Jump to content

Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Joofjoof (talk | contribs) at 23:50, 7 December 2020 (→‎RD: Rafer Johnson). 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.

John Hopfield in 2016 and Geoffrey Hinton in 2023
John Hopfield (left) and Geoffrey Hinton

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

December 7

Business and economy

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Sports


RD: Dick Allen

Article: Dick Allen (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CBS News
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: MLB player, was an All-Star for multiple teams. Dralwik|Have a Chat 22:52, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Natalie Desselle-Reid

Article: Natalie Desselle-Reid (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Daily Beast
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: Actress probably best known for her work on UPN.

2020 Venezuelan parliamentary election

Article: 2020 Venezuelan parliamentary election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In Venezuela, the ruling United Socialist Party of Venezuela wins an absolute majority in the parliamentary elections. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In Venezuela, the ruling United Socialist Party of Venezuela wins an absolute majority in the parliamentary elections despite boycotts from opposition parties.
News source(s): AP The Washington Post France 24
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Latest election event in the country, as well as in South America. Waiting for the final update of the election. Election had a 31% turnout rate with the ruling party winning 67% of the election. cyrfaw (talk) 13:30, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Surprise!Sca (talk) 14:10, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Why are we using <small> here? Regards, Jeromi Mikhael (marhata) 16:05, 7 December 2020 (UTC) [reply]
'Cuz it's an aside. – Sca (talk) 23:10, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
We don't post judgements about the legitimacy of the election. The current President of the United States and his supporters say the 2020 election he lost is illegitimate. We post rigged Russian elections. 331dot (talk) 21:15, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
[citation needed]
But that it was boycotted is not a judg(e)ment, it's a fact, from the RS stories I've read. So it should somehow be included in the blurb, IMO. – Sca (talk) 23:20, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

December 6

Health and environment

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

Sports


(Posted) RD: Soedardjat Nataatmadja

Article: Soedardjat Nataatmadja (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: Held various offices in Indonesia's regional government. The highest person in office in Bogor, 2nd highest person in Papua, 3rd in the Ministry of Internal Affairs, and served as an MP. He died the same day after I finished his article. RIP. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael (marhata) 15:57, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Paul Sarbanes

Article: Paul Sarbanes (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Baltimore Sun
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 updated and well sourced --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 09:53, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Peter Alliss

Article: Peter Alliss (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: Decent golfer but legendary broadcaster. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 21:42, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Withdrawn) Juliari Batubara

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


Proposed image
Article: Juliari Batubara (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Minister of Social Affairs Juliari Batubara faces death sentence on charges of COVID-19 funds embezzlement. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Minister of Social Affairs Juliari Batubara under arrest on charges of COVID-19 funds embezzlement.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Joko Widodo's minister Juliari Batubara under arrest on charges of COVID-19 funds embezzlement.
Alternative blurb III: ​ Joko Widodo's minister Juliari Batubara faces death sentence on charges of COVID-19 funds embezzlement.
News source(s): Al Jazeera, SCMP, CNA, IndiaToday, Straits Times
Credits:
Nominator's comments: If this is a SNOW close please ping me as I'm not too active on Wikipedia for the oncoming week. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael (marhata) 14:15, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – Country (Indonesia) not ID'd in blurbs. Juliari "could face life imprisonment or the death penalty if convicted." Posting might be appropriate if convicted & sentenced. – Sca (talk) 14:43, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on principle - he has only been arrested, no trial has yet been held. It would be different if we were talking the sitting PM of India or the like. --Masem (t) 14:48, 6 December 2020 (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) 2020 World Rally Championship

Proposed image
Article: 2020 World Rally Championship (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Sébastien Ogier (pictured) and Julien Ingrassia win the World Rally Championship. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Frenchmen Sébastien Ogier (pictured) and Julien Ingrassia win the World Rally Championship.
Alternative blurb II: ​ In motorsport, Frenchmen Sébastien Ogier (pictured) and Julien Ingrassia win the World Rally Championship.
Alternative blurb III: ​ In motorsport, Frenchmen Sébastien Ogier (pictured) and Julien Ingrassia win the World Rally Championship, while Hyundai win the manufacturers' title.
Alternative blurb IV: ​ In motorsport, Frenchmen Sébastien Ogier (pictured) and Julien Ingrassia win their World Rally Championship, while Hyundai claim the manufacturers' title for the second straight year.
News source(s): WRC.com Autosport
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: will update asap. Unnamelessness (talk) 13:23, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Tabaré Vázquez

Article: Tabaré Vázquez (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): El País Uruguay Reuters
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: Oncologist and President of Uruguay for two non-consecutive terms for a total of ten years. His article needs a lot of work. As a former leader, maybe a blurb is better. Alsoriano97 (talk) 10:37, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support RD after excellent referencing work by TDKR Chicago 101 - Dumelow (talk) 12:02, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Gotitbro Dumelow: Comment, I would not oppose that he wouldn't be posted as blurb, even though he was a transformative Uruguayan president. The article is a mess but until the middle of next week I will not have the time that I would like to dedicate to improve it, so I would be grateful if someone could give me a helping hand, to me and some who are doing some specific editions. Alsoriano97 (talk) 22:04, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

December 5

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

Politics and elections

Science and technology


(Posted) RD: Belinda Bozzoli

Article: Belinda Bozzoli (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): News 24
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: South African academic and politician. I gave it a quick once over but it wasn't too bad to start with - Dumelow (talk) 10:12, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not much time to edit today but I have expanded a little more here - Dumelow (talk) 14:02, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Hayabusa2

Proposed image
Article: Hayabusa2 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Hayabusa2 successfully returns to Earth after collecting samples from asteroid 162173 Ryugu. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Hayabusa2 successfully returns samples collected from asteroid 162173 Ryugu to Earth.
News source(s): Science Alert, NYTimes, AP, BBC
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Successful end of a six year mission. We know the capsule w/ sample had landed in Australia and just a matter of recovery. (And this is a prelude to the assumed posting of Chang'e 5 next weekish. Masem (t) 19:55, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

December 4

Armed conflicts and attacks

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology


(Posted) RD: James Odongo

Article: James Odongo (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Independent (Uganda)
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: Ugandan Roman Catholic archbishop. Could be expanded perhaps, but I found this is reasonably good condition - Dumelow (talk) 10:02, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Ferenc Tóth (politician)

Article: Ferenc Tóth (politician) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): TEOL (Hungarian)
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: Hungarian engineer and politician. I've tidied up the text and fixed a ref but was otherwise pleasantly surprised with the conditin of this article, though it it a little on the short side - Dumelow (talk) 09:48, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

RD: David Lander

Article: David Lander (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Variety
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: Aka "Squiggy" from Laverne & Shirley. Article needs a lot of sourcing fixes. Masem (t) 20:37, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Jayant Meghani

Article: Jayant Meghani (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Times of India
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Indian editor, translator and book publisher. Gazal world (talk) 08:11, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Narinder Singh Kapany

Article: Narinder Singh Kapany (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The 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: Indian American Physicist. CN tags fixed. Seems alright. Can make any additional edits as required. Ktin (talk) 01:08, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Montenegrin PM

Proposed image
Articles: Zdravko Krivokapić (talk · history · tag) and Krivokapić Cabinet (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Zdravko Krivokapić takes office as Prime Minister of Montenegro, becoming the first independent Prime Minister to hold the post, after 30 years of Democratic Party of Socialists rule in the country. (Post)
News source(s): Government of Montenegro, Radio Free Europe, BBC, Al Jazeera, RTCG, Vijesti, Pobjeda, N1, Reuters (Eng.), AFP via RFI (Eng.)
Credits:

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

 WalterII (talk) 16:05, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose for now, the personal article needs more references, the PM of of Montenegro article has only 1 reference (to an article on the PM of Kosovo) JW 1961 Talk 16:55, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I think that this news is important enough for publication, also i think that the main article is more informative, as well more referenced than the recently published article on the new Lithuanian PM, for example. -WalterII (talk) 13:35, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes of course it is important enough. It was the article sourcing quality I had reservations about. The article on Zdravko Krivokapić is now improved enough for the main page, but, I would still have concerns that the PM article has only a single source JW 1961 Talk 15:33, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Since this is not a normal electoral change, it should be explained in the blurb how he came to power; also an uncommon acronym (DPS) shouldn't be in there. Gotitbro (talk) 16:58, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

December 3

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

  • North Macedonia–United Kingdom relations
    • North Macedonia and the United Kingdom sign a Partnership, Trade and Cooperation Agreement to continue preferential trade terms after the end of the UK's Brexit transition period on December 31. The agreement also strengthens political, economic, security, and cultural ties between both nations. (Gov.uk)
  • Nauru–United States relations
    • The United States and Nauru sign a trade deal which is expected to provide access to the full range of investment support offered by the United States to the Pacific Island nation. Nauru High Commissioner Michael Aroi thanked Joseph Cella, the U.S. Ambassador to several Pacific Island nations, for continuing American support to boost relations between both countries. (RNZ)

Law and crime

Science and technology


(Posted) RD: Maria Fyfe

Article: Maria Fyfe (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Scotsman
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: Scottish politician. I've tidied the article a little, adding some stuff, removing some uncited material etc. It's short but probably OK - Dumelow (talk) 10:30, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So taut it's thin. – Sca (talk) 14:21, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Alison Lurie

Article: Alison Lurie (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): AP 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: 1984 Pulitzer Prize winner, famous novelist Neverbuffed (talk) 00:47, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thank you. I would do more, but I am not familiar with how this kind of article should be structured. I agree with you that it is not comprehensive with her literary impact (or writing career in general). Aoba47 (talk) 19:16, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think there's enough in there now about her life and work for a full-throated support. (Not to toot my own horn re: the additions, of course :) ) Important, Pulitzer-winning novelist with obits in all major English-language papers, and would be a nice corrective the pretty egregious male dominance of RD these days. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 20:23, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Bill Fitsell

Article: Bill Fitsell (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Sudbury Star The Whig
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: Recent death and article update Flibirigit (talk) 02:18, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Jutta Lampe

Article: Jutta Lampe (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): FAZ
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: Legendary stage actress of the Schaubühne, and had a stub for an article. Much more in the sources, if someone wants to help. A translation of the praise by Botho Strauß would be great! Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:43, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Betsy Wade

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

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

Nominator's comments: Article is a bit thin but otherwise in good shape. —valereee (talk) 14:09, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Dharampal Gulati

Article: Dharampal Gulati (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Indian Express
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Indian entrepreneur, founder and CEO of MDH Spices. Edits done. Clean Start-class biography. Good for homepage. Ktin (talk) 03:31, 4 December 2020 (UTC) [reply]

(Closed) Name as called out in WP:RS vs Honorific claim

(Posted) Ongoing: 2020 Indian farmers' protest

Article: 2020 Indian farmers' protest (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In India, a quarter of a billion strike for 24 hours and 100,000 continue with a farmers' siege of New Delhi. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In India, a nation-wide general strike occurs and 100,000 continue with the farmers' protests surrounding New Delhi.
News source(s): BBC, AP, India Today (Bharat Bandh = India-wide strike), Al Jazeera English,
Credits:
Article updated

Nominator's comments: Ongoing. Updates being posted. Sherenk1 (talk) 03:27, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support The article is light on the scale of the protests (no mention of number of protesters), but its definitely in non-indian news as well over the past week. There are sympathy protests with the farmers outside of India, to a lesser extent. Albertaont (talk) 04:19, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Number of protestors added. DTM (talk) 09:59, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
One round of copyediting complete. DTM (talk) 13:20, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Could use some more cleaning. "Awards return", "announced to return his award" and "Chief minister of Punjab" not being properly capitalised are 3 grammar/MOS issues in just the last 2 lines of the article and a subsection's title. The article may need some editors who focus on grammar and MOS. 45.251.33.78 (talk) 04:24, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I have listed the demands in its own section 2020 Indian farmers' protest#List_of_farmer_demands. The provisions are elaborated in the clearly linked parent article Indian farm reforms 2020. However as the demands show, the demands encompass more than just the three new laws. Nevertheless, changes can be made as you said. DTM (talk) 12:39, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"RS coverage seems slight" — seriously? DTM (talk) 15:08, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
One source listed above. – Sca (talk) 15:42, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support once MOS issues have been fixed because... yikes This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 15:19, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Article quality seems to have improved; it's not perfect and I encourage continued work, but it looks passable. It is very well referenced, and seems to cover well all of the main issues. Seems like a good target for an Ongoing link. --Jayron32 15:24, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I was going to oppose this yesterday as "tens of thousands" is not a high percentage in India and the quality of the article wasn't there, but after separately reading that these were in the 100k's of ppl now and seeing that incorporated into this article as well as the further expansion, this is clearly significant with the events from last weekend (road blockages, etc.) --Masem (t) 15:30, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality grounds. The article may be well-referenced, but it is poorly written. One of the purposes of ITN is "To showcase quality Wikipedia content on current events," and I do not believe the article meets that standard. -- Calidum 15:32, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: don't we usually blurb first and then consider ongoing later? Could a blurb be proposed for this item? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:25, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • The protests have been going on since August so a blurb would be "stale" but they have ramped up over last weekend. There is no requirement for a ongoing to start with a blurb. --Masem (t) 14:08, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • This was my thought as well. Usually if something is newsworthy enough for Ongoing, it starts with a blurb. Readers won't necessarily know what this is about, but if we give them a headline story first, then bump it down to Ongoing once that's rolled off, it's much better.  — Amakuru (talk) 10:12, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - the protests follow the 26 November 24-hour strike by 250 million people (= 25 crore) according to trade unions' estimates (Deccan Herald; Tribune (Chandigarh)). Without a police (or BJP) counterclaim, the estimate so far appears to be unchallenged. This does sound like a world record. The Delhi ongoing blockade is gradually attracting more and more worldwide media attention. I did a bit of tidying in the article. Boud (talk) 02:10, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Blurb1 proposal:
In India, a quarter of a billion strike for 24 hours and 100,000 continue with a farmers' siege of New Delhi.
Boud (talk) 20:36, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comments - since the BBC says "hundreds of thousands", we could put 200,000, following the minimal literal interpretation policy that seems to be the preferred en.Wikipedia standard. But this is not the place to dispute numbers, so 100,000 would seem safer to me. A tricky thing for the blurb is the historical ambiguity in the word "Indians" - people of India versus Native Americans, which is why I avoided the word. Boud (talk) 20:41, 5 December 2020 (UTC) I fixed the typo (seige/siege) and posted the blurb above, and removed 'add' from the 'ongoing' parameter since otherwise the blurb would not display. Boud (talk) 21:49, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Journalism rule: Never assume anything. We definitely should not guess at the number of protesting farmers. (And the blurb is sensationalized in this respect.) Topic getting stale. – Sca (talk) 14:50, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I've no idea what "assume" is supposed to apply to - these numbers are from the sources. India Today says 200-300,000 farmers have besieged Delhi. As for "stale", the next national strike is planned for 8 December. There's no sign of the farmers giving up. Boud (talk) 16:22, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Is there a reason this hasnt been posted? We have gone straight to on-going in the past, and a blurb just belabors the point since it would just be an attempt to capture what is going on today. Added altblurb 2 if blurb seems sensational. Albertaont (talk) 15:33, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Whether with a blurb or directly to Ongoing, this should be posted. There seems to be a last-minute objection from Sca, but the objection lacks explanation and is difficult to understand in comparison to the article. Boud (talk) 16:22, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Suggest you rewind your watch. – Sca (talk) 17:14, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Let's quote the source(s) on "hundreds of thousands," then. Let's not pull a number out of the air, however reasonable it might seem. – Sca (talk) 17:02, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • India Today Hundreds of thousands of farmers marching from Punjab have laid siege ... The agitation has seen an estimated 200,000-300,000 farmers converging at various entry points to Delhi.
  • BBC News Hundreds of thousands of farmers have laid siege to Delhi for the past few days, choking almost all the entry points to the national capital.
  • Business Standard As per police estimates, the number of protesters belonging to the Left-leaning union BKU Ekta-Ugrahan could be between 1.5 to 2 lakh with sizeable number of youngsters and women. 1.5 to 2 lakh = 150,000 to 200,000.
Boud (talk) 21:33, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment This is an ongoing siege of the government of the biggest democracy in the world, it's well-covered in en.Wikipedia by the usual criteria, and we have a strong (not perfect) consensus to post. Boud (talk) 16:42, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb – It seems very appropriate for Ongoing, but not for a blurb. Factors include lack of reported casualties and its essentially parochial character, regardless of whatever numbers may be guessed at – and the lack of general RS confirmation. – Sca (talk) 17:06, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Whether this is posted with a blurb or immediately as Ongoing is a minor issue. Regarding deaths or injuries ("casualties"): Wikipedia ITN is not intended to be a tabloid where blood is required for coverage. Regarding "parochial" - India is the world's biggest democracy. There are plenty of sources: claiming otherwise won't make them disappear. This is not the USopedia or UKopedia. Boud (talk) 21:17, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The world's most populous democracy. – Sca (talk) 23:25, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Are we missing something right here? There doesn't seem to be opposition (the only oppose was for quality issues that had long been fixed). Do we have conflicts of interest which prevent this from being posted? Albertaont (talk) 04:25, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Posted altblurb — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:33, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull The article seems to be quite poor quality. I just read it to understand the issue, as it had not appeared in any news report that I'd read or seen, unlike Brexit say, which is all over the news. The article kept talking about the "mandi" system as a key demand of the farmers but doesn't explain it and we don't have an article. After some research, I find a source which explains that these mandis are local markets for produce – the sort of topic that we might cover under a English title like marketplace or agricultural marketing. The word seems to be Hindi but this is the English-language Wikipedia. The article uses other foreign words like Gherao, Dharna and Raasta roko which will likewise be incomprehensible to our English-language readership.
Now, this may not just be a matter of language. While searching the BBC for this topic, the main article I found was India farmers: Misleading content shared about the protests from the BBC Reality Check unit. This explains that misinformation about this matter is being spread deliberately online. As we therefore need to be extra vigilant, we should not be promoting the topic on our main page without more scrutiny. Getting it all written in English would be a start.
Andrew🐉(talk) 20:20, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull – Per previous and my posts above, this one time I support pulling the blurb. This smacks of an overblown cause celebre. The AP photo series of three days ago was very good at illustrating the event(s) but not really informative at all. – Sca (talk) 23:30, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Don't pull. I see little wrong with the article myself, and this is clearly a very major deal and ongoing headline news in India.  — Amakuru (talk) 23:45, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

