprising that it's still getting lots of attention from lots of people, including the news media. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:37, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't see how this is news worthy. It won't result in any policy change and its not the official position of the US government. I know this story is technically "in the news" but that has never been the criteria here. Aure entuluva (talk) 10:50, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Ascertaining the exact cause of the COVID-19 pandemic is a matter of science, not intelligence, so let's wait until a paper with more details on the transmission gets published in a reputable peer-reviewed journal. At this point, the intelligence report merely points out to something that was possible from the beginning with no further details.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 11:21, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Others have made good points, but this is a major development in a gigantic story. If it turns out that COVID-19, a virus that has killed millions, destabilised the fabric of 21st century society, and caused one of the largest economic crises in recent memory, was produced in a lab, that is HUGE news. I know it hasn't been confirmed, but major components of the United States government accusing a foreign adversary of creating this virus is definitely notable, especially with high tensions over Taiwan and the balloons. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 11:36, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Allegations of a "lab leak" and "created in a lab/created by the PRC" are entirely different things, even if this report was 100% accurate and trustworthy, it is most definitely not saying that COVID was "produced in a lab". Courcelles (talk) 15:33, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Something with "low confidence" (quote from the article) and which "White House National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan responded to the report saying there was still "no definitive answer" to the pandemic origins' question." seems like the blurb makes this out to be more significant than the actual information seems to do. --Jayron32 11:55, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Opposite Jesus Christ, no way. Let's not feed conspiracy theories with documents that are very no definitive. _-_Alsor (talk) 12:08, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose "low confidence"... this doesn't seem definitive at all. MarioJump83 (talk) 13:16, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strongest possible oppose I warned the lab leak talk page about this report, which only is saying that the DOE believes the COVID to be from the lab, but this does not represent the full US Gov't stance on it. As such, it should not be considered anywhere close to news. --Masem (t) 13:17, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose There is no way this is serious, This is Wikipedia, not Conspiracy-pedia, and they aren't even sure of it! they even admitted it theselves - Low Confidence! This is also not ITN-Worthy because it has not been confirmed. Editor 5426387 (talk) 13:49, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. This remains an ongoing debate among academics and intelligence agencies. There's no reason to highlight the DoE's report any more than the one from the CIA, WHO or any of the other dozen or so bodies who have reached a variety of conclusions. Modest Genius talk 14:23, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose why, just why. The Department of Energy isn't even 100% sure, and it could be false. TomMasterRealTALK 14:58, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The purpose of ITN is to direct readers to quality content, not government propaganda (not even government propaganda, just outright bullshit from a single government agency) spoken in Wiki-voice.--WaltClipper -(talk) 15:16, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Voicing this as such on ITN might tend us towards undue WP:FRINGE. If there emerges subsequent scientific consensus on the theory that would be the time to post this. Gotitbro (talk) 15:28, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose If we ever got a scientific consensus on the origin of the pandemic? That would, IMO, be worthy of posting. Low confidence determinations that differ from other low confidence determinations? Not so much. Courcelles (talk) 15:29, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Posted) RD: Chester Borrows

Article: Chester Borrows (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): New Zealand Herald
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: New Zealand politician. - Indefensible (talk) 07:36, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Everything is cited, looks good for RD. --Vacant0 (talk) 15:39, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. No issues. Looks ready to be posted. Vida0007 (talk) 17:10, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted. Thryduulf (talk) 21:36, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

February 26

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Sports


RD: Gleb Pavlovsky

Article: Gleb Pavlovsky (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Washington Post
Credits:

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

 Thriley (talk) 06:41, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Italy migrant boat disaster

Article: 2023 Calabria migrant boat disaster (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ At least 59 migrants are killed in a shipwreck off the coast of Calabria in Italy. (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian
Credits:

  — Amakuru (talk) 13:34, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support - Still working on the article, although I think it's in good shape to post now. The ⬡ Bestagon T/C 13:38, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:30, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dumb question: does the article need the year on it? There's only been one migrant boat disaster this year... (this is not in opposition to a support, just a question). --Masem (t) 16:02, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    It conveys information on when the incident happened, so there's no harm in keeping it IMO. The ⬡ Bestagon T/C 16:21, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, per WP:NCE the standard naming format includes the year.  — Amakuru (talk) 17:56, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Article seems to be in good shape, well sourced. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 16:50, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Tragedy, but death toll does not automatically warrant notability. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 16:59, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per above. Article is somewhat short but otherwise good. DarkSide830 (talk) 18:26, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Another sad highlight of the migration crisis, death toll is over 50 now, recommend updating the blurb as well. Gotitbro (talk) 22:18, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per above Editor 5426387 (talk) 01:14, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Definitely. MarioJump83 (talk) 09:12, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Death toll now almost 60, and while migrant deaths is a recurring phenomenon in this part of the world, the scale of this particular event is ITN worthy. Vida0007 (talk) 09:27, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posting. --Tone 09:32, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

February 25

Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Politics and elections


RD: Victor Babiuc

Article: Victor Babiuc (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Digi24 (Romanian)
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Romanian politician. - Indefensible (talk) 18:40, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak support. The Legal career and entry into politics section reads like a poorly-formatted CV, but it is all cited. Thryduulf (talk) 21:39, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: François Engongah Owono

Article: François Engongah Owono (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Gabon Mail Infos (French)
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Gabonese politician. - Indefensible (talk) 18:31, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

73rd Berlin International Film Festival

Article: 73rd Berlin International Film Festival (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: On the Adamant wins the Golden Bear at the 73rd Berlin International Film Festival. (Post)
Alternative blurb: On the Adamant wins the Golden Bear at the the Berlin International Film Festival.
News source(s): https://variety.com/2023/film/festivals/berlin-film-festival-awards-updating-live-kristen-stewart-1235535656/
Credits:

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

 BorgQueen (talk) 04:52, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support: I am creator of the nominated article. The article is comprehensive and written as per WP:MOS. It is fully referenced and wikilinked, wherever available. Rickyurs (talk) 08:18, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose There is nearly no prose about the festival outside the lede. --Masem (t) 13:19, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The article on the film itself looks acceptable, but looking through the archives I see [9] the festival itself is historically a target article, so I agree, that article needs work before this can be posted. Courcelles (talk) 14:42, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Rickyurs: Can you please update the festival article? BorgQueen (talk) 14:51, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality Festival article is almost entirely lists and tables. The Kip (talk) 19:08, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @The Kip It has been updated since. How is it now? BorgQueen (talk) 15:10, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment As far I'm aware we only assess the bolded article for quality, so I'm not sure why the festival article being "lists and tables" should hold up posting.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 19:44, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Because normally for awards and festivals, the target article should be the ceremony if the award or festival. If the winning work or actor hthat we normally name us of good quality, we can bold that too, but the award or festival is still key. Masem (t) 19:53, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments The festival article has been updated with some more prose. BorgQueen (talk) 05:58, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Both the bolded articles are now of sufficient quality to post. Pawnkingthree (talk) 13:58, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on the article about the film, Weak support on the article about the festival; it's still very table heavy, but there's probably enough prose there to be worth highlighting. --Jayron32 15:17, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment It seems we generally bold the award ceremony page and not the winner. See 2022 Oscars or 2015 Berlin Fest. Added altblurb—Bagumba (talk) 05:20, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Gordon Pinsent

Article: Gordon Pinsent (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.cbc.ca/news/entertainment/gorden-pinsent-1.6760868
Credits:
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Canadian actor, writer, director and singer, Order of Canada. Needs more citations. Flibirigit (talk) 13:11, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment I do agree that the article needs ref improvements due to the numerous citation needed tags. I might as well improve it! Tails Wx 13:17, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Support, all {{citation needed}} issues resolved, but I'm unsure if the references are reliable, such as IMDB and YouTube ones. Tails Wx 14:46, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    IMDb and Discogs are listed as unreliable sources on WP:RSP as the content on those websites is user-generated. Vacant0 (talk) 15:41, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not ready, needs ref improvement as IMDb is not considered reliable per above. - Indefensible (talk) 21:22, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Vacant0, Indefensible, I have removed the IMDb and Discogs sources as they are unreliable. Sourcing issues should be fixed! Tails Wx 22:59, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Did a spot check, need additional refs to cover some of the titles, especially in the TV section. - Indefensible (talk) 23:43, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Indefensible:, all {{cn}} tags resolved! Tails Wx 04:00, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    It's getting there, but many of the TV listings still need refs too, I just didn't add cn tags for all of them. - Indefensible (talk) 04:04, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Okay. I'll let you know when I've sourced all TV listings. Thanks! Tails Wx 04:11, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Indefensible, all sourcing issues have been fixed! However, I don't know if the references are reliable. Feel free to let me know if any other improvements are entailed! Tails Wx 17:45, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Mihai Șora

