Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Line 25: Line 25:
| sign = [[User:Pharaoh of the Wizards|Pharaoh of the Wizards]] ([[User talk:Pharaoh of the Wizards|talk]]) 11:57, 17 July 2023 (UTC)<!-- Do NOT change this -->
| sign = [[User:Pharaoh of the Wizards|Pharaoh of the Wizards]] ([[User talk:Pharaoh of the Wizards|talk]]) 11:57, 17 July 2023 (UTC)<!-- Do NOT change this -->
}}
}}
* '''Support''', Article if fine for a notable person. [[User:Alex-h|Alex-h]] ([[User talk:Alex-h|talk]]) 12:18, 17 July 2023 (UTC)


== July 16 ==
== July 16 ==

Revision as of 12:18, 17 July 2023

Click here to nominate an item for In the news. In the news toolbox
Shortcut

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.

Lawrence Wong in 2023
Lawrence Wong

view — page history — related changes — edit

Glossary

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

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

Nomination steps

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

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

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...

Shortcut
  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...

Shortcut
  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


July 17

July 17, 2023 (2023-07-17) (Monday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

RD: Mangala Narlikar

Article: Mangala Narlikar (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The 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: Eminent mathematician Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 11:57, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support, Article if fine for a notable person. Alex-h (talk) 12:18, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

July 16

July 16, 2023 (2023-07-16) (Sunday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Sports

Wimbledon 2023

Proposed image
Articles: 2023 Wimbledon Championships – Women's singles (talk · history · tag) and 2023 Wimbledon Championships – Men's singles (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In tennis, Markéta Vondroušová and Carlos Alcaraz (players pictured) win the women's and men's singles respectively at the Wimbledon Championships. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In tennis, Markéta Vondroušová (pictured left) wins the women's singles and Carlos Alcaraz (pictured right) wins the men's singles at the Wimbledon Championships.
News source(s): NYT - The Guardian - The Independent
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: All three articles need improvements regarding quality (i.e, table walls [surprise]). — Knightoftheswords 18:40, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose DJOKOVIC IS THE GOAT!!! ALCARAZ COULD NEVER WIN FROM HIM!!!!
Just kidding, still opposing for now though due to page quality concerns. 🌶️Jalapeño🌶️ Don't click this link! 19:19, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Procedural support although I fundamentally think sports shouldn’t be treated as ITN/R (and maybe should have their own section akin to RD), as long as current policy holds it meets minimum requirements This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 00:58, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Re-iterating the opposes above. All 3 pages need a substantial amount of prose to augment the tables, including recaps of the final matches in both sides. Masem (t) 01:21, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for the usual sports article problem, needs some good old prose. Scientia potentia est, -MonarchOfTerror(talk) 02:26, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Why do tennis pages consistently misuse the {{main}} hatnote at the tops of pages?—Bagumba (talk) 07:30, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - quality is very poor. I'm not sure why we are bold linking the tournaments, and not just the overarching article 2023 Wimbledon Championships? If that one had a bit of work and an event summary it might be ok. It's a bit crazy to only suggest that the men's and women's events are the only important parts. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 07:36, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Historically, it's been the men's and women's singles that get blurbed. Are they not the most notable events? The bolding of the singles, presumably, was because it's been the pages more likely to meet quality requirements. —Bagumba (talk) 08:03, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ranking The main interest for our readers seems to be the generational change in the mens event. Their ranking is:
1. Carlos Alcaraz
2. Novak Djokovic
4. Wimbledon Championships
7. List of Wimbledon gentlemen's singles champions
10. Rafael Nadal
11. Roger Federer
17. List of Grand Slam men's singles champions
20. Markéta Vondroušová
24. Andy Murray
30. Juan Carlos Ferrero
32. Goran Ivanišević
34. 2023 Wimbledon Championships
43. 2023 Wimbledon Championships – Men's singles
46. Ons Jabeur
47. Annabel Croft
50. Grand Slam (tennis)
So, the 2023 articles don't seem to be getting much attention. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:19, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Which is why we don't care about reader pageviews here. We're not trying to optimize SEO or the like here. Masem (t) 12:03, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Ongoing: Nahel Merzouk unrest

WITHDRAWN
Unrest has largely died down. — Knightoftheswords 18:23, 16 July 2023 (UTC) (non-admin closure)[reply]

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: Nahel Merzouk protests (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian - France24 - WaPo - Fox - DW
Credits:
Nominator's comments: The blurb has fallen off with the recent wave of postings, but is still ongoing and receiving mainstream coverage, with the article still receiving daily updates. — Knightoftheswords 18:12, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose — The protests aren't even on the front page of Le Monde or France24. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 18:15, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nothing documented past July 10 on our article, and as I understand it, the protests no longer have the scale that the original posting merited. Masem (t) 18:19, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Ready) RD: Luigi Bettazzi

Article: Luigi Bettazzi (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.avvenire.it/amp/av/pagine/monsignor-luigi-bettazzi
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: Italian prelate. Article looks to be nearly ready though may need some work. Onegreatjoke (talk) 17:42, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support - good enough to meet requirements in my opinion. - Indefensible (talk) 20:04, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - I don't see anything to throw up red flags. And being one of the few (the last of the 42, actually) Pact of the Catacombs signees and was also at the Second Vatican Council, which has set up the modern Church now (Whether or not its totally worked, up to you) for over sixty years. Arguably, the impact of the Catacombs is seen through the current Pope. TheCorriynial (talk) 23:50, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Two CN tags that I couldn't find sources for. Rest of the article appears fine. Curbon7 (talk) 00:42, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, but the remaining CN tag should be fixed. What a beautiful career he had! _-_Alsor (talk) 09:07, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support I’ve resolved the last 2 cn tags, so the article should be of satisfactory quality now. Marking as ready. Scientia potentia est, -MonarchOfTerror(talk) 09:36, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ongoing: 2023 heatwaves

Article: 2023 heat waves (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian - NBC - VOA - NYT - NYT (again)
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Long time no see ITN! Glad to see that we aren't set to have severa; ITN items be on the main page for a month. Since April, we've continually had nominations regarding heatwaves, be it the three noms for Asia, the North American for June, or the recent Europe nom. An argument that often gets made is that the whole world is experiencing a heatwave, which spurred an idea amongst some: what if we nominated a general article encompassing the whole globe for ongoing? The subject article itself needs serious cleaning up, but I'll work on the article now that I'm done with exams. — Knightoftheswords 14:12, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

52.2°C in northwest China (125.96°F/126.0). Absolutely destroying the world record for 40.000000+° from the Equator (and China's record) by 1.5C (2.7F). If it was c. 2.137551° norther it would've destroyed Earth's record for closer to pole than equator by 2.6C/4.7F (Canada 2021). Turpan City population hundreds of thousands new record over 49C/120F @ c. 42.93°N. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 14:16, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have a source for 52.2°C in China? I saw a few mentions on Twitter but I can't find any articles and the Chinese weather websites have 48.7°C as the maximum. I'm trying to find a RS. Johndavies837 (talk) 18:10, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yale Climate Connections (the university not the door lock) should have an article on the extreme weather in hours, days at worst. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 18:20, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Washington Post had it for a few hours by now. [1] Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 20:37, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This article would be good to cover the record temperatures ITNC from earlier this week as well. However, the article is far from being ready for posting. There absolutely needs to be a section on the metrological reasons for the heat wave and the connection to global warming issues that have been seen, and not just reporting of high temperatures in a proseline approach. --Masem (t) 14:19, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support in principle, oppose on quality Article still needs work depth wise and also generally improved writing. Scientia potentia est, -MonarchOfTerror(talk) 14:27, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Historic event. --Travisthecrab (talk) 14:30, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Just "heatwaves" in general is just way too broad for an ITN item. DarkSide830 (talk) 16:27, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in principle, oppose on quality so far per above. The article should have a broader overview, with more major temperature records. While posting the overarching global warming is debatable, I think the ongoing general consequences should appear one way or the other in ITN. Brandmeistertalk 17:17, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Article need some improved writing, the heatwave does not seem significant enough for ITN, and the article seems too broad. Editor 5426387 (talk) 17:35, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support once ready As stated the article is a WIP, but in principle the matter is absolutely one that should be represented. It feels like every week new heat records are broken somewhere in the world, it's a subject that is absolutely dominating regional and international news cycles. Seems to fit ITN's purpose well enough. BSMRD (talk) 19:26, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The European Space Agency (ESA) said the next week could bring the hottest temperatures ever recorded in Europe. Count Iblis (talk) 19:48, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    That would be amazing, the last European record break was less than 2 years ago (11 Aug 2021 48.8C Sicily). And I was wrong Italy won't be hottest today but days later. Death Valley and NW China are hot today, possibly not a record for Death Valley though (the forecast was 131 a few days ago!) Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 20:06, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on significance I'll let those with more experienced minimum quality radar than me judge when that's reached. This seems to be an unusual time, something should be put up for it. Also Sardinia forecast for 117! Possible break of their record of 118.4. Googling "Rome weather" shows a few F above their record & Google's often low. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 20:27, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - ...good idea. Seems to be no letup soon. Jusdafax (talk) 22:36, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Annual summer traditions, sponsored by climate change. _-_Alsor (talk) 09:08, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This has to be the most serious wave of heat waves. I don't think we had faced these heatwaves this strong before. MarioJump83 (talk) 11:29, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, Notable news. Alex-h (talk) 12:11, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Jane Birkin