December 2

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

Law and crime


RD: Rafer Johnson

Article: Rafer Johnson (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NY Times, CNN, CBS 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: American decathlete and film actor. --SirEdimon Dimmi!!! 01:05, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Blurb posted) RD: Valéry Giscard d'Estaing

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


Proposed image
Article: Valéry Giscard d'Estaing (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Former President of France Valéry Giscard d'Estaing (pictured) dies at the age of 94. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Former President of France Valéry Giscard d'Estaing (pictured) dies of COVID-19 at the age of 94.
News source(s): Europe1 BFM BBCDaily TelegraphLe MondeNYTLA Times
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Former President of France. Johndavies837 (talk) 22:15, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
RD is for deaths that aren't important enough for blurbs, such as this one. Importance means; a stand-alone article on the person's death and/or funeral could be supported. Note the distinguishing between the person and their death. Abductive (reasoning) 07:35, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Abductive: I think you put your reply in the wrong place. Gotitbro (talk) 13:46, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed: "ITNC has a bias towards American officeholders." Anyway, some users have alleged such here in the past. – Sca (talk) 15:47, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong post-posting blurb support Household name in Europe. We posted some literalwho American judge who was like a 100-years old when she died, and people are opposing the blurb about the last president of France under whom the country actually meant something on the world stage? Cringe.
    Also, proposing an alt-blurb that mentions Covid-19. CoronaOneLove (talk) 17:06, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb regardless of being a household name or not, I think blurb posting for any former leader of the G7/8/20 countries is a no-brainer (as long as the rest of the ITN requirements are met). --Masem (t) 17:09, 3 December 2020 (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: Zafarullah Khan Jamali

Article: Zafarullah Khan Jamali (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  Former Prime Minister of Pakistan Zafarullah Khan Jamali dies at the age of 76. (Post)
News source(s): ABC News Association Press
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: 15th Prime Minister of Pakistan. Alsoriano97 (talk) 21:25, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Walter E. Williams

Article: Walter E. Williams (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): WSJ
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 Economist. Article looks in good shape. Picked the article up from Deaths in 2020. Did not have to make any major edits. RIP. Ktin (talk) 19:41, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Pat Patterson

Article: Pat Patterson (wrestler) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NBC 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: French Canadian Professional Wrestler, fairly transcendent in his field - (talk)Spman (talk) 18:29, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Mohamed Abarhoun

Article: Mohamed Abarhoun (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): <Morocco World 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: Moroccan footballer, career cut short by cancer. Not much information out there but I've fleshed out the article a bit - Dumelow (talk) 13:46, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fair point, I'll see if I can find something more on his career. It'll probably be tomorrow - Dumelow (talk) 22:01, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi The Rambling Man, I've fleshed out the club career section a bit more now - Dumelow (talk) 08:48, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support good work. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 08:56, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Banner updated) BNT162b2

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: BNT162b2 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The United Kingdom becomes the first country to approve the BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine for emergency authorisation. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine is approved for emergency authorisation in the United Kingdom.
Alternative blurb II: The United Kingdom approves BNT162b2 for emergency authorisation, becoming the first Western country to approve a COVID-19 vaccine.
Alternative blurb III: ​ The United Kingdom approves BNT162b2 for emergency authorisation, becoming the first country to approve a COVID-19 vaccine after large-scale testing.
Alternative blurb IV: ​ The United Kingdom approves the BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine for emergency authorisation, becoming the first country to approve an mRNA vaccine.
Alternative blurb V: ​ The BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine becomes the first mRNA vaccine to be approved in a country after gaining emergency authorization in the United Kingdom.
News source(s):
  • Roberts, Michelle (2 December 2020). "Covid Pfizer vaccine approved for use next week in UK". BBC. Retrieved 2 December 2020.
  • Mueller, Benjamin (2 December 2020). "U.K. Approves Pfizer Coronavirus Vaccine, a First in the West". New York Times. Retrieved 2 December 2020.
  • Pancevski, Bojan; Strasburg, Jenny; Hopkins, Jared S. (2 December 2020). "Pfizer and BioNTech's Covid-19 Vaccine Wins U.K. Authorization". Wall Street Journal. Retrieved 2 December 2020.

Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: The BBC, NYT, and WSJ sources say that this is the first instance of a Western country approving mass COVID-19 vaccination (after China and Russia's approval of two other vaccines) and the first country to approve this specific vaccine. There are many different ways to word either statement and there are other possible details to include (e.g. adding Pfizer/BioNTech, mentioning that it is an emergency authorization, or linking COVID-19 instead of COVID-19 vaccine), so feel free to suggest better wordings. — MarkH21talk 10:33, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
In light of comments below, I think we should make COVID-19 vaccine a link in the banner. It's already there in many of the links, but we might as well put it directly.130.233.213.199 (talk) 05:49, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Well first off, its not wide-spread approval, its Emergency Use Authorization. Second off, other countries like United Arab Emirates and Bahrain have also approved a COVID-19 vaccine and the ruler of Dubai himself already got the injection. Not exactly sure why this becomes notable, unless you wish to say "The United Kingdom approves BNT162b2 for widespread use, becoming the first G7 country to approve a COVID-19 vaccine. Albertaont (talk) 14:08, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    UAE ran Phase III trials with 31,000 volunteers, and Bahrain with 7,000 volunteers. (Reuters) (CNBC).Albertaont (talk) 15:03, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Stop directly changing the nomination.
    Emergency Use Authorization is an article about an FDA authority, not the authorisation in the UK.
    ALT3 is directly from the NYT: No country until Wednesday had authorized a fully tested coronavirus vaccine, while the Bahrain/UAE approval is for the aformentioned Chinese vaccine that was approved without waiting for large-scale efficacy tests.
    This is also notable for being the first approved mRNA vaccine of any kind (ALT4), as mentioned in the NYT, BBC, and WSJ articles. — MarkH21talk 14:39, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    The very same NYT article said approval in UK is for emergency use. It says it in the very first sentence. Albertaont (talk) 14:48, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    If you look at the article Emergency Use Authorization, it is strictly about the FDA in the United States. That article should not be linked here. — MarkH21talk 14:51, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose for two reasons. Firstly, this should already be covered with the banner and, if not, the update should be done there. Secondly, we didn't post the approval of Gam-COVID-Vac in Russia, so this is not the first country in the world to approve a COVID-19 vaccine (And before coming to contest this view, please provide scientific evidence that this vaccine is better and more efficient). I also don't think that the clarifications 'first Western country' and 'after large-scale testing' in the proposed blurbs make a lot of sense (yet the fact it's the first mRNA vaccine is noteworthy). Let's wait until the World Health Organisation approves its production and distribution, and then discuss posting it as the first widely approved vaccine. Nonetheless, this nomination is a timely warning that the banner should be updated with a link to COVID-19 vaccine.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:24, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
A "strong oppose" carries no more weight than an "oppose." – Sca (talk)
@Sca: I know. But when you see that people continue to nominate COVID-related items for a blurb while the banner is still on the top and, more importantly, it can benefit from the nomination, you need to react somehow and that's a good sign to use an intensifier.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 15:33, 2 December 2020 (UTC) [reply]
We should rely on the sagacity of our comments to persuade our colleagues. "Strong" seems to imply an emotional commitment more than a reasoned argument, IMO. – Sca (talk) 15:51, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not opposed to the COVID-19 vaccine link, just to the BNT162b2 one – which BTW makes a very clumsy title for an article.
Sca (talk) 16:15, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I also thought that the article title is clumsy and not intuitive, but it turns out that is the convention per WP:NCMED: The article title should be the scientific or recognised medical name that is most commonly used in recent, high-quality, English-language medical sources, rather than a lay term (unscientific or slang name).  Bait30  Talk 2 me pls? 20:20, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
WP:IAR – Our loyalty should be to the readers, not to to the multifarious Rule Book. – Sca (talk) 23:24, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

December 1

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology


(Posted) RD: Hugh Keays-Byrne

Article: Hugh Keays-Byrne (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Entertainment Weekly, Deadline, 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: Australian actor. Played the main antagonist in Mad Max (1979) and Mad Max: Fury Road (2015). Joofjoof (talk) 21:39, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: George Ross Anderson Jr.

Article: George Ross Anderson Jr. (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Greenville 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: American judge. I've expanded a bit and hopefully can get some more done - Dumelow (talk) 16:49, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Maria Itkina

Article: Maria Itkina (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Queen Athletics (Italian)
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: Societ Olympic sprinter. I'm adding some stuff but article is OK - Dumelow (talk) 08:03, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Brian Kerr, Baron Kerr of Tonaghmore

Article: Brian Kerr, Baron Kerr of Tonaghmore (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Armagh I
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: Recently retired Justice of the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom. Not got time at the moment to improve it much but its in pretty good shape already - Dumelow (talk) 17:11, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Good point, there was no criteria for selection. I've removed the section and added those not mentioned in the text to "see also" - Dumelow (talk) 23:07, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Arecibo observatory

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: Arecibo Observatory (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Arecibo Observatory — for 50 years the world's largest single aperture radio telescope — collapsed. (Post)
News source(s): "Giant Arecibo radio telescope collapses in Puerto Rico". The Guardian. Associated Press. 1 December 2020. Retrieved 1 December 2020. Coto, DÁNICA (December 1, 2020). "Huge Puerto Rico radio telescope, already damaged, collapses". Associated Press. Retrieved December 1, 2020 – via Yahoo!.
Credits:

Article updated
 7&6=thirteen () 16:42, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Are you sure that this was posted before? In any event, this is analogous to a death. 7&6=thirteen () 17:31, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Closure was on ITN from 20 Nov to 25 Nov. Just answering the question, no opinion on adding a new blurb. --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:48, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose We already posted this, so recently that I think it was the last blurb to roll off the main page. --Jayron32 17:50, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose (Yes we posted the decommissioning already). They knew that if this wasn't decommissioned in a controlled manner soon, it was going to collapse, the question of how disasterous the collapse. While this has destroys the dish and receiver, ending the telescope's "life", the damage from it was not as bad as they had feared (no injuries, some structural damage to remaining buildings), so while a sad event, I think most were already prepared back on Nov 19 when the decommissioning was announced. --Masem (t) 17:52, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: we posted that it was being decommissioned already. It was being decommissioned because it was old and on the verge of collapse. Now it collapsed. Not really unexpected or newsworthy.  Bait30  Talk 2 me pls? 19:01, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – Per previous. Suggest snow. – Sca (talk) 19:33, 1 December 2020 (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) Chang'e 5 Landing