Article: Mihai Șora (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Știrile Pro TV (Romanian)
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Romanian philosopher. - Indefensible (talk) 05:42, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support It's a stub article but looks good enough for RD. --Vacant0 (talk) 15:43, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Actually stub articles are never suitable for RD :) But in this case, it's been assessed as Start class which I think is accurate, so I've removed the stub tag. Pawnkingthree (talk) 23:57, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Ali Yafie

Article: Ali Yafie (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.beritasatu.com/nasional/1029702/kh-ali-yafie-berpulang
Credits:
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Indonesian Sunni Muslim scholar. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 21:13, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

February 24

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

Politics and elections


RD: Edith Roger

Article: Edith Roger (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): danseinfo.no
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Norwegian dancer, choreographer and stage director. Turned 100 in 2022. Several honorary awards. Oceanh (talk) 15:39, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Appears to be sufficiently holistic for our purposes. Article is also well-cited. Curbon7 (talk) 00:39, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Víctor Gómez Bergés

Article: Víctor Gómez Bergés (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Hoy (Spanish)
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Dominican politician. - Indefensible (talk) 18:44, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Not yet ready Quite short; this reads more like a resume listing offices he's held than an encyclopedia article. Just a few sentences explaining things he may have done in these offices (particularly in parliament and as minister of FA) would be sufficient to making this holistic. The article is also pretty underlinked. Curbon7 (talk) 00:36, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Walter Mirisch

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

Nominator's comments: American film producer. Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 06:21, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Felipe González González

Article: Felipe González González (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Proceso (Spanish)
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Mexican politician. - Indefensible (talk) 05:46, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak Support Article sourcing looks complete. Some more details could be added about his term as governor. Joofjoof (talk) 22:53, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Per user above. --Vacant0 (talk) 15:48, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • PostedBagumba (talk) 09:46, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: James Abourezk

Article: James Abourezk (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Yankton Daily
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Former US Senator. Curbon7 (talk) 03:53, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Bernard Ingham

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

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

Nominator's comments: Article ok, but lead needs a bit more, and a few citations are also needed. SchroCat (talk) 23:02, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Needs work Lots of work. I just read the article, comparing it with the BBC and Guardian obituaries. It seems too recentist, giving undue weight to matters like the petty dispute with the neighbour and the Hillsborough matter while giving no attention to more significant issues in his career like the Falklands War. Andrew🐉(talk) 23:40, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

February 23

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology


(Posted) RD: Roger Bonk

Article: Roger Bonk (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Fresno Bee
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Died on February 13, appears to have been first reported on February 23. BeanieFan11 (talk) 18:40, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Everything seems to be cited. --Vacant0 (talk) 15:49, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Article is in good shape. Mooonswimmer 18:41, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support A little short, but sufficiently holistic for our purposes and well-cited. Curbon7 (talk) 00:31, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • PostedBagumba (talk) 04:27, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: John Olver

Article: John Olver (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Boston Herald, CBS, Telegram, Washington Times
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: American politician, rated Good Article. - Indefensible (talk) 06:18, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • The 2004 Electoral College section saying he voted "not to count" Ohio needs work, especially the WP:SYNTH following that sentence. Unlike January 6, 2021, this was not an attempt to overturn an election. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:27, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Indeed a GA, but from a decade ago. I've added cn tags. --Vacant0 (talk) 15:55, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I'll take a crack at fixing some of the issues later. Olver is one of the more famous people to come from my town. Curbon7 (talk) 00:29, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) 2023 Wamena riot

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


Article: 2023 Wamena riot (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: A riot in Wamena, Indonesia, kills around 10 people. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Twelve people are killed in a riot in Wamena, Indonesia.
News source(s): [10]
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Admittedly this happened in the most riot-prone region in the country, but large-scale with large numbers of deaths are a bit uncommon. Information a bit limited due to remoteness of the region and limited international access. "Around 10" due to fatality reports varying between 9, 10, or 11. Figured will give ITN a shot, with just 1 new hook in the last week or so. Juxlos (talk) 10:50, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose My personal feelings aside, I don't think riots in Wamena should be blurbed for the ITN as the riots aren't significant in the wider scale of things. If the riots starting to continue further it will be put as an ongoing, but as it stands, it's unlikely. MarioJump83 (talk) 11:34, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The most bloodshed in the Papua conflict in years. 10 civilians were killed, including 7 or 8 by their own government. That meets the merit of significance, in my view. Blurb needs work, though. Curbon7 (talk) 13:34, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per Curbon7. Long-term significance is not required for posting items to ITN, if we can demonstrate there is adequate short-term significance. I feel this counts as such due to the unusually high numbers of deaths. --WaltClipper -(talk) 14:52, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I mean, we do have NOTNEWS and NEVENT that says we should not be covering topics that get only bursts of coverage in the news and no clear enduring/long-term coverage. It is not immediately clear if this will have that long tail, or if its part of a larger news topic (I don't see an obvious one here immediately, but discussing this riot in that context rather than a standalone would still make it a possible ITN event.) This idea would readily expand to how we usually treat US gun shootings or routine natural disasters in various parts of the world, for example. However, this is probably a discussion for WT:ITN, not in this blurb. Masem (t) 16:13, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Masem, I'm just going based off of what our current consensus seems to favor. And my understanding is that natural or man-made disasters that have a sufficient death toll usually get through without a problem, but then you have edge cases like this one where people ask "where's the long-term significance?" Not to be morbid, but if you compared such an event to elections or declarations of war, it's doubtful that a landslide has any claim at long-term significance whether it kills 1, 10, 100, or 500 people, so it's a bit ticky-tack to apply that evidently nebulous standard to one story and to not apply it to another.
    As far as WP:NOTNEWS goes, I've said before that this applies to the creation of stand-alone articles. If an article doesn't pass that muster, it should be deleted, and the question of nominating the article for ITN would thus be made moot. But until it is deleted, I think it's not a WP:NOTNEWS violation to post those events if it can be determined to be significant in some manner. WaltClipper -(talk) 18:14, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per MarioJump. I'm not sure if this meets our standard of significance. That said, the article quality is up to par. The Kip (talk) 15:29, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Definitely meets the hypothetical WP:MINIMUMDEATHS and even aside from that, it is significant as a great escalation in the conflict as shown by Curbon7. I think that the blurb should give some context though. The ⬡ Bestagon T/C 15:56, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I’m not sure if we can call it a significant escalation without any longer-term significance. If this escalated into days of riots, sure, but if it’s an isolated incident (as it seems to be now) that doesn’t fit the definition. The Kip (talk) 16:42, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • support per curbon7, alt over initial nom. nableezy - 16:02, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Mario. We should wait. _-_Alsor (talk) 16:05, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Mario Ludicrous (talk) 16:10, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait. The article doesn't even seem to have a good handle on how many people were killed. Looks like a lot of uncertainty. DarkSide830 (talk) 17:48, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per @Curbon7 Crusader1096 (message) 01:25, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Provincial. We don't post US mass shootings as a rule, I don't see why security incidents in a security-incident-ridden region are noteworthy. Motion to invoke WP:SNOW This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 04:27, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    To be fair, security incidents there are much less common than US mass shootings. Maybe about the same per capita, I suppose. Juxlos (talk) 06:53, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    There is a fundamental difference between a kook shooting up a supermarket and an ethnic riot leading to clashes with government forces. Curbon7 (talk) 07:01, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    ... WP:SNOW isn't a "motion" you can "invoke"... WaltClipper -(talk) 14:49, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per Curdon. Yes, Papua is a conflict ridden region, but this amount of deaths is unusual. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 05:32, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Oppose Parts of me think this might be significant, but this one does not seem directly connected to the armed conflict in the region. As in the article suggest, this was triggered by rumour of a child kidnapping which is widespread this past few weeks within the entire country, and it just so happened that this one triggered a bloody outcome. Nyanardsan (talk) 14:43, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Per @MarioJump83. Also, death toll does not automatically mean notability. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 11:44, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Would have supported it if it was substantially related to the Papua conflict, but riots over child kidnapping are not it. If it evolves into further rioting/protests that would make it considerable but as of now it does not stand. Gotitbro (talk) 17:24, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Posted) RD: Thomas H. Lee (businessman)

Article: Thomas H. Lee (businessman) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [11]
Credits:

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

 – Muboshgu (talk) 05:22, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Article appears to be very well-cited and holistic. Curbon7 (talk) 05:34, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The article says "Lee was found dead of a self-inflicted gunshot wound" but the corresponding citation says "The police spokesman did not confirm the man had died from a self-inflicted gunshot wound, noting the cause of death would be for a medical examiner to determine." It's not enough to have citations. You have to accurately follow them. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:48, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's a shame we don't all work on an encyclopedia that anyone can edit, or else maybe we'd be able to fix this problem. WaltClipper -(talk) 13:16, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Good catch, I hadn't seen that. Curbon7 (talk) 13:27, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've edited this, all the source is able to fully justify is that he was found dead, not the cause. Courcelles (talk) 16:37, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed it does not say this any more. It did not when I nominated it, and we can semi-protect the article if unconfirmed BLP details are repeatedly reinserted. Please reexamine your vote Andrew Davidson. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:15, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The news sources do not seem to have much detail about this death. As it is somewhat suspicious and controversial, we should wait upon further investigation. There's no rush as we are not a newspaper. Andrew🐉(talk) 18:42, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
... which is why the article shouldn't state a cause of death at this point. But that does not mean the article shouldn't be posted. I don't understand that logic. Nor do I understand why you didn't remove it yourself when you saw it, instead leaving it in the article to comment on it here. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:48, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Also, didn't you complain that we didn't move fast enough to post something? Why the change in tack now? It reads as though you are complaining for the sake of complaining. WaltClipper -(talk) 19:21, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thomas Lee's death ruled a suicide by gunshot. (Not that we needed them to for ITN/RD.) So now that there's no reason to oppose this, Andrew Davidson, I presume you can strike your "oppose", even if you don't want to answer the question about why you saw a potential BLP violation and did not remove it yourself. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:28, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support It's pretty well cited per Curbon7. We don't know the full details of his death, but that doesn't mean he shouldn't be included in the RD. MarioJump83 (talk) 20:25, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - article seems to meet requirements. - Indefensible (talk) 07:56, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • PostedBagumba (talk) 07:31, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Donald Dillbeck

Article: Donald Dillbeck (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: He was killed by the state of Florida today. RockstoneSend me a message! 00:58, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Text RD A name like this draws its own attention. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:12, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The prose is very casual (ex. "Dillbeck's father walked out on him", "shooting a deputy dead", "Dillbeck's court-appointed lawyer conceded his crimes and tried to save him from the electric chair", etc.) in spots. There are also WP:PROSELINE issues. Curbon7 (talk) 05:32, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Seems to violate WP:PERP. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:45, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not sure where you get that. "if there is an existing article that could incorporate the available encyclopedic material relating to that person". There isn't. --RockstoneSend me a message! 10:01, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Read on. "Where there are no appropriate existing articles, the criminal or victim in question should be the subject of a Wikipedia article only if one of the following applies:..." Andrew🐉(talk) 12:40, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, it has a Wikipedia article, so it's inherently notable and appropriate for RD. I'd argue that any person on death row is automatically notable. --RockstoneSend me a message! 02:43, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are about 28,000 people on death row globally so you have your work cut out for you. Even if you just focus on actual executions and just stick to the USA, the rate seems to be about one a week. See List of people executed in the United States in 2023. I'm still not seeing what's special about this case. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:23, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I took another look and realised that this guy was just executed for a murder in 1990 and so he's been on death row for 32 years! The article doesn't explain this remarkable delay though. See the Mills of God... Andrew🐉(talk) 08:58, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • The article doesn't explain it because it's not an unusual delay. In Japan and the United States (the two developed liberal democracies that retain the death penalty), there's usually a significant delay between the crime and punishment, since even people sentenced to die are given strong due process rights. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 22:22, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I don't feel any issues with the article. MarioJump83 (talk) 20:31, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support For the name alone. Inexpiable (talk) 21:31, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral If Andrew wants o test WP:PERP, he should try WP:AFD. However, his concern is valid. 63.44.29.199 (talk) 17:19, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The article jumps 32 years from his conviction in 1991 to his execution without any mention of appeals. There's some details here if someone has the time to add them. Pawnkingthree (talk) 00:42, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: John Motson

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

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

Nominator's comments: Article isn't in too bad a state, but does need some work on getting the sourcing up to spec. SchroCat (talk) 10:05, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support passable for RD. I added a source, put some continuous tenses in the past tense and removed unsourced from the lead. Unknown Temptation (talk) 11:33, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. I've done a quick copyedit of the article, which seems in good enough shape for RD. Modest Genius talk 12:25, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - I've done a quick copyedit of the article, which seems in good enough shape for RD.  — Amakuru (talk) 12:41, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Jinx! Modest Genius talk 13:46, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - I've removed a duplicated paragraph and didn't spot any other issues. Marked as Ready. Awkward42 (talk) [the alternate account of Thryduulf (talk)] 14:55, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support - article looks good Crusader1096 (message) 15:34, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Posted -- KTC (talk) 21:56, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

February 22

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

International relations


(Posted) RD: Doug Fisher (American football)

Article: Doug Fisher (American football) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): San Diego Union-Tribune
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Died on February 12, first reported in the San Diego Union-Tribune on February 22. BeanieFan11 (talk) 21:31, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Looks good, everything is cited. --Vacant0 (talk) 16:04, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Could this be posted? I made sure every sentence was cited and I was hoping to have it posted by today. BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:53, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Article appears to be well-cited and holistic. A personal suggestion is to try and limit mid-sentence citations as much as possible, as these can get in the way of readability, but that's no an issue for our purposes. Curbon7 (talk) 00:25, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • PostedBagumba (talk) 04:26, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Salundik Gohong

Article: Salundik Gohong (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://prokalteng.jawapos.com/prometro/pro-kalteng/23/02/2023/kabar-duka-mantan-wali-kota-palangka-raya-salundik-gohong-meninggal/
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Indonesian politician, former mayor. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 14:17, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Article is very holistic and well-cited. Curbon7 (talk) 16:45, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support could use minor CEs for grammar, but otherwise fine. Juxlos (talk) 06:56, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The article is in good shape. Wanted to create this a while ago but did not have time for it, thank you Nyanardsan (talk) 02:14, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • PostedBagumba (talk) 04:25, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Ahmed Qurei

Article: Ahmed Qurei (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Haaretz
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Former Prime Minister of Palestine. - Indefensible (talk) 06:53, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support looks good enough. Must be published on main page in RD. Fahads1982 (talk) 08:23, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose There are a lots of sentences that are unreferenced that really ought to be. I added the tags, it could be that it's just a question of using thr existing sources and putting them in the right place, but can't have crucial parts going uncited. Abcmaxx (talk) 11:17, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Tags addressed. - Indefensible (talk) 00:15, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Sourcing issues have been fixed. Article appears to be well-cited and holistic. Curbon7 (talk) 16:43, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Per user above. --Vacant0 (talk) 16:05, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • PostedBagumba (talk) 07:10, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Tasuku Tsukada

Article: Tasuku Tsukada (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): TBS (Japanese)
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Japanese politician. - Indefensible (talk) 06:15, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Literary citations should be standardized as {{Sfn}}. The lede also needs to be shortened, as it contains a lot of excessive biographical information that should be moved to the body. Curbon7 (talk) 16:39, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Kanak Rele

Article: Kanak Rele (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): India Today
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Indian performer & academic. - Indefensible (talk) 06:08, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Everything seems to be cited. --Vacant0 (talk) 16:11, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Could use some work here and there, but overall the article appears to be sufficient. Article appears to be holistic and well-cited. Curbon7 (talk) 00:21, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • PostedBagumba (talk) 01:46, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Mats Löfving

Article: Mats Löfving (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Goteborgs-Posten (Swedish)
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Swedish law enforcement officer. - Indefensible (talk) 06:00, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support. I have just added an update which says Löfving died within hours of the end of an investigation into his conduct and a murder inquiry has been launched. But it seems possible it was a heart attack that killed him. Moonraker (talk) 18:08, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - good prose, well sourced. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:20, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Surprisingly, this is better that the article about him on Swedish WP, where it is also ITN. It might be prudent to add that treating this as a murder investigation is purely standard procedure in any case when a death has occurred at home and the authoroties don't know exactly what happened. No one is seriously thinking he was murdered.[12] The investigation against Löfving has also been dropped now that he's dead.[13] cart-Talk 16:16, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • PostedBagumba (talk) 01:47, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Possibly ready) RD: Ellen Inga O. Hætta

Article: Ellen Inga O. Hætta (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NRK (Norwegian)
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Norwegian educator & politician. - Indefensible (talk) 05:55, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment A little WP:PROSELINEy, particularly in the 2nd and 3rd paragraphs of Biography. Is there content that could be added to buff this out (i.e. things she may have done in these posts)? Otherewise, the article is well-cited. Curbon7 (talk) 05:25, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support A little short, but sufficient. Pawnkingthree (talk) 22:54, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose CV in prose format; article is a list of position and dates but lacks information about what the subject did in those roles. SpencerT•C 05:14, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Simone Segouin

Proposed image
Article: Simone Segouin (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): L'Echo Republicain
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Interesting article. Kafoxe (talk) 04:19, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Conditional support Article appears to be well-cited. The brief mention of her post-war career is sufficient for holisticity, as that is not the focus. The condition for my support is that her promotion to LT and awarding of the Croix de Guerre is included twice; I have no opinion on which should be removed, so that is up to someone else's discretion. Irrelevant for RD purposes, but that picture is freaking awesome! Curbon7 (talk) 08:37, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per above, rest in peace. Editor 5426387 (talk) 14:32, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support but I don't think people are going to hack it putting up a photo RD when the current image on the ITN template is a landslide. --WaltClipper -(talk) 20:08, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Considering that at the peak of the Turko-Syrian earthquake, we had folks trying to shuffle stories to keep the earthquake at the top of the ITN section or attempting to remove the section image and replace it with the earthquake image, and how we literally had a story pulled because people were complaining that by including it, it was "crass" and we were disrespecting the victims, you're probably right. Though admittedly the Brazilian carnival landslides are inferior in magnitude to the earthquake. Crusader1096 (message) 21:40, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per above. Crusader1096 (message) 21:36, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support looks good enough. But please, Stop the bandwagon with proposing photos in every RD nominations. _-_Alsor (talk) 23:06, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Agree. Curbon7 (talk) 05:27, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Photo RD, though give the landslide photo whatever seems a fair time to shine first. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:21, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I've resolved a minor sourcing issue with the article, as well as the duplicate information about her rank and award. Kafoxe (talk) 00:48, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I'm not sure what WP:POINT is trying to be made, but seriously, can we stop with the parade of attempted photo RDs for comparatively minor figures. The Kip (talk) 02:20, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The point is on the Talk Page, and it tries to make clear that a Photo RD is not a gift for some arbitrarily elite class of dead people. Any article with a good photo is eligible for nomination. If you don't want one in this case or the other, just Oppose it like you would have a Text RD, back when those were reserved for the consensual faves. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:39, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with The Kip. What's the point of arguing for it here when there is no consensus elsewhere for this Photo RD proposal. Get consensus on the talk page first. Natg 19 (talk) 05:08, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
On the talk page, I already am. Here, I just voted for one, not argued. Sort of arguing with Kip, but only to clarify the point, not sway him. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:18, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Needs attention) Cyclone Freddy

Proposed image
Cyclone Freddy making landfall in Madagascar
Article: Cyclone Freddy (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Four deaths occur after Cyclone Freddy (satellite loop pictured) makes landfall in Madagascar
News source(s): (Reuters)
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Impacts will only become more clear and notable as time goes on. RandomInfinity17 (talk - contributions) 23:49, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose animated GIF, otherwise neutral. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:23, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Why not animated GIF? :,) - azpineapple | T/C 12:43, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    It's annoying, like an ad from an unscrupulous website. Unlike most ads, though, it restarts abruptly and conveys information the average reader can't comprehend. We've all seen clouds on a map, sure, but it takes at least an amateur meteorologist to recognize which signify death and/or destruction. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:10, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I actually think it looks kinda cool PrecariousWorlds (talk) 11:00, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait My general statement here from 24 hours still stands, as the system's impacts are only just starting to roll in.Jason Rees (talk) 00:52, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait until impacts become clearer. And, oppose the animated GIF. Tails Wx 00:53, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait per above. The Kip (talk) 02:12, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait until the impacts in Madagascar (and quite possibly, Mozambique) have been well-reported. As for the image, I suggest that the satellite image of Freddy's landfall in Madagascar should be used instead. Vida0007 (talk) 10:16, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Changing my vote to support. Article looks good (108 references as of this writing and no sourcing issues), and although the damage and death toll is (thankfully) lower than expected, this is a special case. Freddy has broken several records, and is only the fourth cyclone to travel the entire Indian Ocean. Vida0007 (talk) 09:32, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait until we have more details on the impact. This will likely be a major cyclone and definitely notable. - azpineapple | T/C 12:44, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose This is why you dont nominate before you know the extent of the impact. Four deaths is normal for most storms and thus shouldnt be posted.
NoahTalk 12:51, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There is nothing wrong with nominating it early, Hurricane Noah, particularly if landfall is indeed occurring on the date it was nominated for. This is also RandomInfinity17's first contribution to ITN; please don't WP:BITE as it contributes to the notion that ITN/C has a toxic atmosphere. WaltClipper -(talk) 13:41, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is the storm isn't done and the most impactful area is likely to be inland Africa during the next few or potentially several days as a result of the rain threat. Decent potential that Madagascar is only a small piece of this rather than the main event. NoahTalk 14:48, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
An additional comment... I have honestly been stressed out and pissed off this entire week due to exams, people messing stuff up at my job, and my brakes going out on my car which means yet another expenditure. NoahTalk 15:47, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Cyclone Gabrielle had caused 5 deaths when it was posted. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 19:07, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There were different circumstances that lead to its posting. It wasn't about deaths but rather the severity of the damage and rarity of such impactful storms in NZ. NoahTalk 19:53, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support – Article is looking quite nice! ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 13:01, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait – The effects in Madagascar don't appear to be exceptional; however, it remains to be seen what happens in Mozambique tomorrow. As it stands, this event isn't at ITN levels for tropical cyclones. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 00:50, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait Despite the large amount of information in the article, the effects on Madagascar don't appear to be clearer. HurricaneEdgar 04:16, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wait until its impacts becomes clearer after its landfall in Mozambique Rainbow Galaxy POC (talk) 13:13, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wait - Per all above. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 11:44, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Leaning towards Support - freddy made its 2nd landfall and is weakening overland. more info will come out as time goes by but since the storm is dissipating and we keep voting for "wait" then it might be too late to be featured in the news Rainbow Galaxy POC (talk) 14:50, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support ongoing Article is being updated and the storm is still active. It's pretty much been stationary and just dumping rain the past few days which has led to serious flooding across Mozambique and Zimbabwe... Death total is up to 16 and the storm isn't expected to dissipate for a decent while so I feel ongoing would be appropriate. NoahTalk 01:54, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

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

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