:*Hilarious, I don't think [https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2017/feb/17/jannis-kounellis-obituary ''The Guardian''] (where he is described as "Pioneer of the arte povera movement" no less), [http://www.lefigaro.fr/arts-expositions/2017/02/17/03015-20170217ARTFIG00018-yannis-kounellis-la-mort-d-un-poete-de-l-arte-povera.php ''Le Figaro''], even super cute and always cheerful American rag ''Star Tribune'' managed to [http://www.startribune.com/greek-artist-jannis-kounellis-dies-in-rome-at-80/414058343/ cover] this news are "local or specialist newspaper[s]", unless I suppose the UK, France and Minnesota are "local" and newspapers with circulations in their millions/(hundreds of thousands, thanks ''Star''!) are "specialist"..... Oh, hold on, that pesky German ''Berliner Zeitung'' seems to have [http://www.berliner-zeitung.de/kultur/kunst/zum-tode-von-jannis-kounellis-der-meister-der--armen-kunst--25758222 noted it], and .... wait a minute, is that ''Das Spiegel'' [http://www.spiegel.de/kultur/gesellschaft/jannis-kounellis-tot-arte-povera-kuenstler-mit-80-gestorben-a-1135122.html jumping on the bandwagon] along with those other parochial local pamphlets such as [http://www.dw.com/de/arte-povera-k%C3%BCnstler-jannis-kounellis-tot/a-37600007 ''Deutsche Welle''], [http://cultura.elpais.com/cultura/2017/02/17/actualidad/1487344272_920522.html ''El Pais''] and [http://www.lanazione.it/arezzo/cronaca/e-morto-jannis-kounellis-artista-greco-che-aveva-scelto-di-vivere-a-cortona-1.2901814 ''La Nazione'']. Whatever next, an American college basketball coach? [[User:The Rambling Man|The Rambling Man]] ([[User talk:The Rambling Man|talk]]) 21:00, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
:*Hilarious, I don't think [https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2017/feb/17/jannis-kounellis-obituary ''The Guardian''] (where he is described as "Pioneer of the arte povera movement" no less), [http://www.lefigaro.fr/arts-expositions/2017/02/17/03015-20170217ARTFIG00018-yannis-kounellis-la-mort-d-un-poete-de-l-arte-povera.php ''Le Figaro''], even super cute and always cheerful American rag ''Star Tribune'' managed to [http://www.startribune.com/greek-artist-jannis-kounellis-dies-in-rome-at-80/414058343/ cover] this news are "local or specialist newspaper[s]", unless I suppose the UK, France and Minnesota are "local" and newspapers with circulations in their millions/(hundreds of thousands, thanks ''Star''!) are "specialist"..... Oh, hold on, that pesky German ''Berliner Zeitung'' seems to have [http://www.berliner-zeitung.de/kultur/kunst/zum-tode-von-jannis-kounellis-der-meister-der--armen-kunst--25758222 noted it], and .... wait a minute, is that ''Das Spiegel'' [http://www.spiegel.de/kultur/gesellschaft/jannis-kounellis-tot-arte-povera-kuenstler-mit-80-gestorben-a-1135122.html jumping on the bandwagon] along with those other parochial local pamphlets such as [http://www.dw.com/de/arte-povera-k%C3%BCnstler-jannis-kounellis-tot/a-37600007 ''Deutsche Welle''], [http://cultura.elpais.com/cultura/2017/02/17/actualidad/1487344272_920522.html ''El Pais''] and [http://www.lanazione.it/arezzo/cronaca/e-morto-jannis-kounellis-artista-greco-che-aveva-scelto-di-vivere-a-cortona-1.2901814 ''La Nazione'']. Whatever next, an American college basketball coach? [[User:The Rambling Man|The Rambling Man]] ([[User talk:The Rambling Man|talk]]) 21:00, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
*'''Excise contentious sections and post, or close'''' To my eye, the sourcing does not seem to be so bad as to prevent posting. The unsourced sections mentioned above deal with the content of Kounellis' production, which would be made obvious by a simple look at a picture. However, the article is not significantly improved by these unsourced bits, so I wouldn't be against just excising them for the sake of getting the article up. If we're going to let a few phrases describing an exhibit prevent an RD from gracing the front page for a few days, perhaps its better to just get rid of them. I know RD no longer takes notability into account, but this person really does seem to be a large figure in his field.[[Special:Contributions/128.214.163.237|128.214.163.237]] ([[User talk:128.214.163.237|talk]]) 14:38, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
*'''Excise contentious sections and post, or close'''' To my eye, the sourcing does not seem to be so bad as to prevent posting. The unsourced sections mentioned above deal with the content of Kounellis' production, which would be made obvious by a simple look at a picture. However, the article is not significantly improved by these unsourced bits, so I wouldn't be against just excising them for the sake of getting the article up. If we're going to let a few phrases describing an exhibit prevent an RD from gracing the front page for a few days, perhaps its better to just get rid of them. I know RD no longer takes notability into account, but this person really does seem to be a large figure in his field.[[Special:Contributions/128.214.163.237|128.214.163.237]] ([[User talk:128.214.163.237|talk]]) 14:38, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
*'''Meh?''' I mean really, meh? TRM gives sources, which is great, and mad props for that. But meh. And basketball coach? WYF!?!!? TRM, You are a racist, and yes, I say you are a racist. [[User:Medeis|μηδείς]] ([[User talk:Medeis|talk]]) 20:03, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Comment on a story without first reading the relevant article(s).
Severe storms, from the weather system that hit Southern California Friday, reach southwest Texas injuring several people and damaging at least 100 homes with one confirmed tornado in San Antonio. Heavy rains continue today with flash floods likely as the storm moves to eastern Texas and southern Louisiana. (USA Today)(Weather Channel)
Malaysia recalls its ambassador from North Korea amid an ongoing dispute over the alleged assassination of Kim Jong-nam by North Korean agents in the country. (BBC)
A Montenegrin prosecutor accuses Russian authorities of being involved in the October 2016 coup plot in order to halt Montenegro's accession to NATO. Russian officials dismiss the allegations as "absurd." (The Guardian)
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: Sitting UN ambassador on a high-profile (ermanent USCI) posting to die in office is pretty notable. Perhaps even blurb? Lihaas (talk) 18:10, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb upon improvement The article is a bit undersourced, but I think the death of a sitting representative of a world power to the UN is worth a blurb. EternalNomad (talk) 18:14, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose blurb under all circumstances unless the death is an assassination or in some other way remarkable, this is just RD. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:24, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
RD only unless Trump or Putin had him assassinated. Totally agree with TRM on this. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:47, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support RD only Barring the assassination angle, ambassadors even to the UN don't hold that much political power that their sudden death even while at the job is not news-breaking. Article seems okay for posting. --MASEM (t) 19:26, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support RD only ... unless, etc. Sca (talk) 19:38, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The UN has officially declared a 2017 South Sudan famine. This is the first official famine (rather than a warning of potential famine) in six years - not Yemen, Boko Haram, nor Somalia actually were declared famines. It emerged from a standardized process, the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification as part of its normal updating, so this is as objective and apolitical an assessment as can be had. I understand that Wikipedia has a problem with the timing of slow events but if there is any one moment where they reach genuine newsworthiness then this is that moment. And how can the deaths of thousands of people not be newsworthy? Wnt (talk) 15:57, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I added the nomination template. Support when the article gets some more work (I see editing is ongoing). --Tone 16:31, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think the articles needs expanding more on the background. I can't believe this was just suddenly the case, and while the famine 6 years ago is mentioned, I think there needs to be more discussion of the order of the events that get from there to now. But I do think this is an ITN story once that is in place. --MASEM (t) 19:28, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That's not true. I've added a lot. And the event is still unfolding (ongoing)...Zigzig20s (talk) 09:43, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The last event noted when i reviewed the article was 14 February. That's six days. Two flare-ups in six months is not really an "ongoing" issue. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:47, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The video story I've just added was published on 18 February. Also to be honest it's happening in the middle of nowhere, which probably explains the lack of instant breaking news by the hour.Zigzig20s (talk) 10:11, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Well unless it's regularly updated it's no use at Ongoing. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:30, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for ongoing The article is very short, and there's very little regularly updated information. As noted by TRM, the last significant event happened almost a week ago, the last event of ANY kind is a reaction statement from February 16. If the article could be greatly expanded, and if it could be shown that events were happening rapidly by daily updates to the article, I'd change to support. --Jayron32 11:40, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as not really being "in the news". This is the first I'd heard of this, and the sourcing on the article itself is pretty narrow: a few Reuters sources, but then the Vatican, niche African-oriented press and RFI. RS's sure, but this isn't the broad sampling of sources I would expect from a highly-notable event of world-wide import.128.214.163.237 (talk) 14:14, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
[Closed] Russia recognizes passports from Ukrainian separatists
No consensus to post, consensus in favour of highlighting an article with a suitable update. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:25, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Article:No article specified Blurb: Russia recognizes passports from Ukrainian separatists (Post) News source(s):[1][2] Credits:
Nominator's comments: This is the same action that Russia used as justification for intervening in South Ossetia and Abkhazia. I think Russian military intervention in Ukraine (2014–present) is the most suitable article for this, but 2014 pro-Russian unrest in Ukraine and War in Donbass are also plausible. As of time of writing none of the articles are updated. If anyone has other suggestions for other target articles / blurb feel free to suggest. Banedon (talk) 07:12, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Is there enough to this new development to create a separate article?Zigzig20s (talk) 07:24, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose all sorts of countries recognise all sorts of passports from all sorts of places. Maybe a DYK hook? The Rambling Man (talk) 07:40, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: Neo-Soviets gonna neo-Soviet. Don't see how this rises to the level of ITN. -Kudzu1 (talk) 07:51, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose No article. What's the point of making such a nomination?128.214.163.237 (talk) 12:24, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
There are two approaches to ITN nominations. The first is "I've just written a great article, you should feature it". The other is "this could be something, what do you think?". If it isn't obvious enough, I'm a believer of the second kind of nomination. Banedon (talk) 12:45, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - I feel that nominating an event without an article is like telling a friend something without any context or any way to read more. It's absolutely useless to tell somebody something without giving some kind of context and allowing them to read more. UNSC Luke 1021 (talk) 13:52, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Moot - No article.--WaltCip (talk) 15:24, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Even if we had a target article, this seems more on paperwork rather than anything groundbreaking. --MASEM (t) 16:12, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose because there's no article to consider. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:21, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
[Closed] Daniel Craig now second longest serving James Bond
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.
Nominator's comments: I thought that this might be worthy of a news blurb as the James Bond franchise is fairly notable as is Daniel Craig and several news agencies/websites (including CTV Television Network) have covered this development. TheSandDoctor (talk) 18:52, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Oppose.--WaltCip (talk) 18:56, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
SNOW close Good faith nomination, but this is trivial. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:56, 20 February 2017 (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.
Iraq Prime MinisterHaider al-Abadi says U.S.-backed Iraqi forces have launched an operation to regain control of western Mosul from ISIL militants. The United Nations says humanitarian agencies are setting up in these older sections of the city where, already, food and fuel supplies are dwindling, running water is scarce, and electricity in many neighborhoods is unreliable for the estimated 800,000 civilians. (CNN)(BBC)(UN-OCHA)
An overnight Pakistani counter-terrorism raid kills five members of the banned Jamaat-ul-Ahrar, which has claimed responsibility for recent deadly terrorist attacks. Four militants escaped. (AP)
Business and economics
Kraft Heinz drops its bid to buy Unilever for US$143 billion. Unilever rejected the idea last Friday but Kraft Heinz still expressed interest in finding an agreement. (BBC)
Voters head to the polls to select the National Assembly and a new president with former vice-president Lenín Moreno facing off against former bank president Guillermo Lasso, and six other opposition candidates. There will be an April 2 runoff unless the leader receives 40 percent of the votes and is at least 10 percentage points ahead of the others. In addition, there's a tax haven referendum. (Reuters)
Two top level officials overseeing South Sudan's military courts resign from their posts, accusing the government of interfering in the court's moves to discipline soldiers accused of rape and murder. The resignations come less than a week after a military general and the Minister of Labour resigned in protest of President Salva Kiir Mayardit's alleged approval of atrocities against civilians not belonging to the Dinka group. (Al Jazeera)
The week-long 2017 Asian Winter Games open at Sapporo Dome in Japan with more than 2,000 athletes from 31 countries, including North Korea, participating. (AP)
At the Munich Security Conference, a truce between Russian-backed separatists and the Ukrainian army, per the Minsk Protocol, takes effect Monday. Pending a permanent political agreement, Russian President Vladimir Putin orders that civil registration documents issued in separatist-held areas of Donetsk and Luhansk in eastern Ukraine be temporarily recognized. Ukrainian authorities say this violates provisions in the Minsk agreement. This is the third such agreement because the previous two in 2014 and 2015 were violated. Low-level fighting and artillery fire never fully stopped. (Al Jazeera)(CNN)
Law and crime
According to the United Nations, as many as 96 families have been displaced by criminal gangs who are filling the vacuum left by FARC rebels in Colombia after the latter signed a peace deal with the government last year. (BBC)
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.
Support can't see anything major at a quick glance here. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:34, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment the vast majority of the WP:RS refer to him as "Dan Vickerman" rather than "Daniel Vickerman" so it's worth considering a page move too. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:35, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
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: Drummer for James Brown, article well referenced with the exception of the discography. Suggest forking that off to a separate article if that is an issue that prevents listing. Jusdafax 23:22, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Is Allmusic.com a reliable source?Zigzig20s (talk) 00:14, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – If we're supposed to be judging this on article quality, here's a few things:
The lead section can be called an indiscriminate collection of information far more than it can be called a capsule of a biography. Based on my experiences working in public radio and dealing with that audience face-to-face, it's entirely possible that many folks know of Stubblefield from his appearances on Whad'Ya Know? and aren't very familiar with James Brown, and would look at that lead section and consider it to be a bunch of trivia. It's incongruous and smells of haphazardly slapping content together to have a lead which reads more like a James Brown WP:COATRACK than about anything having to do with Stubblefield, all the while the infobox photo is from a Whad'Ya Know? program but the article contains only one mention of the program and his association with it about halfway down.
Speaking of which, such mention is minimal to the point of being irrelevant. Not mentioned in the article, but mentioned in the program's article is the fact that Stubblefield only appeared on the program when they did "road shows" and didn't appear on the programs recorded in Madison, which is something I never quite understood considering that he lived in Madison.
The career section starts with mentioning his birth and childhood, which is typically found in a separate section from one discussing a subject's career. I know that's a common tactic on the part of editors who work on biographies in various fields. Believing that we don't need to mention anything about a musician's life if it has to do with their life but has nothing to do with music makes us appear to be hopelessly one-dimensional. I didn't read the comment, but noticed that someone used the term "one-trick pony" in addressing a recent concern of mine. They ought to take a good look at content like this before casting such aspersions. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 00:56, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Was just coming here to nominate, but needs some more sourcing at this time. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:17, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Needs some work with an emphasis on referencing. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:51, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support - In my judgment, which is based on a very cursory review of the article, it really only needs a couple more sources here and there, as well as one to replace this opinion piece. They won't take long to be added. Kurtis(talk) 14:16, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, so I've moved some sources around and named a couple pre-existing ones that referenced the uncited claims; I've also removed the opinion piece reference, which leaves a total of three citations where there were once four.[6] Does the article look any better? Are these changes sufficient for an RD posting? Kurtis(talk) 14:56, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support, references could use some work, but I think it's good enough for ITN. --AmaryllisGardenertalk 17:09, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Some very contentious claims are unreferenced. Stephen 00:55, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I've been working for some time at finding reliable sources to rectify this problem, but the job is actually tougher than I had anticipated. For instance, the specific institutions to which she had allegedly been sent are extremely difficult to locate in much of the publicly available documentation regarding her life, and some of it may have be taken from Wikipedia in the first place. I'm considering changing my support to an oppose if providing adequate referencing proves to be impossible in the short-term. Kurtis(talk) 01:33, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Article is B-quality, a few citation needed tabs but nothing that can't be fixed. His group al-Jama'a al-Islamiyya was responsible for the deaths of nearly 1,000 people, and he also gave the fatwa supporting the assassination of President Anwar Sadat. I think his notoriety and the fact that he died in a US prison may be blurb-worthy. EternalNomad (talk) 18:03, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The mujaheddin and legacy sections are both completely unsourced, which would obviously be a prerequisite to posting. As for thoughts on a blurb, I think it's a borderline case – before about 1995 he was probably higher profile than Bin Laden, so certainly understand why this was chosen as a topic of discussion. On the other hand, the circumstances of death were unremarkable and for obvious reasons he has been somewhat overshadowed within his... field... over the past 15 years or so. StillWaitingForConnection (talk) 18:21, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose blurb RD is fine once the sourcing issues that StillWaiting identified. It would be one thing if he was killed while there was a manhunt for him, but he was captured, tried, and sentenced, effectively closing the book on the attack; his death while in prison is unremarkable. --MASEM (t) 20:58, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose blurb, not called for in this case. A few more citations are needed before RD. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:40, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose blurb, support for RD only after citiation fixed - Notable Sherenk1 (talk) 10:17, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support RD; his death is unremarkable and we're not talking about someone whose baseline significance matches that of, say, Ayman al-Zawahiri or Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. A blurb would be overdoing it. But an RD mention is more than warranted, once the legacy and mujaheddin sections have adequate referencing. Kurtis(talk) 15:00, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The article fails to explain why he was not given the death penalty. Perhaps if we can understand that, an RD would make sense. Right now it looks elliptic.Zigzig20s (talk) 16:08, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose blurb per StillWaiting; old convicted terrorist dying in prison doesn't warrant a blurb; not tops in 'field' either. 331dot (talk) 16:12, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose blurb and I don't know how possible it will be to cite the stuff in the aforementioned sections. Unless a genuine past-contemporary source is found, RS<->WP reinforcement probably means that those sections are from tweets or some armchair jihadist's synth. The Stewart conviction should have a real source, at least in the court's documentation. Is there a possibility to get this guy's picture up when this goes to RD? Ol' Rockabilly Santa Claus looking sheik.128.214.163.237 (talk) 14:08, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
British-Dutch consumer goods company Unilever rejects a US$143 billion takeover from Kraft Heinz, saying the deal had no financial or strategic merit. Nevertheless, Kraft is still interested in finding agreement; it has until March 17 to make a final bid under UK takeover rules. (Reuters)
Severe storms in southern California prompt flash flood warnings over most of southern and central California, toppling trees and power lines, and delaying over 300 flights from Los Angeles International Airport. Since the largest El Nino of 1997-98 and 2009-10. (ABC)
Article needs updating Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Article has been well sourced as Michel served as House Minority Leader (setting record for serving the longest period) --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 22:57, 17 February 2017 (UTC) --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 22:57, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support Looks well-referenced and balanced.Zigzig20s (talk) 18:12, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – The article title appears to be yet another example of someone else's naming conventions taking precedence over our own. I've always heard him commonly described as "Robert Michel" or usually "Bob Michel", not "Robert H. Michel". RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 06:50, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Was in a hurry to finish up and get out the door and wasn't quite finished. Breaking the article into so many sections that are mostly devoid of detail makes the disparity between our coverage of certain portions of his life and coverage of certain other portions of his life all the more obvious, suggesting that we're defining "article quality" in strictly superficial terms. One of the passages from his early life caught my attention: "From 1949 to 1956, he worked as an administrative assistant to U.S. Representative Harold Velde". It would appear to me that we call them "congressional aides" if they worked for a member of Congress at certain points in history, but by other job titles if they served at certain other points in history. How does that make sense? If I made my living by panhandling on the street, but described it to a newspaper reporter in more fanciful terms and they published my description at face value, does that mean that we're obligated to follow suit if it came down to that? RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 01:23, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
PostedStephen 00:52, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Article needs updating Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
At least 70 people are killed and more than 150 injured in suicide bombing at Lal Shahbaz Qalandar Shrine in Sehwan, Sindh, Pakistan; 50 of the injured are in critical condition, medical emergency has been declared in the hospitals of Hyderabad, Dadu and Jamshoro. (Dawn News)(The News)
The U.S. Justice Department tells the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals that it won't be seeking further action by the court since this executive order will soon be replaced by a different one. Justice added they expect the Ninth Circuit ruling will be vacated once the new executive order is issued. (NBC News)
Hundreds of restaurants and other businesses in U.S. cities close their doors after activists called on immigrants to stay home from work, avoid shopping or eating out, and skip classes Thursday for #ADayWithoutImmigrants, to protest the President's immigration reforms and highlight the immigrant community's contributions to the United States. (Reuters)(The Atlantic)(The Philadelphia Inquirer)(Los Angeles Times)
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.
Comment I see about three standalone sentences (two in bio, 1 in influence) that are unsourced that need sourcing, but appear to be statements that should be relatively easy to find sources for. --MASEM (t) 21:46, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Unreferenced content.Zigzig20s (talk) 18:14, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
[Withdrawn] Zealandia proposed as New (8th) Continent
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.
Nominator's comments: A new 8th continent seems like less-than-once-a-century news (though it's mostly submerged, except for New Zealand and New Caledonia). At first glance, the article seems in decent enough shape, though I'll let others decide that. I assume this nom's problem will be that it's still only one paper, albeit a potentially momentous one. I'll let others argue whether that's notable enough for ITN, but I think the question deserves to be at least asked, so this nom asks it. In reply to 'It's just a proposal', I agree, but the serious proposal that there is a newly discovered continent here on Earth is the biggest and most surprising news that I've heard in a very long time (far more surprising to me than Brexit or Trump's election), and something I would have called 'impossible' yesterday, whereas by the time it gets 'accepted' or 'rejected' by the rest of science, if it ever does, it will be almost boring almost non-news, at least to me. Incidentally the blurb is the wording currently in the article. The altblurb with 'paper proposing' is my 'weaker' wording, just in case the article's wording is 'too strong' (I don't know whether it is or not). Tlhslobus (talk) 14:47, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Wait - I'd support this, but only after it gains consensus among scientists. Banedon (talk) 14:57, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Wait. I agree with Bandeon; I wouldn't support a mere proposal(which essentially is just the opinion of those making it) until it is more widely accepted. 331dot (talk) 15:02, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Zealandia has been known about for years - the ZealandiaZealandia (continent) article has existed since 2006. This is not a discovery, rather another part of the discussion on the technical definition of what Zealandia/a "continent" is. --LukeSurltc 15:03, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It's been known about for years by experts. Like probably 90 to 99% of non-experts, it's complete news to me, and I want to hear more about it, because it's a proposed new continent that's in the News headlines. And I expect the same is true of many other readers. And facilitating such readers is what ITN is supposed to be about.Tlhslobus (talk) 15:25, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Wait per above. If affirmed/assigned that way, absolutely an ITN story. --MASEM (t) 15:04, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Zealandia is not new, and nor is the idea that it is a continent. This is just improved evidence and a proposal to adopt the name. There is no official body which rules on the use of the term 'continent'. Maybe other scientists will start using that term, maybe they won't. In the former case it will be a gradual process due to continued accumulation of data, not this one paper, in the latter case there's no story. Modest Geniustalk 15:21, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Also, just because the paper is in a GSA journal, that doesn't mean that the GSA agrees with it or has anything to do with the proposal. It's inappropriate to identify them with it. Modest Geniustalk 15:23, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
If so, we can always take GSA out of the blurb. I've added an altblurb2 to that effect. Tlhslobus (talk) 16:30, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
By your logic, we'll quite likely end up with a new continent without ever mentioning it in ITN. ITN is not about what's news to scientists, but about what's news to our readers, and this is news to our readers because the news media have decided to make it news to them.Tlhslobus (talk) 15:33, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. It seems that this is simply one organization publishing a paper developing already well-established findings. Not news. Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:28, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. If one is going to count geological continents, the proposed Zealandia would be the 7th not the 8th. Eurasia is a single geological continent. Dragons flight (talk) 15:36, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
8th is from newspaper (Telegraph, I think) and not in blurb, partly for that reason.Tlhslobus (talk) 16:36, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yawn New Zealanders have continent envy. Next. GoldenRing (talk) 15:41, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – Big wow. Sca (talk) 15:58, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Not a new find; it's been known for years. The discussion is trivial because nothing actually happened and probably won't. It's not like we actually discovered a giant new continent with millions of native people; this is small and underwater, like a lot of submerged land. UNSC Luke 1021 (talk) 16:38, 17 February 2017 (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.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Recent death, article seems reasonably well sourced already but may need some expansion and care Fram (talk) 14:00, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There's no update reflecting his death in the article, and the list of the exhibitions that he was a part of and where his works are now needs sourcing. --MASEM (t) 14:30, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I've made a minor addition regarding his death (not much to be said about it, old man dies is sad but not unexpected news), and added a lot of sourced exhibitions and sources to already mentioned ones. Many remain unsourced though, and I currently don't have the time to source these one by one. Hopefully someone else will go for it, or the unsourced ones can be removed for now (though at least a few of the Arte Povera ones need to be included and sourced). Fram (talk) 15:21, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose No awards section, no major coverage, despite "Gradually, Kounellis introduced new materials, such as propane torches, smoke, coal, meat, ground coffee, lead, and found wooden objects into his installations" no evidence of importance or influence on an ITN level. Again, being in a local or specialist newspaper doesn't mean your passing is "in the news". μηδείς (talk) 18:01, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The relevant page you are looking for if you do not believe the subject qualifies for RD is WP:AFD. Ciao. StillWaitingForConnection (talk) 19:54, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hilarious, I don't think The Guardian (where he is described as "Pioneer of the arte povera movement" no less), Le Figaro, even super cute and always cheerful American rag Star Tribune managed to cover this news are "local or specialist newspaper[s]", unless I suppose the UK, France and Minnesota are "local" and newspapers with circulations in their millions/(hundreds of thousands, thanks Star!) are "specialist"..... Oh, hold on, that pesky German Berliner Zeitung seems to have noted it, and .... wait a minute, is that Das Spiegeljumping on the bandwagon along with those other parochial local pamphlets such as Deutsche Welle, El Pais and La Nazione. Whatever next, an American college basketball coach? The Rambling Man (talk) 21:00, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Excise contentious sections and post, or close' To my eye, the sourcing does not seem to be so bad as to prevent posting. The unsourced sections mentioned above deal with the content of Kounellis' production, which would be made obvious by a simple look at a picture. However, the article is not significantly improved by these unsourced bits, so I wouldn't be against just excising them for the sake of getting the article up. If we're going to let a few phrases describing an exhibit prevent an RD from gracing the front page for a few days, perhaps its better to just get rid of them. I know RD no longer takes notability into account, but this person really does seem to be a large figure in his field.128.214.163.237 (talk) 14:38, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Meh? I mean really, meh? TRM gives sources, which is great, and mad props for that. But meh. And basketball coach? WYF!?!!? TRM, You are a racist, and yes, I say you are a racist. μηδείς (talk) 20:03, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support The cautionary note here is because they used spectrographic methods, rather than more direct analysis, it's not proof. They are right that there is very little else that could give off the spectroscopic signals at those frequencies - but there are non-organic things that do, but they've obviously tried to eliminate anything outside of organic materials by other means. --MASEM (t) 23:44, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support in principle, but article not updated. Banedon (talk) 00:52, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose significance is abundantly unclear, not updated so it's actually impossible to form a realistic opinion other than to reject the nomination out of hand. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:02, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support, bigger incident than the one in Lahore unfortunately. Mar4d (talk) 17:12, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support, while it looks like most of the critical details are in place, I'd just give this a few hours for more info to settle, but it otherwise seems ready at this point. --MASEM (t) 17:16, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Toll reaches 72, according to Reuters. Others say [9]70. – Sca (talk) 18:42, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support huge attack. Article is just about good enough. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:37, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Two separate bombings take place in Pakistan, killing at least seven people. A suicide bomber kills five people at the administrative headquarters in the Mohmand Agency tribal district while the other kills two people at a hospital in Peshawar. Jamaat-ul-Ahrar claims responsibility for the first attack. (Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty)
At the Indigenous Peoples Forum in Rome, Italy, Pope Francis says that developmental needs have to be reconciled with the protection of the particular characteristics of indigenous peoples and their territories. This is taken by some as a reference to the Standing Rock Sioux and other groups opposing the Dakota Access Pipeline. (Reuters)
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Article seems to be in fair shape, but someone more knowledgeable than me should have a look. Nohomersryan (talk) 05:16, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The bibliography should include the ISBN numbers (for sourcing) and the discrography needs some type of equivalent sourcing. --MASEM (t) 05:33, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose bibliography/discography basically unreferenced. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:40, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose bibliography and discography need citations. MurielMary (talk) 09:58, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Please note that bibliographies and discographies do not commonly have citations in the main Wikipedia article, eg Doris Lessing, David Bowie, George Michael. All three of these people have been featured on the main page within the past few months. - Tenebris 66.11.171.90 (talk) 10:28, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't make it right, and in most of those cases, all items within the discogs/bibliographies either had articles or ISBNs. That's not the case here. How does our reader verify the existence of these? The Rambling Man (talk) 10:29, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Where were your comments on this when George Michael was being discussed? And no -- they don't all have ISBNs or articles. In fact, none of Doris Lessing's have ISBNs on the main page, and only about a third of them have articles. - Tenebris 66.11.171.90 (talk) 10:31, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Other stuff exists, sure. I can't police it all, much as I'd like to stop problematic articles getting rushed onto the main page. Better for you to spend this time fixing the article rather than berating me for not catching all the problems on the main page. And answer the exam question, which is rooted in core Wikipedia policy. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:43, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Just as an amusing note, I would not myself have suggested or supported Stuart McLean as an RD, and that despite knowing more about him than the name. (Nice guy btw. Nothing like me.) I only spoke up because you *did* originally speak up about the George Michael blurb, repeatedly (to strongly support the blurb, in fact, even to the point of suggesting any lack of support might be because George Michael was not American) -- so it is scarcely a matter of "police it all", but of specifically policing an article you actively supported for an ITN blurb. ("Policing" -- another interesting word for a once and would-be future administrator.) Interestingly, you never once mentioned lack of references in the discography in your multiple comments there. We can learn our own biases from our inconsistencies, or we can hide behind quoting policy. Your choice. - Tenebris 66.11.171.90 (talk) 04:12, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Just as an amusing rebuttal, as Masem points out, Michael's discog contained bluelinks and most, if not all, were covered in the prose with inline citations. You need to try harder if you want to be actually amusing. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:19, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
And of course, what really is amusing is that Michael's entire discog was forked out to this page which... oh... just happens to be a featured list with inline citations for every single thing he ever did as a musical artist. Now please, try to think of something constructive to do around here as we've wasted enough time already on this baseless (and tasteless) tattle. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:22, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
And for the avoidance of doubt, my first comment at Michael was "Support blurb unexpected death of a "pop icon", easily outweighs people like Paul Walker" which was after the blurb was posted. Do you get that? Subsequent posts reminded Wikipedia that we had summarily posted Paul Walker for a blurb despite him being a B-list American actor. American users had set the bar so sufficiently low with that post, that it was super easy to promote Michael and Princess Leia and her mother to full blurbs. The Rambling Man (talk) 23:08, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Lessing probably needs them regardless, but for Bowie and Michael, the fact that they made those albums or went on those tours are sourced in the lengthy prose section of the bio, and they are also all blue-links to notable articles. In this case, more than half the works are unlinked, and likely not notable, and there's no significant discussion of each work in the bio prose. So an ISBN or reference to affirm the book/album was made and they authored is necessary. --MASEM (t) 14:39, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment bibliography/discography now referenced. --Jnorton7558 (talk) 18:36, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's comments: The highest record so far has been of 37 satellites by Russia in 2014 followed by USA's 29. I suppose the topic would be news-worthy in either of the cases of its success or failure. With success, this will be a word record of launching 104 satellites in a go which surpasses the previous record by a huge margin. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 11:15, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No news source currently. When are we expecting to determine whether this will be a success or failure?--WaltCip (talk) 14:48, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It happened, it was a success, I've included one source. --MASEM (t) 14:53, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Notable enough for ITN. Article could do with a bit more reaction detail, the views section - currently giving one person's negative option of the project - needs to be expanded. --LukeSurltc 15:01, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Needs expansion. Also the blurb should clarify what record it has broken. Feel free to refer to how The New York Times phrased it - "India’s space agency launched a flock of 104 satellites into space over the course of 18 minutes on Wednesday, nearly tripling the previous record for single-day satellite launches...". Morningstar1814 (talk) 17:31, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose. Whilst an impressive feat, it doesn't really seem to have any implications. Any space agency or private launch company could do this if it filled a single rocket with CubeSats. This just shows that ISRO has a lot of contracts for microsatellite launches. Other than breaking a trivial record it's unclear what (if anything) the implications are. I've struggled to find any media interest outside India, and the article is pretty basic (e.g. no indication of what the payload satellite are even designed to do). Modest Geniustalk 17:39, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
In addition to the NYT article above, here's the Washington Post. There seems to be interest outside of India. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:55, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
LaLa Land has no implications whatsoever... Any film could win 5 awards and 5 awards is no record either. This is atleast better than the current lead blurb of a gossip magazine. Plus, this is an actual record. But yes, i agree that more expansion should happen. 117.222.8.10 (talk) 18:39, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support, given what the ITNR criteria are for manned space missions, I think importance wise this unmanned feat cuts the mustard. $15m to successfully launch 104 satellites borders on economical, which is perhaps more significant than the record itself. StillWaitingForConnection (talk) 20:45, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose until it's made clear what the capabilities of these 104 satellites are. It's not covered in the article as far as I can tell. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:50, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I think this is an ITN-caliber story that only hinges on article quality. It's a pretty big deal for India to be making waves in the spaceflight industry. – Juliancolton | Talk 02:30, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I'm working on expanding it. —MBlaze LightningT 03:15, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Cigna announces that it has terminated its merger with Anthem, a deal that was blocked by a U.S. federal judge last week. In addition, Cigna sues Anthem for the $1.85 billion reverse termination fee, and for more than $13 billion in additional damages. Anthem says Cigna has no right to terminate the merger, a deal which in January was extended to April 30, 2017. (Bloomberg)(CNBC)
Aetna and Humana terminate their proposed merger that had been blocked last month by a U.S. federal judge. Aetna announces it will pay Humana the $1 billion fee for calling off the agreement. (Forbes)(NPR)
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.
Nominator's comments: Ping @EdChem: for expert opinion on this. Banedon (talk) 03:03, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support but the article needs updating with this and some improvements (eg the lead figure only has 3 "captions" but there's 4 figures. --MASEM (t) 03:08, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Care to explain how come the article you linked to says, "After unsuccessful attempts by Erich Clar in 1953, trioxytriangulene was synthesized by Richard J. Bushby in 1995, and kinetically stabilized triangulene by Kazuhiro Nakasuji in 2001"? Abductive (reasoning) 06:56, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose. I like to see science stories on ITN, but this seems a fairly minor advance of interest only to specialists. I'm just not seeing anything to raise this above the sort of typical scientific development announced every week. We don't have an article on triangulene and the section linked in the nomination is barely related to it. If there was a high-quality article I might be swayed, but we have nothing and it doesn't seem worth quickly developing one. Modest Geniustalk 12:37, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Too specialized for the Main Page.--Pawnkingthree (talk) 18:04, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on quality grounds at present - The eminently relevant question raised by Abductive above is still unanswered after over 12 hours. Of course even if it were answered I doubt if it deserves posting on notability grounds. Tlhslobus (talk) 22:09, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Should this be closed per WP:SNOW], or is it too early to do so? Tlhslobus (talk) 22:09, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No, it's time. Getting a lot of snow lately, time of year I guess. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:13, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'm of opinion this should wait for expert input (*cough Edchem*). I will say though, I'm finding Modest Genius's arguments persuasive, especially since updating the article is not easy. Banedon (talk) 23:24, 15 February 2017 (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.
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: Exiled elder brother of North Korea's leader, Kim Jong-un. There are unconfirmed reports that he was assassinated by North Korean agents. Article is basic but seems okay. Nominating for RD only; even if the rumours are true I don't think there's enough in the way of implications for a blurb. Modest Geniustalk 13:53, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I would seriously consider this for a blurb. But we can post to RD prior to forming a consensus on that one way or the other. At the moment, seems adequate for a RD post. If going for a blurb, the death section would need to be expanded. --LukeSurltc 13:57, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Article is good, and this is most likely an assassination. (Also, may I just note that the reason this guy isn't leader of North Korea is because he got caught by Japanese authorities trying to sneak into Disneyland.) UNSC Luke 1021 (talk) 14:16, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose too many unreferenced claims in this BLP for main page inclusion. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:18, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Could you put {{cn}} tags where you think the issues are? --LukeSurltc 14:36, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Just find any of the unreferenced sentences. There are many. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:38, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I have tagged each section that needs work. Especially problematic are direct quotes without citations (each direct quote must have a direct cite to where it is from) and statements like "It was verified later on..." which does not cite WHERE it was verified... --Jayron32 14:43, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I have added references in the tagged sections where they were needed. --LukeSurltc 15:35, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support RDblurb. Unless it's proven to be an assassination, I don't think this deserves a blurb since he never took power. From a quick glance, it looks like everything is sourced in the article except the date of Kim Jong-un's ascension, which is an uncontroversial fact and would be sourced in that article. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 16:43, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
NYT and other sources are now reporting that it's confirmed as an assasination. I would support a full blurb in this case and have added it to the nom ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 17:18, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Post blurb - Assassinations are a big deal, especially when North Korea commits one outside of the country, at a public place, an airport nonetheless, on an exiled North Korean, who is a brother of the dictator Kim Jong Un II. UNSC Luke 1021 (talk) 18:26, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Wait for a blurb until this is more widely reported as an "assassination". Most sources I have seen indicate the situation is not entirely clear yet(although The Guardian link above claims the US and South Korean governments believe Kim to have been killed by DPRK agents). 331dot (talk) 18:32, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose blurb unless this is definitely ruled as an assassination targeting him. Yes, a duck test suggests it was, I don't question that, but they have not completed the investigation. (Was he purposely the target, and was the attack with the liquid meant to kill him or just harm him?) Let's not rush to call it an assassination and put it as a blurb until we have better confirmation. --MASEM (t) 18:33, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb - reported as assassination by NYT [13], citing a South Korean news channel, and as murder by BBC [14]. -Zanhe (talk) 18:41, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Reluctantly oppose blurb more or less per Masem. On balance of probability I believe this was an assassination, however the people who would need to say this for it to be justifiable to post a blurb of some description – either the Malaysian police, or a relevant Government, to whom we could attribute the claim – are not doing so. StillWaitingForConnection (talk) 22:42, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The only reason I don't think this should be posted is because no major player has reacted (like sanctions or any declaration of support or criticism). Nergaal (talk) 22:48, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb - Death section is now substantial enough to merit main page posting. Story is developing, most recent development is an arrest. --LukeSurltc 10:02, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I've added an alt-blurb that avoids the word "assassination". --LukeSurltc 11:02, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb Target article is in good-shape, top news story with international geopolitical impact, etc. --Tocino 12:26, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose blurb, even as the nominator. Kim Jong-nam was a private citizen who hadn't been involved in North Korean affairs for over a decade. His assassination, which is strongly suspected but still unproven, is deplorable but merely demonstrates the ruthlessness of the current regime. It doesn't directly impact upon current events or international relations. Nor was he a public figure on the level of Mandela or Thatcher. Therefore this doesn't reach the (high) threshold there should be for a blurb. RD is enough. Modest Geniustalk 12:41, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Mandela and Thatcher died of natural causes. The argument for posting a blurb comes from the violent circumstances of the death. A comparable case is the Murder of Jo Cox. Cox was a fairly junior politician, but the violent and sudden nature of her death meant that it was headline news and an ITN item. --LukeSurltc 19:15, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb somewhat reluctantly. It's major news globally and it has been widely reported that Mr. Kim was being maintained by China as a potential replacement for the current N. Korean dictator should a change in leadership be required. At this point I don't think there is any reasonable doubt that this was an assassination and it is being called that by a huge number of reliable sources. -Ad Orientem (talk) 13:57, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Consider at least temporarily Pulling from RD? I don't know why, but the BBC 6 o'clock TV News this evening was strangely cautious, repeatedly referring to his 'possible body', as if they have some doubt as to whether it's actually him, in which case it just might yet turn out to be a case of Mark Twain's "Reports of my death are much exagerated". Tlhslobus (talk) 21:50, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Tlhslobus: - Both the Kuala Lumpur Police Department and the North Korean Embassy have confirmed that the assassinated was indeed Kim Jong-nam. UNSC Luke 1021 (talk) 14:22, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I've now also asked the same question at WP:ERRORS. Tlhslobus (talk) 21:56, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose blurb. The BBC website tonight says: "North Korea has asked Malaysia for the body of a man believed to be leader Kim Jong-un's half-brother. Kim Jong-nam is thought to have been poisoned as he waited to board a flight in the capital Kuala Lumpur on Monday. Local authorities are carrying out an autopsy to establish the exact cause of Mr Kim's death, but Pyongyang has reportedly objected... Malaysia has yet to formally confirm that the dead man, who was travelling under the name Kim Chol, is Kim Jong-nam." (My emphasis). So, we should wait before doing anything. Even if it is confirmed to be him, his death, in whatever manner, is not sufficiently notable to be worthy of a blurb. Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:58, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Ghmyrtle. Does that mean that you support at least temporarily pulling him from RD? I note that item 2 of the criteria for inclusion at WP:ITNRD states:
2.Updated, including reliably sourced confirmation of their death.
Incidentally, I'm planning to copy your above quote to WP:ERRORS. Tlhslobus (talk) 22:16, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's OK to keep him as a death at present - it is reliably sourced. But, in the circumstances, we should be cautious about giving it any more prominence. Ghmyrtle (talk) 22:29, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
His death has been reported as an assassination in more RS sources than I can count. The only question seems to be coming from Pyongyang, which is not a reliable source for the current weather much less anything serious. This remains one of the top news stories globally (except in the United States where we remain convulsed in self obsession over our laughingstock of a president). That it has not been posted is simply ridiculous. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:33, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
More careful and cautious sources like the BBC are not saying they are certain it is him, are not saying it was murder, and are certainly not calling it an "assassination". Ghmyrtle (talk) 22:45, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
How many sources beyond the BBC are towing Pyongyang's line? The only source for this manufactured doubt is the North Korean government. The BBC may regard Pyongyang as a reliable source, but I do not think we do. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:47, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose blurb for the time being, at least unless changed to 'reported assassinated' : Apart from the above-mentioned caution of the BBC, here from Google are just some of the sources saying 'reported assassinated' or 'suspected assassination'; admittedly most are a day old, but ABC is only 3 hours ago.
Kim Jong-un's Half Brother Is Reported Assassinated in Malaysia - New York Times · 1 day ago
Kim Jong Un's half-brother apparently assassinated in Malaysian airport - USA TODAY · 1 day ago
Kim Jong-nam death: Woman arrested over suspected assassination in Kuala Lumpur - ABC Online · 3 hours ago
Kim Jong Un's half-brother apparently assassinated in Malaysian airport - www.usatoday.com/story/news/...reported-assassinated.../97886974/ - 1 day ago -
Kim Jong Un's half brother is reported assassinated in Malaysia - The ... www.ocregister.com/articles/kim-743969-jong-north.html - 1 day ago -
Kim Jong Un's half brother is reported assassinated in Malaysia | The ... www.reformer.com/.../kim-jong-uns-half-brother-is-reported-assassinate... 1 day ago -
Kim Jong-un's Half Brother Is Reported Assassinated in Malaysia - www.msn.com/en-in/news/...reported-assassinated.../ar-AAmVAUr?... - 1 day ago
It is not 'rubbish' to suggest that the BBC, ABC, USA Today, the New York Times, the Boston Globe, etc, are NOT all just dupes or mouthpieces of North Korea. (And meanwhile we are still awaiting official Malaysian confirmation that he is in fact dead. Malaysia is NOT just a puppet of North Korea either.)
If it's changed to 'reported assassinated', then I'm at worst neutral, and tending towards weak support for a blurb, on the basis that there's no doubt that he has been reported assassinated, and this is 'all over the news'. But I prefer to leave it to others to argue over whether we should be posting such 'highly credible but still unconfirmed reports'. Tlhslobus (talk) 01:39, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
BLURB! brother of sitting world ruler assassinated? The news is the assassination, and otherwise he would not even rate listing as a normal RD. μηδείς (talk) 03:38, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb - was leaning towards opposing per Modest Genius, but eventually was persuaded by the ongoing coverage of this. It's not a one-off "______ was assassinated!" headline that then disappears from view entirely; it's continuing to generate stories about the perpetrators' arrest, the relocation of the corpse, and so on. That's enough to support for me. Banedon (talk) 08:30, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb He does not merit a blurb on the grounds of notability as a person, but his assassination with the impact so far does. The whole story tops the news for days and there are many major ongoing developments coming from the investigation.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:23, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Posted blurb -- KTC (talk) 10:10, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Post-Posting Comment: Malaysia has now officially confirmed that the body is Kim Jong-nam's (NBC). Tlhslobus (talk) 13:38, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Change Blurb - To say that he was indeed assassinated. Several news reports are now using the term 'assassination'. UNSC Luke 1021 (talk) 14:26, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You may well be right, but proposed changes to the blurb should be argued at WP:ERRORS. So I'll now copy your request to there. Tlhslobus (talk) 14:36, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Nominator's comments: Kind of an oddball nomination, but just putting it out there. Compare precedent [17]. One difference is that Valentine's Day is not a religious holiday; another is that there were protests this time round (according to the photos in the news articles). Banedon (talk) 07:36, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose not the first and probably not the last. DYK fodder. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:50, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose not ITN material. --LukeSurltc 09:41, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose a domestic court ruling; the stories are also contradictory, with the CNN piece saying it is in the entire country and the BBC saying it is in the capital only. 331dot (talk) 11:37, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose minor local ruling regarding an unimportant event. I agree that DYK might take this (if there's an actual article, perhaps Valentine's Day in Pakistan), but it's not of ITN significance. Modest Geniustalk 12:55, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Disregarding the fact that it's not notable in any sense, it's also not surprising that a majority Muslim nation (97%) would ban a generally Christian holiday. If they were to ban an Islamic holiday I'd be more surprised, but banning a Christian holiday is somewhat expected. Remember that Pakistan is not a secular state like most of the Western world; the state openly prefers Islam to Christianity or Judaism. (No hate towards Pakistan or Muslims, just stating the facts). UNSC Luke 1021 (talk) 13:10, 14 February 2017 (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.
At least 34 people are killed after a tour bus, carrying mostly local elderly tourists, overturns on a freeway in Taipei, Taiwan. (Focus Taiwan)(BBC)
The U.S. Coast Guard continues to search for the missing F/V Destination, a Seattle-based fishing vessel operating near St. George, Alaska, with a six-member crew. The Coast Guard has discovered a debris field, but no sign of the crew. (KTUU-TV)
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: Ex-VP of Panama. Article is GA quality. EternalNomad (talk) 17:18, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support Looks good to me. I made a few small formatting changes. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:41, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
PostedStephen 22:58, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
[Closed] Michael T. Flynn resigns
No consensus. ITN don't post resignation of governmental advisor. -- KTC (talk) 10:02, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Nominator's comments: Very big deal in that Flynn was an important official in Trump's administration, as one of the president's senior advisors; lots of media attention. The blurb may well be too long, in which case the second part ("after...") should probably be removed. Everymorning(talk) 04:39, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose He was in an important position and his story has been making news, but ITN never posts the resignation of a person at that level, and this resignation doesn't significantly change things to the point that I'd say it should be an exception. It's nominations like this that give Americans a bad name around here. – Muboshgu (talk) 05:10, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose - while it's certainly making the news and is a rather big deal, I think it's a bit too specific to the more meso-level politics of the USA. The only benefit I can see is that it might help folks learn who Flynn is, but it doesn't seem make enough to put in ITN. EvergreenFir(talk) 05:16, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - As per Muboshgu and EvergreenFir, this doesn't seem to rise to the level of an ITN entry for a global encyclopedia. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 05:30, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose tempting as it is to nominate every twist and turn of Trump's administration, this is simply not significant in the big scheme of things. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:11, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose per EvergreenFir. Ironically though, this is probably seeing more international coverage than the Oroville dam nomination below. Banedon (talk) 07:41, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose per EvergreenFir. --LukeSurltc 09:42, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per EvergreenFir.Zigzig20s (talk) 09:45, 14 February 2017 (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.
Marking ready concur that both sourcing is good and the article is reasonably complete for an event like this. --MASEM (t) 21:13, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support Important story and decent article. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:41, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
PostingStephen 22:53, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Post-Posting Comment It isn't really 'First attack inside a major Pakistani city in a long while' as claimed in the nom - the article itself makes reasonably clear that 75 people were killed in the same city less than a year ago. And bombs are usually let off partly to gain publicity, and our posting means we are doing our bit to help them get that publicity - but presumably that's a trivial price that others should be happy to pay for the privilege of helping us adhere to our interpretation of our policies? Tlhslobus (talk) 03:01, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
[Closed] Oroville Dam
No consensus, non-event. Stephen 08:02, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Nominator's comments: Quite a few people contributed to the updating of this article. PFHLai (talk) 12:33, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I'm wondering if we should wait and see if the spillway fails; if they manage to save it this story becomes a lot less notable. 331dot (talk) 12:47, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support - unusual event, major impact whether or not the dam fails. Mjroots (talk) 13:20, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Oppose It seems to be a story about a large scale inconvenience at this point. -Ad Orientem (talk) 13:52, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose This evac seems to be a very precautionary measure should the steps to restore the operations to normal fail in ways they cannot determine at this point. --MASEM (t) 14:31, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for now - When the levee breaks, we can reconsider posting then.--WaltCip (talk) 16:52, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose looks like a non-story, some inconvenience but no actual real news. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:35, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support this is a huge event, it's the highest dam in the US and spillways are planned, but never tested so the ramifications are large. Sir Joseph(talk) 17:58, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
As I understand it(and unless the situation has changed) the dam itself is not in danger, just the spillway- and once the lake water level drops below the spillway, the danger will be reduced. I'm still willing to wait and see what happens. 331dot (talk) 20:04, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Right, it's the spillway that "broke" but it's a huuuuuge mess. Tens of thousands of people evacuated and the cost to repair is very large and is shedding light on California's infrastructure problem. I would use 2017_Oroville_Dam_crisis instead of Oroville Dam. Sir Joseph(talk) 20:12, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It's okay, I'm sure the Mexicans will pay for it. It's not really an actual story, more of an "almost story". Perhaps DYK is the best venue. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:59, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as long as are not casualties. - EugεnS¡m¡on 21:31, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support - People, the dam doesn't have to collapse for it to be notable. Almost a quarter of a million people are being evacuated and for a dam collapse nonetheless. I'd say it's extremely newsworthy as it is a historic dam, a historic evacuation and a historic event. UNSC Luke 1021 (talk) 22:31, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing to see here. Lots of inconvenience, but nothing more. The Rambling Man (talk) 22:48, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support - seeing just about enough international coverage to support this. Prefer different link regardless per Sir Joseph. Banedon (talk) 01:26, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support This news story has been covered enough that I think it should be posted. The comments about an evacuation being an "inconvenience" are hard to fathom. Getting stuck in traffic is an "inconvenience". Being evacuated is a big deal. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:19, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nothing major happened there, just evacuations. Don't think that only for this to post on the main page. Rambling Man has right. - 2A02:2F0B:B0D0:17C2:FD0E:360A:C664:861B (talk) 07:03, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose unless upcoming storms result in significant material damages. SpencerT♦C 09:58, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Wait. If the dam bursts, this could be a big deal. If it doesn't, this isn't. Modest Geniustalk 12:58, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - I agree with TRM's assessment that this is an "almost story." The evacuations have been a precautionary measure, not a direct response to imminent dam/spillway failure. As it stands, the only story here is the evacuation order, and in the realm of natural disaster preparedness, 180,000 affected people is not an especially large evacuation. There's no way we would post a blurb about evacuations for a hurricane until the storm actually struck land, and I don't think this is much different. – Juliancolton | Talk 14:39, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support - hopefully the dam will not collapse, but the evacuation of 180,000 people in itself is ITN-worthy. This has been widely reported all over the world. -Zanhe (talk) 18:44, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I reiterate that the dam itself is not in danger of collapse; the problem here is the spillways, which if they collapse, will only release part of the lake(certainly still very bad, but not as bad as the whole thing going) More rain is expected in the area in the coming days, so this may worsen, but not yet. 331dot (talk) 18:47, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That is true. We shall see if the coming rain is enough to cause the crisis they're thinking may happen. The way I see it, even without the worst possible scenario, this is already worthy of posting because of the (1) 180,000+ evacuations which are incredibly disruptive to their personal lives and the local economy and (2) the light being shown on the crumbling infrastructure of the United States. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:19, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
But 'crumbling infrastructure of the US' is surely grounds for opposing posting, as it could be used by Trump supporters to criticize the Obama administration, and to support Trump's stated plans for more spending on infrastructure, and the first rule of ITN currently seems to be that we only post anti-Trump stories :) Tlhslobus (talk) 02:45, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per TRM. By the standards of typical evacuations, both in the US and elsewhere, 180,000 is not unusual. The root cause is somewhat unusual, but in that case the root cause itself would be the story should this evacuation have proven to be lifesaving (as opposed to the appropriate precaution it currently seems to be). StillWaitingForConnection (talk) 22:47, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Update: Evacuation order has been rescinded; downgraded to "Evacuation Warning" status. [22]SpencerT♦C 00:07, 15 February 2017 (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.
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:
In the news toolbox_(cropped).jpg)