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: Chang'e 5 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Chang'e 5 lands on the moon, becoming the first lunar sample-return mission since Luna 24 in 1976. (Post)
News source(s): (New York Times), (The Verge)
Credits:

The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: WP:ITN/R per "arrival of spacecraft (to lunar orbit and beyond) at their destinations." Perhaps it was meant for arrival at lunar orbit, but landing also counts nonetheless. Albertaont (talk) 16:29, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I think we want to affirm it returns to Earth, which should be in two weeks, IIRC. That would mark the successful mission. (It hasn't made the return so its not really a full sample-return mission yet). --Masem (t) 17:53, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Masem. The spacecraft has not yet reached its destination, which is Earth. GreatCaesarsGhost 18:00, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    That's quite frankly ridiculous. If you go on holiday to X. Your holiday distination is X, not your home despite knowing you would be returning with souvenirs. -- KTC (talk) 18:02, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, it matches the ITNR, but the fact that its return would also be an ITNR means we'd probably want to wait for the latter since it will be very very soon. If this was a return-sample mission to Mars where the return would take several months, that would be different as we'd not have to worry about piggybacking stories on the same thing. --Masem (t) 18:08, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Hey, I tried to reduce the number of space exploration (wouldn't have affected this one) on ITNR, those that supported on here didn't comment, a number of those that commented objected to it there. They suggested that if people bothered to update the articles, it should be posted. So here we are, an article that has sufficient details, meets ITNR, so post it. -- KTC (talk) 18:20, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    It is not listed as ITNR on return to earth, only on reaching the moon. There is no ITNR for returning to earth in the criteria. Albertaont (talk) 20:00, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Don't be so obtuse. A destination is the end of a journey. I go on a journey to my holiday destination, at which point the journey is over. The trip home is a separate journey. Has Chang'e reached the end of its journey? No. GreatCaesarsGhost 19:45, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • GreatCaesarsGhost I can equally argue that Chang'e has reached the end of it's "first" journey but that's not what's important. What's important is whether this meets the ITNR criteria, and it does, when applying the criteria as it was intended. Also: the point of the mission is to go to the moon AND come back, NOT only coming back. Had Chang' e not landed on the moon, this mission would have been useless. 74.101.118.65 (talk) 21:31, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Correct - you could argue either way; my position is not "ridiculous" as another editor rudely opined. You say the distinction is unimportant because this is ITNR, but the distinction defines if it is ITNR. Given that the key objective of the mission is to return specimens, the return to Earth would seem to be plainly more significant than the craft reaching the moon. GreatCaesarsGhost 14:13, 2 December 2020 (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) Mahara prison 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.


Articles: Mahara prison riot (talk · history · tag) and Mahara Prison (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Eight prison inmates were killed and 71 injured during a prison riot in Mahara in Sri Lanka. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Deadly clashes between prisoners and police officials resulted in killing of eight prisoners at the Mahara Prison in Sri Lanka
News source(s): CNN, Reuters, The Guardian, Al Jazeera
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: A deadly prison riot which has got adequate wide media coverage. Abishe (talk) 05:33, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I have done a full article CE. Coverage is global and the article is well composed and referenced. The lede is too long, and the parts dealing with the riot should be broken off into their own section. It is odd to find an article with only sections named Background and Aftermath. Perhaps Riot and fire is needed in between. A few details don't make sense to me; was the "fire from the Mahara fire" a secondary fire, and is "succumbed" used to mean "died" (the 8 prisoners) or "subdued" (in the whole prison population)? Will support once these are done.130.233.213.199 (talk) 07:50, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose For now, too short ATM. Also this seems to be connected with COVID, which is being avoided for blurbs unless especially notable (the blurb should also reflect the COVID relation which is the reason for its coverage in news). Gotitbro (talk) 10:56, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Not widely covered in media, lede is much longer than body, among other general quality concerns with the article. Albertaont (talk) 02:50, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose Not widely covered, article is not great This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 04:04, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Article is stubby, and event seems a bit too local for ITN (though if death toll rises past say, 30, I'd support) Gex4pls (talk) 04:35, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment While I agree that the article quality needs to improve, what's the objection to coverage? CNN (sourced from Reuters), Guardian (apparently independently sourced), and Al Jazeera (sourced from AFP). That's at least 5 sources representing 3 languages and 3 continents, just taking the links in the nom.130.233.213.199 (talk) 06:14, 2 December 2020 (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.

November 30

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology


(Posted) RD: Hella Brock

Article: Hella Brock (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): LVZ (in German subscription)
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: Musicologist, internationally known as Grieg scholar, 101. The article was basically there, translated in May, I just made an external link to a ref and added 2 obits. More may come. Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:52, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Irina Antonova

Article: Irina Antonova (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Meduza (Russian edition)
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: Added some references to the article, seems to have no major issues --Andrei (talk) 10:35, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Ben Bova

Article: Ben Bova (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Tor.com, SFWA
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: Myself and Schazjmd worked to ud the page, they got the formal 'update' edit in Eddie891 Talk Work 21:53, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support - looks in good enough shape to me.  — Amakuru (talk) 00:25, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I'm not thrilled that for such a short bio, the biblography was previously shuffled off to a separate article. Yes, 100+ works is long, but I feel it would be better for that to be included in the bio page, and which would only need to add the necessary ISBNs for published works to complete referencing there. I won't oppose posting if that's not done here, but I just feel it's better overall if there's no reasonable way to expand the present article. --Masem (t) 01:54, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I would say the exact opposite. Articles that are mostly bibliography, compared to the amount of text, are a eyesore, and this seems like a neat way to have resolved that issue, with a summary remaining at the parent. Few will be interested in that great long list of works, but for the few that are, they now have a page to visit.  — Amakuru (talk) 09:33, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, a giant in his field. On the afternoon when the first images from the Viking 1 Mars lander were printed in the newspapers in 1976 I showed him a front page (he hadn't seen the TV relay). Bova immediately said "Looks like New Jersey". Randy Kryn (talk) 02:02, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Article looks fine for an RD even without the bibliography. Gotitbro (talk) 03:42, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted - Dumelow (talk) 07:57, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(Attention Needed) AlphaFold

Article: AlphaFold (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: DeepMind's AlphaFold achieves results in protein structure prediction comparable to laboratory determination techniques at CASP 2020 (Post)
Alternative blurb: DeepMind's AlphaFold breaks a significant barrier in solving the protein folding problem; a grand challenge in computational biology.
Alternative blurb II: DeepMind's AlphaFold AI breaks a significant barrier in solving the protein folding problem.
Alternative blurb III: The AI program AlphaFold successfully doubles the accuracy of computationally-predicted protein folding
News source(s): Nature New Scientist The Times Science Bloomberg Economist CASP press release Guardian BBC NY Times DeepMind blog
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Article on DeepMind's Alpha Fold needs a lot of development, but this looks like a very big deal.
John Moult, organiser of CASP: "This is an enormous breakthrough. A 50-year-old grand challenge in computer science has been to a large degree solved." (Times). Andrei Lupas: "It’s a game changer. This will change medicine. It will change research. It will change bioengineering. It will change everything." (Nature). Venki Ramakrishnan 'said the achievement was stunning. “It has occurred decades before many people in the field would have predicted... it will fundamentally change biological research." (Times) The Times has been running this as top story on its website. Jheald (talk) 19:33, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support. Comment. I wrote up a little bit about AlphaFold which you can use as the target article. It is currently a start-class article, but, will definitely require someone more knowledgeable to help expand before it can get to homepage levels. I can lend a hand later tonight. Edits and expansion to the article is completed. Article has shaped up well to a C-class article. I feel pretty good about it. Now, if folks can hash out news-readiness and the blurb, I think this is good to go :) Ktin (talk) 02:58, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Can we get a source from a reputable science journal that's NOT some pop science press release bullshit? If it's as groundbreaking as the scientists say it is, then they can get a peer reviewer to state that.--WaltCip-(talk) 20:38, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @WaltCip: Nature and Science are pretty much the top of the tree, as science news reporting goes. Venki Ramakrishnan is President of the Royal Society, a structural molecular biologist himself with a Nobel prize to prove it, and unaffiliated to both DeepMind and the competition. What speaks for AlphaFold are its results -- see eg the schematic from the article in Science for a sense of the degree to which AlphaFold has scored way better than has ever been achieved before, and done it across the full range of hundred or so structures that entrants were asked to try to solve. Also impressive is Lupas's testimony of how he gave AlphaFold one more sequence, which his team had been trying to understand for 10 years. Half an hour later came back a structure, which explained all the data they had been struggling with. The CASP conference continues until Thursday, so expect more comment and information and assesment to come. Automated structure prediction really has been seen as the 'holy grail' of structural biology for 50 years. CASP is a reputable competition and collaborative conference, the benchmark in the field, which has witnessed steady but slow improvements for 20 years. But this year AlphaFold has "annihilated" the challenges. That is why this news is getting such a reaction. Jheald (talk) 21:04, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Clearly notable for an encyclopedia. I'd prefer the first blurb. --bender235 (talk) 00:01, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on article quality + significance but I yearn for a slightly more usable blurb (even with alt2). Its unfortunate these problems aren't as famous as the various math challenges where we could just name and point to them. But that's my only issue otherwise, article's been improved when I first peaked at it. --Masem (t) 01:23, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support a variant of alt 2.  Nixinova T  C   03:07, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb The original one that is. The target article could use some multimedia and expansion but is okayish. Gotitbro (talk) 04:23, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Big scientific news. I think Alt-2 is the best option. Alexcalamaro (talk) 05:15, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I won't oppose this, but we should be clear that this is a rather incremental improvement. It is marginally more accurate (against a curated database of empirical data) than previous computational approaches, while still not being able to solve all of the problems in the curated database, and certainly not all problems that arise outside of curation. The lede in the article gets this point across, but the blurb should do so as well, in a way that doesn't just handwave terms like "significant barrier".130.233.213.199 (talk) 07:59, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
No. This builds on what has gone before, but it is more than just an "incremental improvement". Understand the scoring system here. 2018's score of 45 means that 45% of atoms were in more-or-less the right place. Which meant that 55% weren't. Which meant the 2018 predictions weren't accurate enough to be biologically useful. In contrast a score of 85-90 means that all but 10 to 15% of atoms are placed just where they should be. (And some of that remaining 10-15% may not have a stable position - in reality it may be a bit that flaps about). AlphaFold 2 is predicting structures accurately and robustly enough (and with well-calibrated estimates of local confidence), that its predictions are reliable enough to meaningfully understand the biological structure of the protein. That has never been consistently achieved before -- and AlphaFold is managing this across the full range of sequences it was presented with (with, as I understand it, just a single exception in the whole of the CASP test set). This is beyond a tipping point, it is revolutionary. In context: 90% position accuracy on this metric is as good as you can get from structures 'solved' with the best available experimental data. (For which people win prizes). And AlphaFold 2 is consistent achieving this, or getting damn close, across the board. Jheald (talk) 09:04, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
People win those prizes because they are doing something truely novel: they are solving previously unknown structures. This is solving a subset of those already-solved structures, again, in the hopes that it might one day solve an unknown structure. The field has moved onto complex interactions and macrocomplexes, and single molecule folding has become a purely academic interest. Which isn't bad or disqualifying, it will have impacts regarding time and scale of certain projects, but "revolutionary" it is not. I have added an altblurb to reflect the meat and bones of the current news.130.233.3.185 (talk) 09:37, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The algorithm didn't know the structures had been solved, nor did it use any of the information from those solutions. The whole point of the CASP test set is that it is designed to be a typical cross-section of proteins that is representative of proteins for which we have sequence data but no 3d structure. So solving a CASP protein is expected to be as difficult as solving a typical unknown sequence. Currently there are 200 million known protein sequences, with 30 million new sequences being added every year, compared to about 170,000 proteins with known structures. Typically it currently takes an entire PhD to solve one sequence, if you can get the experiments to work and if you can get the protein to crystallise and if you can make sense of the results - none of which are guaranteed. There was a protein (without a known structure) that Lupas's team gave as an 'extra' to AlphaFold, that they had been trying to understand for ten years. AlphaFold came back with a prediction that they were able to confirm explained their experimental data, and which they were able to tweak in 30 minutes to give a final structure. So AlphaFold has in fact already been used to solve completely unknown proteins. Yes, of course one wants to know the proteins interact with other molecules, how they function as molecular machines. But getting a structure is an essential prerequisite for this -- it is anything but a "purely academic interest".
