Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 63: Line 63:
:'''Support''' The death toll and injury statistics are actively changing and disruptions to city centers and highways would impact trade/tourism/etc. Toroko (the sit of at least 4 deaths) is possibly the most visited national park in Taiwan. [[User:Ycleike|Ycleike]] ([[User talk:Ycleike|talk]]) 14:39, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
:'''Support''' The death toll and injury statistics are actively changing and disruptions to city centers and highways would impact trade/tourism/etc. Toroko (the sit of at least 4 deaths) is possibly the most visited national park in Taiwan. [[User:Ycleike|Ycleike]] ([[User talk:Ycleike|talk]]) 14:39, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
:'''Support''' That over one hundred people are trapped in highway tunnels, with no outside contact established, is grim and disturbing. Rescue attempts guarantee this earthquake is ITN. [[Special:Contributions/128.91.40.237|128.91.40.237]] ([[User talk:128.91.40.237|talk]]) 14:52, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
:'''Support''' That over one hundred people are trapped in highway tunnels, with no outside contact established, is grim and disturbing. Rescue attempts guarantee this earthquake is ITN. [[Special:Contributions/128.91.40.237|128.91.40.237]] ([[User talk:128.91.40.237|talk]]) 14:52, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
:'''Support''' on account of the damage to infrastructure; and, suspension of semiconductor manufacture from some larger plants which could end up affecting the global electronics economy. - [[User:AquilaFasciata | AquilaFasciata]] ([[User talk:AquilaFasciata |talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/AquilaFasciata |contribs]]) 17:54, 3 April 2024 (UTC)


== April 2 ==
== April 2 ==

Revision as of 17:54, 3 April 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.

Ebrahim Raisi in 2023
Ebrahim Raisi

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

April 3

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections


RD: John Barth

Article: John Barth (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NYT
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 postmodern writer. Several cn tags. Sincerely, Dilettante 10:46, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2024 Taiwan earthquake

Article: 2024 Taiwan earthquake (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A 7.4-magnitude earthquake strikes near Hualien City, Taiwan. (Post)
News source(s): [1]
Credits:

– Muboshgu (talk) 01:34, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Wait for effects to become more clear/article to be expanded further, then support. The Kip 01:47, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The tsunami warning has passed, and while there are some collapsed buildings, it looks like there's no significant fatalities or injuries based on most recent reports. Helps that the epicenter was several miles out from land. --Masem (t) 02:25, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Just adding that the count has been upped to 1 death and 50+ injuries but that's rather tame for a quake of this scale, to the point I still don't think we need to post this. Masem (t) 04:07, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree with this line of thinking. Any large earthquake above 6.5 or 7.0 magnitude with its own article is "in the news" and should be worthy for posting. Natg 19 (talk) 04:12, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. This earthquake was significant in the region and did damage buildings. Any earthquake over 7.0 where there are people nearby should qualify as a major news story. S-1-5-7 (talk) 05:21, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just because an earthquake exceeds a threshold should not be reasons to post, since that factor alone doesn't give any weight to notability or long term impacts. It's along the lines of "if a tree fell in the woods...", that simply happening may not generate the sourcing or coverage we could expect if it was a major disaster. — Masem (t) 14:18, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: Article is reasonable now. This is not a "best article" category; it is what is in the news. More details will presumably be added. S-1-5-7 (talk) 05:21, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: No issues with article and seems ready to be posted. More details can be added to the article as further information is released. Tofusaurus (talk) 06:02, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment: The earthquake is already receiving extensive international coverage. Reported casualties are also increasing as time goes on. It is the most powerful earthquake in Taiwan in 25 years. This is definitely noteworthy of an ITN post. Focus should be on article quality at this point. Tofusaurus (talk) 12:30, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per reasons listed above. —Jarrod Baniqued (he/him) (talk) 06:14, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose since there's no significant casualties, it happened in the desolate part of the island.3000MAX (talk) 06:29, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The BBC is reporting seven fatalities, and that the epicentre was within 12 miles of Hualien City, which has a population of nearly 100,000. GenevieveDEon (talk) 06:54, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
right, the area is not isolated. 3000MAX (talk) 09:56, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is no minimum death toll needed to count something as a disaster. If this was an earthquake was equally sized as this one but in a remote area where there wasn’t much potential to cause any real damage, this would be a more valid point. But this happened in a somewhat populated area where the potential for damage was high. QuarioQuario54321 (talk) 16:26, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait This seems borderline as List of earthquakes in 2024 indicates that there's a mag 7+ earthquake every month on average and so we should focus on the ones with significant impact. The details of this one still seem to be emerging. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:36, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support – It has caused considerable damage and rescue efforts are ongoing. Several dozen people remain trapped in buildings. Sounds notable for inclusion.Dora the Axe-plorer (explore) 07:38, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Although a magnitude 7+ earthquake happens every month or so on average, this is the second most powerful earthquake of the year, and it did hit a densely populated area rather than the middle of the ocean, and had secondary effects such as a landslide and a small tsunami. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HelloThereQuestionablePerson (talkcontribs) 11:36, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support significant event, many missing and injured, the casualties are only going to rise over the next several days. Kcmastrpc (talk) 12:46, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait until the impacts of the earthquake become more clear. Gödel2200 (talk) 13:03, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait for the situation to become clear. NW1223<Howl at meMy hunts> 13:32, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait until we have more reports of the impact. Magnitude 7+ earthquakes are common, but this happened in the middle of a fairly large town and there are already several casualties reported with the possibility for many more. Estreyeria (talk) 14:00, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support since around ten people died, making it a significant event. LiamKorda 14:04, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support the death toll cureently stands at 9 and it could increase. We blurbed 2024 Noto earthquake when the death toll was still in the mid single digits. PrinceofPunjabTALK 14:19, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support The death toll and injury statistics are actively changing and disruptions to city centers and highways would impact trade/tourism/etc. Toroko (the sit of at least 4 deaths) is possibly the most visited national park in Taiwan. Ycleike (talk) 14:39, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support That over one hundred people are trapped in highway tunnels, with no outside contact established, is grim and disturbing. Rescue attempts guarantee this earthquake is ITN. 128.91.40.237 (talk) 14:52, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support on account of the damage to infrastructure; and, suspension of semiconductor manufacture from some larger plants which could end up affecting the global electronics economy. - AquilaFasciata (talk | contribs) 17:54, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

April 2

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

Business and economy


RD: Christopher Durang

Article: Christopher Durang (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Deadline Hollywood
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.

American playwright. 240F:7A:6253:1:7572:264F:E304:8869 (talk) 14:34, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose the work section barely has 4 sources and have multiple tags and there are cn tags in the other parts of the article too. PrinceofPunjabTALK 14:43, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Ready) RD: Juan Vicente Pérez

Article: Juan Vicente Pérez (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Hindu
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.

Article updated and well sourced. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 06:20, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support The article is of sufficiently good quality. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 08:54, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support the article is well cited. PrinceofPunjabTALK 14:22, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gayrettepe nightclub fire

Article: Gayrettepe nightclub fire (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In Turkey, at least 29 construction workers are killed in a fire while renovating an Istanbul nightclub. (Post)
News source(s): Reuters
Credits:

Article updated

Little surprised this hadn’t been nominated yet. The Kip 21:19, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, not every disaster with 20+ deaths has to be on ITN. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 22:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose barring something like this being arson or the like, thus type if low-level man made accidental disaster isn't good material fir stand alone articles as it likely will have no impact within a few years. Masem (t) 22:43, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- I'm sorry, if this occurred in an Anglosphere country, this would be posted instantly. There is no requirement for a minimum number of deaths, but this event is nonetheless notable enough for posting, the fact that it happened in Turkey instead of the US or UK is not reason not to post. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 23:26, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'd also oppose it if it was in an Anglosphere country. Accidents of this level are, sadly, pretty routine news at the world's scale, and not the kind of impactful events that should be featured on Wikipedia's main page. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 23:32, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Tragic event but not notable enough. ITN is supposed to serve for the uttermost uncommon events, and this event itself will most likely have no impact long term per Masem. TwistedAxe [contact] 23:50, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Nearly 30 people died in a fire. Unfortunate and not really common event. Too bad systemic bias sometimes seem very evident around here. Please remember this is a global project, not an anglophone-countries one. --Bedivere (talk) 00:23, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. An incident with 14 spanish dead got in ITN within hours. Lukt64 (talk) 00:53, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per Lukt64. Does border on NEVENT but for the sake of consistency we probably should post this. DarkSide830 (talk) 01:12, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per above; the article does not indicate this will have any long term impact. Gödel2200 (talk) 01:16, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Construction deaths are common everywhere and the article lacks detail. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:31, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per notability, the number of casualties is higher then a simple work accident. 3000MAX (talk) 10:22, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not Ready the article is not ready to be featured on ITN. PrinceofPunjabTALK 14:24, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Something like this would absolutely be posted if it had occurred in Chicago or Los Angeles. Duly signed, WaltClipper -(talk) 14:58, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    As a workplace accident or as a nightclub fire? Does your hypothetical US-based scenario automatically make this fire in Turkey notable? 24.125.98.89 (talk) 17:17, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Judith Tuluka Appointed First African Woman PM

Article: Judith Tuluka (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The President of DR Congo names Judith Suminwa Tuluka as first African female Prime Minister (Post)
News source(s): Al Jazeera
Credits:

Heatrave (talk) 20:31, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • This is an appointed position, so it's not an election result.
  • It's not the chief executive position; that's the president, who made the appointment.
  • The claim in the nomination is false. Aside from the various presidents Kip has linked to, there have been several female prime ministers in various African countries before now. GenevieveDEon (talk) 23:56, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. PrinceofPunjabTALK 14:24, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above Ion.want.uu (talk) 14:33, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: John Sinclair

Article: John Sinclair (poet) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [2][3][4] [5] "John Sinclair, Whose Post and Prison Sentence Who Inspired John Lennon's Song Dies at Age 82". Washington Post. April 2, 2024. He helped usher in Ann Arbor's $5 fine and celebrated when Michigan legalized recrational cannabis in 2018.(subscription required) Legaspi, Althea (April 2, 2024). "OBITUARY: John Sinclair, Poet, MC5 Manager, and Activist, Dead at 82". Rolling Stone. The Detroit counterculture icon who managed the MC5 symbolized youth rebellion in the Sixties(subscription required)</ref>
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.

Big in the White Panther Party. Important poet. Counter cultural icon. Founder of the Hash bash in Ann Arbor, Michigan John Lennon played to free him from persecution (and prison). 7&6=thirteen () 20:23, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support: His journalism career alone seems illustrious enough to me. Jarrod Baniqued (he/him) (talk) 06:17, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
RDs don't have a criteria of notability: only article quality matters for them. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 08:56, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait The discography section is entirely unsourced. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 08:59, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wait some paragraphs do not have sources at the end and some sections of discography are not unsourced. PrinceofPunjabTALK 14:27, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Chris Cross

Article: Chris Cross (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Sky News
Credits:

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

Ultravox bassist; co-wrote "Vienna" amongst others. Died on 25 March; news released today. Article needs a lot of work. Note: NOT Christopher Cross, who was surprised to be informed he was dead on social media. Black Kite (talk) 19:51, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not Kris Kross either.—Bagumba (talk)

(Closed) Viertola school shooting

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: Viertola school shooting (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A school shooting in Finland leaves one dead and two injured. (Post)
News source(s): PBS
Credits:

Very rare and tragic event in Finland. 🔥Jalapeño🔥 Stupid stuff I did 15:23, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose for now. Article is a stub and I'm leaning towards lacking notability as well. mike_gigs talkcontribs 15:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose it might be rare in Finland, but come on now. With one death, this isn't notable. It's not even a mass shooting by any definition. --RockstoneSend me a message! 16:36, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    No, it is not that it "might be rare" to occur in Finland, it is that “it is rare”. A certainty. _-_Alsor (talk) 18:04, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, not every shooting is notable, even in countries with a usually low crime rate. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 16:51, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose A shooting is rare in Europe, let alone Finland. But with one fatality, this unfortunate act is not ITN-worthy. _-_Alsor (talk) 18:06, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Although my heart goes out to the victims, this is just standard police blotter stuff. rawmustard (talk) 19:06, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per all above, and recommend SNOW close. The Kip 21:01, 2 April 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.

RD: Maryse Condé

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

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

Arguably the preeminent French writer. Perennial candidate for the Nobel. Brilliant writer, dead at 90. Bibliography needs sourcing. Sincerely, Dilettante 14:45, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Ready) RD: Larry Lucchino

Article: Larry Lucchino (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Boston Globe
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.

Longtime baseball executive, article seems well-sourced. MAINEiac4434 (talk) 14:19, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

April 1

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections


World Central Kitchen drone strikes

Article: World Central Kitchen drone strikes (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In Gaza, Israeli Defense Forces kill 7 World Central Kitchen aid workers in a drone strike. (Post)
News source(s): BBC, Reuters, O Globo
Credits:

Article updated

I know this is covered in ongoing, but I believe the significance and magnitude of this event is worthy enough of it to be covered as a full blurb as well.  Bait30  Talk 2 me pls? 20:48, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose blurb Unlike the consulate strike below, this is covered by ongoing, and besides the non-Israeli/Palestinian nationalities of the deceased I don’t see what makes this especially different than any of the war’s unfortunately many attacks on civilians (including aid workers). The Kip 21:00, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It's unfortunate that the media/world governments care more when it's Western nationalities, but that fact is the reason why it's getting so much more coverage than any of the other killings of civilians in this war. And again, just because something is covered by ongoing doesn't mean it cannot be blurbed.  Bait30  Talk 2 me pls? 21:29, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose not the first humanitarian aide deaths and likely won't be the last until Israel changes their approach to Gaza. Should be covered by ongoing. Masem (t) 21:35, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support this is heavily covered by major news organizations and its ramifications are far ranging; also I was just going to nominate this anyway. Makeandtoss (talk) 22:23, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Just because an event is considered "ongoing" doesn't mean that all events relating to it can't be blurb, contrary to the claims of some users. It simply means that there needs to be a higher threshold of coversge/significance for something to be blurbed. For example, the Bucha massacre and the Sinking of the Moskva were both blurbed even though the Russian invasion of Ukraine is ongoing. The widespread coverage of this attack, and with the overwhelming death toll being of foreign nationals, more than meets the extended criteria for posting. Mount Patagonia (talkcontributions) 00:58, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose The event is covered by ongoing, but the fact that the World Central Kitchen is stopping its operations in Gaza due to the attack could be significant (though it is too early to tell what the impacts of it will be). Gödel2200 (talk) 01:23, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is what ongoing is for - We currently have two Israel/Gaza related blurbs nominated in the last day, posting them both is a stretch. This is exactly what the purpose of ongoing is, not just for ongoing events, but for when there is a constant flow of blurb-worthy stories like this. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 08:05, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose once again, this is covered by ongoing. _-_Alsor (talk) 08:05, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Israel has struck UNRWA facilities before, this is only making headlines due to the victims not being Palestinian. Unlikely to see any long term consequence of this when compared to other individual incidents of Israel attacking aid organisations. Traumnovelle (talk) 08:29, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose it's been covered in ongoing, last few month back, when the attack on American base in Jordan Killed 4 military personel the consensus considered it as covered in ongoing news, red sea crisis as i remember. I don't see any difference in this case. People are dying on a daily basis in Gaza these days, it's a dense warzone!3000MAX (talk) 10:05, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    User 3000MAX is not an autoconfirmed user so I am not sure if their input is allowed at an ARBPIA discussion. Makeandtoss (talk) 12:07, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Joe Flaherty

Article: Joe Flaherty (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NBC 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 Actor.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 18:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Not ready. Many paragraphs without citations. The filmography is mostly unsourced. A citation is needed for his birth date. Flibirigit (talk) 20:03, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Lou Conter

Article: Lou Conter (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NY Times, WaPo, Honolulu Star-Advertiser
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.

Last survivor of the USS Arizona sunk at Pearl Harbor. Ad Orientem (talk) 00:57, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In less of that I’d go for in the news rather than for recent deaths. It’s big news, at least in the US.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1011:b13f:5382:6420:adfe:2a66:f322 (talk) 01:59, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've no view on the article itself, but this IP comment appears to be calling for a blurb. I really think that's not appropriate; being present at an event, and then surviving for a long time afterwards, is not a particularly noteworthy achievement in itself. GenevieveDEon (talk) 07:56, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. I don't think this is blurb worthy. When the last survivor of World War II goes, that would be worth considering. -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:17, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support RD, oppose blurb The article is of sufficiently good quality for RD, but the death itself isn't noteworthy enough to be blurbed. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 11:53, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD - article is sourced well-enough mike_gigs talkcontribs 15:23, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • The first paragraph in the Military career section need more sourcing. --PFHLai (talk) 08:08, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. Wyliepedia @ 09:52, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the new footnote. It supported that the subject was a QM, as indicated at the end of the paragraph. But we still need sources for which class of QM, and for the rest of the paragraph. -- PFHLai (talk) 11:25, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Never mind. Found another ref. --PFHLai (talk) 11:53, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Vontae Davis

Article: Vontae Davis (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NBC News
Credits:

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

The Kip 21:11, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD/Blurb: Mohammad Reza Zahedi, 2024 Iranian consulate airstrike in Damascus

WARNING: ACTIVE ARBITRATION REMEDIES
Proposed image
Articles: Mohammad Reza Zahedi (talk · history · tag) and 2024 Iranian consulate airstrike in Damascus (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  In Syria, an Israeli airstrike kills eight people at the Iranian consulate in Damascus, including brigadier general Mohammad Reza Zahedi (pictured). (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In Syria, a suspected Israeli airstrike kills eight people at the Iranian consulate in Damascus, including brigadier general Mohammad Reza Zahedi (pictured).
News source(s): Reuters
Credits:
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Israeli forces killed 8 people in an airstrike against the Iranian consulate. The death of Mohammad Reza Zahedi is the most senior death since Solemani. The first article needs work. — Knightoftheswords 19:31, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support for RD senior IRGC general, def deserves an RD at the very least, weaker support for ITN just because these attacks also happen all the time with Hamas leadership and they aren’t reported on Ion.want.uu (talk) 01:56, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD once at quality, oppose blurb (either as news story or death blurb) Zahedi does pass notability (info about him well before today), but clearly is not a major figure that we'd give a normal out-of-respect death blurb to. The strike itself is part of the existing ongoing Red Sea crisis item, and would have just been an update to the appropriate article and considered under ongoing for this, so blurbing the event doesn't make sense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Masem (talkcontribs) 02:00, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD Zahedi's article has enough details & references to post as a RD. Support altblurb on notability, oppose on quality This is important enough for a blurb, but the quality of the airstrike article isn't good enough. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 03:12, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Blurb per Blaylock, but agree we should wait to post until the airstrike article is improved after additional updates/news coverage take place. I do think Zahedi's article is fine though, even if brief. FlipandFlopped 03:53, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Blurb - Per above. Article is of high quality, making a lot of headlines PrecariousWorlds (talk) 11:51, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb per above. A very blurb worthy one. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 12:46, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb in principle, significant event which is not directly part of the Gaza war (so not covered by ongoing). The bold link should be the airstrike article, which is a good start but not ready. It has a few {{cn}} tags and currently has only one sentence about the actual airstrike - most of the content is background and 'reactions'. It needs to expand the description of what actually happened before posting. Modest Genius talk 12:55, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Update: reliable sources are now reporting this as a genuine Israeli airstrike, not just 'suspected', based on private comments by Israeli sources. Modest Genius talk 16:22, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb As per above, this is not covered by ongoing, and I think the killing of a high ranking IRGC general is notable enough. As per Modest Genius, the bold link in the blurb should only be the airstrike itself. Gödel2200 (talk) 14:13, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support on the blurb. Event is notable and has the possibility to dramatically escalate tensions in the region, but I'm just a little hesitant to not violate WP:CRYSTALBALL. Definitely Support RD though. mike_gigs talkcontribs 15:32, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb, happened in Syria against Iranian personnel, so neither covered by the Gaza war nor the Red Sea crisis. The uniqueness of the strike and the high rank of the person targeted make it notable enough. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 16:54, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support blurb, support RD per Mike_gigs. The Kip 20:57, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think the overall event itself is blurb-worthy even if none of the deceased have an article for RD. That one of those killed has an article and this is a RD/blurb nomination just sort of complicated things. -- KTC (talk) 21:16, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    WP:ITNRD states that a death blurb can be invoked if the manner of death is the main story. Additionally, this may was well be his RD, since we're not going to be scheduling a seperate RD nom just for him. — Knightoftheswords 03:18, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support original blurb – This to me feels like a very scary and direct expansion of the conflict. Article can use work but is of sufficient quality. Zahedi's article looks good. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 14:30, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support As per above, this event is not covered by ongoing, and I think this could lead serious escalation in the region. PrinceofPunjabTALK 14:39, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Legalisation of recreational cannabis use in Germany

Proposed image
Article: Cannabis in Germany (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In Germany, the Bundestag legalises recreational cannabis use. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Germany becomes the third country in Europe to legalise recreational cannabis.
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

This follows a nomination back in February after the bill got passed, but now the law has actually come into effect. Gödel2200 (talk) 00:44, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Largest country that has legalized cannabis fully. Lukt64 (talk) 01:04, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose It's not that big of a deal. A lot of countries have either legalized it outright, or de facto decriminalized it. If they decriminalized recreational drug use more broadly, I'd probably support. But this is neither novel, nor an especially major development in global attitudes towards drug use. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:09, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    There are not much countrys who have legalized it for recreational use. Its subjectiv to think there are a lot of countries who have decriminalized it. See Legality of cannabis. LennBr (talk) 12:11, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Per AO. With almost one country every 6 months doing this, it ain't news anymore, especially the Western Hemisphere. Could be more notable on the other side of the globe. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:34, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Was practically legal before and per Ad Orientem's last sentence. Traumnovelle (talk) 02:36, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Not that big of a deal, and as @Traumnovelle stated, cannabis was practically legal already. 🔥Jalapeño🔥 Stupid stuff I did 06:04, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Citation needed that it was practically legal in germany. And please don't link to an article about the state of berlin or whatever. It varied wildly from basically zero tolerance to unofficial decriminilization. But it certainly wasn't 'practically legal' on the federal level. Neither was it 'practically legal' in the majority of states. 80.228.131.106 (talk) 12:06, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Don't tell me that then, tell Traumnovelle. 🔥Jalapeño🔥 Stupid stuff I did 07:42, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It was already legal for medicinal use, consumption wasn't illegal, and police had guidelines to not prosecute for personal amounts unless it was in the public interest - which corresponded to use in public or around minors, which is still illegal under the new law. This law change is more of policy and recommendation being codified in law than any serious and major change. Traumnovelle (talk) 07:52, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Consumption of no drug is illegal in germany in itself. Just how the laws work. Not aimed at consumers, allowing them to seek help and whatnot without criminalizing themselves etc. Just a different philosphical aproach. Doesn't mean opiods(as a random example) aren't highly illegal. But someone ODing can seek help without fearing criminal consequences, just as an example. That police nationwide had guidelines to not prosecute is just simply not true. In some states, sure. In others... yeah, not at all. It is a major change in most states. And as a meaningless anecdote, i live in a state which had a more liberal stance towards defacto acceptance, i still could have gotten into major trouble for what i am now legally allowed to do. And it wouldn't have been a misdemeanor but a crime that would have prevented me from getting visas in some countries and the like. Broad real life consequences that now simply vanished. But you lot do whatever. I am just happy to not be a 'criminal' anymore. 85.16.39.169 (talk) 13:05, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Needs work There are several {{citation needed}} and some parts are still written in a tentative future tense. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:38, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral on notability, oppose on quality The article has multiple short and unreferenced sections. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 09:12, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on notability The most populated country of europe legalizes cannabis possession for recreational use. Not many countries have done that. see Legality of cannabis. --LennBr (talk) 12:15, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on notability I've added an altblurb that would reflect this legalization a lot better. Support on notability as this is currently making headlines in European news, but the article needs some work before it's ready. TwistedAxe [contact] 13:06, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - The most populous country that has legalised recreational cannabis use so far. While it was decriminalised before in certain parts and regions, this didn't really apply to the entire country. And it also being only the third outright legalisation in Europe, as well as it having plenty of news coverage, makes me think this is notable enough to be covered. - Bucket of sulfuric acid (talk | contribs) 13:39, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - per above 2A00:23C8:B00:AD01:106:C016:D59A:AA77 (talk) 14:25, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. This is not a new thing. That this "isn't common in Europe" (debatable) or that Germany has many people (and what of it?) shouldn't be relevant. DarkSide830 (talk) 17:18, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I support this solely based on the fact that Germany's the most powerful European nation. And we've posted gay marriage legalizations in small irrelevant central american countries, why not post about Cannabis legalization in the biggest european one? Kasperquickly (talk) 20:11, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Pretty sure that ITN items shouldn't be supported solely because of the country it's in. 🔥Jalapeño🔥 Stupid stuff I did 07:56, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Forgive me for being blunt. But it rings a bit hollow for you, who blindly followed the untrue rationale of someone else, to be lecturing people. If someone states a 'fact' as rationale, at least check for yourself if that is actually true. And i by no means want to call anyone a liar or assume bad faith otherwise. Misunderstandings happen and all of that. But please, if you vote 'per' at least check the claim yourself. 85.16.39.169 (talk) 21:33, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral leaning toward oppose This is pretty minor news, just one country of 195 legalizing cannabis. Asjhsz (talk) 02:12, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support original blurb on notability per the reasoning of Lukt64 & LennBr. Oppose on quality The quality of the article isn't good enough. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 03:02, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Leaning support on notability not per the population of Germany (as this would implicitly suggest developments in smaller countries are less notable), but per the rarity of cannabis being legalized. It's not that common. I can understand ITN's increasing reluctance to post marriage equality blurbs these days, opting to only post them when there's something extraordinary about it, e.g. Taiwan being the first country in Asia to do it. The tides have already shifted on that one and it's become par for the course in the West. But I don't think the same can be said about the legal status of cannabis, at least not yet. Per Legality of cannabis, very few countries throughout the world have legalized recreational cannabis, so I don't think we're at the point where we can say this is so commonplace that it doesn't represent any significant shift in legislation. Rather, legislative changes like this are the major turning points that will eventually lead to it being commonplace. I sympathize with the counterargument that in Germany or in other parts of Europe there existed a de facto but not de jure legalization, but I feel this is also a little overstated.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 13:42, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • support blurb on notability, since it's a controversial subject. 3000MAX (talk) 17:03, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support original blurb per above. The Kip 21:10, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support original blurb and, noting improvements since the nom, suggest it’s ready to post. Jusdafax (talk) 08:17, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support original blurb per above. PrinceofPunjabTALK 14:40, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

March 31

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

Politics and elections


Ongoing: War in Sudan (2023–present)

Article: War in Sudan (2023–present) (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
Credits:

Nominator's comments: I am proposing this as an alternative to the nomination below. Also add timeline parameter per Godel2000. Lukt64 (talk) 17:39, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support though we can't just list the main article, as it doesn't have enough updates. Instead, we should do what we did for the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and list the timeline (which has daily updates), looking something like: War in Sudan (timeline). Gödel2200 (talk) 17:54, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Support timeline being added Lukt64 (talk) 17:56, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Support timeline being added since the updates are daily and include frequent events from March 25, 26, 27, and 28 most recently Fileyfood500 (talk) 18:00, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Near daily updates to the article, and recent events added to the timeline from February and March 2024 Fileyfood500 (talk) 17:56, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Fileyfood500 Staraction (talk | contribs) 18:14, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per above, and list the timeline alongside. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 19:05, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Godel2200 (include timeline) FlipandFlopped 20:04, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per above. Almost daily, huge sections are updated. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:36, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support idk why the ever took it down it’s still massive Ion.want.uu (talk) 03:05, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per above, and include timeline. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 09:13, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are no dates in the article beyond March 21. It only takes 50 edits to go back to March 14. The article must be updated with current events? Stephen 11:00, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can't we do what we did with the Russian invasion of Ukraine? The Russian invasion of Ukraine article does not list many dates in March 2024, but that is fine as the Timeline of the Russian invasion of Ukraine (1 December 2023 – present) has daily updates. The situation is the same with the War in Sudan (2023-present) article, with the timeline getting near daily updates. Gödel2200 (talk) 12:51, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For the last weeks that just seems to be a minor skirmish ticker, no significant events. Stephen 21:54, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Some major events from the last few weeks include: RSF claiming capture of El Madina Arab (March 5), SLM-MM announcing it would fight the RSF/joining the conflict (March 24), SAF claiming capture of the Doha neighborhood in the city of Ondurman (March 26). Other days consist of airstrikes, vehicles destroyed, bridges being captured. Fileyfood500 (talk) 03:08, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly, a lot of claims and very minor back and forth of low level conflict. Stephen 04:11, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In this light, I am unclear about what makes the other 4 conflicts shown more significant. I reviewed the timeline from March for the Russia-Ukraine war, and found 3 instances where a village was reported to be captured. I otherwise found many reports of airstrikes and drones being shot down, and reports of single digit casualties. There is no doubt, there are significantly more policy updates and financial announcements, and the arms being used/destroyed are more expensive, however, it's not clear to me that the wealth of the combatants should set the distinction here. Fileyfood500 (talk) 04:32, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - ITN isn’t an armed conflicts ticker. 2A00:23C8:B00:AD01:106:C016:D59A:AA77 (talk) 14:26, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but the only major things ongoing are armed conflicts. Lukt64 (talk) 15:30, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Still doesn't make it a criteria. Ongoing is for when there is a continuous stream of blurb-worthy items; To me if we post this we might as well put up every other armed conflict. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 08:32, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support This is a whole civil war going on in the 15th largest country by area on the planet, so there's not much reason it shouldn't be up in the current event section. Asjhsz (talk) 02:16, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per above. A very active conflict going on right now in one of the biggest countries in the world. TomMasterRealTALK 03:45, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support, detailed entry, copiously sourced. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 08:51, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Ongoing: Masalit massacres

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.


Fileyfood500 (talk) 04:38, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Well cited, and an ongoing genocide is absolutely what ITN is for. Bremps... 06:52, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support a few more cites can't hurt, but looks good enough for ongoing. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 07:35, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, no recent news, not regularly updated, the last 50 edits go back to November last year. Some people need to educate themselves about what is needed for an article in ongoing. Stephen 07:38, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Per @Stephen. If we were to post this, it should be combined with the War in Sudan ongoing item. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 12:17, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per above. The article does not mention any dates past January 2024, meaning this is not suitable for ongoing. Gödel2200 (talk) 12:59, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per above. Ongoing should be for areas of the news that are getting near-daily coverage and updates (like the Ukraine/Russia war or the Gaza strip situation). Simply being a long running engagement doesn't meet the bar. --Masem (t) 13:09, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    For this reason I’d also take off Myanmar until there are more developments 2A00:23C8:B00:AD01:106:C016:D59A:AA77 (talk) 15:34, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Myanmar civil war (2021-present) article is actually getting a lot of updates. See for example the Tenuous ceasefire and continued 2024 campaigns section, which lists many dates in March. Gödel2200 (talk) 15:56, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Masalit massacres, Support War in Sudan. Lukt64 (talk) 13:46, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, the War in Sudan (2023–present) article is getting frequent updates and encompasses this article. Fileyfood500 (talk) 17:10, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. There was not a single edit for a month prior to the nomination. We should only add those articles which gets updated regularly. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:54, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support War in Sudan (2023–present) per Fileyfood500 Staraction (talk | contribs) 17:37, 31 March 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.

March 30

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Law and crime

Politics and elections


RD: Bill Delahunt

Article: Bill Delahunt (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.

Former House of Representatives, from 1997 to 2011.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 16:45, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support - Well cited and notable. Article is in good shape too. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:38, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: An expansive, well-cited article that does not appear to be biased by any means. However I would like to note that every Wikipedia biographical article is considered notable enough for RD; nominations are based on quality and quantity of articles instead. Jmanlucas (talk) 21:02, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Chance Perdomo

Article: Chance Perdomo (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian, Variety, Hollywood Reporter
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 actor. Jaguarnik (talk) 23:28, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support - Article in good shape and notable too. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:05, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Filmography needs sources as does his BAFTA nomination. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:30, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    His BAFTA nomination is cited, and the filmography is completely cited in the career section. Jaguarnik (talk) 19:41, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ongoing removal : Red Sea crisis

Article: Red Sea crisis (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item removal (Post)

Attacks have largely stopped. lukt64 (talk)

  • I believe this situation is still developing - see [6] for instance. Staraction (talk | contribs) 00:18, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Still eventful. Article history shows almost daily additions of large sections. Maybe in a week or two, we can rethink. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:08, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The article seems to be getting sufficient updates. It lists events taking place on 21, 24, 27, and 28 March, meaning it seems fine to leave it for now. Gödel2200 (talk) 13:04, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose the crisis is still going on and the article is updated almost daily. PrinceofPunjabTALK 13:56, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The article has frequent updates in March, including multiple events. Fileyfood500 17:52, 31, March 2024 (UTC)
  • Support largely out of the news. AryKun (talk) 17:26, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The article has had recent updates. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 23:04, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Les Twentyman

Article: Les Twentyman (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2024/mar/30/one-of-melbournes-big-characters-youth-worker-les-twentyman-dies-aged-76
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 youth worker and community activist. The article could do with some work and more sourcing. HiLo48 (talk) 06:58, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose on multiple uncited paragraphs, but that could change. Bremps... 11:39, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for now. Notable, but like Bremps said, uncited sections present. Feel free to ping me if that's resolved. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 02:10, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

March 29

Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

International relations

Law and crime


RD: Hans Joachim Meyer

Article: Hans Joachim Meyer (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): FAZ
Credits:

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

The last Minister of Culture of East Germany, and then for years Minister of Culture in Saxony in a unified Germany, and president of the Central Committee of German Catholics, originally a linguist teaching in Berlin. The article was mostly there, - I trimmed a bit: too much about general political development. Most of the many sources were still working. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:31, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Emilio Lora-Tamayo

Article: Emilio Lora-Tamayo (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): El Mundo, El País, ABC
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.

Spanish physicist and president of the Spanish National Research Council. gobonobo + c 19:13, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Louis Gossett Jr.

Article: Louis Gossett Jr. (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): LA Times, Variety, Associated Press, Dark Horizons, The Hollywood Reporter
Credits:

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

7&6=thirteen () 13:58, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak oppose entire lead section is unreferenced. (Feel free to ping me when this is rectified) Aydoh8 (talk | contribs) 01:05, 30 March 2024 (UTC) Support looks good. Aydoh8 (talk | contribs) 04:52, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Aydoh8 Lead section doesn't necessarily need citations; see MOS:CITELEAD Staraction (talk | contribs) 04:01, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh ok. Aydoh8 (talk | contribs) 04:50, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Meanwhile, 867,628 pageviews 7&6=thirteen () 11:27, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ITN is not here to consider page views. We are here to present topics with quality articles that are in the news. Masem (t) 16:13, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I was about to post but there are several items in the accolades section that are still unreferenced. --Tone 12:33, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I spent a lot of time trying to address your concern. awardsandwinnder.com had most of the listings. Unfortunately, my prolonged effortst got thwarted twice. By an "edit conflict" and my retry ended badly, too because that is a blacklisted website. I give up.
We could simply get rid of that section, if that would help. 7&6=thirteen () 14:31, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If someone had access to these books (I don't) I'm guessing the problem is easily solved.
7&6=thirteen () 14:51, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Or we could delete the section from this article, and move it to Louis Gossett Jr. on screen and stage. Problem solved. 7&6=thirteen () 16:06, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's sweeping the problem under the rug. The filmography page was already separated off well before this no, but we should never move awards off the page just because they can't be sourced. Masem (t) 16:11, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Or you just selectively remove awards that cannot be sourced. If they cannot be sourced, notability of those awards may be so-so. Tone 16:14, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Some of the unsourced awards do look barely notable, but things like the Daytime Emmys or the NAACP Image Awards are clearly notable awards that should not be removed for this reason. Masem (t) 16:33, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've removed the obviously non-notable awards, and one which appears to be wrong, but the NAACP Awards are a struggle - I've sourced one so far... even his 1998 win is beyond me at the moment, not helped by the fact the website doesn't appear to have any history pages. Black Kite (talk) 17:12, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There already is a source cited that documents the NAACP gave him awards. Doesn't go into much detail, but it is already there. 7&6=thirteen () 13:19, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sigh. We really shouldn't be creating a pointless extra article purely to get an article onto RD, I really wish people would stop doing it. Black Kite (talk) 10:33, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The awards article is not "pointless" and is now cited. The biography article Louis Gossett Jr. is now completely updated and ready to go. But the ball is in your court. 7&6=thirteen () 11:55, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It 100% should be merged back into the main article, especially given there was no discussion prior to it being split. DarkSide830 (talk) 00:26, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"there was no discussion" goes against WP:BEBOLD, but one is free to merge it back if they have specific reasons.—Bagumba (talk) 09:40, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I certainly would move it back if it was completely sourced, but it isn't. It's still missing sources for the Daytime Emmies, most of the NAACP awards, and some CableACE awards (are they notable?). Black Kite (talk) 09:49, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm down to two NAACP nominations. There's plenty of sources out there, but none of them are reliable. Black Kite (talk) 10:39, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't seen 7&6 provide a reason for doing so. The article is not so long, nor the section itself, to justify splitting. DarkSide830 (talk) 17:24, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support no maintenace tags on the article. TheGreatestLuvofAll (talk) 13:08, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There was a cn tag in the section "1998–2024: Later works" and I've just added two more. I'm going to have another look at sourcing that awards article. Black Kite (talk) 09:48, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Added one citation for "he provided the voice of Lucius Fox in The Batman animated series. [Lucius Fox in The Batman animated series" and removed the cn template. Deleted the "In 2008, he filmed the "Keep It Real" series of commercials for the Namibian lager Windhoek." which still would need a citation. All of the on line sources for that are wiki and fandom websites. I don't think it can be sourced from a WP:RS. So I think that it is unimportant, and deleted the unourced material. I think that was all the CN templates in the article. 7&6=thirteen () 11:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was able to find a citation for the beer commercial, and put it back. In 2008, he filmed the "Keep It Real" series of commercials for the Namibian lager Windhoek.[1] 7&6=thirteen () 12:00, 2 April 2024 (UTC)thi[reply]
I did go to the three separate wikipedia articles on NAACP image awards. I took citations right out of those articles. Two of them have citations that are now on the blacklist. The third was not.
  • ref name="Image1"//awardsandwinners.com/category/naacp-image-award/1998/|title=1998 Image Award Winners|website=Awards and Winners|access-date=August 2, 2016
  • ref name="Image 2"//awardsandwinners.com/category/naacp-image-award/2005/|title=2005 Image Award Winners|website=Awards and Winners|access-date=August 2, 2016}}
  • ref name=”Image 3"Couch, Aaron (February 1, 2013). "2013 Image Winners". The Hollywood Reporter. Retrieved August 2, 2016.

The third one worked. the first two did not, and you have to either go to the award wikipedia articles, or put in "https://" in front of the links. I could not save them otherwise.

I have tried diligently to find reliable sources. I know the complaints about IMDB. And I've also been through the Awards and Winners blacklist recently on another article. Holding up the main article because we are on a mission impossible for the awards article seem harsh to me. The awards article is now split off. We have a well plead article with 142 sources. Lots of effort went into this, and one ought not to punish Lou Gossett and his interested readers for the penurious reportage of these particular awards. 7&6=thirteen () 19:00, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In the past, the community has often expected material split after the death announcement to still be sourced, to avoid gaming the system merely to expedite posting. What we generally don't want is verifiable content that is useful to readers to be quickly deleted to get a Main Page posting. In this case though, it seems much of the unsourced material was actually added after the death (see my comment below), so there might have been more leeway to delete that unsourced contested material, if it was identified as such at the time. —Bagumba (talk) 06:06, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also, the RD process should not be construed as a "award" for the individual posted nor as a punishment for those not. It's as much an incentive for editors to colloaborate on a recent news topic and improve the page's quality. —Bagumba (talk) 06:10, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • almost there - I actually like the awards split off. I see two citation tags, and believe that awards mentioned in the lead need some citation in this article. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:04, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Awards additions It seems the list was smaller but fully sourced until this edit at 18:49, 29 March 2024 by SibTower1987. At any rate, it seems to be mostly sourced now.—Bagumba (talk) 05:58, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - A tip o’ the hat to the article improvers. Ready to post. Jusdafax (talk) 07:56, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support the article is ready now, although it would look better if the "acting credits" and "Awards and nominations" section have some kind of prose. PrinceofPunjabTALK 14:57, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

March 28

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime


RD: Ross J. Anderson

Article: Ross J. Anderson (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Record, Duncan Campbell, Cambridge University Security Lab, Danny O'Brien, Alec Muffett, NetWars
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.

OwenBlacker (he/him; Talk) 22:10, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Tom Henry

Article: Tom Henry (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Associated Press, WANE-TV, FOX59
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.

Mayor of Fort Wayne, Indiana from 2008 until his unfortunate death. The article needs work that I'll fix in the next few days. Thanks! :) ~ Tails Wx (🐾, me!) 18:18, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

TDKR Chicago 101, the article is now well-sourced, no unsourced issues remain. Pinging for the update! :) ~ Tails Wx (🐾, me!) 02:11, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Issues have been fixed. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 16:32, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Thomas Mensah

Article: Thomas Mensah (engineer) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): GhanaWeb
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.

Heatrave (talk) 10:07, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Very weak oppose Only uncited parts are Corning Glass and education. Bremps... 11:41, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Limpopo bus plunge

Proposed image
Article: Mamatlakala highway accident (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A bus full of pilgrims falls from a bridge in Limpopo (pictured), killing all except an eight-year-old girl. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ A bus falls from a bridge in Limpopo (pictured), killing 45.
News source(s): Al Jazeera, BBC, DW, Le Monde, NYT, Sydney Morning Herald
Credits:

Article updated

For precedents, see Carberry collision, Kenya crash, Epidemiology and List. Andrew🐉(talk) 22:20, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support This is de-facto discrimination. If 45 people die after a bus falls off a bridge in the United States it would be ITN in hours. Lukt64 (talk) 23:55, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To be fair, I would also disagree with having a US bus plunge on ITN. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 00:02, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The issue is that it is a road accident caused by only one fault (the driver) that is likely going to have little long term impact. This is exactly what NOTNEWS and NEVENT recommends from having standalone articles on. If it was a mutli-factor situation (such as a mega-car pileup) that might be something. But normal road-traffic accidents tend to not be topics that can be expanded on further. — Masem (t) 00:14, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's discrimination based upon what's typical for a country: if this was were in the USA but a mass shooting, this would never get ITN. But were it a mass shooting in any other country it would get on the front page within a few hours. This is because the former is shot down as "Oh, a tragedy, but all too common because it's a country where there are few to no safeguards against such a thing." The exact same logic is being applied here, but for some reason people get a lot more up in arms about it when the country in question isn't the USA. Nottheking (talk) 01:36, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is only 4 pages on bus crashes on South Africa. Lukt64 (talk) 03:01, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If your intent was to argue that was evidence that bus crashes are rare in South Africa, that was a rather dubious selection. After all, Wikipedia is not a newspaper, and thus won't record every single item of news. Rather, the fact that there's clearly a lot of crashes (a casual research pass suggests hundreds of fatal bus crashes every year, with one high-profile study showing 4,001 fatal crashes involving trucks & buses across a 5-year period) and yet only four received an article seems to be a very strong indication that such events... Are just not notable in South Africa. Nottheking (talk) 05:31, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I find it very hard to imagine a mass shooting in the US with 40+ deaths not being posted. In October 2023 we posted one with 19, and in 2022 we posted one with 10 (although there were racial/political elements increasing its notability). Jjamesryan (talk | contribs) 13:53, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So the 2018 New Jersey bus crash wasn't nominated, the 2020 Pennsylvania Turnpike crash wasn't nominated, the Schoharie limousine crash was nominated for AFD, voted keep, and still not posted. What was posted though was a 2023 bus plunge in Panama, 2020 bus plunge in China, 2018 in Hong Kong, and one I think last year in Italy that I can't find right now among many others. Your assertion then that "if this had happened in the United States", as is always the case when claiming "American bias" is in fact unsubstantiated horse shit utterly devoid of any basis in reality and contrary to the normative behavior at ITN which is to ruthlessly suppress stories from or about the United States in some hysterial and misguided effort to fight "systemic bias" despite that not appearing anywhere at WP:ITN. If you want to do something useful, maybe review the wall of forever wars in the WP:ONGOING section and nominate for removal those which no longer meet the criteria for inclusion. --24.125.98.89 (talk) 11:25, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the list of similar blurbs and articles in the past, this is very interesting and helpful for understanding precedent here. We've posted many more busplunges than I thought we had, and the death-count of this one is double many previous blurbs. I think your aggression towards Lukt64 is wholly unwarranted and unhelpful... ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 12:15, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The outlier here is the Schoharie crash. I agree it probably should have been posted, but the New Jersey and Pennsylvania crashes had seven deaths between the two of them. They are simply not significant enough events to warrant posting. I have no hesitation in saying a crash with two casualties wouldn't have been posted no matter where in the world it happened. In fact, its occurrence in an English-speaking country is probably the only reason it has an article here. There's no sense in asserting anti-American bias because a non-American topic with 39 deaths was posted and an American article with 2 wasn't—and you were really quite disrespectful to an editor engaging in good faith while you were at it. Jjamesryan (talk | contribs) 14:12, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To be fair, the first two didn't have as many deaths. Personisinsterest (talk) 14:25, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
May I add that this particular incident had a higher death toll than all of those you mentioned. Ollieisanerd (talkcontribs) 19:46, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - That's a remarkably high death toll for a single-vehicle accident. GenevieveDEon (talk) 23:57, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per above. The article does not indicate this will have a lasting impact. Gödel2200 (talk) 00:44, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support the death toll is pretty significant for this news to be ignored. PrinceofPunjabTALK 04:30, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose from what I've seen of it so far, it's been a tragic accident, but a comparative "blip" news-wise: no wider scandal or fallout, for instance. Instead, it appears to be the sad result of what (in this country) appears to be commonplace poorer safety standards, which result in accidents like these not being particularly noteworthy. (e.g, a bus was towing a trailer which would dramatically hinder its handling ability, making it unsafe for driving such dangerous mountain roads) To give an analogy, it's also why few mass shootings in the United States are given ITN treatment: particularly lax gun control laws in that country & the overall cultural environment make what would be a nation-defining tragedy in virtually any other country into a commonplace occurrence.
Note that were some of these elements to change (e.g, in the next day or two a major inquiry & public investigation gets touched off by the South African national government) then that could change the picture. But as it stands, there's no indication of that happening. Nottheking (talk) 05:24, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • CLOSED Consensus to post is unlikely to develop. Aydoh8 (talk | contribs) 08:31, 29 March 2024 (UTC) (non-admin closure)[reply]
  • RE-OPENED Sorry but half a day when there are multiple support votes and an ongoing discussion is way premature closing; we should let the discussion run its course at least and give a chance for editors to respond, discuss and other to have their say. I have re-opened as a result. Abcmaxx (talk) 09:26, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think an blurb like this would live or die on the article's quality. It's an intense tragedy with a big impact on many people's lives in the region. However, I don't think the article has quite enough depth/length for a front-page feature right now. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 10:47, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support High death toll and international coverage. Anon has done a good job of showing precedent. Article looks fine to me. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 16:02, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think the news is quite notable enough and should be included on the main page. LiamKorda 17:36, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This is getting significant coverage. Government has indicated there will be further inquiry suggesting potential long-term impact. While the region has a poor traffic safety record, such large-scale incidents are uncommon. We blurbed the bus accident involving a hockey team in Canada a few years ago, so I don't see why we should not blurb this one. Kcmastrpc (talk) 18:45, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support It's a notable accident with significant casualties and it's receiving some international coverage as well (fairly routine coverage, but enough). The article looks ok. I know some people will argue that they would also object if this happened in the U.S. but there's no doubt in my mind that this would get posted quickly. Less than a year ago we posted a bus crash in Canada with 15 deaths (which increased to 17 after posting). There was nothing particularly extraordinary about the Canadian bus crash, except for the fact that it happened in Canada. Johndavies837 (talk) 20:37, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per Johndavies. The Kip 21:42, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support abnormal high amount of death. Ollieisanerd (talkcontribs) 22:29, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose. Most news articles I've seen so far for this event (including those nom includes) mention the same things (as a result of the coverage being based off of AP and Reuters): how the crash occurred (including 8-year old girl who survived), some limited context (Easter celebrations, road safety in Africa), and government responses. None of the coverage I've seen goes into depth about any of those responses - in fact, there is only one article sourced in the article that breaks out of this pattern in its headline (once you click on that article, it goes back to the routine coverage). I believe this puts the coverage under routine, which per WP:DIVERSE decreases its notability.
Similar arguments can be made about the precedent cited in the comments for this nomination. However, precedent acts as a rule/guideline, and per Wikipedia:IAR / WP:OTHER, if the precedent is making the project worse (by rotating tragic accidents that, while horrible, don't have long-term impact per Chaotic Enby), it ought not to be followed. I don't agree with the posting of some of the preceding articles either, in particular Carberry highway collision.
That being said, this is a horrific accident that definitely calls for reforms to be made to infrastructure in South Africa for safety. If this event sparks such reform, or otherwise leads to further action, I would support the nomination. Staraction (talk | contribs) 05:09, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There's an extensive in-depth follow-up in the NYT: No One Can Explain This Miracle. The BBC shows forensic investigation. So, while the many lesser news organisations are just repeating the wire story, the big ones are making more of it.
Andrew🐉(talk) 08:16, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. A bus crash with an unusually high number of deaths, receiving an unusually high amount of international attention, and with some novel elements (that it was a religious pilgrimage, that there is a "miraculous" sole survivor). BD2412 T 17:12, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    We absolutely should not be posting stories because of those aspects (the religious pilgrimage or the sole survivor) as that's going along the lines of "won't someone think of the children"-begging rationale. Even if that's an aspect that the media focuses on, that's something we should be blind towards per NPOV policy. Masem (t) 19:56, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong support per Lukt64. Although pointing out systemic racism on wikipedia can be uncomfortable, it needs to be called out. We posted Carberry highway collision and Humboldt Broncos bus crash with minimal opposition. Both of these crashes were very similar on the facts: driver error resulting in a mass casualty incident, resulting in devastation to the local community affected + widespread public sympathy in the news. Interestingly though, even despite this crash having *more* casualties, all of a sudden there is mass opposition at ITN and even an effort to snow close the nomination. From where I am standing, the only easily discernible & substantive difference separating this bus crash from those aforementioned is that as opposed to white westerners dying, here it was Black South Africans. There is no good excuse for this to miss out on a blurb. FlipandFlopped 18:29, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    We shouldn't have posted any of these, actually. Bus plunges, whether they happen in the West or in Africa, are not the most defining events in international news. I wasn't on ITN at the time to oppose the other two, but they shouldn't have been there either, and the fact that we posted a bus plunge 6 years ago doesn't mean we should keep posting them now. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 19:29, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, the problem is that we've become too lax on enforcing of NOTNEWS and NEVENT. Most land-based man-made traffic accidents like this will have little lasting effect because there's nothing to easily regulate or the like as there is with airlines, trains, or ships. But editors are rushing to create articles on every news event just because its in the news without the consideration if it will become an encyclopedic topic. We do have list articles that cover nearly every type of such events where these can be listed, but we don't need standalone articles on each of these, and by extension, feature in ITN. Masem (t) 19:50, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Fair enough - I respect your position that bus crashes generally should not go to ITN. I might even agree with you as a matter of general policy. With this being said, it is important not to put on colour blind glasses even as you make respectable higher-level arguments about the parameters of ITN - there's a reason for the sudden broader surge in opposition to this bus crash when there wasn't to the Canadian crashes I mentioned: subconscious bias/racism, even if unintentional. Given the overarching context and the fact that so many other bus crashes have been posted, it is highly questionable that we as a community would decide to draw the line in the sand here. To that end, I think torpedoing this nom would unnecessarily stoke perceptions of racial inequity on Wikipedia... something that would be harmful to our project generally. All just my humble opinion though. I appreciate both of your respectful responses. Cheers, FlipandFlopped 21:12, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I couldn't agree more with what's been said here. This is a drum I beat constantly, attempting to stem the tide of systemic bias, but it's usually just greeted with polite nods and somehow people don't even see how blinkered their worldviews actually are. For example, we blurbed Italian president Giorgio Napolitano's death (someone who wasn't even a national leader, given that the PM wields the power there), and ex-Canadian PM Brian Mulroney, there wasn't that much opposition, yet when Daniel arap Moi died - ruler of Kenya for almost a quarter of a century - my initial decision to post a blurb was met with an outcry and had to be pulled. And 10-year Tanzanian president Ali Hassan Mwinyi, again it was deemed that he almost certainly wasn't notable enough for a blurb. I'm not accusing anyone of bad faith, I just think we need to collectively open our minds a bit more than we have done up until now, and I'm extremely glad this story got posted, given the precedents of the other similar cases. It's important to remember that despite the editor base being overwhelmingly based in US/Europe/Australia etc, we're not just here to serve those communities, we're here for the global English community, and sometimes that means covering things that aren't deemed important enough in the Western media.  — Amakuru (talk) 20:42, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Stephen 01:17, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Late request for feedback This should have been called a 'crash' from the start regardless of nomination, as none of the reliable sources are calling it such (I went through each one) Please sound off on the talk page. Dreameditsbrooklyn (talk) 00:40, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Then you might have missed the NYT article linked in the nomination: "8-Year-Old Survives Bus Plunge Off Bridge That Left 45 People Dead". Most of the other articles use the verb "plunge", not of all them use the word "crash". ---Sluzzelin talk 00:47, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Almost all of them are running with 'crash' and I didn't argue against 'plunge' Dreameditsbrooklyn (talk) 00:52, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I guess I don't understand what you meant by "such" in "as none of the reliable sources are calling it such". I gathered it couldn't be "crash". What were you referring to? ---Sluzzelin talk 00:55, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Almost all of the reliable sources are naming it as a 'crash' not 'accident' either in the headline or lede, and MOS says we should start with year, so 2024 xxxx crash Dreameditsbrooklyn (talk) 00:57, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In fact on clicking through to each, I can't find the word "accident" used at all in the first nine citations for the article, only crash or sometimes plunge. Dreameditsbrooklyn (talk) 00:59, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I understand now. I didn't know you were referring to the article title. Sorry for adding to the confusion! ---Sluzzelin talk 01:01, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Larry Lloyd

Article: Larry Lloyd (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Yahoo sportDaily star
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.

Football player needs some work.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 13:13, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose needs a lot more refs. Aydoh8 (talk | contribs) 08:33, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Mukhtar Ansari

Article: Mukhtar Ansari (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Times of India
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.

Indian Politican.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 17:51, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose for now The article currently has emotive language which violates WP:NPOV. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 03:03, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

March 27

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections


(Posted) RD: George Gilbey

Article: George Gilbey (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [7] [8]
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.

--2A00:23EE:14E0:15A0:D9D4:EACA:4221:4590 (talk) 22:23, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak support Article is short, but what is there is of sufficient quality to post. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 02:50, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Joe Lieberman

Article: Joe Lieberman (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Yeshiva World New York 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.

Nominator's comments: United States senator from Connecticut from 1989 to 2013. Nominee for vice president of the United States in the 2000 U.S. presidential election. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keeves (talkcontribs) 22:00, 2024 March 27 (UTC)

  • Support. One section is tagged as relying on sources too close to the subject, but that is hardly the same as being unsourced. BD2412 T 22:03, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Comprehensive, B-Class article of an extremely notable figure. Staraction (talk | contribs) 22:04, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Extremely notable figure in U.S. Politics. Article is of high enough quality as it is now for inclusion. Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 22:30, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Personal life section has several citation needed tags. Natg 19 (talk) 22:54, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Found sources for all outstanding citation needed tags in that section! Staraction (talk | contribs) 00:37, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Definitely a notable figure in American politics; article is not perfect but sufficiently ready for RD. FlipandFlopped 01:14, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I was considering posting this however, there is an orange tag in the DHS section. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:34, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Ad Orientem: I have addressed the orange tag in the DHS section and added diversified sources (NYT, Bloomberg). Assuming no other issues, I think article is ready for RD. Cheers, FlipandFlopped 02:30, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Flipandflopped There are a number of referencing gaps that I have tagged in the article. Having edited the page, alas I am now WP:INVOLVED, so I can't post the article once it has been improved. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:47, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Too many dead refs. Just randomly wanted to check some refs. 2 of the first 3 refs are completely dead. I haven't checked the rest. Hard to determine the quality of the article when its statements can't be verified. 51.154.145.205 (talk) 12:12, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support article quality meets threshold for posting Kcmastrpc (talk) 12:36, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Democratic Vice Presidential candidate in 2000 election and long running Senator and notable for being a key figure in many hot topic political issues in the 1990's and 2000's. Harizotoh9 (talk) 14:37, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support He was the Democratic VP nominee in 2000 and was a long-serving senator who influenced major legislation like the Affordable Care Act and the repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnAdams1800 (talkcontribs) 16:02, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose His notability is not a requirement for him to be included in the RD, as it's already presumed by having an article on Wikipedia. Many CN tags and two subsections are orange-tagged. _-_Alsor (talk) 19:33, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Procedural oppose per above This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 23:55, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose It's actually a very good article, and none of it is contentious, but desperately needs more sources in order to make it reliable. I added more "citation needed" tags. Abcmaxx (talk) 13:00, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I've fixed 30/48 citation needed tags made since this post, but have to attend to other business now. Hopefully someone can pick up from here. Staraction (talk | contribs) 15:56, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment @Alsoriano97: @Orbitalbuzzsaw: @Abcmaxx: I've significantly updated the citations in the article. Let me know if it is good enough to post now or if I should add more citations. Staraction (talk | contribs) 02:38, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Further to Staraction's comment, all citation needed tags are now resolved, either by the addition of citations, or by the removal of persistently uncitable claims to the talk page. BD2412 T 17:14, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted. I see zero {cn} tags in this wikibio at this time. I still object to the bullet-points under Committee assignments for wikibios for US senators (prefer prose with more details on what they do and when), but I gave up on that a while ago. --PFHLai (talk) 08:39, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted to RD) Blurb/RD: Daniel Kahneman

Proposed image
Article: Daniel Kahneman (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Bloomberg, Washington Post, The New York 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.
  • Nobel Prize winning author, psychologist and economist. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:22, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Almost there: very few statements lack a citation. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:14, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    rather than discussing blurb or not, could we please have citations for at least two facts missing one? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:52, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks, Gerda. You might want to add some tags to direct effort. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:12, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    No, Martin, I hate tags. I saw two things:
    1. "They would continue to publish together until the end of Tversky's life, but the period when Kahneman published almost exclusively with Tversky ended in 1983, when he published two papers with Anne Treisman, his wife since 1978."
    2. Both paragraphs under "Focusing illusion" end without citation. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:40, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Ok, thanks. I also saw the first and thought it would be self-evident from his list of publications. Maybe not. Those other paragraphs are worth a look. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:43, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    So I repositioned the citations for "Focusing illusion" (although primary). Alas, the article has only a list of his books, not a full list of all his publications (I'm assuming that might be quite extensive). Martinevans123 (talk) 11:00, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you, but how is it self-edvident that she was his wife from a certain year? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:38, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, that bit not self evident from a list of publications, but the year is given in the infobox and in "Personal life" where it is sourced? Martinevans123 (talk) 12:46, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This comes sooner. You could just duplicate the ref from personal, and had obliged to "have a ref at the end of each paragraph". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:52, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Blurb when ready. Ktin (talk) 18:38, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If this is to be blurbed, there should be a clear section besides a few lines in the lede to explain why he was important though impact and or legacy. Just being awarded including a Nobel isn't sufficient for a blurb. Masem (t) 19:12, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If only we were to apply the same standard (last sentence) to the PM of Ruritania. Nfitz (talk) 22:48, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We don't automatically blurb former PMs when they die either. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 19:05, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD, Oppose blurb I remember reading his work in school, especially his collaborations with Amos Tversky. That does not rise to the super-high level we need for a blurb. I think quality is sufficient for RD now, the few statements lacking citation don't need to hold this article up long. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:14, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD He was 90 and died in Parts Unknown from nothing of note. "Variants of utility" doesn't quite ring true to me, but it's footnoted and probably written for someone else. The two chunks in "Focusing illusion" could easily be deleted if backing them up with a reliable source or two proves difficult. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:31, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb Old man dies. Noah, AATalk 01:33, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    In all seriousness, it doesnt rise to the level of significance for a blurb. Noah, AATalk 02:13, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I find statements like Old man dies when used as a comment in a discussion like this, to be extremely disrespectful. Ktin (talk) 02:53, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    When someone suggests a blurb that would relay exactly how old a man was when he died, it seems only fair to doubt the significance of that central fact. There's really nothing else to oppose. The age at death is the news item in question. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:18, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    No, the blurb is the summary of the news item which is the death of the person. Age is additional information. Ktin (talk) 04:35, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Sure, that's why it's in all the headlines provided above and why no such prior blurb has added a place or cause. I hope the small print means you're kidding. If not, maybe propose an ageless blurb that rather focuses on how the field of behavioural economics has been affected by the loss of its bedrock (or something RD can't say). InedibleHulk (talk) 05:03, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Small font because this conversation is irrelevant. Clearly you can think of a blurb which doesn’t include age. Go figure. Ktin (talk) 06:32, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    There was a recent blurb that was about an old man dying. Traumnovelle (talk) 08:38, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't think there's ever been a moment in the history of ITN when "we recently blurbed an old person's death" didn't ring true. Kurtis (talk) 16:40, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    If you mean old man Mulroney, yeah, quite unfortunate. He was 84. At least in that case, further information did appear for a week or so in his death section and funeral article. Kahneman's article doesn't even have a death section. We could link the whole article, in bold, with a photo and note of how old he was. But I don't think that update is ever going to tell a reader more, so there's really no point in following along. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:43, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Are you calling his death unfortunate or the fact it got blurbed? Traumnovelle (talk) 23:49, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Both (in different ways, of course). InedibleHulk (talk) 23:56, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. The current criteria for blurbing deaths allows for major figures in any domain. The question to ask is -- as someone who served as the bedrock of behavioral economics as a field of study, was Kahneman a major figure in this area. My thinking is yes. Ktin (talk) 02:58, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb Certainly at the top of his field, one of the most influential economists of his time, and Nobel laureate. Also somewhat of a household name due to his bestselling book Thinking, Fast and Slow which encompasses much of his research. Davey2116 (talk) 03:48, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb, a blurb on this would be an embarrassment to the Main Page. The nominator should refrain from making blurb suggestions going forward. Abductive (reasoning) 07:29, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Not my suggestion. I'd say it was borderline. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:03, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Even if it was your suggestion, and even if said suggestion would be "an embarrassment to the Main Page", that doesn't give anyone the right to cast aspersions against you or anyone else over a difference of opinion. Kurtis (talk) 16:33, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Perhaps I'll just make blurb suggestions going backwards. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:37, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Just as long as you're okay with receiving credit in a future that never comes. Kurtis (talk) 16:42, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Should make RD a lot more prdictable and won't take me a minute. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:00, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Seeing as a blurb has been receiving at least a modicum of support, I'd say it's not an unreasonable proposal. Kurtis (talk) 16:29, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, am tempted to change my mind. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:31, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb Great thinker and theorist, but not really for a blurb. I included insights from the prospect theory in my master thesis some ten years ago, and the true brain who delivered that theory was Amos Tversky. Not to belittle Kahneman's work, but he came up with ideas regarding cognitive biases that Tversky managed to mathematicise and bring to the general audience. Moreover, his contributions to behavioural economics are not seminal enough as John Forbes Nash Jr's contributions to game theory (in fact, the cornerstone in behavioural economics that most other theories descend from is the bounded rationality, and the real equivalent to Nash in behavioural economics would be Herbert A. Simon). There are also other psychologists who independently developed mainstream theories with wide applications to economics, such as Gerd Gigerenzer with his work on heuristics, so Kahneman's work isn't really a starting point for anyone working in the field. That being said, the statements that he was on top of economics as a field are quite wide off the mark.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:36, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb Just running his name alone in RD would be insufficient and the article seems quite comprehensive and worthy. The bottom blurb which would be replaced is two weeks old now and so is stale. It's also less interesting -- just another routine election. Andrew🐉(talk) 13:13, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • The few expansions of the past 24 hours have been nice, but I do believe we need more expansion on this article before a blurb is appropriate. In particular, I think more details on his later life and death would be necessary for a blurb. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 13:23, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb I do not think this is blurb worthy as I believe we should only blurb when the death is notable enough. PrinceofPunjabTALK 15:34, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Is there anything pending for this article to go to RD? Please can someone tag / annotate accordingly if there are any editor actions needed? Ktin (talk) 18:45, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Joseph2302 has asked for all items in the Notable contributions section to be given sources. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:53, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Bit of an overkill to add references to that section. Should ideally be treated like the "See also" section. Nevertheless, I went ahead and added references to that section. So, we should be good there now. Marking ready. Ktin (talk) 01:49, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD, oppose blurb. If we have to explain who the person is in the blurb, they really shouldn't be blurbed. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 19:04, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb not a serving head of state or government and the manner of the death is not notable This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 23:56, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb His death was not notable in and of itself, and there is only a two sentence update about it on his page. Gödel2200 (talk) 00:38, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted to RD Stephen 02:17, 29 March 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:

  1. ^ "Windhoek Later's Biggest Boldest Namibian Adventure". Retrieved April 2, 202. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help)