Posted to RD, consensus for blurb unlikely to develop. (non-admin closure) Curbon7 (talk) 00:31, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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: Jane Birkin (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  Anglo-French singer and actress Jane Birkin (pictured) dies at age 76. (Post)
News source(s): Sky News The Independent
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: English-French singer. Article is in good shape. TwistedAxe [contact] 12:15, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Article is nearly there but filmography and discography need citations. Scientia potentia est, -MonarchOfTerror(talk) 12:47, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Talented actress, article looks in good shape, esp once remaining refs filled in. Am adding some references. --2001:BB6:4E52:7D00:AC64:A20D:AAB6:7877 (talk) 12:49, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Blurb Per Macron and others, she was an icon that transcended generations. Andrew🐉(talk) 17:27, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    No, just no. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:45, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Don't handwave assertions of such importance - they need to be in the article first and foremost before we can consider blurbs based on that. Masem (t) 17:53, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I cited a good source which seems both reliable and respectable. The opposition just seems to be based on their personal opinion, which is otherwise. Andrew🐉(talk) 18:55, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    There needs to be significant coverage of this in our article. Otherwise, while you can point to a source, its handwaving to claim she is significant. Masem (t) 20:12, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • No blurb Iconic in some ways yes, but her actual body of work is quite slim and certainly not transformative in any way. Black Kite (talk) 17:43, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • No blurb per Black Kite. Modest body of work and inspiring a handbag is not "transformative" or in any way meeting what should be stringent criteria for a blurb. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:46, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • No blurb and commented it out from the template, even. Maybe premature, but even among those who support the posting of actors and entertainers as blurbs, you will not find a consensus for this. Getting an OBE isn't enough. In addition, it's an unfortunate distraction from what should be a straightforward RD nom since we get cluttered with the usual !votes of "never heard of them" and "not famous enough" which, even as I engage in the practice, at times I feel can be somewhat callous. Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 18:35, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb per Muboshgu. Labeling her as a fashion icon might be a bit overstated, as her influence primarily revolves around a single handbag (which bears her name and has since evolved into a status symbol, to be fair) rather than a more extensive and consistent impact on the industry. Mooonswimmer 19:37, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb. Discography needs some more refs per MonarchOfTerror, otherwise support RD. - Indefensible (talk) 20:35, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb Another instance of an off the cuff addition not intended by the nominator. Sidney Poitier is the last veritable posting which was posted without much debate. That is the standard we have here as of now. Gotitbro (talk) 21:22, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Update - Article now fully sourced.2001:BB6:4E52:7D00:AC64:A20D:AAB6:7877 (talk) 21:26, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Marked RD ready, blurb discussion still under way. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 22:27, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posting RD, as the discussion stands now, there is a consensus against the blurb. --Tone 22:45, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb An icon, but no. Again agree with WaltCip that some sense needs to be used before suggesting RD blurbs to avoid unnecessary putdowns. Kingsif (talk) 00:27, 17 July 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.

July 15

July 15, 2023 (2023-07-15) (Saturday)

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Sports

RD: Derek Malcolm

Article: Derek Malcolm (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.theguardian.com/film/2023/jul/16/derek-malcolm-longtime-guardian-film-critic-dies-aged-91
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: English film critic. Almost ready though could use a bit more expansion. Onegreatjoke (talk) 17:27, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Billy MacMillan

Article: Billy MacMillan (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.nj.com/devils/2023/07/devils-mourn-death-of-former-coach-billy-macmillan.html
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: Canadian hockey player. Almost ready but needs more citations. Onegreatjoke (talk) 17:21, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Marie-Laure de Decker

Article: Marie-Laure de Decker (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): France 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: French war photographer Thebiguglyalien (talk) 15:52, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

2023 South Korean floods

Article: 2023 South Korean floods (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A dam in North Chungcheong Province, South Korea overflows, leading to at least 33 deaths. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Flooding and landslides in South Korea leave at least 40 dead and 9 others missing.
News source(s): AP News
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Unusual high death count for a flooding in the region. The article might have to get significant amount of work since it is short. MarioJump83 (talk) 09:41, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support - notable, unusually high amount of deaths. — Knightoftheswords 18:59, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment, expanded the article a bit and added an alt blurb since some of the deaths were not in the named province nor due to the overflowing dam. ⇒ Lucie Person (talk|contribs) 05:38, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Francisco Ibáñez Talavera

Article: Francisco Ibáñez Talavera (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Reuters ABC
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: Spanish comic book artist and writer. Article looks fine except for an uncited “works” section. Scientia potentia est, -MonarchOfTerror(talk) 07:55, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Article looks good. TwistedAxe [contact] 12:22, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I am improving his article, as he had a long professional trajectory that I believe is not yet reflected. I would prefer to let you know once it is fully ready so that it can be posted. _-_Alsor (talk) 13:04, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, Article has enough information. Alex-h (talk) 12:03, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

2023 European heat waves

Article: 2023 European heat waves (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Heatwaves spread throughout the European continent, causing record-breaking temperatures. (Post)
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Gaining lots of news attention, likely to get more severe in the coming months. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 22:50, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Oppose, as it is hot EVERYWHERE in the world, and we should be looking to post the record temp ITNC below. Masem (t) 22:52, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait for the likely more severe coming months (and related events) or acknowledge this latest continental summer as Ongoing now. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:55, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    At least wait till tomorrow. Rome could break its record by 2°C and Earth could break its record by ≥1°F. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 03:54, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Lytton broke the Canadian record three consecutive times before bursting into flames just shy of 50, so world famous or not, Rome's going to need something tangible to impress me (not just confirm a number). As far as Earth is concerned, it's already tomorrow in Sydney and Durban, where it's 15 degrees. Maybe that's warm for winter, but not hot. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:46, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The Death Valley part of Earth isn't even Sunday yet. Californian time zone. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 06:52, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    And yet, true to form, has already seen more bloodshed. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:09, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Observation This article has the same problem as those gone by, wherein everything to do with heat (whether Germany's "warmer than usual" or Ireland's "mini heat wave") are treated as legitimate heatwaves (which don't spread or cause high temperatures). There are eight instances of "expected". About half apply to dates which have already passed. Not cool then, not cool now. In my opinion, of course. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:00, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose currently, the whole world is experiencing a heat wave, and records for a certain place gets changed all the time, so this does not seem ITN-worthy, when it is record-breaking in the entire world, then it might be ITN-worthy.Editor 5426387 (talk) 05:18, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ongoing There was a big Asian heatwave earlier and there's more to come. We should put something general into Ongoing to help get readers started on these many weather stories. For example, 2023 heat waves or Weather of 2023. Andrew🐉(talk) 06:41, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    +1 on this Schwinnspeed (talk) 11:13, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Leaning ongoing, as more importantly, heat waves in this year seems to be occurring at a higher frequency than the last time. Let's just say, 2023 heat waves should be considered here. MarioJump83 (talk) 09:32, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on Quality. This article suffers from the same issue most heatwave articles do. It's a jumble of different statements under each country's section without much cohesiveness. Also, I oppose this as the target article anyway if we are to post this item, as the correct target should be the ongoing heatwave, Heatwave Cerberus, though this article suffers from the same issues. DarkSide830 (talk) 16:32, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

July 14

July 14, 2023 (2023-07-14) (Friday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Business and economy

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

Sports

Chandrayaan-3

Article: Chandrayaan-3 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ India has launched its third Moon mission, Chandrayaan-3, from spaceport in Andhra Pradesh. (Post)
News source(s): NY Times, TOI, Al Jazeera, BBC, CNN
Credits:

 Ainty Painty (talk) 12:40, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Wait We should wait until it has either landed or crashed. 2607:9880:2D28:108:B818:9A26:1F7B:43A (talk) 12:57, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Article(s) appear to be in good shape, waiting until the craft does "xyz" is irrelevant to the existing coverage in the news -- something is going to happen to it, regardless. Kcmastrpc (talk) 13:06, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    waiting until the craft does "xyz" is irrelevant to the existing coverage in the news Yes, except that portion of the event is WP:ITN/R, specifically under the "Space Exploration" category: Arrival of spacecraft (to lunar orbit and beyond) at their destinations. Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 13:44, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Per @Kcmastrpc. Best of luck to ISRO! PrecariousWorlds (talk) 13:48, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait until 23 August per User:WaltCip 5.151.106.5 (talk) 14:14, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Respectfully, I don't see the significance here. This is already the third mission in this program alone, and at this point launching a craft to explore the moon is hardly new. DarkSide830 (talk) 16:03, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per DarkSide, after the 1st launch, the subsequent ones are generally not as notable. --Masem (t) 17:37, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait, leaning toward Support - We should wait until this mission either succeeds or fails, either way, it would make for a great ITN title due to widespread media coverage. Editor 5426387 (talk) 18:06, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait This mission is going to have a result no matter what. Whether it succeeds or fails, only time can tell. It's better to post the full results instead, whether if its successful or crashes or something. TwistedAxe [contact] 18:19, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Point of order - If and when the spacecraft lands, it will be considered to have fulfilled the ITN/R criteria for arriving at lunar orbit and beyond. If this is simply not notable despite fulfilling this, we ought to have a conversation about amending this criteria yet again; or if we had come to a consensus, amending the page so that it reflects reality. Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 19:04, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I think it is more that being an ITNR is not a 100% assurance of being posted (outside of quality or timing issues). There are reasonable exceptions when an ITNR is made, which in this case "this is the third time India has reached the moon, its not as unique as the first" would be a valid point. Masem (t) 19:29, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I can already hear the opposition to Artemis 3. After all, the US landed people on the moon six times before that, and we've got this discussion lined up as precedent. —Cryptic 04:47, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Tbf, Artemis III will be one of the most momentous events in human history, so it's a little bit different. But yeah, I agree. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 17:27, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    And that's fine, but if it starts to become a regular occurrence (i.e. if as Cryptic says, it's used to challenge the Artemis 3 landing) then we need to reconsider its existence as an WP:ITNR criteria or at least amend it to specify "This generally does not apply to missions repeating similar past flights made as part of a larger programme". Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 12:24, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Masem - (in all fairness, I am just seeking to understand): What about the part in ITN/R that states Items which are listed on this page are considered to have already satisfied the 'importance' criterion for inclusion on ITN, every time they occur. Seems completely counterintuitive to me to not post because its 'happened before'. Also FWIW as I stated below, this would be India's first successful soft-landing on the moon - not the third. Schwinnspeed (talk) 18:23, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    There's a difference between assuming that the general ITNR topic meets the significance level so that we don't keep debating why that ITNR topic exists (this was common when we still had the Boat Race on there, the ITNC would question why do we even have that ITNR), and finding that one specific instance of an ITNR is significant, which is the case here. No one is questioning the launch or the arrival of space missions as an ITNR, just this particularly event. Masem (t) 12:20, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Renominate after landing (i.e., wait) The criteria at ITN/R (as Walt has stated) is to post upon on 'arrival' This criteria reflects several discussions that posed similar concerns about the significance of repeated space missions (ie previous consensus took this into account) Also, for what it's worth, if it lands, it will be the first successful soft-landing of a spacecraft on the lunar surface for India, only the 4th country to do so. Notable in my book. Schwinnspeed (talk) 18:14, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait If it makes India’s 1st successful landing, it’ll be notable enough to post. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 18:47, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait, leaning support when it lands in late August this year. Arguments of DarkSide and Masem are equivalent to saying that Apollo 11 wasn't relevant enough after earlier Apollo missions. I don't think a success is the criteria here and this should be displayed irrespective of the mission outcome.>>> Extorc.talk 18:56, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    If there was some significant new aspect of this 3rd mission - in comparison to Apollo 11 actually landing on the moon for the first time - then that would be reason to post this one. But as I understand the mission , the goals of this lander is not really as novel as previous missions. Masem (t) 19:06, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    It has the same goal as the 2nd mission, but the outcome could be different. The 2nd mission didn’t land successfully. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 19:18, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Small launches like this happen weekly or at least monthly, if we start posting them all this whole page would be nothing but spess launches Daikido (talk) 19:39, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait, lean Support only if it successfully lands. India successfully deploying a lander/rover on the moon is notable, a hypothetical failure like the second mission is not. The Kip (talk) 21:42, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support It's an interesting mission profile with a launch into earth orbit and then a process of raising the orbit until the leap to the moon. As this is happening now and is in the news now, we should post it now. The article could use some work but is already quite informative. The item which would be displaced by this is the Bolsonaro ban which is not so informative and is not in the news. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:05, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Article in reasonable shape, and a blurb highlights a mission to an area of the moon, the Lunar south pole, that is currently the focus of attention in coming years. Notable, and a significant source of pride for emerging space power India. Posting this now is a plus for the 'pedia: inclusive, of international interest, and timely. Opposes and "wait" !votes are unconvincing. Jusdafax (talk) 09:20, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait until it successfully lands, then it's definitely in the news. Thought to nominate myself or at least get involved if it lands.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 09:25, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait. I would support if it successfully deploys on the moon. Black Kite (talk) 12:54, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. It's a notable event that's currently in the news. The article meets basic quality standards (though a few more citations wouldn't hurt). We can update the blurb if something else worth noting occurs. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 14:55, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

July 13

July 13, 2023 (2023-07-13) (Thursday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Sports

RD: Marilies Flemming

Article: Marilies Flemming (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Die Presse
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: Austrian politician. - Indefensible (talk) 19:28, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not yet ready Not sufficiently holistic: big gap in content between her birth in 1933 and 1999, de.wiki article could be used as a baseline. Curbon7 (talk) 21:03, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) New York City Council veto override

Consensus will not develop for city politics. Stephen 23:37, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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: Eric Adams (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The New York City Council overrode Mayor Eric Adams' veto of legislation to expand housing voucher for homeless families and individuals, marking the first override since the administration of Michael Bloomberg (Post)
News source(s): https://citylimits.org/2023/07/13/nyc-council-overrides-veto-to-expand-rental-vouchers/
Credits:
Nominator's comments: This is a major political event in NYC and could shape Adams' mayoralty going forward. voorts (talk/contributions) 23:02, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose NYC’s a major city, but its internal political affairs are not ITN-worthy. Virtually no impact outside the city itself. The Kip (talk) 23:08, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The top ITN right now is: "In the Netherlands, the governing coalition collapses and Prime Minister Mark Rutte (pictured) resigns." Is that not internal political affairs of a country that has virtually no impact outside of the country itself? See also WP:ITNCDONT #2 and the first bullet in ITN arguments to avoid. voorts (talk/contributions) 23:12, 13 July 2023 (UTC), updated 23:22, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The Netherlands is a country, NYC is a city. Different levels. - Indefensible (talk) 23:26, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    NYC is larger than many countries and its politics are routinely the subject of global attention. voorts (talk/contributions) 23:30, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Just how it works. ITN would turn into a political ticker if every major city had its news posted. This blurb is also a 1-sentence update in the article which does not meet the requirements either. - Indefensible (talk) 23:33, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Not that significant. This is more local news and not ITN worthy. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 23:23, 13 July 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, posted) 2023 SAG-AFTRA strike

Arguably posted a bit prematurely, but consensus will not form to pull.—Bagumba (talk) 07:58, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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 SAG-AFTRA strike (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In the United States, Hollywood actors in SAG-AFTRA join writers in a strike following failed negotiations with the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In the United States, actors in the SAG-AFTRA trade union go on strike, joining writers in the Writers Guild of America strike.
News source(s): CNBC, NYT
Credits:

Article needs updating
Nominator's comments: Fine, Walt; it's just a bunch of rich people striking in the USA because they want more money from other rich people. Yes, this is so, but this effectively cripples the entire digital entertainment industry in the USA. Never since 1960 has there been a shutdown of this magnitude. I believe the impact for this is going to be large; even if it's not a disaster in the sense of killing people, it's still very broad and has implications for the entire industry. Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 20:15, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Addendum - Though this was previously nominated, at the time it was limited to just the Writers Guild. Despite the article title, we are now talking about a very, very broad strike. An article move is anticipated to 2023 WGA and SAG-AFTRA strikes pending the outcome of this discussion. Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 20:16, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I disagree with the framing that its just a bunch of rich people striking. Most writers make a pittance. Most actors do too, they don't all make the salaries that a Tom Cruise or Jennifer Lawrence earn, and have to keep working to pay their bills. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:25, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, I was hoping it was clear I was being facetious. This has vast impacts beyond just the big name people. Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 21:51, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Since it's often easy to miss intonation in text, I just want to make sure we all know that those lesser known actors need their health care too. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:04, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose — If this were a trilateral strike against the AMPTP with directors joining, I would support an ongoing entry, but the DGA has already signed a tentative agreement. The blurb is also incorrect; actors have joined writers in the strike, but have not had a strike of their own until this morning. If you want to link an article, use 2023 SAG-AFTRA strike. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 20:29, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the clarification, I've amended the article in the template. I wanted to get the nomination up rather quickly and then fix it later, so it was a bit sloppy to start with. I'm welcome to alt-blurbs or amendments to the main blurb. But note that even with the directors not involved, we are still talking about something that has broad residual impacts on the industry. Other auxiliary employee classes will not be able to work under this environment. Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 20:32, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose this has already been nominated as the Writer's Guild strike, and this seems to have little impact outside the U.S. Editor 5426387 (talk) 22:05, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    "Please do not ... Oppose an item solely because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. This applies to a high percentage of the content we post and is generally unproductive." - WP:ITNCDONT voorts (talk/contributions) 23:07, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Two separate strikes... NoahTalk 00:52, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Unless you've never ever watched an American show or movie in your life, I really don't understand how you think this will have no impact outside the US. 223.233.87.68 (talk) 05:49, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This is the first time the two unions have struck together for 60 years. voorts (talk/contributions) 23:06, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Article is in good shape. These two strikes have had an impact on the entertainment industry which in turn does affect businesses and other affairs globally. Also per voorts, first time in 60 years is a significant/not common event. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 23:25, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - anyone who likes Hollywood movies is going to be affected by this. I agree that now is the time to post a blurb about it. --RockstoneSend me a message! 23:48, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Increasingly large impact on the entertainment industry, and the first time both the WGA and SAG have gone on strike concurrently in over 60 years. The Kip (talk) 23:54, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Article looks good. Big impact on the entertainment industry and rare event making global headlines. --2601:249:8E00:420:ACB3:7483:9BF:B6A3 (talk) 00:00, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. I'd say this is a real tipping point in the larger conflict going on here. DarkSide830 (talk) 00:16, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Honestly, the combination of this strike and the writer's strike will look to have significant impacts on the entertainment industry in the U.S Onegreatjoke (talk) 00:26, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This is a major shift--basically shutting down Hollywood, absolutely of global significance. :3 F4U (they/it) 00:32, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Hugely newsworthy, article seems well written given the fluidity of the situation. --19h00s (talk) 00:35, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I don’t believe we posted the writer’s strike when it started in May. What makes this different? GeicoHen (talk) 01:31, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    During a writer's strike, one scrub writer can still write a show, while so many actors are that much harder to hire. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:30, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment the articles needs to be about the combined strike, and right positioned only as the SAG one. This is absolutely burying the lede. Masem (t) 01:36, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Only if the directors do join the strike would this be blurbworthy as that trifecta has never happened before TMK. That would have international impact given that, whatever one thinks about, US-made content accounts for a lot of the world's TV and movie viewing. Daniel Case (talk) 01:39, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Even w/o the directors, these strikes will have a major impact on Hollywood. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 05:43, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Stephen 02:10, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting support per above. Davey2116 (talk) 06:18, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting oppose meh. Per Daniel Case. _-_Alsor (talk) 07:13, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting oppose. There have been numerous strikes throughout the world in this past year. Why is this one being given pride of place. Doesn't meet the threshold for ITN significance.  — Amakuru (talk) 09:00, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    This is the one happening now. It was nominated, it won, it's world famous. The other recent newsworthy ones are all the artillery, missile and tornado type. If another world famous strike pops up, nominate it. It, too, might pass. InedibleHulk (talk) 09:11, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Who decides what strikes are famous? Better to focus on impact then fame. Bart Terpstra (talk) 10:26, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    160,000 actors, 20,000 writers, and all of the staff that work in those scripted industries not working for an indefinite period of time. I'd say that's impact. Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 11:46, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    exactly, i agree with you. cheers?
    I just thought the "but it's [more] famous" is a weak argument for WP:N. A more obscure, not famous, but covered by RS and impactful strike should imho make the news too. Bart Terpstra (talk) 12:05, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree with you, fame is not the best kind of argument to use and should certainly not be used as a substitution for impact and consequences when measuring a story's (or a death's) notability. I know we've turned down strikes before that are equally as notable but perhaps didn't have the romanticism accompanying this particular one. Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 12:09, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    In my head, "world famous" is pretty much synonymous with what a lot of regulars call "globally covered"; if it weren't for Hollywood's place in the allegorical world as an established symbol of fame, I'd have gone with the regular. Anyway, it's not an argument because I'm not voting, just saying. I'll also just say, perhaps leaning Oppose, that the "impacted" fans aren't nearly as out of luck during this dispute, since these are the recorded arts and nobody's watched everything filmed, taped or digitized over these past hundred years. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:12, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting support per Blaylockjam10. Aaron Liu (talk) 13:45, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting support per WaltClipper Bart Terpstra (talk) 13:49, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting oppose - Per @Daniel Case PrecariousWorlds (talk) 13:49, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support of international importance and widely covered. Secretlondon (talk) 17:08, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull & Post-posting oppose - I'm not seeing this in my diverse newsfeed. It's impact doesn't seem to be significant enough. Pirate of the High Seas (talk) 17:11, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    "I'm not seeing this in my news feed" is effectively a permutation of WP:IDL. ITN doesn't cater to what one does/doesn't see; otherwise, half the non-western world news stories we post wouldn't get blurbed. The Kip (talk) 17:17, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm pretty sure we don't vote "pull" or "post" here unless we're an admin. Aaron Liu (talk) 20:00, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting question - would we post about a similar situation in a larger country with a bigger film industry? Bollywood has about double the output of Hollywood. Nfitz (talk) 19:54, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes we would. Also note that Hollywood still has a bigger impact than Bollywood though the latter is still quite a big film industry also with international impact. Aaron Liu (talk) 19:58, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    As long as somebody nominates it, yes. Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 20:28, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    1. Bollywood may have a higher output, but you’re kidding yourself if you don’t think Hollywood has a far greater global influence at the moment.
    2. We would certainly consider it if it happened and was nominated. The Kip (talk) 03:45, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting support due to the huge number of affected people/industries (the impact is larger than I think many people realize). I also don't foresee this being resolved any time soon, so count this as an early support for ongoing assuming it is still ongoing once it naturally rolls off. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 20:35, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I second the support for ongoing once this rolls off too. There’s lots of information that can update this event once it rolls off, until it’s eventual conclusion. DrewieStewie (talk) 04:16, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Another Post-posting question. Part of the nomination basis is this is the biggest such strike since 1960. Where's the article for the 1960 strike? Hard to see how this is ITN-worthy, if the last double-header isn't notable. Nfitz (talk) 00:03, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Just because it doesn't exist yet, doesn't mean it's not notable, right? Bart Terpstra (talk) 00:06, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    1960 Writers Guild of America strike. It's a stub, and I agree with Bart. Aaron Liu (talk) 01:42, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    That's the WGA strike, not the 1960 actors strike. It certainly is odd that such an allegedly significant event doesn't have an article, given the thousands we have for anyone who walked onto the grass on a 100+ British soccer pitches in 1960. Nfitz (talk) 02:55, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The latter are routine articles, they already have a basic template and all get filled out. However, we don't have routine strikes. Aaron Liu (talk) 03:20, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting oppose per Amakuru. Banedon (talk) 01:07, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull & post-posting oppose I don't see how this is even close to being notable for ITN. I mean, sure, it is notable in some aspects, especially for people who really enjoy watching Netflix or such, but no way that this belongs in ITN. Amakuru pointed out a good point too. TwistedAxe [contact] 10:07, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting support I personally don't particularly care about this strike, but it is in the News (it did also feature in the German news media I read), and there was consensus for posting - so let's just let this be. Pulling should just be done in egregious quality cases. Khuft (talk) 10:16, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting support Strike is very much in the news right now. It was already posted since a consensus existed at the time. It reflects badly on us to pull items unless there is a serious quality issue.
NoahTalk 10:57, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's still all over the British news too. Secretlondon (talk) 18:08, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting Oppose I can't help thinking this would have been better as an Ongoing item. After all, what is the impact now? And posted in less than SIX HOURS - have we still not gathered that this is a really bad idea except for items that are ITN/R or otherwise obviously going to be posted? Black Kite (talk) 14:33, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    How can this make more sense as Ongoing rather than as blurb? It used to be the norm that an event is first blurbed and then moves to Ongoing once it drops off, assuming it's still relevant by then. Khuft (talk) 16:37, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Post-posting oppose per Amakuru. estar8806 (talk) ★ 14:43, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting support I'm not pulling this. Above editors are citing Amakuru's reasoning for pulling, which is literally an OTHERSTUFF argument. This story is in the news and has a quality article. Let it stay. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:49, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah, this would be a horribly irresponsible pull. DarkSide830 (talk) 17:53, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    That's not really an OTHERSTUFF argument. This argument is "we generally don't post strikes, what makes this one more important than all the others that have happened"? To which there has yet appeared no answer, as far as I can see. Black Kite (talk) 18:07, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The answer could be as simple as "from now on, post more strikes of major industries". Bart Terpstra (talk) 18:10, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    As the supports repeatedly make a point of saying, it’s important due to the wide-ranging effects on the entertainment industry and the fact it’s the first strike of its kind in sixty years. Virtually anyone that watches TV or movies will in some way be affected here. The rationale is that it’s simply important; arguing that it needs to be proven more important is, as stated above, textbook OTHERSTUFF. The Kip (talk) 18:12, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Those "other strikes" are "other stuff" we didn't post, and "we shouldn't post this" as a result is an OTHERSTUFF argument, never mind the fact that every nomination here should be considered on its own merits and cannot be compared to an event that wasn't nominated. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:14, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I think you're missing Amakuru's - and my - point. I can't see that we've ever posted strikes before, so why is this one - affecting relatively few people (yes, 180K is relatively few in this context) and which has only just started so its impact is unquantifiable - different? Other than "but famous people"? Black Kite (talk) 18:36, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't understand why you think it's limited to 180,000 people. Yes, the writers and actors themselves are striking, but it also affects the livelihood of those other personnel who contribute to those sectors in the entertainment industry, as they are now without work and many of them have no recourse. Although it might be WP:CRYSTAL to assume how long this will last, it's also not appropriate to post as an ongoing item, as you have suggested. A labor dispute has two milestones: the beginning of the strike, and the final negotiation of a contract. There are no intermediate steps that would merit this be ongoing. Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 18:45, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    If this is the first strike ITN has posted, I'd actually be asking why we hadn't posted any before. A potential UPS strike may cost the U.S. $7 billion in a ten day period. I'd at least consider supporting that, if the strike happens and is nominated here. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:52, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting support These strikes will have a major impact on Hollywood, which will affect anyone who watches shows or films made by Hollywood. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 18:52, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Did not support this originally but at this point think it should just be left up. This will also create precedent for other such events which might diversify coverage in the future. - Indefensible (talk) 20:48, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting support This should probably stay up mostly due to the fact that Hollywood has global influence and this strike is already affecting ton of productions thus impacting more than hundreds of millions of consumers worldwide rather than just the writers, actors, and companies involved. This put it way above other strikes that we did not post or nominate. Also, I don't think Amakuru's argument should just be dismissed as WP:OTHERSTUFF since this is not an actual policy and only concerns deletion discussions iirc. --StellarHalo (talk) 22:52, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Now now, don't forget about WP:ONLYESSAY. 😉 Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 00:46, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    To be clear (God, I hate my catchphrase), when I told Amakuru OTHERSTUFF, it was just in an edit summary. Those mean next to nothing. The main reason was italicized: this one is the one (famous or significant or impactful) that won now. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:20, 16 July 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) 2023 North India floods

Article: 2023 North India floods (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In northern India, heavy rainfall causes flooding and landslides which kill at least 100 people. (Post)
News source(s): CBS, CNN, Reuters
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Current weather disaster with significant damages and casualties. - Indefensible (talk) 18:22, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose on quality Article is definitely past stub status, and events are notable enough; however, there’s a lot of uncited statements in the article. The Kip (talk) 23:55, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Can you add some {cn} tags? - Indefensible (talk) 02:59, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Seems most of the article's been cleaned up, but most of the Punjab section is wholly uncited. The Kip (talk) 17:30, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Some refs added. - Indefensible (talk) 18:08, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I've also gone in and addressed any missing refs, latest info etc. Should be ready for posting now. Thanks to both of you for the substantial clean-up too. Schwinnspeed (talk) 16:56, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Article is good enough (just) and it's certainly a notable event. Schwede66 04:12, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per Schwede. -- Kicking222 (talk) 14:00, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The article says that at least 105 deaths have occurred yet does not give any indication where and how these casualties occurred. The "Delhi" section appears somewhat undersourced as well. Black Kite (talk) 14:06, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Have cleaned up and provided context to any mention of the deaths. I dont see any unsourced sections under "Delhi" any longer. I believe this should be good to go now Schwinnspeed (talk) 16:52, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    That looks much better. Black Kite (talk) 18:09, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support With over 100 dead and substantial damage across a large swath of India, this is definitely notable and covered broadly in the news for the last week. We've posted similar weather events like Cyclone Cheneso which had a quarter of the death toll (not saying any less significant just citing a similar event as precedent to post) Schwinnspeed (talk) 16:50, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This is important enough for a blurb & it has enough details & references. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 19:15, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Stephen 23:44, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

July 12

July 12, 2023 (2023-07-12) (Wednesday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

RD: Daniel Goldberg (producer)

Article: Daniel Goldberg (producer) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://deadline.com/2023/07/daniel-goldberg-dead-the-hangover-producer-late-shift-emmy-nominee-1235436510/
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: Canadian film producer. Article looks good but there's an uncited filmography that needs citing. Onegreatjoke (talk) 20:56, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: André Watts

Article: André Watts (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Indiana Public Media
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 well sourced and updated --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 18:16, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Ryuchell

Article: Ryuchell (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: Japanese non gender conforming artist, 27. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 14:31, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Added English language BBC reference. Suicide is not confirmed, just suspected according to the article. Secretlondon (talk) 17:15, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not quite ready – I had to place three citation needed tags. Schwede66 04:22, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

July 11

July 11, 2023 (2023-07-11) (Tuesday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

Sports

RD: Oleg Tsokov

Article: Oleg Tsokov (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.moscowtimes.ru/2023/07/11/esche-odin-rossiiskii-general-pogib-na-voine-v-ukraine-a48547
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: Russian General. Article looks good. Onegreatjoke (talk) 20:46, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support There are no blaring citation needed tags or anything that catches my eye, so I think the article looks fine ❤HistoryTheorist❤ 04:26, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This does not affect my support, but I think the article should be divided up into individual sections if there's enough material (it's kind of difficult to navigate) ❤HistoryTheorist❤ 04:28, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support, Article is fine. Alex-h (talk) 12:40, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Indian Haven

Article: Indian Haven (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.thoroughbreddailynews.com/classic-winner-and-sire-indian-haven-dies-at-23/
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: British Thoroughbred racehorse. Nearly good aside froma few uncited statements. Onegreatjoke (talk) 20:39, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(blurb posted) RD/Blurb: Milan Kundera

Proposed image
Article: Milan Kundera (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  Czech-French writer Milan Kundera (pictured) dies at the age of 94. (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian, The New York Times, CNN, AlJazeera, Le Monde, Deutsche Welle
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: Czech-born French writer --Vacant0 (talk) 10:10, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support. If anyone deserves a blurb it's Kundera. Fantastically referenced throughout save for the list of works. --Ouro (blah blah) 12:52, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support blurb, surprisingly little about this in world news, but probably just about enough. Definitely support RD. Article is good enough. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 12:54, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. This is all over the news, also because of the obvious link to Russia's invasion of Ukraine. I'd add to the blurb "author of the The Unbearable Lightness of Being" -ELEKHHT 13:18, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb. Famous author, numerous awards, around 75 wiki pages. I also see he was in a fiction book as a character. Kirill C1 (talk) 13:37, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose blurb - Once again, we have RD for a reason. Blurbs aren't meant to be awards for recently deceased famous people, unless their deaths have far-reaching impact on the world (Elizabeth II, for example). Also, it's not even front-page on most news sites. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 13:43, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It is not award. If we blurb any writer at all, this should be him. Kirill C1 (talk) 05:56, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose both blurb and RD on quality Many here are looking at only the notability/significance requirements, but have yet to see that all of the book subsections (with the exception of Milan Kundera#The Festival of Insignificance), much of the non wikipaged books and poems in the Bibliography, the first paragraph of the Writing style section, and the first three statements of the Biography section are uncited, which means this article needs some serious sourcing cleanup. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 14:21, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Correction: there is one sourced statement in Milan Kundera#The Book of Laughter and Forgetting. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 14:22, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb Kundera is definitely a literary giant, having contributed to both the Czech and French literatures. There are very few writers who have received acclamation for writing in more than one language (another notable example is Nabokov).--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:33, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb per Kiril. Since the death blurb criteria are somewhat nebulous, I'll judge based on my own subjective findings: Compare with Günter Grass whom we have also posted as a death blurb in the past. This man was a legendary writer and certainly falls into my previously declared category of "the writer has some credits or notoriety outside of their field, such as being a public figure in other areas as well." --Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 16:26, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose blurb doesn't have Nobel prize in literature, not enough of household name. No doubt a notable author etc but this isn't even close to Shinzo Abe level or even Tina Turner. QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 17:01, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The Nobel Prize in Literature has relatively low regard and is definitely not the highest award in the field.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 17:18, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Which one is better known than the Nobel Prize in your opinion?Paradise Chronicle (talk) 17:59, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's the most notable one among normal people (ie. most wikipedia users) who are not bibliophiles enough to know all the other awards. Looking at his awards, I don't even see a Booker prize (one of the few other book awards that I personally am aware of). Simply put, he is not fit for a blurb on English wikipedia. Certainly a RD is merited, and probably a blurb on French or Czech wikipedia would totally make sense - but he is not notable enough to be on the front page. A DYK would also be fitting i think QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 17:27, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but do most readers judge writers off of just prizes? Perhaps it's the most notable prize, but winning an award doesn't make you a great writer, nor does not winning one make you not a great writer. DarkSide830 (talk) 18:25, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There's certainly no standard that requires that an author win a Nobel Prize in order to be considered transformative. In fact, the idea that it's required seems a bit Eurocentric. Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 18:41, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Tolstoy and Chekhov don't need a Nobel Prize to be regularly named among the greatest writers of all time (even the opening sentence in their article mentions it). So, it's not about awards at all. I'm sure most people admire him because of his works.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:56, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb Not having a Nobel prize shouldn't disqualify him from having a blurb. John B. Goodenough, Nobel winner, died a month ago and he didn't get a blurb. Per Kiril, the man was an influential writer in two languages which already speaks about his influence. --38.106.246.207 (talk) 17:13, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support A Nobel isn't indicative of importance (James Joyce is a great example and John Ashberry is a more recent example). He's probably more famous than any of the recent deaths up there. Novo Tape (She/Her)My Talk Page 17:20, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Certainly notable for RD but nowhere close enough for a blurb. I believe you were resopnding to me. QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 17:23, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I was; my bad. On Le Monde (see "Les plus lus"), for example, it's the 2nd most read article right now. I'd expect similar stats for most French and Czech news sites. He was definitely notable, but not necessarily in chiefly anglophonic areas, which could be why most are arguing that the news sites are showing he's non-notable by listing his death off the front page. Novo Tape (She/Her)My Talk Page 17:32, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    While you'd probably argue that this is enwiki and not frwiki, about 15% and 23% of pageviews from France and Czechia, respectively, are on enwiki and both countries are fairly populous.1 Novo Tape (She/Her)My Talk Page 17:46, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support impressive author.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 17:59, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    But article needs a lot of work. For now I oppose on quality but support in principle. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 20:51, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
For the moment I support an RD. A blurb I won't oppose, but also not support, there are differing sources for his private life, and a lot of gossip is around in the sources. I'd remove the challenged rest before adding a citation needed tag again and AGF the rest.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 09:43, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Blurb - not a household name. We didn't blurb more well-known authors who passed away, I don't see why this author should be blurbed. --RockstoneSend me a message! 18:51, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    "not a household name". The ignorance is very bold. Looking at your track record on Candidates, I think you mean "not an American name", because, frankly, I can't understand it. _-_Alsor (talk) 22:44, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    It's not ignorance. Just because he's a household name to you doesn't mean he's a household name to the rest of the world. In the immortal words of Leela from Futurama "The United States is part of the world." --RockstoneSend me a message! 00:51, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Citing a line from an American cartoon sitcom to make your philosophical point. That'll certainly do the job. I agree with Alsor that it would do you well to educate yourself beyond just the apparently limited perspective you bring to ITN every day. Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 12:01, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    It'd do you well to read WP:NPA. All perspectives are valid here. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 16:36, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    It'd do you well to read WP:SYSTEMICBIAS. Noting that you are viewing this author with a limited point of view is not a personal attack. Our goal here is to direct readers to subjects they might not have been looking for but nonetheless may interest them. It behooves us to maintain an open perspective about these subjects when discussing significance. Yes, all perspectives are welcome here, but transformative figures ought to be viewed as an absolute whole rather than relative to other people, places or points of view. Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 16:54, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    WP:DUEWEIGHT also applies. People known in the Anglosphere are inherently more notable as they are more likely to be widely covered on the English Wikipedia.
    I feel like many go so far to try and remove some arbitrary American or European-bias we have, but naturally there will be more significance placed, like how the Spanish Wikipedia will be more likely to put up stories related to the Hispanosphere on their ITN. Completely natural, not that we should strive to be biased. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 19:26, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, exactly. This reminds me of when I looked at the Indonesian Wikipedia during the height of COVID; they dedicated a huge portion of ITN to Indonesia specific statistics. I don't think there's anything necessarily wrong with that when they knew most (nearly all?) of their viewers were coming from Indonesia. Of course, English Wikipedia is different in that English is a more global language. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 19:37, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, do remember that English is the lingua franca and that, combined with of course the diversity of demographics within the USA alone, is a huge driver for why English Wikipedia is unique in that it's not strictly representative of an Americentric/Anglosphere POV. They are certainly the dominant group on Wikipedia in terms of participation, but tyranny of the majority is something that ought to be avoided in general in a collaborative environment such as this. Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 20:37, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    But it's not like that. The major difference is that in English Wikipedia the imbalance is within the Anglo-Saxon sphere (titanic preference for U.S. related topics) while in Spanish Wikipedia, although it obviously predominates the issues that concern the Hispanic sphere over the Anglo-Saxon sphere as a matter of course, it does not highlight a dominance of one of the countries. You also forget the categorization of English as a universal language. _-_Alsor (talk) 20:26, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    But whatever, it's more something political and patriotic (something almost inherent in Anglo-Saxon culture) than something strictly objective. _-_Alsor (talk) 20:31, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    In retrospect, I strike and withdraw my comment. Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 19:15, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @WaltCip: I appreciate you doing that. Thank you! -- RockstoneSend me a message! 19:37, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't say it, but everyone says so, both experts and Kundera's millions of readers. But ok. _-_Alsor (talk) 20:22, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    First, the name of the novel I think is household, no objections about that?
    Second, it is not criteria. We didn't blurb Harry Belfonte, William Hurt, Ray Liotta, Olivia de Havilland, Alan Arkin, Vangelis and more who were household names. It is about transfomativeness, which is the case here. Kirill C1 (talk) 06:00, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Highly important author. — Ixtal ( T / C ) ⁂ Non nobis solum. 19:29, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Textbook case of a perfect candidate, but that lead is atrocious what is with the extreme focus on citizenship and classification of French/Czech right there in the opening para (a single descriptor should do). With that lead it is a no from me on quality concerns. Gotitbro (talk) 20:28, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on current quality, support blurb Absolutely a household name, and more so if you happen to be from anywhere in continental Europe. Big cleanup including lead and more citations needed though. Abcmaxx (talk) 20:30, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb on notability, Quality fine for me The Tina Turner of world literature, especially with his masterpiece of the 1980s The Unbearable Lightness of Being. This year has witnessed quite a few deaths among famous authors, many of which I would have considered worthy of blurbing. Kundera is certainly among the most worthy of blurbing. If we blurb important figures of music (Turner) or sports (some of the baseball / basketball / football players we have blurbed in the past), I would hope we are as forthcoming with more serious (and maybe less popular) arts such as literature. Khuft (talk) 21:54, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb on quality undisputed and unquestioned notoriety. But the article is far from having the necessary quality. _-_Alsor (talk) 22:47, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb as nothing in the article gives any type of impact or legacy aspect to consider, and Oppose RD on poor sourcing quality. --Masem (t) 22:51, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I want to stress to those supporting a blurb "because he was important" that our article gives nothing to talk about this. Awards are important to include but alone do not tell us of wht he was considered important or influential. Do not just handwave the importance, please document the evidence in the article. Masem (t) 15:24, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD due to notesworthy career and good article quality. --NoonIcarus (talk) 01:19, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    As of this post, the article quality is nowhere close to posting. far too much unsourced material. Masem (t) 01:22, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Definitely worthy for RD, famous author with multiple awards, not sure if it is ITN worthy, but it is definitley RD worthy. Editor 5426387 (talk) 03:09, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb It's only 12 words which is still next to nothing for such a great figure. And we should be running a new picture every day, not running them for weeks as we just did with Bolsonaro. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:39, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Blurb, Article not ready for posting - Given his notability and coverage in the press, I'm ok to include a blurb. However we often delay or oppose posting many RD nominations because the bibliography or filmography is not adequately cited - I would really hope we apply the same scrutiny here and hold this article to the same quality standards as many other less popular RDs. Schwinnspeed (talk) 11:46, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose RD whole sections without citation. GreatCaesarsGhost 14:00, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Blurb There is current discussion on the ITN talk page about how stale ITN has been lately. Given that this is a very notable, very well-respected figure in literature, I see no convincing argument for why this shouldn't be posted. SunsetShotguns (talk) 15:15, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb on significance, oppose RD on quality There is currently a whole section that is uncited. Never heard this name ever before either... TwistedAxe [contact] 16:34, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment for the ones who want to voteː It won't get posted as long the article has numerous uncited phrases, also several paragraphs and small but whole sections that are unsourced. Better invest the time you need for voting in sourcing the article.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 00:20, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And as much as I want a blurb, I have to agree. Furthermore, I am not sure about the reliability of sources like this one and the fact that some sources which may be reliable nonetheless fail verification. Daniel Case (talk) 01:35, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not ready – sourcing is in serious need of attention. Schwede66 04:45, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Blurb, Well notable person. Alex-h (talk) 12:35, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment A lot of editors have chipped in and improved the sourcing. We're at 69 references now - certainly enough? I cleaned up the Essays section, which was orange-tagged, adding refs and deleting a couple of essais where I couldn't find a reliable source. Are we fine to blurb now? Khuft (talk) 08:09, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Blurb posted I find that there is consensus for a blurb and the article quality has improved sufficiently. Schwede66 09:41, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting question What made Kundera notable enough to blurb & not Cormac McCarthy? Blaylockjam10 (talk) 08:30, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Global temperature records broken

Proposed image
Articles: Weather of 2023 (talk · history · tag) and List of weather records (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Global temperature records for the day, week and month are exceeded as a result of global warming and El Niño. (Post)
News source(s): Hottest day, Hottest week, Hottest June, Why so hot?,
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Temperature records for the globe are being broken on a daily basis, the WMO has announced the hottest week on record and last month was the hottest June ever. We have heatwaves all over with more to come as a result of El Niño. But we don't seem to have a single good target article. I've found what I can to make a start but feel that we need the assistance of some weather experts such as Femke, please. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:44, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support in principle, but currently oppose on quality / update grounds: It's in the news, but the article linked is a general one about weather records, and does not cover the current heat records, except as date entries in tables. Articles should have up-to-date relevant prose to be featured ITN, in my view. Sandstein 08:37, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support - in le news. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 09:11, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support, kind of surprised there is no ongoing story climate change, as it creates a new content for Wikipedia every single week :) Bart Terpstra (talk) 09:17, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Climate change is far too broad to be ongoing. No real start or end date, very loose definitions as to what constitutes it. Better to just leave it to the occasional blurb. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 09:23, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Anthropogenic effects leading to permanent changes in the climate.
And yes, sometimes it's harder to tell, but "record amount of hurricanes" or "warmest XYZ" is almost certainly climate change and would be encyclopedic. (but repetitive 🙂) Bart Terpstra (talk) 09:30, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Still too broad for ITN. It would practically be ongoing for the next 100 years. Not really what ITN is for. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 11:48, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Somehow, it's too broad and common knowledge to be news, but i also still require sources to say it exists and is a cause for obvious things. Fun contradiction. Bart Terpstra (talk) 19:50, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I know some don't believe it exists, but I don't get what we're supposed to do about that. ITN isn't for environmental PSAs exactly.
The reality is that it's too broad, there's nothing contradictory about that. It's so long-term it's comparable to putting the War on terror on ongoing between 2001 and 2021 since it was a regular recurring item. It was just too broad of an event.
It doesn't help that the notability of most climate-related blurbs comes from the impact of these climate events on human civilisation, rather than being linked to climate change itself.
I can see where you're coming from, but even if we were to put it on ongoing, it still wouldn't make sense as climate-related stories are very rarely brought up. Ongoing requires a very regular stream of updates to its target article. In regards to protests or wars, we usually need very regular day-to-day updates on the article and recent developments.
For example, we took off the Israeli judicial reform protests since, while there still are lots of protests in Israel, there are not enough regular updates to warrant it being still 'Ongoing'. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 18:41, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per above. However agree with Sandstein that we should improve the target article. — Czello (music) 09:22, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support once target article is suitable. Whatever happened to (or why can't we use) "Global Warming"? CoatCheck (talk) 13:58, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Global warming should be put into context in the blurb. Everyone knows it as a standalone term which is not news anymore. Brandmeistertalk 14:05, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would support this but agree that we need a better target article. I don't think any RS denies this is connected to global warming do that may make sense. --Masem (t) 14:21, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support this certainly seems to be ITN-worthy due to the fact that it's not everyday (hopefully) that a new "Hottest day, week, and month ever" comes to be, I would oppose Global Warming as ongoing, because it's too broad, and has been going on for a long time. Editor 5426387 (talk) 14:31, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support in principle However unless I’m missing something, neither of the articles have this in them. Also there needs to be a citation for the causal links mentioned in the blurb. 2A00:23C5:5082:6101:2976:4C03:A0E4:E7F5 (talk) 16:58, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per above, but article needs improvement. Nascar9919 (talk) 17:00, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on notability, Oppose on quality Not a frequent occurrence, but as stated above, the articles need updating. The Kip (talk) 19:37, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Extremely warm temperatures all over the northern hemisphere, and the North Atlantic. Even for the global warming increases, this year has been extreme and a (hopefully) an outlier. Post when article is improved. Nfitz (talk) 21:18, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Hardly opposing on notability, but I have to agree that neither the current blurb nor the target article are sufficient at this time. The former can be rectified, perhaps, but it may be hard to find a sufficient article for this nom, barring the creation of a particular one for these records. DarkSide830 (talk) 22:08, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support notability, oppose quality Lots and lots of orange tags that need to be addressed. No doubt that this is notable for ITN though. TwistedAxe [contact] 22:11, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on notability, oppose on quality per above. It's unclear what article is supposed to be the target here. The Articles section of the nomination says Weather of 2023, but this is not linked to in the blurb (makes sense, as it's the one in the worst shape at the moment). List of weather records, Global warming, and El Niño are in good shape, but lack prose about the story.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 23:24, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    El Nino wouldn't be good as this (even if the yearly version) because this has global effects and El Nino is generally North and South America only (eg the Pacific Ocean) Masem (t) 00:51, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Apologies if my comment was unclear, I only mentioned the state of the El Niño article because the proposed blurb links to it; I was not proposing to make that the target.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 01:56, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on grounds of quality. It's nclear which article(s) should be targeted, and there are many orange tags that need fixing. – dudhhr talk contribs (he/they) 05:37, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Candidate articles
As noted from the outset, the challenge here is finding the best target article. So far, the only article I've found with an update is Weather of 2023. Possible candidates include:
  1. 2023 heat waves – List of heat waves
  2. Climate change – Current rise in Earth's average temperature and its effects
  3. El Niño – Climate phenomenon that periodically fluctuates between three phases
  4. Global surface temperature – Average temperature of the Earth's surface
  5. Global temperature record – Fluctuations of the Earth's temperature over time
  6. Global warming – redirects to climate change
  7. List of weather records
  8. Weather of 2023
We should figure this out because we're only halfway through the year and there's more to come. I had hoped that some weather specialist editor(s) might help but I suppose they are mostly out enjoying the warm weather. :)
In the meantime, the article that's getting most attention from our readership is El Niño. See stats.
Andrew🐉(talk) 07:18, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Can't get on board with any of these. Most of them are too broad to reasonably list these record, and as PC notes below, lists probably aren't great targets either. The obvious issue with most of these is that, should these record be broken again, the current record will likely be removed from the article, which is not really an issue for the life of the item while it is at ITN, but is a concern worth noting as well. DarkSide830 (talk) 18:10, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on notability, oppose on quality. A list "article" is not really informative for such news.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 18:02, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose — Hottest on record so far. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 19:54, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Why even post records at all then? What a silly rationale. An unprecedented breaking of a historical temperature record and you just blow it off like it's a hot-dog eating record. Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 20:21, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't know. It's not unprecedented for late July to top early July, or for mid-August to be "a real scorcher" (relatively). Anyway, Strong Neutral. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:55, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Strong Neutral - I see someone just got back from a vacation to Switzerland! Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 12:31, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I'll see you when this is nominated next year. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 02:16, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) 2023 Vilnius summit

No consensus to post. SpencerT•C 20:48, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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 Vilnius summit (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ World leaders meet at Vilnius, Lithuania for a NATO summit to discuss Ukraine and Sweden's membership, as well as the ongoing Russo-Ukrainian war. (Post)
News source(s): [2] [3]
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Well, it is a recurring meeting where important world leaders discuss important, pressing issues in the world. So, why not put it on the Main Page? — Prodraxis {talk • contributions} (she/her) 01:15, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait Until the summit has actually occurred. Currently, the article has nothing detailing what is going on, because it isn't going on. (Side note: the article you put at the top of the ITN candidate template is always bolded.) Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 01:22, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Our past approach to any such world leader meeting is to see if there are any significant achievements made by the end of the event and then we'll post that. It should be clear that either Ukraine or Sweden joining NATO is very much ITN-quality material, but we need a definitive on that. Masem (t) 01:22, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Masem, @Fakescientist8000 Ok, understood :) I'm new to this whole ITN thing, and I do certainly agree that Ukraine or Sweden joining NATO would be certainly ITN-worthy. In the meantime, I will continue editing and updating the article. — Prodraxis {talk • contributions} (she/her) 01:29, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose unless something comes out of it. Banedon (talk) 01:24, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait Until after the summit, if anything were to come out of it. Editor 5426387 (talk) 03:44, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support more in the news and influiental than some of the events currently in ITN.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 04:55, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose These summits are exactly the kind of things that we don't and should never post. If they agreed to admit Sweden in NATO, we can post it when the country actually joins.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 06:43, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong support -- influential and important, and has the potential to finally see Sweden join NATO. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 06:58, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose have we ever posted a local military alliance summit before? I dont see why we should start now. (Personal attack removed) Daikido (talk) 07:31, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • You should probably strike this comment, accusing users here of canvassing is a direct violation of WP:AGF. Edit: Signing my comment and directly requesting (rather than just suggesting) that you remove your use of an ableist slur at the end of your comment. --2001:8003:1C20:8C00:4048:BA85:DEB4:B3D8 (talk) 07:54, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      I removed it. Daikido, you need to improve your conduct at ITN/C. Many of your !votes have been unnecessarily in violation of WP:NOTFORUM. Please don't resort to slurs or personal attacks. Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 14:17, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Totally agree with Kiril Simeonovski. I've been watching this space for when the inevitable nom would come, and this is not on the ITN level. I'll be back to support a blurb when we Sweden actually joins NATO. cart-Talk 07:43, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support It's in the news and the article is looking good for a new article with 50 editors, 44 citations and lots of content. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:29, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. It's important world news, the article is decent, and there's little else to post currently. Bolsonaro, France, etc. are already yesterday's news. Sandstein 08:32, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    We don't make exceptions to what we normally don't post just because the current period in news is slow or stale. That's a slippery slope for several other major exceptions. Masem (t) 12:06, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose until there's a significant result (Sweden/Ukraine joining). Perhaps consider removing some of the older stuff from the box? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 08:54, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose all talk, but nothing changes as a result. Also since Russia's invasion such meetings are WP:ROUTINE. Abcmaxx (talk) 09:07, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Covered by ongoing, literally just a meeting of global leaders, like G7. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 09:13, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose routine and meeting is not noteworthy, only potential conclusions would be noteworthy. Bart Terpstra (talk) 09:27, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Plenty of media coverage [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14]. The summit is already significant for opening a way for Sweden to become a NATO member. It is also significant as unprecedented NATO support for Ukraine is being announced. Mindaur (talk) 09:36, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    3, 7, 8, 10, 13 fail verification, they link to a Ukraine war news feed. it's not a link to an article about the summit.
    6, 9, 11, 12 fails relevance, the news story is Turkey becoming approving of Sweden or something else adjacent, not the summit, the summit is more of an afterthought. Bart Terpstra (talk) 09:45, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    This is not argued by how many references there are. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 16:30, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - All of the coverage. None of the outcomes/deliverables. CoatCheck (talk) 14:00, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, it's just a meeting. Post sweden/ukraine when it joins NATO (a la finland, or a la croatia joining EU). QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 14:30, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose barring something significant happening, such as Sweden or Ukraine being formally admitted. Otherwise, it's just a meeting, like the G7 summit we decided not to post. The Kip (talk) 20:03, 11 July 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.

July 10

July 10, 2023 (2023-07-10) (Monday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

RD: Ernst-Ludwig Petrowsky

Article: Ernst-Ludwig Petrowsky (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): 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: Iconic free jazz saxophonist of East Germany, - had no article yet!! It took some time and is hopefully not too late. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:17, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

RD: JoAnn Watson

Article: JoAnn Watson (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): 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: Detroit city councillor. Article appears to be in good shape. Curbon7 (talk) 21:20, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Date of birth is unreferenced. Schwede66 09:24, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    There is a footnote next to the DoB now. -- PFHLai (talk) 14:38, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: The intro is where one would expect career highlights or a summary of one's life. The intro in this wikibio does not seem to match the materials in the main prose, which needs a paragraph or so about the subject being a media personality and a professor as stated in the intro. --PFHLai (talk) 14:56, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Al Giordano

Article: Al Giordano (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://dankennedy.net/2023/07/13/al-giordano-1959-2023/
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 journalist. Article looks alright. Onegreatjoke (talk) 03:39, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Reopened) Ongoing: 2023 Israeli judicial reform protests

Nominator's comments: In Israel, there are weekly largescale protests with over 100'000 participants going on since months. the protests are over a judicial reform which would allow criminally charged politicians such as Benyamin Netanyahu to seize control over the judiciary. Israels President Herzog mediated a dialogue between supporters and opponents to the reform project in March, but Netanyahu pushes forward since late June. The protests are likely escalating as a vote on the reform is expected for tomorrow, Monday and companies will give their employees free to be able to protest. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 07:50, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Conditional oppose - Article hasn't been updated in 10 days. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 09:08, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have updated it today. Just check the edit history. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 20:41, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, I mean in terms of recent protests. It has been now, but at the time of writing my comment the last update on the protests was on July 1st. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 14:14, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Also, isn't it still July 10th? PrecariousWorlds (talk) 16:29, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for now Article is lacking the regular/daily updates necessary for an ongoing item. There's nothing on any protests since the 1st of the month. The Kip (talk) 19:31, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - not getting updates and no longer all that widely covered. nableezy - 19:34, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Not widely covered, and has not been updated recently. Editor 5426387 (talk) 22:30, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per above. Mount Patagonia (talk • contributions) 00:06, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The opposes per "not updated" and "per above" are invalid as the article is getting updated. I am contesting the close but I do not know how.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 03:31, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have reopened the discussion as I have updated the article before and after the nomination. The article also received regular major (more than a 500 bytes) updates in the month of July here, here, here, here, by different editors in the month July. Some even specifically mentioning protests in July. So the votes with arguments like the article has not been updated in 10 days or there is nothing since the 1 of this month and the per above arguments I don't see as valid points to make.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 06:09, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There's still absolutely nothing on anything that happened in between the 1st and 11th, and you've failed to demonstrate it's still getting wide coverage. Your opinion of/disagreement with "invalid points" is not grounds to re-open the discussion. As such, this should be re-closed. The Kip (talk) 19:41, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@The Kip Check the edit from the 1 July which treats protests of the 1st of July with the edit summary add 1 July events. 130'000 people...then the edit from the 6th of July on protests of the 5th of July. Then the one from the 11 July for the protests of the 11 July. All of them not my updates, with mine it would be way more. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 22:51, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The article is poorly structured as that last section seems to be a chronological order of protests ... which are already discussed in the timeline of the protests? There needs to be a lot of improvement in the article to consider this, particularly if the most current events elevate it to ongoing when really the big issue started around January? Masem (t) 00:55, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that later sections need to be reworked. I've removed some dubiously notable sentences from the article and will do another round soon. Frankly, i weak support the inclusion of the protests in the 'ongoing' section in light of recent events. If the issue's a lack of updates, i hope someone steps up to fix that Totalstgamer (talk) 10:06, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. I can understand that the frequnecy of updates here is somewhat borderline, but it's very clear the significance and recency of these protests. I personally see the updates that have been made recently as sufficient for posting. DarkSide830 (talk) 00:40, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose for now. Appears to have been only two events in the past 2 weeks, which are only covered by two small updates. Also, article has major quality issues, mostly of the usual WP:PROSELINE problems that plague these kinds of articles; the lazy "On XX Date..." writing needs to be fixed and put in a more natural narrative flow. --Jayron32 14:19, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mirziyoyev remains president of Uzbekistan

Proposed image
Article: 2023 Uzbek presidential election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Shavkat Mirziyoyev remains the president of Uzbekistan after a presidential election. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In Uzbekistan, Shavkat Mirziyoyev (pictured) is re-elected president.
Alternative blurb II: ​ After an election widely seen as neither free nor fair, Shavkat Mirziyoyev remains the president of Uzbekistan.
Alternative blurb III: ​ Shavkat Mirziyoyev retains his position as the president of Uzbekistan.
News source(s): Reuters
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: Needs more prose. Wording of proposed blurb to reflect sham election and de facto authoritarian rule. Abcmaxx (talk) 13:21, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment I don't think we should be attempting to WP:RGW by changing the standard election blurb to reflect a sham election. It's an election either way, and I'm not even sure we have prior consensus to have blurbs be the defining line between real vs. fraud elections. Seems like a WP:NPOV issue, too. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 16:21, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Quality wise, the article needs quite a bit of work in the length department. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 16:21, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Added altblurb that doesn't violate WP:RGW or WP:NPOV. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 18:46, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Conditional oppose - Article remains dodgy. Also, the fact that this election was essentially a sham brings down notability. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 16:29, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I'm not sure what's significant about a dictator staying in power, in an authoritarian one-party nation. Nfitz (talk) 16:42, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment If this is about the 2023 Uzbek presidential election, this should be reflected in the blurb language. Still ITN/R even if it's a sham election (we post them for Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, etc). Blurb shouldn't be RGW. I'd say I support on notability as it's still a general "election", but that's what ITN/R is for. It's definitely not ready on quality, though. Counted 8 sentences in the article across 3 sections.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 18:38, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I am not sure if some dictator whom we all knew would win won, see, the DPRK re-elects Kim Jong-Un every five year, did we post about it ever? no, and about Putin being re-elected in 2020? also no, and so on, and so on. Editor 5426387 (talk) 21:31, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    We actually did post Putin's re-"election" (it was in 2018).  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 22:36, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Sorry, my bad, but you get the point.Editor 5426387 (talk) 03:47, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - we actually have precedent of WP:IAR not posing sham elections like this. --RockstoneSend me a message! 23:01, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Rockstone35 such as..? Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 23:41, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Fakescientist8000:@Rockstone35: The Cuban parliamentary election in March wasn’t posted. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 21:15, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for quality, no prose, no expansion since days. If concerns are addressed, I'd support alt2. It is ITNR but I also understand the concern of Rockstone. So alt2 is a possibility to raise awareness on environment the elections were held in. If this alt2 goes against the rules, I support alt3.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 06:20, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
there is also an unsourced paragraph, no info on presidential campaigns...Paradise Chronicle (talk) 04:47, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I'm more concerned that the article is in extremely poor shape with absolutely no information on the results and the allegations that the election wasn't free and fair.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 07:02, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. It's technically an election, but it's not in the news, because nobody doubted the outcome and therefore no major media write about it. Sandstein 08:34, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • IAR Oppose Rare for me, but it was a sham election and is receiving little international coverage. The Kip (talk) 19:42, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality The article doesn’t make it clear that this was a sham election. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 21:38, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The election article barely has any prose. --Jayron32 14:20, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose—The ballot boxes might as well have had paper shredders in them. Kurtis (talk) 18:30, 14 July 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:

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates&oldid=1165789788"