Secondly to say that AlphaFold has "successfully doubled the accuracy of computationally-predicted protein folding" is to profoundly misinterpret the significance of what the AlphaFlow team has achieved. More relevant is that they have reduced the mismatch between the prediction and what experiment can reliably determine from almost half the protein to between nought and five percent. That is a step forward of truly huge significance. Previously predictions were not reliable or precise enough to inform biological understanding of the protein. Now, on the strength of the CASP competition results, they are. That is a sea change, as well as an extraordinary intellectual achievement. Jheald (talk) 12:20, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per IP above. It sounds like the popular press has over-blown the significance of this. If Alt3 is correct, then it doesn't look like the sort of major breakthrough that would warrant ITN. Also, none of the Hooks give any indication of why this is important, to a nonspecialist.  — Amakuru (talk) 09:42, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Amakuru, definitely respect your views. But, as a layperson, this is how I read it. Proteins -- linear structures of amino acids -- fold into 3D shapes and structures -- which eventually what causes them to express themselves and have the intended effects -- good / bad etc. So, for biologists to explore drug discovery / disease research etc -- they need the final structure that proteins take shape. But, the only way currently to do it accurately is via laboratory examinations. These lab examinations -- are time consuming and expensive. So, computational algorithms can do that. But, until now their accuracy levels were not up there. Now, accuracy levels have reached upwards of a score of 90 (lets say 90% just for this conversation, though there are some more nuances). Now suddenly, the algorithms become valuable as a way to determine these protein structures sans experimentation (x-ray crystallography etc.). So, the barrier between when algorithms become accurate enough to be truly valuable has been breached. Hence, this is important.
    PS: The above explanation is quite simplistic. But, this is the gist of what I have learnt as a layperson. Ktin (talk) 17:59, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I'm not an expert in AI or protein folding, but I know enough to realise that this is a major advance if the claims are true, definitely worth an ITN blurb. The issue is whether now is the right moment. I'm a bit hesitant that the researchers haven't published their results in a peer-reviewed paper, which is usually our threshold for science stories, but I suppose they were part of the community annual testing process so have at least had some scrutiny by experts. However they haven't publicly described the methods used yet, or released the algorithm. It's undeniably in the news now though. I'm therefore torn and refraining from !voting. Modest Genius talk 12:50, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – Obscure and arcane. It may be significant, but will be understood only by a specialized niche audience. Most readers won't have a clue about what "protein folding" is, much less what this development may signify. – Sca (talk) 13:40, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Front page of The Times newspaper this morning with photo [1], plus two inside pages and leader. Do they really have such a higher opinion of their readers than we do of ours? And aren't encyclopedias here to inform people? Jheald (talk) 13:58, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see it here at the moment. Anyway, the hoi polloi don't read The Times of London. – Sca (talk) 14:28, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Pardon my French, but this is an asinine argument. Protein folding is the premier problem in computational biology. People unaware of its significance or implications can read the respective articles. As I wrote above, this achievement is clearly relevant for an encyclopedia, just as gravitational wave detection or the black hole image was before (both of which we featured on ITN). The number of readers who at the time knew what a gravitational wave was was probably hardly bigger than the ones you suspect knowing of protein folding now. --bender235 (talk) 05:03, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Most scientific discovery is incremental. To the extent that we ever see advancement quickly enough to qualify here, this nom is as good as it gets. GreatCaesarsGhost 17:48, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Per Amakuru. Also, the body of the article hasn't been updated properly beside a small 3-line paragraph about the, uhh, "breakthrough". Also, also, I've also counted 7 yays and 4 nays as of right now, with nays becoming more frequent as time goes by, so I'm removing the ready tag for now. CoronaOneLove (talk) 17:58, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@CoronaOneLove: we're not counting votes on Wikipedia. The embarrassingly uninformed statements of people unaware of the significance of this breakthrough can be safely ignored. This is easily the most important methodological discovery in biology since CRISPR gene editing a decade ago (and which won a Nobel just this year). --bender235 (talk) 04:40, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yet again, CRISPR and others win prizes because what they are doing is novel. This is partially solving, to a better degree than previously, already-solved problems. It's an extended machine learning training. I have a nearly-full career of "we've finally solved the protein folding problem" behind me; I don't make uninformed statements here, so you can kindly unstrike my alt blurb relating to the mathematical scoring of this competition.130.233.213.199 (talk) 05:58, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Calling this merely an "improvement on an already-solved problem" is like saying AlphaGo beating Lee Sedol was only slightly better than beating a random 6-yr old at Go. And your claim isn't even plausible. If achieving 92% accuracy was that easy, why hasn't it occurred in the past 26 years of CASP already? --bender235 (talk) 17:35, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Albertaont:. Please, notice that this is more than a press release. The results have been shown during the CASP meeting, solving previous unknown protein foldings with 90% accuracy. Even, an unknown folding, that a research group has been battling for ten years, has been solved as an "extrawork". All the results has been "peer reviewed", in a way by the jury, formed by top field experts. Also, this groundbreaking work is already In the news, as in Nature and Science, etc. Alexcalamaro (talk) 06:04, 2 December 2020 (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: