Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit
Line 36: Line 36:
*'''Weak support''' - Seems notable enough, plus encyclopedic as noted above. The article is a little short, but that may just be because it's covering a recent event, and that can certainly be worked on. If we want to be cautious on notability, we could wait to see if it leads to something more major. [[User:Bucket of sulfuric acid|Bucket of sulfuric acid]] ([[User talk:Bucket of sulfuric acid|talk]]) 08:40, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
*'''Weak support''' - Seems notable enough, plus encyclopedic as noted above. The article is a little short, but that may just be because it's covering a recent event, and that can certainly be worked on. If we want to be cautious on notability, we could wait to see if it leads to something more major. [[User:Bucket of sulfuric acid|Bucket of sulfuric acid]] ([[User talk:Bucket of sulfuric acid|talk]]) 08:40, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
*'''Support''' - Definitely encyclopedic and from a place we unfortunately don't hear that much about. [[User:Chaotic Enby|<span style="color:#947E00">Chaotıċ<span style="display:inline-flex;rotate:30deg;color:indigo">Enby</span></span>]]([[User talk:Chaotic Enby|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Chaotic Enby|contribs]]) 09:16, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
*'''Support''' - Definitely encyclopedic and from a place we unfortunately don't hear that much about. [[User:Chaotic Enby|<span style="color:#947E00">Chaotıċ<span style="display:inline-flex;rotate:30deg;color:indigo">Enby</span></span>]]([[User talk:Chaotic Enby|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Chaotic Enby|contribs]]) 09:16, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
*'''Support''' Protests like this are very rare in Russia. [[User:MarioJump83|MarioJump83]] ([[User talk:MarioJump83|talk]]) 13:18, 19 January 2024 (UTC)


== January 18 ==
== January 18 ==

Revision as of 13:18, 19 January 2024

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

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

Nemo
Nemo

Glossary

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

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

Nomination steps

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

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

Purge this page to update the cache

Headers

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

Voicing an opinion on an item

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

Please do...

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

Please do not...

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

Suggesting updates

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

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

Archives

January 19

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Science and technology


2024 Bashkortostan protests

Article: 2024 Bashkortostan protests (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Protests break out in the Republic of Bashkortostan, Russia (Post)
Alternative blurb: Protests break out in Russia's Bashkortostan following the imprisonment of Fail Alsynov
News source(s): The Guardian, NY Times, CNN, ABC, DW, Reuters
Credits:
  • Support I'm usually familiar with the places that we highlight here but Bashkortostan is new to me. So, this item is quite encyclopædic in expanding our horizons. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:14, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral - Notability is debatable but as you say this is enyclopedic (I already knew of Bashkotostan but I didn't know they had such a large independence movement), and protests in Russia are certainly rare these days. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 08:34, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are two independence movements actually, Free Idel-Ural and the Committee of Bashkir Resistance! ChaotıċEnby(talk · contribs) 09:17, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support - Seems notable enough, plus encyclopedic as noted above. The article is a little short, but that may just be because it's covering a recent event, and that can certainly be worked on. If we want to be cautious on notability, we could wait to see if it leads to something more major. Bucket of sulfuric acid (talk) 08:40, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Definitely encyclopedic and from a place we unfortunately don't hear that much about. ChaotıċEnby(talk · contribs) 09:16, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Protests like this are very rare in Russia. MarioJump83 (talk) 13:18, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

January 18

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology


(Posted) RD: Nancy Adler

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

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

NY Times obit published 18 January. Thriley (talk) 02:08, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ongoing Removal: Myanmar Civil War and War in Sudan

Articles: Myanmar Civil War (talk · history · tag) and War in Sudan (2023–present) (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item removal (Post)

These conflicts are not being updated enough and are also not getting sufficient media coverage to warrant ongoing. Ongoing is for a constant stream of blurb-worthy events, it's not an armed conflict ticker. If we were to keep these conflicts up then I think wars of similar intensity like the Maghreb Insurgency and Somali Civil War should also be put up. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 12:37, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support for Sudan, Oppose for Myanmar. I haven't seen much out of Sudan, but active warfare is very much so going on in Myanmar to an extensive degree still. River10000 (talk) 13:44, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral for Sudan, Oppose for Myanmar given there is very much ongoing developments there. ChaotıċEnby(talk · contribs) 14:07, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Enough to warrant multiple blurbs? PrecariousWorlds (talk) 14:18, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fall of Laukkai and of the Northeast Command Headquarters on January 5, tentative ceasefire negotiated by China on January 12 (soon broken by the junta), fall of Paletwa on January 15... ChaotıċEnby(talk · contribs) 19:24, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Every single individual event of these could warrant a blurb? Dubious imo PrecariousWorlds (talk) 07:31, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The negotiated ceasefire would've definitely been blurb-worthy if not for the fact it was ongoing. But these were just the last few examples, many more (and more blurbworthy ones) if you go back to December, like Chinland being proclaimed as an independent state, ... ChaotıċEnby(talk · contribs) 09:48, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Both of these articles are still seeing active updates in the past week, moreso than I'm used to from long-standing Ongoing articles. In fact, they are more actively updated and expanded than the main Russian invasion article is. Whether our level of activity on any of these articles is sufficient to keep promoting them, I have no clue. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 14:36, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    We dont just want updates tk the article but also that these are new breaking events that are being added. The Ukraine/Russia war still gets daily headlines, but both of these seem far beliw tye fold with little daily coverage to warrant ongoing. Masem (t) 14:56, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Oppose both With recent developments in South Kordofan, it looks like an RSF offensive is about to begin there. Myanmar is still a warzone, with town captures happening almost daily. Lukt64 (talk) 16:42, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    WP:CRYSTAL. When/if it happens, we put it up. Also there are many more warzones than Myanmar, that doesn't automatically mean notability. ITN isn't a conflict ticker PrecariousWorlds (talk) 16:57, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Suggestion it may be time to consider putting the Maghreb insurgency in Ongoing. Lukt64 (talk) 16:44, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you’re talking the Insurgency in the Maghreb (2002-present)… there’s not even a 2022 section in there, let alone 2023/4. You sure about that? The Kip 18:25, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
i meant Sahel insurgency Lukt64 (talk) 19:06, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Which has one listed incident this month. The Kip 21:34, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Then we might as well put every armed conflict in ongoing. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 07:29, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support for Sudan, Neutral for Myanmar, due to the war in Sudan being old news and nothing significant recently, however the Myanmar war is still very much ongoing. Editor 5426387 (talk) 18:36, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. There are still things happening. Kirill C1 (talk) 19:05, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ongoing items need to show ongoing news coverage, not simply that the event is continuing. — Masem (t) 20:12, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! Just because there are events happening in the world doesn't automatically mean notability. My main point is that if we are to keep these on the main page, we might as well put every significant armed conflict up. I just want consistancy. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 08:38, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support for Sudan, Neutral for Myanmar. Sudan was removed once already, but then put back up when the conflict picked back up again. No reason that we can't do that again. JM (talk) 20:30, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Additionally, there are now 6 articles listed in the Ongoing section now that Houthi involvement in the 2023 Israel-Hamas war has been added. Probably at least one should be removed, and given that it's the Sudan one with the least amount of updates, I think it should be that one. JM (talk) 23:04, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support for Sudan as most recent updates seem to be on the diplomatic issues related to the war, rather than the war itself. Oppose on Myanmar as there's been a solid amount of recent combat-focused updates. The Kip 20:37, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
oppose for both. Rebels in myanmar captured another town three days ago and in sudan a lot of attention is being drawn to fighting by a world heritage sight and ethnic conflict. Personisinsterest (talk) 01:16, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support for Sudan, Oppose for Myanmar. Theres not much going in Sudan but Myanmar still has active developments. Setarip (talk) 03:34, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral for Sudan, oppose for Myanmar—The former doesn't seem to be getting too many major updates these days, but Myanmar's civil war has been experiencing quite a few developments in recent times, to the extent where I'd honestly say that the Tatmadaw is facing the greatest threat to its supremacy over Burmese politics in the 60+ years since they took over the country under Ne Win. Myanmar is still very much ongoing. Kurtis (talk) 04:56, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Sudan's article has recent updates about fighting in Kordofan & Myanmar's article has recent updates about fighting throughout Myanmar. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 09:42, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

January 17

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime


RD: Shawnacy Barber

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

world champion pole vaulter.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 09:50, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Dejan Milojević

Article: Dejan Milojević (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ESPN Daily Mail
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.

Assistant coach for the Golden State Warriors. Coached Jokic in Euro League, Article looks good. - RockinJack18 20:37, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose 18 paragraphs that end without a reference. Stephen 21:32, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose article does not look good. Per Stephen. _-_Alsor (talk) 22:30, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) 2024 Iranian strikes in Pakistan

Article: 2024 Iranian strikes in Pakistan (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Air strikes by the Iranian military killed 2 children and 3 injured around Panjgur area of Balochistan, Pakistan. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Iran launches missile strikes against Pakistan, and aerial strikes against Iraq and Syria
Alternative blurb II: Iran launches missile strikes against Baloch separatist group Jaish ul-Adl based in Pakistan leaving 2 dead and 3 injured . In retaliation, the Pakistan Air Force launches Operation Marg Bar Sarmachar against Iran, leaving 7 dead.
Alternative blurb III: ​ Iran launches missile strikes in Pakistan, and aerial strikes in Iraq and Syria. In response, Pakistan conducts retaliatory airstrikes in Iran.
Alternative blurb IV: Iran launches missile strikes against Baloch separatist group Jaish ul-Adl based in Pakistan, as well as strikes in Iraq and Syria. In response, Pakistan airstrikes several targets in Iran.
News source(s): VOA, CNN, BBC, AP, NY Times
Credits:

Ainty Painty (talk) 16:34, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose - Totally irrelevant and insignificant from ITN's point of view. Fahads1982 (talk) 17:53, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support – totally relevant and significant from ITN's point of view. It represents an expansion of existing tensions around Iran and in the Middle East. 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 20:59, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This is a notable increase in tensions, and the article is of reasonable quality for ITN --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 21:03, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Attack by Iran on foreign (Pakistani) soil leading to a flare-up of tensions between the two countries in the context of the Balochistan conflict, definitely ITN material. The blurb could mention that it was the IRGC (Sepah) that was responsible, rather than the Iranian army (Artesh), as Iran maintains two parallel armies (with separate navies, air forces, etc.). ChaotıċEnby(talk · contribs) 21:28, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support resulted in the recall of an ambassador, seems significant enough. JM (talk) 22:04, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Article is in good shape. Significant event with global coverage. Schwinnspeed (talk) 01:14, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support - per above supports. Jusdafax (talk) 01:28, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Could mention that Iran has attacked Iraq, Pakistan and Syria in the last couple of days, and link 2024 Erbil attack as well. Stephen 02:59, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Agreed. This was not done in isolation from other recent Iranian strikes. JM (talk) 03:18, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Are there sources connecting these attacks? The ones in Iraq and Syria are allegedly related to the Iran-Israel proxy conflict, while the Pakistan one is part of the Balochistan conflict. While they all happened relatively recently, it might be OR to connect them all as part of the same blurb. ChaotıċEnby(talk · contribs) 03:52, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose we should wait till further escalation Iran is indirectly attacking Pakistan, it is directly attacking the terrorists(Jaish-ud-Adl) Even though Pakistan's government said 'it was a breach of their airspace' , I think this matter would not escalte with Israel-Hamas was going on. So, I say it is not ITN worthy until the matter escalates Harvici 04:09, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support added Alt Blurb II , since Ainty Painty nominated Operation Marg Bar Sarmachar for ITN , since both are related , I think Alt Blurb II would be the best to be posted on ITN. Harvici 07:13, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Added Alt Blurb IV to mention the strikes in Iraq and Syria. Other blurb states that these strikes are "against Pakistan, and Iraq and Syria", which would imply that they were targetted at the UN-recognised governments of these countries, which Iran strongly denies. Much better to say 'in', same with the Houthi conflict. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 12:32, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Precarious 's Alt Blurb IV, but we can edit the second sentence from 'In response, Pakistan airstrikes several targets in Iran' to 'In response, Pakistan Air Force launches Operation Marg Bar Sarmachar , leaving 7 dead. Harvici 12:40, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would personally prefer a simpler headline along the lines of Alt Burb III, without going into too much details; the articles are there to provide context. If we mention Iran’s targeting of Jaish-ul-Adl, then by extension we’d also have to mention Pakistan’s targeting of Baluch insurgents bases, and the blurb will get too long. That’s besides the fact, of course, that both Iran and Pakistan have not alluded to any militant deaths as of yet (on their own side) and have only acknowledged civilian casualties. Mar4d (talk) 13:05, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Alt3 - definitely a notable event that highlights the rise of tensions in the Middle East mike_gigs talkcontribs 14:45, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • support alt3 only. nableezy - 14:55, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted alt3 with the strong support above. I tweaked the link placement slightly to avoid MOS:EGG and removed an unnecessary comma. Ed [talk] [OMT] 15:19, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Operation Marg Bar Sarmachar is probably still not quite at the level it should be for the front page. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 15:27, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • I checked each article before posting. That one is indeed short, especially after some recent paring back, but nevertheless it is comprehensive and fully cited. Ed [talk] [OMT] 15:52, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Tony Lloyd

Article: Tony Lloyd (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Sky News, BBC News
Credits:

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

British Labour MP. Fats40boy11 (talk) 16:24, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support , the article looks good now . I had a little misunderstanding earlier
Support, the article looks in great shape. @User:Harvici, the DoB and the Trafford Council job are both sourced in the body (cites 9 and 8 respectively). – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 17:33, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support article appears well sourced Dantus21 (talk) 23:11, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Ongoing nomination: 2024 missile strikes in Yemen

Article: 2024 missile strikes in Yemen (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
Credits:

This is likely to go on even after the blurb rolls off. Interstellarity (talk) 13:00, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Conditional support/Wait if they do something akin to the 12th, or if the Houthis retaliate, definitely support. If not, insignificant. The sum of all human knowledge (talk) 13:13, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose it is the involvement of Houthi in Israel - Hamas war; there is no need to include it in ongoing unitl it escalates and becomes Ansar Allah vs USA (etc) , then it can be ongoing worthy Harvici 13:44, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait - I said this in the original nom as well, but I think we should first wait and see if the situation actually escalates further into a more long-term conflict before deciding on whether or not to put it in Ongoing. Bucket of sulfuric acid (talk) 14:10, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait until further escalation, Conditional Support on notability if it does escalate. Editor 5426387 (talk) 14:31, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Suggestion – Add "(Houthi involvement)" to the Israel-Hamas War ongoing. Having a secondary article in ongoing can be nice, as we see with the Russian invasion timeline. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 15:14, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    By far the best proposal! PrecariousWorlds (talk) 15:54, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Support Nice suggestion but if the matter escalates , this can change. Harvici 16:06, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Support Mable's idea. By far the best solution to including the matter of the Houthis. River10000 (talk) 16:39, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Support as a concise proposal until further escalation. ChaotıċEnby(talk · contribs) 16:43, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Support for now, seems reasonable enough. JM (talk) 01:19, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Support I think this is a great solve Schwinnspeed (talk) 01:56, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Support - Good idea! We could certainly keep it like that until anything major happens. Bucket of sulfuric acid (talk) 08:14, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Support, very good idea. Lukt64 (talk) 16:48, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Support. @Admins willing to post ITN: I feel like there's a consensus to do these parentheses now. Aaron Liu (talk) 19:53, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Support as proposed by Maple. The Kip 20:41, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Strong oppose While the initial escalation by the Houthis was made in relation to the Israel-Hamas war, multiple reliable sources indicate that the Houthi attacks have become indiscriminate, targeting vessels with no discernible connection to Israel. No source that I am aware of currently makes the strong statement that the ongoing fighting between the US/UK and the Houthis is a direct part of the Israel-Hamas war. I think lumping them together as the same "ongoing" is not defensible with reliable sources. eyal (talk) 21:23, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment The article in question is subject to a proposed move, so I wonder that if it ends up getting moved to Red Sea crisis that it should be un-bracketed and listed separately. JM (talk) 23:06, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh wow, I'm a bit overwhelmed by all the Supports on an idea I had forgotten I posted, haha. Feels very good. Yes, I expect the setup will change shortly, and Red Sea Crisis sounds likely to work as a separate Ongoing too. Our coverage evolves faster than we can make decisions. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 07:54, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support as this is an ongoing conflict now, but I would suggest a broader focus on the conflict than just the missile strikes. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 21:00, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Maplestrip's suggestion of adding ([[Houthi involvement in the Israel–Hamas war|Houthi involvement]]) as there is consensus for it. That brings me to the interesting issue of credits, though, with Interstellarity having nominated 2024 missile strikes in Yemen, but a different article being posted that Interstellarity has never edited. If that's ok with you, Interstellarity, I hand out credits to two other editors instead who I have added to this nomination. If there are diverging ideas on how to handle the credits, please discuss and ping me when a resolution has been reached. Schwede66 22:20, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Makes sense to me. Although it came out of the original nomination, it was an altogether different article by a different nominator that got consensus to post. JM (talk) 23:02, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi, can you please clarify how you determined that consensus was reached (WP:DETCON)? I raise the concern that this decision violates WP:VER, and so far this point has gone unaddressed. eyal (talk) 23:06, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    NYT says [Houthi] has claimed it is acting in response to the Israeli military response in the Gaza Strip. I don't think the fact that the attacks became indiscriminate means it's not a part of the war (plus NYT reports it as part of the war) Aaron Liu (talk) 23:34, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Agree with the fact that it kinda violates WP:VER, I'm thinking of changing my vote but it's hard to word it as on the one hand it was absolutely a reaction to the Israel-Hamas war, on the other hand Houtis are kinda doing their own thing now despite claiming it's about Israel, so if there's an elegant solution that wraps up all of this I'd be interested. ChaotıċEnby(talk · contribs) 23:56, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Although I'm not convinced that this is a problem, given that there's an active proposal to change the article title to Red Sea crisis, that could be the solution you're looking for. It would mean that the article is no longer directly subordinate to the Israel-Hamas war and therefore would no longer be bracketed, while also maintaining that it's otherwise the same article which is listed as Ongoing. JM (talk) 00:06, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That's fine. Anything that improves upon my nomination helps out a lot. Interstellarity (talk) 02:06, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support adding the Red Sea crisis to Ongoing, though oppose doing so as a parenthetical add-on to Israel–Hamas war, per Eyal 3400. DecafPotato (talk) 23:08, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

January 16

Armed conflicts and attacks

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections


2024 Comorian presidential election

Proposed image
Article: 2024 Comorian presidential election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Azali Assoumani is re-elected President of the Comoros. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Incumbent Comorian president Azali Assoumani is re-elected in a disputed election.
News source(s): France 24 AP BBC
Credits:

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

Was going to nominate this on the day of the election, but soon realized that election results weren't out yet. Added an altblurb in case weight should be given to the controversies that erupted after the election, not sure though since international observers have commented on the election and did not condemn it for alleged irregularities. Some work may still need to be done before posting, but the aftermath section has an acceptable amount of prose in my opinion and the material seems to be well-sourced.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 00:08, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Alt1 looks fine. Every paragraph ends with a citation except the last sentence of one, I'm assuming the citations at the end of each paragraph are meant to give a source for the whole paragraph. Table is cited. Given the disputed results, Alt1 is better in my opinion. JM (talk) 00:15, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Peter Schickele (P.D.Q. Bach)

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

Better known under his pseudonym P.D.Q. Bach, so I think we should include it as parenthetical in the Recent deaths entry Smurrayinchester 12:08, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support. The article has plenty of sources, including for the death. Einsof (talk) 14:05, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Oppose Although I am sad to see him go, there are a few sources that could use some citations before posting but overall, it looks alright. ❤HistoryTheorist❤ 04:50, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Claire Fagin

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

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

Needs a little bit of work. Natg 19 (talk) 20:52, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Sergio Sebastiani

Article: Sergio Sebastiani (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Vatican 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.

A cardinal and diplomat , article is also good Harvici 10:51, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose There's an unsourced paragraph and a cn tag. DoB unsourced as well. Scientia potentia est, MonarchOfTerror 12:10, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. The death is sourced and the quality is good enough. Putting it on the main page may encourage new editors to source other parts of the article. Einsof (talk) 13:57, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose article is not good yet: some lines and paras are unsourced. _-_Alsor (talk) 14:07, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: José Agustín

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

Noted Mexican writer.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 01:00, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose The bibliography and the filmography are missing some sources, the life and career section has some unsourced info. Scientia potentia est, MonarchOfTerror 10:29, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. The death is sourced, the article quality is fine, and it is not nominated for deletion. Those are the three criteria for posting, per WP:ITNRD. Einsof (talk) 14:02, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose article should be fully sourced. _-_Alsor (talk) 22:29, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) 2024 US Republican presidential primaries

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


Article: 2024 Republican presidential primaries (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
Credits:
I know, I can see the incoming comments already. "Not a US Politics ticker", "Needs international significance", etc., but hear me out. This is an item that, like it or not, is getting way more public and media attention than most blurbs that have been put up. The Iowa caucus is front-page news on every major outlet. I think while Haley, DeSantis, and Trump continue to face each other off, it's useful to the general reader to link this. Once the candidate pool thins and a presumptive nominee is established, we can take it off. In any case, it's worth considering. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 14:50, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose We post the election of the president. Trump is going to be the nominee without any doubt unless the Supreme Court deems him ineligible to run. This result in Iowa was clearly expected.
Noah, AATalk 14:58, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:CRYSTAL PrecariousWorlds (talk) 15:25, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ongoing or Weak oppose, it is of some interest to the general reader (given US influence and the potential consequences of the election) but highlighting Iowa in particular doesn't bring too much. In any case, there isn't much suspense and Trump will likely be nominated, so not that interesting either. ChaotıċEnby(talk · contribs) 15:06, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The syntax must've changed because I put ongoing as 'yes'. This is an ongoing nom PrecariousWorlds (talk) 15:25, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it wasn't an ongoing nom when I replied. ChaotıċEnby(talk · contribs) 15:44, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as we do not cover the run ups to any election, and in the cade if the Republican caucuses, it's pretty much assured who's going to win. — Masem (t) 15:18, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strongly oppose We'll have primaries/caucuses going on the next few months, but none of them (either individually or collectively) have the significance of the general election in November (which is INT/R). rawmustard (talk) 15:22, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose totally irrelevant and insignificant from ITN's point of view. We are going to post only the presidential election. _-_Alsor (talk) 15:33, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose and suggest snow close This is a ridiculous nomination, because, as the nominator has observed, this is not a US politics ticker. In case anyone needs reminding, Wikipedia is a global encyclopaedia. People in every other country would never dream of nominating pre-election party politics as an ITN. Just because it happened in the US doesn't make it more special. Chrisclear (talk) 15:51, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you; you've made your point in every other U.S.-related nom you've opposed for this reason. ITN/C is not your soapbox. Oppose the nom and move on. Duly signed, WaltClipper -(talk) 15:55, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you, but I don't quite understand your comment, I opposed the nomination and moved on - just as you suggested. The only reason I am back here is because of your strange comment. Chrisclear (talk) 15:57, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Closed) Narges Mohammadi

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: Narges Mohammadi (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Iranian government has extended Nobel laureate Narges Mohammadi's jail term of 12 years for 'spreading propaganda'. (Post)
News source(s): https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-67986227
Credits:
John Cummings (talk) 01:26, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on quality article not updated, blurb unclear about whether the sentence has been extended from an original 12 years or by a further 12 years. Neutral for now on significance. JM (talk) 01:30, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: Blurb is potentially misleading as she is only sentenced to an additional 15 months. We did not post similar news when Hong Kong pro-democracy activists like Joshua Wong received additional sentences. Tofusaurus (talk) 06:12, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - little international significance. Banedon (talk) 06:41, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose little significance Setarip (talk) 11:28, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Insignificant as per above, Editor 5426387 (talk) 13:18, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Not significant enough for the blurb. Nigej (talk) 17:16, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

January 15

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Sports


RD: Shih Ming-teh

Article: Shih Ming-teh (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ABC News, MSN
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.

Taiwanese activist, also known as "Taiwan's Nelson Mandela". NoonIcarus (talk) 12:48, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Was thinking of nominating this, but oppose on quality. Lots of cn tags, and unsourced sections. Natg 19 (talk) 17:11, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Primetime Emmy Awards

Article: 75th Primetime Emmy Awards (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ At the Emmy Awards, The Bear wins Best Comedy Series, while Succession wins Best Drama. (Post)
News source(s): Deadline Hollywood
Credits:

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

Probably some more updates to the ceremony itself but the article is well-established before tonight. Masem (t) 03:57, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support pending sources for the presenters (typically pulled from the YouTube clips, which should be added overnight), unless accepting the broadcast as a primary source is allowed. Images will also probably be added but shouldn't cause issues. (Note: I've been fairly involved in the article.) RunningTiger123 (talk) 04:08, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Live blogs from RSes (which sites like Variety and Deadline run) should also work. Also, while I did not watch, I would expect an "in memorandum" section if that was part of the show. Masem (t) 04:13, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I've added in references for all of the presenters. There are also references for the list of winners (somehow that got missed, whoops), the total wins by program and network, and the In Memoriam section. I'm pretty confident everything is now sourced. RunningTiger123 (talk) 01:59, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per RunningTiger123, pending sources for presenters mike_gigs talkcontribs 16:27, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose way too many tables conmpared to the one section of text, and way too many images that violate WP:NOTGALLERY. Until this article meets Wikipedia's encyclopedic standards, it should not be posted. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:36, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • The article is written in the same format and approach of past Emmy articles as well as other major entertainment awards like the Oscars. Tables for the awards (winners and noms) and (free) images of the winners. This complaint doesn't nake sense. — Masem (t) 17:43, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • So the "other stuff exists".argument wins? Nigej (talk) 17:53, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • It does seem to me like tables are the best way of presenting information like 75th Primetime Emmy Awards#Programs. That's info that is essential to the article but reading it in prose would be tiresome. I'm not so sure the same can be said for the bloated tables in #Nominations and wins by program and #Nominations by network, which verge on trivial. For example, do Max's two nominations really warrant mentioning in the article? Or could we sum up all of that with a sentence like "HBO led all networks with 43 major award nominations, followed by Netflix with 23 and Apple TV+ with 17? (Or at the very least, could we collapse those tables by default?)
      • All that said—if this is the common format across Emmys articles, there's a larger discussion to be had somewhere else and this shouldn't be a barrier to ITN promotion. Ed [talk] [OMT] 18:54, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
        So the "other stuff exists" argument does win. Nice to know. Nigej (talk) 19:21, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
        Other stuff exists is an argument to avoid in deletion nominations... it's not a content policy, let alone an issue at ITN. Ed [talk] [OMT] 19:28, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
        • Tables are fine. Unsourced tables are not. Black Kite (talk) 19:33, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
          Yes I know all that, which is why I was surprised that you and Masem are using the "other stuff" argument, which doesn't seem to have any basis in policy/guidelines. Nigej (talk) 20:35, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
          The point is that they were not making an "other stuff" argument. You mentioned it, then turned it on its head, and are now complaining about it. I do not think you do "know all that", but it's time to drop it anyway. Kingsif (talk) 01:41, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
          Should be added that the tables are now sourced, to demonstrate that this type of counting is not original research here. Masem (t) 02:04, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Currently not up to the required standard. Plenty of unreferenced material. Nigej (talk) 17:19, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The prose is mostly OK, but there's a crapload of tables and lists without any sources. Do we actually need some of this fancruft, though? A lot of it (i.e. the "Nominations and Wins by program" tables) could probably be nuked without any loss to the article. Black Kite (talk) 18:58, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Only as a comment, those have been standard across many Award articles, and there is usually discussion in the RSes about which programs and networks led nominations and/or wins (which I know exist for this year as well) but those sources don't typically break up that information to the degree we present. In other words, about half the entire in those tables can be shown to be reported in a manner by RSes (the top halves) but not the other 50%, so those tables are mostly filling out the rest. — Masem (t) 19:49, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • Also, these tables are simply WP:CALC derivations made by counting up wins or nominations. What still probably be done is add a bit of prose with sources to say so-and-so led the nominations / wins. — Masem (t) 19:59, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per above where editors indicate that they are planning to base the article on blogs, YouTube and their own calculations. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:35, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Live blogs from RSes are RSes. Once notability has been passed, YouTube clips of the actual event published by the event holders are RSes. And there is allowed own-calculations per WP:CALC, as long as they are simple (as this is). — Masem (t) 13:15, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per Masem's arguments, I don't see anything in especially poor shape. The Kip 20:40, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Stephen Laybutt

Article: Stephen Laybutt (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-01-15/socceroos-stephen-laybutt-dead-northern-nsw/103320868
Credits:

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

Australian soccer player. HiLo48 (talk) 06:00, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak oppose Honors section needs citations, rest is short but adequate for RD. The Kip 18:14, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose For a man notable for being a soccer player, the "Playing career" section is ridiculously thin. Nigej (talk) 17:23, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Real Madrid wins Supercopa de España

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


Article: 2024 Supercopa de España final (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Real Madrid defeats FC Barcelona by 4-1 to win their 13th Supercopa de España (Post)
Alternative blurb: Real Madrid emerges victorious over FC Barcelona with a 4-1 scoreline, securing their 13th Supercopa de España title.
News source(s): [2]
Credits:
One of the biggest rivalry in football , and big victory for Real Madrid Harvici 05:52, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for the same reason The Boat Race or the Army-Navy game are not in ITN. The La Liga championship is already posted to ITN. Doesn't matter if it's a rivalry or not. DarkSide830 (talk) 06:04, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose minor tournament only featuring 4 teams. Technically this is not like The Boat Race or the Army-Navy Game, as those are fixed teams. But still not major enough for ITN. Natg 19 (talk) 06:20, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose pretty much an exhibition tournament, hence it was hosted in Saudi Arabia not in Spain. Abcmaxx (talk) 06:49, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per everyone else. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 07:17, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose based on precedent that we didn't run the 2023 FA Community Shield and also because its not listed on WP:ITNR. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 07:29, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose This is by any sensible metric a bigger and more significant sport event than the 2024 College Football Playoff National Championship, but we shouldn't overflood ITN with too many football stories when we already have La Liga on ITN/R.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:15, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per all the above. Nothing like significant enough for the blurb. Nigej (talk) 09:46, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per pretty much all above. Not significant enough. Scientia potentia est, MonarchOfTerror 09:49, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose association football cup series like these generally get way less coverage than their league equivalents, and this is also the case here. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:14, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Posted) Inauguration of Arévalo in Guatemala

Proposed image
Article: Inauguration of Bernardo Arévalo (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Bernardo Arévalo is inaugurated as President of Guatemala. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Bernardo Arévalo is inaugurated as President of Guatemala after multiple attempts to obstruct the event.
News source(s): [3] [4] [5]
Credits:

Extremely important occurrence in Central America, following months of obstruction from the establishment in Guatemala. Moved to Jan 15th since the inauguration occurred after midnight. Blurbs can be adjusted as seen fit. River10000 08:13, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Iffy - I could go either way on this. On one hand the multiple attempts to block this from happening makes it notable, on the other hand we rarely post inaugurations of presidents, only elections (I don't know if we posted the 2023 election). PrecariousWorlds (talk) 08:20, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – One-line update. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 11:12, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • There's an entire article's worth of updates. —Cryptic 11:24, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • Why in the world is this not wikilinked in this nomination or anywhere in article. I support this being featured if the election itself hadn't been. I will still say that Arévalo's article needs work too. Would it be alright if we change the original nomination template to propose the inauguration article instead? ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 12:22, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
        It's been changed now. I wasn't aware of the article either tbh. River10000 (talk) 16:08, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - the article about the inauguration itself should also be linked to in the blurb if this gets posted, as Arévalo's article has very limited information (essentially just one line). Bucket of sulfuric acid (talk) 14:34, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It's been changed. River10000 (talk) 16:08, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support considerably more significant than some rich kid taking over mommy’s job in Denmark. nableezy - 15:09, 15 January 2024 (UTC) - support alt as that’s the reason this is significant. nableezy - 22:26, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Enough. Stephen 23:00, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
  • An admin closed your thread in that discussion exactly because of this behavior, I’d suggest you strike the comment and quit it. The Kip 17:46, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    i suggest you not repeat the badgering of people who have opinions you dislike. nableezy - 21:11, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Let's not do this again. Enough of the battleground behaviour already. JM (talk) 21:15, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Jesus Christ I am not looking to engage with you anywhere, is there a reason you are incapable of leaving me alone? nableezy - 21:17, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not looking to engage with you either. If you stopped with the battleground behaviour and incivility then I wouldnt feel the need to call it out. You are the only person at ITN who is behaving like this. Like I said, there is no reason for you to be uncivil toward me, there is no reason for you to answer me if you don't want to, and I'm not just going to let your incivility toward other editors here stand. JM (talk) 21:22, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not looking to engage with you either. then stop or I’ll ask that you be made to. nableezy - 22:19, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    While I agree with your sentiment, ITN isn't an appropriate place to say this. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 21:53, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Indeed. They have four separate editors telling them to stop such behaviour within the last 24 hours just on this page. If anyone's going to be made to stop, it's likely going to be them. JM (talk) 22:25, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You can add a fifth one here. ChaotıċEnby(talk · contribs) 22:46, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    If you all don’t like how I’m judging significance you can point to some overriding policy on it. I have not been uncivil in the slightest, and the repeated badgering of my !vote is getting beyond annoying. You don’t like my vote? Ah well, I don’t like lots of things on the internet. nableezy - 22:48, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree with the point made in your vote, but it is the wording that is unnecessarily rude and not really productive for the discussion. Also, raising an objection one time about a comment's wording isn't badgering, that would be going under every comment and repeatedly demanding you to change your wording. ChaotıċEnby(talk · contribs) 22:55, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Rude to who? Not liking an opinion isn’t the basis for a complaint, especially by a user like JM2023 or whatever their username is having been annoying me across a range of pages, including my own user talk. Anyway, my !vote is that this is more significant than the non story of somebody inheriting a job that we currently feature, so I support its inclusion. If somebody has a problem with that, oh well. nableezy - 22:58, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose The efforts to stop it were/are important, but the fact it ultimately went through as planned moreso makes this a “business as usual” story rather than something truly notable. The Kip 17:48, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment did we cover the election? If so, I oppose this nomination. JM (talk) 21:16, 15 January 2024 (UTC) Oppose as the election was indeed posted. JM (talk) 21:57, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - this is more important and interesting than the coronation of a new monarch in Denmark, in my opinion, but also, the fact that the inauguration was significantly delayed makes it notable, even though we covered the election. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 21:52, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on notability but the article could benefit from an improvement in quality --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 22:42, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on notability, pretty rare for an inauguration to be notable separately from the election, but the surrounding context (especially the fact that the inauguration wasn't at all guaranteed to happen smoothly, if at all) definitely make this one notable. ChaotıċEnby(talk · contribs) 22:47, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. We posted the election results and I believe some of the surrounding protests? Not without noteworthiness, but this event has been inevitable for a month since the Constitutional Court ruled the election results were valid. DarkSide830 (talk) 00:42, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • The protests never ended up getting posted. The election itself was but never the attempts to cancel it after.
    River10000 (talk) 01:10, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I'd like to see more context in the context section of the article (especially if altblurb is used), but given said context, this is clearly significant enough to post. Banedon (talk) 03:07, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: Election was already posted and we don't usually post inaugurations. Tofusaurus (talk) 06:05, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support altblurb The attempts to block Arévalo’s inauguration make it ITN-worthy. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 08:15, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose we didnt post US Inaugurations Setarip (talk) 11:32, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support altblurb on quality and notability. --NoonIcarus (talk) 12:52, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support altblurb We don't normally post presidential inaugurations. But this case is totally different and its notoriety is easily visible and understandable by reading the news and articles about Arévalo and his inauguration. The quality of the inauguration article could be better, but it's just enough for it to be posted. _-_Alsor (talk) 15:36, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Admin note this has enough support to be posted, both in the quality and number of !votes, but I'm not seeing any details in the article about the "multiple attempts to cancel his inauguration". I've read the news and know that political opponents were organizing in a last-ditch effort to delay and weaken Arévalo's presidency (notably not cancel/prevent, at least from what I've seen). Why isn't any of that info included? The altblurb could also be tweaked to avoid repeating forms of the word inauguration. Ed [talk] [OMT] 18:45, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • I've went ahead and added the word obstruct instead. Debatably fits better. Also will add context about election canceling to the article asap. (I've now added a bit more context from the 2023 guatemalan election page)
    River10000 (talk) 19:13, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Usually the inauguration is a formality and not worth posting, but in this case there was enough going on to make it doubtful that the inauguration would happen. The Inauguration of Bernardo Arévalo article now also has a section explaining the context. Ucucha (talk) 03:42, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Alt Blurb. I agree that "we usually don't post inaugurations", but there usually aren't attempts to not have them. – Muboshgu (talk) 04:01, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

January 14

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Politics and elections


(Posted) RD: Munawwar Rana

Article: Munawwar Rana (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/renowned-urdu-poet-munawwar-rana-dies-at-71-4863447
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.

Famous Indian urdu poet Harvici 09:07, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Article seems to be well referenced. Though it doesn't include the typical section on his notable works. Schwinnspeed (talk) 01:33, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Stephen 00:14, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ongoing : 2024 Ecuadorian conflict

Article: 2024 Ecuadorian conflict (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
News source(s): NOS
Credits:

Article updated
  • Oppose Last news update to article was on the 11th, there doesn't seem to be that much coverage or activity of this for a sustained ongoing. --Masem (t) 23:20, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait If important news come out of the country, it would be good to have it, but not every low-intensity conflict needs to be Ongoing by default. As much as it looks like it, it isn't a "current wars" ticker. ChaotıċEnby(talk · contribs) 23:49, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I wonder if it should be put in the secondary Ongoing tier which is visible in Portal:Current events. I don't know the process for that though. JM (talk) 23:52, 14 January 2024 (UTC) Although now that I look at it, Ecuadorian security crisis covering 2020-present is already there. JM (talk) 02:57, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Wait - per @Chaotic Enby. If situation continues to deteriorate after a few days, then we can put it up. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 08:31, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait per CE. The Kip 17:48, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment the conflict in Equador is really an extension of the Mexican drug war which might be a better ongoing candidate. Sadly the utter collapse of these countries has made routine the assassination of judges, the slaughter of children, the beheading of villages, such that there aren't regular updates of the savage barbarism there. --24.125.98.89 (talk) 10:21, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I genuinely think you could tone down your wording a little bit when saying things like savage barbarism, especially since it's not the first time you use this kind of language to describe Latin Americans. ChaotıċEnby(talk · contribs) 15:12, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't know how else to describe a continent that has 8% of the world population but 33% of the murder [6] and literally celebrates death except as irredeemably violent and depraved. --24.125.98.89 (talk) 17:40, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    There's a difference between honoring and remembering the deceased and celebrating death itself. Please stop with these racist generalizations based on gross cultural misunderstandings. ChaotıċEnby(talk · contribs) 18:06, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Such a xenophobe and ignorant comment. Let me guess where you're from... Bedivere (talk) 01:39, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    No point in responding, the user is blocked. But what we also don't need is anything like let me guess where you're from in response. JM (talk) 03:16, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait, leaning toward support There are several new developments, including the death of the prosecutor probing the TV studio attack, and 43 prisoners escaping as reported by Reuters. There is just so much going on in "ongoing" right now that this is considered relatively low-intensity. Schwinnspeed (talk) 01:47, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support was considering a nom of this myself This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 05:01, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) 2024 El Carmen de Atrato landslide

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


Article: 2024 El Carmen de Atrato landslide (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: A landslide kills at least 34 people and injures at least 35 others in El Carmen de Atrato, Colombia. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ At least 34 people are killed and at least another 35 injured after a landslide in the Colombian town of El Carmen de Atrato, Chocó.
News source(s): Guardian, AP, Reuters, BBC, CNN
Credits:
Ainty Painty (talk) 17:09, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Now merged both into 2024 El Carmen de Atrato landslide after page was moved again. Abcmaxx (talk) 06:45, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on quality article is 1 sentence. However, the Spanish and Portuguese articles are much longer, so if anyone wants to translate one or both of those, the quality issues will be resolved. JM (talk) 23:24, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on Quality. Target article shouldn't even be in the mainspace yet. DarkSide830 (talk) 03:23, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality as it’s a stub. The Kip 03:29, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Stale PrecariousWorlds (talk) 17:56, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Closed) 2024 Pingdingshan mining accident

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


Article: 2024 Pingdingshan mining accident (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: A coal mine accident in central China's Henan province leaves 13 people dead. (Post)
Alternative blurb: A coal mine accident in Pingdingshan, Henan province, has left 13 people dead and 3 people missing.
News source(s): Al Jazeera, Reuters, VOA, AP,
Credits:
Ainty Painty (talk) 16:46, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: Article is absolutely not ready. Incident bares no significance either and does not differ from any past mining incidents recently. Tofusaurus (talk) 17:06, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Added altblurb Abcmaxx (talk) 20:10, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as article is far too short for main page. The Kip 17:49, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Posted) RD: Lev Rubinstein

Article: Lev Rubinstein (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Meduza, The Guardian, BBC, Reuters, AFP, Moscow Times
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.

Russian poet of great merit, one of the founders of Moscow conceptualism, political/opinion journalist, vocal opponent of the war against Ukraine. Died after a traffic collision some days ago. Had an acclaimed book in English, many books in other languages. Trepang2 (talk) 10:34, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Danish royal succession

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: Frederik X (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Frederik X succeeds Margrethe II as king of Denmark, after her abdication. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Margrethe II abdicates the throne and is succeeded by Frederik X as king of Denmark.
Alternative blurb II: Margrethe II abdicates the throne and is succeeded by Frederik X as king of Denmark.
News source(s): [7] [8] [9] [10]
Credits:
Happening today at 1300 GMT. Natg 19 (talk) 09:16, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Long live Frederik X! PrecariousWorlds (talk) 09:28, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Long live the King! ChaotıċEnby(talk · contribs) 10:52, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MSN12102001 (talk) 11:07, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait until he formally ascends, otherwise support altblurb - Article quality is sufficient for it to be posted. Tofusaurus (talk) 11:39, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Frederik has not yet ascended as King (in about two hours as planned) and his article needs to be worked on: perhaps expand the content and, above all, that the information it have is referenced. _-_Alsor (talk) 11:48, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait until 2:00 PM Danish time (when he is formally going to succeed his mother). Otherwise, support especially because the target article already looks good to be posted. Vida0007 (talk) 12:28, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Should have done it right now (14:15 CEST). Need to wait for official confirmation. Gust Justice (talk) 13:15, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support as per the reasons given above. - Therealscorp1an (talk) 13:25, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support - all's good with the articles, formal accession is done. No need to wait much longer. estar8806 (talk) 13:41, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support - article looks good and he has ascended to the throne. Should we also link Abdication of Margrethe II in the blurb? - azpineapple | T/C 13:44, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality - too much uncited material in article. Polyamorph (talk) 13:49, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality - per above. Nigej (talk) 14:00, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    In addition, the dozen+ refs on that one statement in the Scientific support section is overkill. When there are that many sources to one sentence, that is a possible symptom of OR being pushed. --Masem (t) 14:13, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support gaining major coverage around the world. Long live King Frederik X! Though I agree the abdication article should be linked and perhaps worded "following her abdication" rather than "after her abdication". Richiepip (talk) 14:52, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • How is this ITNR? Elections of heads of state/government are ITNR. Oppose on significance, some lady quit her "job" and her son has taken over. Whopdee doo. nableezy - 15:19, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A new head of state taking over is significant whether by election or inheritance. Richiepip (talk) 15:48, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Enough. Stephen 04:33, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
It isnt ITNR if not by election, and it isnt significant if they have nothing significant about their powers. nableezy - 16:28, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You're totally wrong on that one. Per WP:ITNELECTIONS: Changes in the holder of the office which administer the executive of their respective state/government, in those countries which qualify under the criteria above, as listed at List of current heads of state and government except when that change was already posted as part of a general election. We just had the succession in Kuwait, and it was considered ITN/R because the Emir of Kuwait is the highest executive authority in that country. While this change isn't ITN/R, it's still significant because it's a change of monarch and it's all over the news. JM (talk) 18:26, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That’s because the emir of Kuwait administers the executive. Which isn’t the case for the king of Denmark. Also, doesn’t appear to be all over the news that I read. Not on the front page of the New York Times, Washington post or Wall Street journal or Chicago tribune. nableezy - 19:03, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You said only changes by election are ITN/R, which was wrong. I am aware that the difference between Kuwait's emir and Denmark's king is executive power, which is exactly what I said in the two sentences right after the green quote. And fortunately, we at ITN are not limited to the front pages of a few major American newspapers; many here are also wary of systemic bias toward American perpsectives. JM (talk) 19:30, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The line you quoted is about Changes in the holder of the office which administer the executive of their respective state/government, in those countries which qualify under the criteria above, as listed at List of current heads of state and government except when that change was already posted as part of a general election. The line you quoted has literally nothing to do with a nomination for somebody who does not administer the executive. As far as not limited to a few major American newspapers, sure, but there has been no evidence offered that it's all over the news, and my comment was a refutation of that. But kindly badger somebody else, I dont find this to be a particularly fruitful exchange. nableezy - 19:34, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know what you're trying to say here. For the second time, you said that changes in head of state are not ITN/R unless by election, I said that changes of head of state without election are ITN/R if the head of state is the the supreme executive authority, using that quoted section. I don't know why your response to that is to tell me that my quoted section has "nothing to do with a nomination for someboy who does not administer the executive" when I never said that it did in the first place. You're disputing something that I never said. JM (talk) 19:39, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Again, please badger somebody else. nableezy - 19:42, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I started writing my comment before you accused me of "badgering" and so didn't see your accusation until after I published. Regardless, you don't need to respond, and if anything, I'm being badgered considering you're arguing with me about something I never said in the first place. Anyway, to respond to the second half of your comment that you added after the fact: using a few American front pages does not show that it's not "all over the news". I don't have to re-prove it, because the nominator provided four different sources from four different American and British top publications; that means it is indeed all over the news. JM (talk) 19:45, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
All of those are well past the front page. But now that you know I’d like you to stop badgering me, can you stop plz? Thanks in advance. nableezy - 20:33, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't matter whether they're on the front page or not. But just from a quick check of CNN and the Guardian, it's at the top of both home pages in the "headlines" section of both. I find it interesting that you consider me responding to you "badgering", but not you responding to me. You can't honestly expect me to stop responding to your arguments just because you call it badgering despite doing the same thing. JM (talk) 20:39, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Um, you see who's !vote you're replying to right? The only place I see it on CNN's homepage is in its list of headlines, below Chiefs win, Coach Andy Reid’s mustache freezes and Taylor Swift bundles up in 4th-coldest game in NFL history. Guess Reid's mustache freezing is a bigger story. nableezy - 21:05, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So it is at the top of the homepage under headlines, as I said. i.e., front page. So there is absolutely no reason for you to argue with me, since you apparently agree with me. Anyway, what's the policy that says an editor responding to an editor under the latter editor's !vote can be said to "badger" but the latter editor replying to the former editor's replies cannot be said to "badger"? JM (talk) 22:13, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is nothing good that can come from either of you continuing this back and forth. What's said is said, and what isn't said probably isn't worth saying. So probably a good time to chill. Polyamorph (talk) 22:32, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:SEALIONING nableezy - 02:17, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is abosutely no POV-pushing from me here at all. I agreed with Polyamorph that there was nothing more to say and that this was detrimental, but I just have to answer this allegation, because really? Accusing me of POV-pushing and bad faith, because why, I told you the guidelines and that this was on the front page? There's no POV to even take here. Come on. JM (talk) 02:21, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can you please please please annoy somebody else? Pretty please? nableezy - 04:06, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ugh... you're being disruptive at this point. If it annoys you that I respond to your baseless allegations of POV-pushing and bad faith, then don't make baseless allegations of POV-pushing and bad faith. JM (talk) 04:09, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
lol needs that last word on somebody else’s !vote in a nomination that’s already posted. Go ahead, have at it. nableezy - 04:22, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support on notability because while this is not ITN/R it's still a significant event. But, per above, the article is not ready due to quality. JM (talk) 18:29, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I also think that the abdication should be the linked article, so I've proposed and support Altblurb II; the abdication article is already of sufficient quality, so any quality concerns I had are moot, and the change in target article would also alleviate all above quality concerns by others if their support is changed to Alt2. JM (talk) 19:53, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose only ceremonial role, and we pulled the French PM change which was a much more meaningful change. Royal news is essentially no more than celebrity news in the modern world and has no real impact at all as their roles are completely redundant. Abcmaxx (talk) 20:14, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It's much, much more than just celebrity news. I agree we should've posted the French PM, why not both? PrecariousWorlds (talk) 20:38, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    How is it much much more? A YouTuber, multinational company CEO or Instagram influencer has more influence on the world Abcmaxx (talk) 23:26, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support - We posted separately the ascension and coronation of Charles and Camilla. This is, in some ways, both an ascension and coronation for the Danish Realm, and so highly significant. Wide media coverage, as has been pointed out. In addition, I also think it's crucial that we also include Queen Mary in the blurb. Her ascension has been reported in its own right for her Australian roots (eg. SMH, CNN, NYT, BBC), but in any case her ascension to queen consort is significant enough to report on ITN. JMonkey2006 (talk) 21:46, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • We posted separately the ascension and coronation of Charles and Camilla and that was a mistake. I understand that some people love monarchies for some reason, but Wikipedia shouldn't have. It was heavily inappropriate (and I felt bad for all the British citizens who are not monarchists but had to be constantly reminded of the monarchy). -- RockstoneSend me a message! 05:46, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support alt2: Notable event, and iirc, when her abdication was first announced, there was consensus to wait until Jan 14. ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 21:52, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You indeed RC. JM (talk) 21:58, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    yes, good point. _-_Alsor (talk) 22:08, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support alt2 the article on Margrethe's abdication is in great condition. So if that is the article we could put in bold highlighted, this nomination is ready to be posted. It's very important to know about monarchies before questioning the notability of an abdication and the ascension of a crown prince/princess to the throne. _-_Alsor (talk) 22:07, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You get born in the right order at the right time and by this mere fact irrelevant of merit or anything else one becomes a monarch. That is all there is to it and it's hard not to question its notability. Abcmaxx (talk) 23:28, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It's a head of state, a person ostensibly considered sovereign, and it's the second abdication in this country ever, and the first in nearly 1,000 years. Seems notable enough, even when the person has little practical power. JM (talk) 01:10, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    If a change in the French PM isn’t notable enough for ITN, I normally wouldn’t consider a change in a ceremonial monarchy notable enough for ITN. However, the 1st abdication in Denmark in nearly 1,000 years would make this more notable than most changes in a ceremonial monarchy. That should be noted in the blurb. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 07:08, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Stephen 22:35, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Late oppose A poorly written article that fails to meet any level of importance or readability for the average Wikipedia user Dreameditsbrooklyn (talk) 03:56, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Are you referring to the blurbed article (the abdication article)? JM (talk) 04:02, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am, sorry if I put this in the wrong place. Dreameditsbrooklyn (talk) 04:22, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm really not seeing how this is poorly written and unreadable. What specifically is the issue? JM (talk) 05:53, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting oppose - I might be in the minority here, but the king of Denmark has no real power, so it's silly to blurb this. I'm not convinced that it matters enough to warrant posting. --RockstoneSend me a message! 05:43, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-Posting Support. Change in head of state. DarkSide830 (talk) 05:57, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

January 13

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Politics and elections


RD: Romuald Twardowski

Article: Romuald Twardowski (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Polskie Radio
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.

Prolific Polish composer in many genres from opera to choral works for Catholic and Orthodox church. Most of the article was there but needed references. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:53, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Alec Musser

Article: Alec Musser (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [11]
Credits:

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

American actor. Needs a lot of work. Natg 19 (talk) 19:36, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Joyce Randolph

Article: Joyce Randolph (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [12]
Credits:

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

American actress. Natg 19 (talk) 19:31, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Bernard Descôteaux

Article: Bernard Descôteaux (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Montreal Gazette
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.

Canadian journalist. Article needs some work. I will work on this later tonight unless someone gets to it before me. Basic edits done. Article has shaped into a basic-start class biography.Ktin (talk) 00:37, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Tom Shales

Article: Tom Shales (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [13]
Credits:

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

– Muboshgu (talk) 17:07, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) 2024 Taiwanese presidential election

Proposed image
Article: 2024 Taiwanese presidential election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Lai Ching-te is elected President of Taiwan. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Vice President Lai Ching-te is elected President of the Republic of China (Taiwan).
Alternative blurb II: Lai Ching-te, a supporter of Taiwanese independence, is elected President of Taiwan.
News source(s): The Guardian - NBC News - Al Jazeera
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: Historic election in Taiwan where the DPP has won a consecutive third term. A major result as well as it may impact the geopolitics of the region especially with China. - Tofusaurus (talk) 12:57, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support alt blurb - Major implications for region. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 14:45, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, preferably with mention of his support for Taiwanese independence The sum of all human knowledge (talk) 15:40, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    bit weird to include policy proposals on election blurbs PrecariousWorlds (talk) 17:09, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Definitely - that starts getting into POV (even in this case, Taiwan's independence would be desirable for most of the rest of the world, that's still a POV) — Masem (t) 17:15, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Also I believe he doesn't support an actual declaration of independence, but rather strongly asserting Taiwan's sovereignty from PR China. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 20:44, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support on quality but ideally the section move proposal should be dealt with soon, otherwise, nothing problematic stands out. ITN/R so no question about notability, agree that the mention of Taiwanese independence support (Altblurb II) should be added for context. ChaotıċEnby(t · c) 16:39, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: No preference on blurb/altblurb. If someone wants to include the mention of his independence support, please provide an altblurb. I'm leaning oppose on that mention for now, however. ARandomName123 (talk)Ping me! 17:57, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - I was surprised it wasn't already listed. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:18, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, with strong preference for main blurb over altblurb per WP:COMMONNAME, and "President of Taiwan" as by far the most widely used term in media coverage. Leaning oppose of Taiwan independence mention for WP:NPOV, as even the definition of Taiwan independence is heavily contested. Butterdiplomat (talk) 19:52, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support sufficient quality is present. Added Altblurb II for mention of Taiwanese independence support; I support Altblurb II and I don't think it's NPOV to mention that in the blurb. JM (talk) 19:57, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support altblurb II; oppose other blurbs. It would be POV were this ITN entry to endorse or oppose Taiwanese independence, but not only is it not POV to state his position on the issue, but it would be missing important context on the significance of this news item to not do so. —Lowellian (reply) 21:18, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Significant regional news with global implications. Melmann 22:17, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support INTR and article is in good shape Kcmastrpc (talk) 23:08, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per above Hungry403 (talk) 23:22, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Are we leaving out the legislative election? The Kuomintang won one more seat than the DPP. Howard the Duck (talk) 23:46, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You can propose an altblurb for that if that's what you want. It would probably be pretty long. JM (talk) 01:04, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think it is fine to leave out the legislative election in the blurb. Though significant for Taiwan, major international headlines including the New York Times, The Guardian, NPR, etc. focused on the presidential race, particularly on the front page. Butterdiplomat (talk) 05:12, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The result of legislative election is a clear indicator showing that the public opinion of Taiwanese is very unsteady, a large portion of electors prefer parties seeking less conflicted relationships with PRC (although not necessarily a causation). This should not be ignored or even oversimplified as "Taiwanese prefer independence". Oppose altblurb II and support altlurb before new altblurbs is proposed by the way. --Tiouraren (talk) 06:00, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Taiwanese prefer the status quo, which is what Lai explicitly pushed for. The presidential election dominated media coverage and headlines. No one is saying to leave out the legislative election in the articles - it is just not as important for the short blurb. Butterdiplomat (talk) 13:33, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Looks good, I'm hesitant on ALT2 because there is reporting that Lai supported the status quo position as opposed to Taiwanese independence. Ornithoptera (talk) 05:00, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb 1 or alt1. Natg 19 (talk) 05:16, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support altblurb 2 I think it's the clearest at explaining the significance of the event in an NPOV way. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 05:58, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) RD: Imam Hassan Sharif

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: Imam Hassan Sharif (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CBS
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.
Ainty Painty (talk) 03:02, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not recent and death has been known for ten days. Bedivere (talk) 13:46, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose he was murdered on 3 January. This nom is stale. _-_Alsor (talk) 14:40, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Aside from the fact that he might not pass notability requirements, his death happened too long ago. Johndavies837 (talk) 16:25, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

January 12

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime


(Posted) RD: Bill Hayes (actor)

Article: Bill Hayes (actor) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Wrap
Credits:

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

Thriley (talk) 03:08, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Some unreferenced material in the personal section. Stephen 22:08, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The unreferenced material in the personal section has references now, so this article now has enough details & references to be posted. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 11:25, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Stephen 11:48, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Annie Nightingale

Article: Annie Nightingale (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC, The Guardian, Clash
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.

She was best known for being BBC Radio 1's first female presenter and longest-serving host, as well as an innovative figure within British music and radio platforms. Unfortunately, the article is pretty much a mess at the moment (being in desperate need of sources and copy-editing), but I hope someone can help fix it! Oltrepier (talk) 16:41, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • There are still a number of footnote-free paragraphs, so sourcing in this wikibio seems rather inadequate. Please add more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 06:29, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) 2024 Yemeni airstrikes

Nominator's comments: A previous nom regarding the formation of the coalition was not posted; now that there has been actual military action, I think it's natural to bring this up again. — Knightoftheswords 04:03, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • support it's an obvious invasion to a country and it's important, a high escalate invasion involving two mean power nations and their alleys is indeed big news. 3000MAX (talk) 04:39, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't recommend calling them "mean power nations" as a reason for supporting, since it gives the impression of POV. JM (talk) 07:34, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support, I'd also recommend adding the map as a picture Abo Yemen 04:56, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support on notability, but the article needs to be improved before we post this. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 05:19, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article covered the whole thing splendidly, it's short because we're in the very early stage of the incident and there is very little detailed information released about the conflit. 3000MAX (talk) 05:54, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support article is well-cited and I previously supported the Operation Prosperity Guardian nomination (and nominated it, but withdrew after you beat me to it) so of course I support this one. JM (talk) 07:32, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support - lets go. Hugely notable event, and there will be a lot more from this, so we could possibly put it in ongoing (I think it's detached enough from the war in Israel to count) PrecariousWorlds (talk) 08:03, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Extremely notable news. Might be put in ongoing if this leads to a more long-term conflict, but I'd say we should wait for that first. Article is a bit short, but we can work on that. Bucket of sulfuric acid (talk) 08:17, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Stephen 08:21, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The article linked in the lead is currently a double redirect. Fixed, but it's still a redirect now. ChaotıċEnby(t · c) 10:59, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I started a move request as the title of the article is misleading, implying the strikes were against Yemen as a country rather than one terrorist group within it PrecariousWorlds (talk) 11:27, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support First joint U.S., U.K. airstrikes since the 2018 bombing of Syria. Ecrusized (talk) 12:14, 12 January 2024 (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: