Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:In the news

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Centuries123 (talk | contribs) at 03:53, 9 March 2024 (→‎RD (blurb?): Akira Toriyama). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

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

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

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

Frank Bainimarama in 2014
Frank Bainimarama

view — page history — related changes — edit

Glossary

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

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

Nomination steps

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

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

Purge this page to update the cache

Headers

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

Voicing an opinion on an item

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

Please do...

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

Please do not...

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

Suggesting updates

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

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

Archives

March 9

March 9, 2024 (2024-03-09) (Saturday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Politics and elections

March 8

March 8, 2024 (2024-03-08) (Friday)

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

Politics and elections

RD: Ramya Wanigasekara

Article: Ramya Wanigasekara (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Divaina Ada Derana
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.

Sri Lankan actor, singer, and radio broadcaster. Titanciwikitalk/contrib 21:10, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Jonathan Hunt

Article: Jonathan Hunt (New Zealand politician) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Stuff.co.nz Radio NZ
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.
  • Wait A few unsourced bits and maybe some missing information, but almost there. InedibleHulk (talk) 15:36, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support The article seems to be well-sourced now. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 22:22, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
'Procedural support RIP to the Minister of Wine and Cheese This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 22:37, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – I've added a ton of references and cut out some material for which I could not find any sources. What's there should now satisfy the requirements. I've added myself to the credits list. Schwede66 22:46, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

March 7

March 7, 2024 (2024-03-07) (Thursday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

RD: Steve Lawrence

Article: Steve Lawrence (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NYT, WaPo, AP
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 singer and actor. gobonobo + c 19:28, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Article already looks good, should be fine to post. PolarManne (talk) 19:52, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD (blurb?): Akira Toriyama

Proposed image
Article: Akira Toriyama (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  Japanese manga artist Akira Toriyama, author of Dragon Ball, dies at the age of 68. (Post)
News source(s): Official X account of Dragon Ball (in Japanese), Oricon (in Japanese) Mainichi Shimbun (in Japanese), The New York Times, BBC, NDTV, The Straits 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.

Nominator's comments: Died on March 1, but announced on March 8. --210.165.152.210 (talk) 03:20, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Support once we get additional information. He was the creator of one of the largest intellectual properties ever, after all. Hard to imagine he wasn’t notable enough. RPH (talk) 03:26, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb Arguably the most famous and influential manga author of all time, certainly in the top 3. Article is already in good shape. PolarManne (talk) 03:27, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb - Absolutely legendary creator. GamerPro64 03:28, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb. He created Dragon Ball, he deserves one. LilianaUwU (talk / contributions) 03:28, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I added Oricon and the Mainichi Shimbun as sources to this nomination. Mlb96 (talk) 03:31, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb. Transformative figure in anime, known worldwide. RIP. DigitalIceAge (talk) 03:33, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb Absolutely one of, if not the, most influential figure in his entire industry. Known worldwide, had multiple projects in production. Easy blurb. Parabolist (talk) 03:35, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Blurb Easily one of if not the most influential modern manga artists. Rest in peace. Link20XX (talk) 03:42, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb Definitely at the top of his field, his work is known worldwide. Johndavies837 (talk) 03:52, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb Absolutely transformative figure in Japanese Animation, Toriyama was the giant whose shoulders everyone else stood on Spman (talk) 03:57, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb - Influential in his field and has global recognition. Article is in good shape. SounderBruce 03:58, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lots of unreferenced material in the Works section, which is probably too detailed anyway. Stephen 04:17, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb - There should be no question here. He is in top of his field and very important in the development of animanga fandom & industry and JRPG genre of games through Dragon Quest in the late 20th century. Until then there should be some fixes on the article, then we're good to go. MarioJump83 (talk) 04:21, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality no RB or Blurb until the works are properly sourced. --Masem (t) 04:28, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on quality the works section is still largely unsourced. PrinceofPunjabTALK 04:40, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Support He's one of the single most influential persons in regards to anime and manga. ACasualEditor97 (talk) 05:25, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb - Without a doubt one of the most influential people in anime and manga, and arguably, in modern Asian literature. Fulserish (talk) 05:36, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Once the sourcing issues are resolved, then strong support blurb per above. ~~lol1VNIO (I made a mistake? talk to me) 05:52, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose blurb — Influential figure in manga, but the medium is too vast and arguably a fraction of entertainment sales to warrant a blurb from any one figure. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 06:03, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Animanga is indeed very vast ever since 21st century, but Akira Toriyama has influenced a lot of mangakas and artists (incl. One Piece and Naruto mangaka) on this field of entertainment, not to mention the burgeoning anime fandom in late 1990s and early 2000s following Japanese economic recession in the early 1990s. I can't understate how popular anime is across the world, since their mainstreaming in 2010s alongside K-Pop. MarioJump83 (talk) 06:33, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fourth best selling manga in history, and Dragon Ball television and film series is massively popular in Latin America, Europe, North America, and elsewhere. It's a widely popular series with huge national appeal and has had a following since the 80's to today. Harizotoh9 (talk) 20:50, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb - although I’m not personally a fan, the man’s impact on anime/manga, now a huge media item, is undeniable. Oppose on quality for now, though - it’s a GA, so mostly good, but there’s some missing citations. The Kip 06:19, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, but leaning oppose I often find this page to be very informative regarding recent deaths and other news. I mean no disrespect to the late Akira Toriyama, who did much to advance his field and who passed away somewhat prematurely. My condolences to his family, friends and fans. However, the whole anime/manga industry is pretty niche (or maybe I'm just getting old). Although there may be significant overlap between manga fans and Wikipedia editors, the general public doesn't pay much attention to it. Given the high standards which this forum has established for itself for blurb-worthy content, touting Mandela-Thatcher rules and excluding many notable and significant individuals, personally, I find the near universal support for a blurb here for the creator of Dragon Ball to be, well, among the most humorous things I've seen on the internet today.
Please don't take this comment as rude. I appreciate the work that many of you do. Keep up the good work!Ryan Reeder (talk) 07:14, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Animanga is more closer to a pop cultural juggernaut today than it was in prior decades, though in some parts of the world I could see why it is a niche. MarioJump83 (talk) 07:31, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No disrespect, but I think it's a somewhat uninformed opinion to suggest that Japanese media is niche. See List of highest-grossing media franchises.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 19:06, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose I find it surprising to see that Pokémon has had 1.6 times greater sales than Mickey Mouse and nearly double that of Star Wars. But genuine question--why does Satoshi Tajiri's Wikipedia article only have about 2,000 words, while Walt Disney and George Lucas are around 11,000 and 9,000 words, respectively? I would say that Disney's and Lucas' names are much more widely recognized, at least in the Western, English-speaking world, which is the audience served by this Wikipedia.
Also, Dragon Ball is down around Grand Theft Auto, Angry Birds, Thomas and Friends and Fortnite, and I wouldn't consider their creators' deaths blurb-worthy either, at least not by the Mandela-Thatcher standard. But that ship has sailed. Ryan Reeder (talk) 20:34, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Of course, it is no surprise that there are far more English-language news articles written about George Lucas and far more English-language sources about the legacy of Walt Disney, but we've long agreed that ITN is not only for English news. One could also argue that the impact of Dragon Ball on manga and anime is far more transformational than the impact Angry Birds had on mobile video games, but that's neither here nor there as the notability question seems more than settled by now.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 20:45, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb. Well-known artist in multiple countries, both Japan and the entirety of the West. Article looks ready to me, given that there are no citation needed tags remaining. 64.231.206.241 (talk) 08:01, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm glad to see all the strong support on significance and I fully agree. I will say that the death and legacy sections should be updated further, with more detail. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 09:32, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb, second in importance to Osamu Tezuka only probably, and arguably the first to really make manga popular in e.g. Europe. A defining figure. Fram (talk) 09:40, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb - per above. Creator of one of the most popular works of fiction out there, and an inspiration for many artists to follow. Rest in peace. - Bucket of sulfuric acid (talk | contribs) 09:44, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Splitting out a problematic and woefully under-sourced section into a completely new woefully under-sourced article to get this posted on ITN is very subpar editing, I think. It's supposed to be a Good Article! Black Kite (talk) 10:12, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This here. It is 100% inappropriate to sweep the unsourced works section to a separate article. Breaking it out was not required as there was no SIZE issue. That needs to be undone at this point too. Masem (t) 13:38, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality as per Black Kite. Removing a whole unsourced section so the article looks better for ITN [1] seems like a clear attempt by Justanothersgwikieditor to WP:GAME the system, and should not be tolerated. Same as how ITN has been cracking down on people doing these splits for unsourced music/film lists for musicians/actors. The current version has insufficient sourced detail on the works, and therefore doesn't meet ITN quality standards, and this will be the case until the unsourced content is re-added with sources. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:50, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't think the extended table/list is required for the article, but I agree that the Works section should be further re-expanded before posting. Rather than WP:GAME, you could see this as akin to WP:TNT, clearing away the uncited mess to be replaced by something better. Of course the problem is still there, however... ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 10:55, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This is not an accurate summary of Wikipedia policy. Poorly sourced material can always be removed. Mlb96 (talk) 12:49, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Poorly sourced material should be sourced if possible. I'm sure most of the works could be sourced if there were a desire to do so. TNT is for when it isn't salvageable, and lots of that content would be salvageable. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:02, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That usually applies to material that is not central or common to the specific topic. A list of works by a highly regarded artist and writer is central to that person and should not be removed because sources were lacking. If it were removing one or two completely obscure works from the list, sure, but not the full list. Masem (t) 14:07, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Observation Perhaps just goes to show, more people may have heard of the world's most famous politicians, but cartoon fans actually respect their heroes and buy their work. Anyway, he was 68, which isn't that old. I'm not opposed, just keep it clean. InedibleHulk (talk) 12:25, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb, once the cn tags on the list are resolved either by removal or sourced. I am of the opinion that not all entries need to be sourced, but at the minimum, follow the guidelines at WP:CSC. – robertsky (talk) 12:54, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb, this definitely has the needed quality as a GA. --NoonIcarus (talk) 13:13, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb Wrote the fourth best-selling manga of all time. HadesTTW (he/him • talk) 13:28, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb definitely notable enough, well-known in multiple countries. Editor 5426387 (talk) 13:57, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb There is only a three sentence update about his death. While he was very notable during his life, his death itself isn't notable. Gödel2200 (talk) 14:09, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    His death got an article on the BBC and CNN within hours of announcement, it was clearly notable. ACasualEditor97 (talk) 14:17, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it is notable in the sense of having gotten news articles written about it very quickly, but that doesn't change the fact that his death does not have significant Wikipedia coverage. Without that significant Wikipedia coverage, I do not think a blurb is warranted. Gödel2200 (talk) 14:51, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is zero requirement that the death itself of a notable person be significant to require a blurb. Where the death (and most often the funeral and other memoriable services that follow) are covered in depth by sources, that's a fair reason for a blurb, but by no means the only reason for one. Instead, when the death is from natural causes, we should be looking to the person's relative importance, impact, and legacy on their field to judge if a blurb is appropriate, and there's clear indicators, already present pre-death, why Akira was a key figure in manga and video games. — Masem (t) 15:44, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"when the death is from natural causes, we should be looking to the person's relative importance, impact, and legacy on their field to judge if a blurb is appropriate." Should we? There may be no requirement that the death itself be notable, but I also don't see any requirement that we must assess the notability a person has to determine if they are blurb worthy. In fact, if we went along this route, I would be inclined to make the argument that the only people who are 'notable' enough to get a blurb are those who have significant Wikipedia coverage on their death. But regardless, as far as I can tell, both of these view points are valid. Gödel2200 (talk) 16:01, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is definitely not the case that we only post blurbs when the death itself get significant coverage. As to when we post otherwise is still heavily debated, but aspects of importance and impact are common criteria. But we have never expected the death to be heavily covered for a blurb. Masem (t) 16:06, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It may be a common practice to assess blurbs of notable deaths based on the notability of the given person, but I don't see how this in any way discredits opposing based upon no significant Wikipedia coverage. I'm not saying that we should never be assessing if a blurb is warranted based on notability, but rather that we should take that into account together with the coverage of the death; assessing the blurb based upon Wikipedia coverage or assessing based upon notability are not mutually exclusive, and my argument is using the former. Gödel2200 (talk) 16:24, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We have never in the past looked to the amount of coverage of the death by natural causes as a reason to blurb. When the death is unusual, that's a different matter. When the death is by natural causes, significant attention to the death may be a reason to blurb, but never the sole reason to blurb. Masem (t) 16:35, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that the amount of coverage should never be the "sole reason to blurb", but I also think it should go the other way: the notability of a person during their life shouldn't be the sole reason for a blurb; both of these factors should be satisfied. Gödel2200 (talk) 16:46, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We can certainly talk about the respectives and long-form obits a person gets above and beyond simple obits as a factor, but those also have to be present and documented in the article, if that legacy is not already present. Just that those aren't expected to be documented as part of their death, as you stated in your original post. Masem (t) 16:55, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As I've said before, the fact that it is not "expected" that there is significant Wikipedia coverage of someone's death does not mean this is an invalid reason to oppose. I do not agree with the common practice of posting blurbs solely on notability during life, and I am saying we should take both factors into account. Gödel2200 (talk) 17:31, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Gödel2200, RDs as blurbs have long been understood to be for people who lived exceptional lives and were at the top of their respective fields. I understand that you feel this should change, and that's okay. Every RD-as-a-blurb nomination will meet some resistance, some more than others. But I think it's best that you accept that you're in the minority on this. You've made your point, and you've generated a very long back-and-forth in the process. If I weren't replying, I would have collapsed it myself to make the wider discussion more readable.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 18:55, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I feel like it's worth pointing out the article for Brian Mulroney, who is currently blurbed, also has three sentences about his death. The manner in which they died doesn't need to be notable, just the impact they've had on society. PolarManne (talk) 20:07, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am not making an argument that the manner of death needs to be notable for a blurb to be posted, in fact, far from it. I consider the amount of Wikipedia coverage of a given person's death to be a significant factor in deciding if they are notable enough for a blurb. I think RD blurbs should only be used in extremely exceptional cases, and the deaths in those cases almost always have a lot of Wikipedia coverage. Gödel2200 (talk) 22:38, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb Most notable manga/comic artists of all time. Nyescum (talk) 14:13, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb Along with most of the support blurbs, he created Dragon Ball which is one of the most notable media franchises of all time. Sincerely, Icantthinkofanamexd (talk) 15:03, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb It appears citation concerns were resolved this morning. I agree with many above on his notability and the impact he brought to the manga/comic industry. --Engineerchange (talk) 15:13, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    And to the toy industry. InedibleHulk (talk) 15:42, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    They were not: ppeople just shuffled the list of works to a separate page to hide the lack of sourcing there. That's got to be sourced before we post, because otherwise that's just sweeping dust under the rug. — Masem (t) 15:45, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    More like cleaning your room by cramming everything into your closet and hoping the door doesn't spring open from the pressure. Kurtis (talk) 16:23, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb—Per all above me, an iconic Manga artist who had an indelible impact on popular culture, both in Japan and abroad. This support is, ad always, contingent upon the article being well sourced and of adequate quality. Kurtis (talk) 16:23, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb DBZ is a very significant, notable manga. Pretty much everyone knows it. I've already seen a lot of people talking about this guy's death. Setarip (talk) 16:32, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb DBZ is a popular manga, people would want to know this, I think it's notable AndrewGarfieldIsTheBestSpiderMan (talk) 17:33, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb Clearly notable for his work and transformative within the field of Japanese manga and animation.
Noah, AATalk 20:12, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb as per above. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 23:09, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: As RD blurbs appear to be trending from an exceptional to a regular occurrence (this discussion hasn't closed yet, but it seems to be trending towards support for a blurb), perhaps a compromise for certain notable deceased persons is to have their photograph placed as the main image, with "(pictured)" next to their name under the Recent Deaths ticker (see right)? Morgan695 (talk) 17:53, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • And to clarify, I'm not proposing an end to the practice of doing blurbs for recent deaths, just proposing another option for noting deaths without doing a blurb. Also just realizing now that I forgot to italicize "(pictured)" in the mockup I did. Morgan695 (talk) 17:58, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • We have done this before, and I wouldn't be opposed because I still think we should move away from blurbing RDs. Kingsif (talk) 20:12, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yup, and this should be reasonable if none of the other blurbs have pictures or the picture has become stale. (I am still brainstorming an idea that would allow automatic picture rotation that could incorporate RDs with free pictures too, but that's not a simple task yet) Masem (t) 20:18, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Also support this idea, and also support moving away from blurbing RDs. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 21:51, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I support this idea. RD blurbs can fill ITN blurb space rather quickly, and ITN blurbs should be more focused on the serious events happening around the world. MarioJump83 (talk) 01:40, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb Not just known for his work on Dragon Ball but also Chronotrigger and blue dragon. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 18:19, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb as he was one of the greatest and most influential manga artists of all time. I’d say that he was in manga what Stan Lee was in comics.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:55, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Manga is comics, just in another direction and language. In the whole panel-based story art game, Stan Lee's "vision" was far more influential, spawning a hundred times the characters, 80 billion more dollars and two more decades. It's more reasonable to put Toriyama up there with Hergé and his so-called bandes dessinées, probably. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:51, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment If you are coming to add yet another "Support Blurb" we've clearly passed that line, but this cannot be posted until List of Akira Toriyama's works is properly sourced, and I would recommend fixing that first. --Masem (t) 19:10, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Good luck finding reliable English language sources to cite his authorship of 40 year old Japanese comic books, it’s probably not going to happen. What an absurd demand. Spman (talk) 19:27, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Not ridiculous, required by WP:ITNQUALITY. Or maybe users shouldn't create WP:CFORKs for the sole purpose of trying to get this ITN passed with no effort of improving article sourcing. Joseph2302 (talk) 19:31, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It is ridiculous because he’s a Japanese artist who created the bulk of his work in Japan and outside of the main thing he’s noted for, most of that work has zero traction outside of Japan. Expecting English Language editors to find foreign language sources to cite his works that literally no one disputes his authorship of is a ridiculous demand to move forward on this. Spman (talk) 19:56, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Works that are notable on their own (that is, the blue-linked ones) presumably can go without sources as his authorship should be on the blue-linked page, but those that have been included without links do need sources. And while they may be obscure Japanese works, the fact someone added them to en.wiki means they know they exist. We don't need secondary coverage, but appropriate reliable sources that simply address authorship.
    Also just doing some searching found me this book with the first work on the list sourced. [ https://www.google.com/books/edition/Dragon_Ball_Culture_Volume_1/JYvmBQAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=%22Nazo+no+Rein+Jakku%22&pg=PT63&printsec=frontcover] That probably has a lot more that can be used. So no, not impossible at all. — Masem (t) 20:12, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Despite us being the English Wikipedia, sources do not have to be in English, per WP:NONENG. Curbon7 (talk) 21:19, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    There is zero requirement for sources having to be in English. Don't make up rules that don't exist, Spman. Schwede66 22:50, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb, and support moving away from blurbing RDs in general. We don't need a two-tiered system of death honors. Of course, there are cases where the death is its own story that is separately ITN-worthy (like, a non-ceremonial monarch dying and being replaced would still be WP:ITN/R), but it shouldn't just be "important person dies", as important as the person is. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 21:52, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb It's a GA and so its quality is a given. To now require citations for the authorship of his works is absurd because such works are sources and presumably he is credited. And the {{authority control}} is there to provide general backup for this in the world's major libraries. As for his notability, his death was announced in a BBC radio bulletin that I heard while driving today and that's more prominence than the usual RD. And a blurb is needed to explain who the guy was as the name alone is useless. I've heard of DBZ but am not a fan and so his name is not familiar. Andrew🐉(talk) 00:13, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • We're discussing the article Akira Toriyama for ITN - so why should the separate article List of works by Akira Toriyama hold back the GA from being posted? BeanieFan11 (talk) 02:05, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Because the sub-article was spun off yesterday in an attempt to avoid referencing any of his works. Stephen 02:08, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Stephen: So? And, additionally, almost everything on that list is referenced. BeanieFan11 (talk) 03:30, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb Very notable figure in the anime/manga industry. Centuries123 (talk) 03:52, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Sweden's accession to NATO

Proposed image
Article: Sweden–NATO relations (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Sweden joins NATO as its 32nd member. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Sweden joins NATO as its 32nd member.
News source(s): US Department of State, Politico, Reuters
Credits:

Sweden is set to join today formally. Was on hold last time, it's about time we nominate this now. TwistedAxe [contact] 14:53, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support although blurb can be improved and the article will likely be moved to Sweden in NATO like for Finland in NATO. (edit: I somehow hallucinated that move) Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 14:55, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. Could someone maybe insert a fitting image as well? TwistedAxe [contact] 14:57, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Done (blurb and image), although if someone has an image of the accession ceremony it would be even better than the map! Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 15:02, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The accession ceremony is set to be held on the 11th of March, although the treaty is set to come into force today. TwistedAxe [contact] 15:03, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We can go with this image, and maybe update it when the accession ceremony happens if it's still on the main page by then (likely). Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 16:14, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment one section is tagged as source less, and I spot a couple CNs floating around. Masem (t) 14:58, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Just wait until it is really, really, really set and fixed. Please! We can't risk anything now. Everyone on Swedish media is going: "For the love of..., don't jinx anything now." Cart (talk) 15:01, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    All 31 member states have deposited their instruments of ratification and the US Department of State have confirmed that the treaty is in force as of today. There are no more "risks" Going to note that the PM has yet to deposit the instrument at 4PM UTC, in less than an hour. Still fitting to post it though considering everything will be done today and formal accession will conclude by the end of the day.TwistedAxe [contact] 15:05, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you had followed this as closely and for as long as we Swedes have, you wouldn't mind waiting that hour. We have become very jaded with all the things that have popped up along the process. Cart (talk) 15:12, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have followed this as long as the Swedes have considering I am Swedish ;) TwistedAxe [contact] 15:16, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, not so used to bumping into fellow Swedes here at ITN. More used to explaining things to Americans. ;-) Cart (talk) 15:19, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. TwistedAxe [contact] 15:30, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Full membership has been announced, and the article looks good to go. Comment According to the table on the article, full membership hasn't taken effect yet. I would think it would be best to wait until full membership takes effect. Gödel2200 (talk) 15:09, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Totally agree, we can polish up the article and make everything ready in the meantime. Cart (talk) 15:13, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support we had brought it up earlier that we would like to nominate it once they had officially joined. It is very notable given the ongoing tensions between russia and nato. Ion.want.uu (talk) 15:35, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I do agree however that we should clean up the article a bit if needed. Ion.want.uu (talk) 15:35, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait just a liiiiittle bit longer, we're almost at the point of full membership, but it's not yet there. Duly signed, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 16:12, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Done!!!! Go, go, go! Cart (talk) 16:28, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I've added 2 additional sources. It's official now. TwistedAxe [contact] 16:45, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Lazy jannies ruining another good nom by sleeping all day instead of posting, sad 2600:100F:B1B9:3F82:141C:495C:DB68:F117 (talk) 17:01, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Let's get this up ASAP Moncoposig (talk) 17:18, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Either blurb is OK. Nsk92 (talk) 17:21, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Needs work The lead of the nominated article has not been updated – its most recent date is July 2022. Andrew🐉(talk) 17:25, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
this is importent news. i agree. 2600:1700:8090:4440:B4B9:F680:424F:F9 (talk) 17:48, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on significance, with advice that we move quickly to get this up while it's timely. Sdkb talk 17:54, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support great news. Article looks good and it’s ready to be posted. _-_Alsor (talk) 18:39, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted. Appears uncontroversial. Per MOS, I've spelled out the number, omitted the wikilink to Sweden, and used the term "member state" that seems to be more commonly used by our articles than "member". The map still needs protection on Commons before it can be posted. Sandstein 19:01, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Sandstein, I'm not a fan of the alterations you made to the blurb when you posted. thirty-second member state of NATO linking to Sweden–NATO relations is very much an MOS:EGG. Sdkb talk 06:13, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It's not more egg-y than the proposed blurbs, I think. I don't really see a good way to use the article title "Sweden–NATO relations" in the blurb. Sandstein 07:30, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting support Woohoo! Do I get an IKEA discount now? --RockstoneSend me a message! 02:18, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You do if we get a Microsoft discount. Cart (talk) 15:32, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
prime minister ulf kristersson (left) and secretary of state antony blinken at the ceremony
prime minister ulf kristersson (left) and secretary of state antony blinken at the ceremony
  • comment: i thought i might mention that commons has a few photos of the ratification ceremony, including the one at right. dying (talk) 01:59, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: John Kumah

Article: John Kumah (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Citinewsroom, Reuters
Credits:

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

Heatrave (talk) 14:38, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Article is well-sourced and looks good. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moncoposig (talk • contribs) 16:21, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb Person is not really a household name, support RD article looks good enough for RD though. Editor 5426387 (talk) 19:31, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    He was deputy finance minister and a big face of the ruling party. Heatrave (talk) 02:13, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support RD The article is a little sparse in terms of prose, but I think it's of sufficient quality to post. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 23:05, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality correctly orange tagged. If fixed, RD is fine. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:35, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

March 6

March 6, 2024 (2024-03-06) (Wednesday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

RD: Nick Sheridan

Article: Nick Sheridan (journalist) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [2]
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.

 Ollieisanerd (talk • contribs) 21:03, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Pigcasso

Article: Pigcasso (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Clarín
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.

South African painting pig. Death announced on 6 March. gobonobo + c 14:45, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support, article looks very well rounded, hope she doesn't hog the main page. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:50, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No reference for death. Secretlondon (talk) 14:50, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Clarin news source given above has been used? Martinevans123 (talk) 14:56, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Mohammed Al-Sharekh

Article: Mohammed Al-Sharekh (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Al Sharq
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.

Kuwaiti business magnate, founder of Sakhr Software Company. Jmanlucas (talk) 08:44, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support - Article seems well-sourced. - Bucket of sulfuric acid (talk | contribs) 12:22, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Seems like a noteworthy person and a noteworthy death at that! - Petjayso (talk) 14:07, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    "Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post" Secretlondon (talk) 14:43, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Although the article has many short sections, the sourcing and quality is sufficient to post. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 23:08, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pakistan floods

Article: 2024 Pakistan floods (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ At least 35 people have been killed and 50 injured in floods in Pakistan. (Post)
News source(s): Al Jazeera, BBC, VOA, Al Arabiya, Crisis 24,
Credits:

Ainty Painty (talk) 03:53, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mild Support not sure if this is the most notable but I could see it getting nominated. Ion.want.uu (talk) 05:11, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose - While we don't have a specific death tally for natural disasters like this (or at least, none that I'm aware of), news like these very rarely get posted. Plus, the article could use a bit of work. - Bucket of sulfuric acid (talk | contribs) 08:08, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per WP:NEWSEVENT. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:32, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality The article claims these are ongoing floods, but says: "At least 40 people were killed", not have been killed. Also, besides from making an unreferenced claim that the floods began on 29 February, the article does not mention any other dates, which means the claim that the floods are ongoing needs to be sourced. Gödel2200 (talk) 13:18, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality per above; article also feels rather barebones, consisting of a series of one or two-sentence statements. The Kip 05:51, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

March 5

March 5, 2024 (2024-03-05) (Tuesday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

RD: Dagmar Loe

Article: Dagmar Loe (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NRK
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: Norwegian journalist. Turned 101 in 2024. Oceanh (talk) 19:21, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Although short, the article is sufficiently well-sourced. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 23:09, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Shafiqah Hudson

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

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

Death in February but news coverage dates to March 5. Innisfree987 (talk) 09:52, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose Seems not noteworthy enough - Petjayso (talk) 14:08, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Anything living with a Wikipedia article is notable enough for RD. MyriadSims (talk) 14:30, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support The previous oppose vote should be discarded. I'm currently leaning towards support but the article could use a little expansion. Jmanlucas (talk) 17:41, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Linda Balgord

Article: Linda Balgord (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://playbill.com/article/broadway-cats-phantom-of-the-opera-star-linda-balgord-dies-at-64
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 Broadway actress and singer. 65.94.213.53 (talk) 07:12, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Solihin G. P.

Article: Solihin G. P. (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [3]
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.

Juxlos (talk) 06:33, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support The article seems well-sourced and of sufficiently good quality. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 11:17, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support The last living general to fought in the Indonesian National Revolution. RIP. --Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 11:52, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

March 4

March 4, 2024 (2024-03-04) (Monday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

Politics and elections

RD: James Hedges

Article: James Hedges (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [1]
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.

Jon698 (talk) 21:03, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) State of emergency in Haiti

Article: Gang war in Haiti (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Haiti declares a state of emergency after armed gangs storm major prisons, demand Prime Minister's resignation (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Haiti declares a state of emergency after gangs storm two prisons and demand the resignation of Prime Minister Ariel Henry.
News source(s): Washington Post, BBC
Credits:

Staraction (talk | contribs) 21:48, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support altblurb on notability as this is arguably the worst the crisis has been since the President was assassinated; however, oppose on quality as the article hasn't been updated seemingly since late December. The Kip 22:03, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've written a little bit about the new state of emergency on the originally nominated article - see Gang war in Haiti#2024 prison storming. If another article is used, please feel free to transfer what I've written over under WP:CWW!
Staraction (talk | contribs) 22:36, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality due to there being only two paragraphs about the event in the article. I'm not sure on notability, but will reassess when more details are added to the article. Support on notability Article has been significantly expanded, and this seems to be notable enough. Gödel2200 (talk) 00:59, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, highly notable security crisis with national and international implications. Marquisate (talk) 01:54, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support, as this is a major escalation in the already dire situation of the conflict AG AGR280 (talk) 03:55, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support on notability, although I think the prison storming should be its separate article (more than 4700 escapees, by the way). Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 04:10, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Did try to create separate article - however I removed references to it since it has less detail than the Gang war in Haiti article at this point. Ought I add it back? 2024 gang violence in Haiti Staraction (talk | contribs) 04:16, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Still good to have it on hand (likely as an altblurb) if it gets expanded in time. Also you could add {{main}} from Gang war in Haiti#2024 prison storming to the new article! Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 04:32, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support altblurb. Notable enough and article looks ready to go, if the section covering the current riots is a bit short. Moncoposig (talk) 04:31, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support as this has been one of the worst events in human history Ion.want.uu (talk) 04:48, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support here- though I'll be requesting that the current article about the events is changed to fit the fact that much more than a jailbreak has happened, it's still a very notable event - presidentofyes, the super aussa man 11:33, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support altblurb - per all above Abo Yemen✉ 11:58, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Needs work The lead of the nominated article says nothing about the recent developments. Andrew🐉(talk) 13:09, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I've added some to the lead of the nominated article - let me know if I'm missing anything. Staraction (talk | contribs) 15:21, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Stephen 00:35, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Shouldn't the blurb link to the specific jailbreak rather than the article on the overall conflict? It has a dedicated article at 2024 Haitian jailbreak. Tube·of·Light 02:29, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    When originally posted, that dedicated article was in bad shape - however it has been significantly improved since, and I think this is a good idea now Staraction (talk | contribs) 07:08, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

France adopts abortion rights in constitution

Article: Abortion in France (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ France becomes the first country to enshrine abortion rights in their constitution. (Post)
News source(s): CNN
Credits:

While a larger celebration is due this Friday on Int'l Women's Rights Day, the passage completes the process today. Holding off to Friday is not unreasonable. Masem (t) 18:36, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support on notability, oppose on quality This is notable enough as France is the first ever modern country to place abortion rights in their constitution. But the Abortion in France article is nowhere near ready. Besides for massive sourcing issues, the article doesn't actually mention the enshrinement yet. I will also note that the prevalance section is outdated, only giving dates up until 2020. Gödel2200 (talk) 19:08, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not that familiar with how legislation works in France, but was this an actual bill that was being voted on, or was the vote explicitly for the change in the constitution? If it was the former, we could just make an article for that bill, which could then be the target. If the latter, as per Brandmeister, we could target the Constitution of France article. While that article does need a bit of work (and an update about the enshrinement), it is of far better quality than the Abortion in France article. Gödel2200 (talk) 19:39, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support as per above Ion.want.uu (talk) 04:49, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support as per above PrinceofPunjabTALK 05:41, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose ...until we have an article on this actual event. Having it buried in as a minor part of another article isn't good enough. HiLo48 (talk) 05:46, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • ITN does not require a separate article for any event, just that there is a significant update to an existing article (which is lacking presently). — Masem (t) 13:06, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - a blurb is proposed, but there is no specific article about this event, actually there isn't even a named paragraph in the suggested article. 51.154.145.205 (talk) 07:44, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality the article suggested is Abortion in France, which has multiple orange tags and doesn't have a specific section on this event. If we get an article on this event (or substantial content about it in another article that also doesn't have multiple orange tags), and that meets WP:ITNQUALITY, then it and only then would it be worth considering whether or not to post this. I'm confused as to how anyone can just vote support when there isn't even an article for this. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:06, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The section "21st century liberalization" in Abortion in France covers this (going back to Dobbs in 2022 when the bill to change the constitution was introduced, for two paragraphs, but it definitely could be expanded). Masem (t) 13:21, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It has 2 short paragraphs totalling 908 characters about it (excluding the mention of Yugoslavia that isn't sourced)- that's not enough. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:34, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Both on quality and notability. I don't really see how a domestic constitutional amendment is notable enough for ITN. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 13:16, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It is similar to how we've posted first countries in specific regions to support gay marriage. It's the first country to specifically call out abortion rights as protected, which is a milestone for women's rights. If it was the second or third to do so, yes, it wouldn't be so significant. Masem (t) 13:23, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah but I feel it draws on quite an arbitrary metric which is 'codified in the constitution'. Almost nothing has changed in actual French abortion law. We shouldn't automatically post "first to enact law" countries unless it has an excessive amount of notability. Even if you think this is a milestone for women's rights, I still don't see the justification for posting this. Barely any news coverage outside of domestic French politics, as well as the article only being two sentences. PrecariousWorlds (talk) 13:41, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree. There is massive variation in what a constitution is around the world. In my country, Australia, abortion is fully legal everywhere, but I don't believe it's the kind of thing that could ever go in the country's constitution. It's just not what our constitution is for. I'm sure similar situations exist elsewhere. So abortion in Australia is already as legal as it can be, but that didn't appear in ITN. HiLo48 (talk) 20:38, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Abortion was already legal and widely available in France. Quite how that is codified (law vs constitution) is a technical detail. This is a largely symbolic step that has more to do with domestic political posturing than any real change in access to abortion. The nominated article is a mess, the update is minimal, and the 'first' being claimed here is both questionable and unimpressive. Modest Genius talk 16:13, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Couldn't have said it bettter myself PrecariousWorlds (talk) 16:49, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, per Modest Genius. Cambalachero (talk) 16:22, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Modest Genius. Nothing substantive has changed and ITN is not in the business of promoting political theatre. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:24, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - would we oppose blurbing a ratified amendment to the US Constitution? Almost certainly not. Although this may not actually affect things in France, it's still notable and worthy of a blurb. --RockstoneSend me a message! 00:39, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lean support being the first amendment to the French constitution in over 15 years: a notable gap given how often it used to be amended before then (6 times in 5 years at one point!). — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 00:56, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose because nothing actually changed. Abortion was already legal in France and has been since 1975. Distinction without a difference here. nableezy - 01:00, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support For fairly obvious reasons. France is the beacon of liberty for humanity once again Kasperquickly (talk) 18:42, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I suppose what changes is that any attempts to de-constitutionalize (is that even a word) abortion will be harder than by simply amending statutes. So, something changed, but is not readily apparent, more so if you have a dick. Howard the Duck (talk) 18:49, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Supreme Court rules Trump must appear on Colorado's ballot

Clearly not going to garner consensus to be posted. No need to waste time on further discussion. Noah, AATalk 17:47, 4 March 2024 (UTC) (non-admin closure)[reply]

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

Article: Trump v. Anderson (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Supreme Court of the United States rules that Donald Trump must appear on Colorado ballots in the 2024 United States presidential election, unanimously reversing a ruling by the Colorado Supreme Court. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The Supreme Court of the United States rules that Donald Trump must appear on Colorado ballots in the 2024 United States presidential election.
News source(s): New York Times the Guardian
Credits:
IntoThinAir (talk) 16:36, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. When the election happens, we'll post the winner as a blurb. There's no need for updates on who even appears on the ballot. We never post the winners of the party nomination primaries, for example. Modest Genius talk 16:40, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think this rather makes the case to have the 2024 U.S. presidential election campaign as ongoing. The twists and turns are piling up. BD2412 T 16:46, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not intrinsically opposed to putting major election campaigns in ongoing, but I think this proposal is premature. We should only put the US election there at the earliest when both parties have definitively chosen their candidates; likewise the UK one only when parliament is dissolved. Otherwise we'll be overflowing. GenevieveDEon (talk) 17:42, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose largely per Modest Genius. Supreme Court decisions from any country are rarely posted and this does not fundamentally alter any constructional law. Beyond which this is just part of the evolving story of the 2024 presidential election. I am ambivalent on whether or not to add the election to ongoing. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:51, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per "not every US election-related thing is notable", also oppose having an Ongoing item as many countries have election campaigns and having only this one featured would be pretty blatant US bias. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 17:06, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose because, effectively, nothing changed. Trump was and remains on the ballot. I would have supported it if he was removed. Johndavies837 (talk) 17:37, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - A purely administrative decision affecting one candidate in one state's poll for the presidency. We absolutely should not cover such minutiae at ITN. GenevieveDEon (talk) 17:40, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. I think Trump being disqualified would have been ITN-worthy, but this ruling was expected. Jessintime (talk) 17:43, 4 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 3

March 3, 2024 (2024-03-03) (Sunday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

Politics and elections

RD: Juli Lynne Charlot

Article: Juli Lynne Charlot (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.

Staraction (talk | contribs) 02:37, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose There's an orange tag indicating multiple issues. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 11:11, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Eleanor Collins

Article: Eleanor Collins (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CBC
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.

Canadian jazz singer, television host and civic leader. Known as "Canada's first lady of jazz". Scientia potentia est, MonarchOfTerror 10:15, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Chris Mortensen

Article: Chris Mortensen (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.

240F:7A:6253:1:2DDA:5B3F:E171:D64F (talk) 04:11, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose for now I think the article is giving undue weight to Deflategate and his undisclosed ad tweet in relation to the rest of his biography. – Muboshgu (talk) 04:31, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Ed Ott

Article: Ed Ott (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [5]
Credits:

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

– Muboshgu (talk) 00:10, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: U. L. Washington

Article: U. L. Washington (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [6]
Credits:

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

– Muboshgu (talk) 18:54, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's a real splitting hairs discussion that is not material to the decision on quality here. GreatCaesarsGhost 12:01, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There was originally a Cn tag there on recently added material before the discussion was started.[7] I'm not saying it's a showstopper or not. —Bagumba (talk) 12:36, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You say that, but here you are stopping the show. By pointing out an unsettled discussion started by...YOU...after the CN was addressed. Regarding a matter of remarkably low significance. GreatCaesarsGhost 21:23, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support The article is of good enough quality now. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 00:50, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Pakistan New PM

Proposed image
Article: 2024 Pakistani general election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Following the general election, Shehbaz Sharif is appointed Prime Minister of Pakistan. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Following the general election, Shahbaz Sharif is appointed Prime Minister of Pakistan amid allegations of election rigging.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Following the general election, Shahbaz Sharif is appointed Prime Minister of Pakistan with the support of PML-N allies, amid allegations of election rigging.
Alternative blurb III: ​ Following the general election marred by rigging allegations, Shahbaz Sharif is appointed Prime Minister of Pakistan despite the PTI-backed independent candidates winning majority seats.
Alternative blurb IV: ​ Following the general election, Shahbaz Sharif is appointed Prime Minister of Pakistan despite the PTI-backed independent candidates winning majority seats.
Alternative blurb V: ​ Following the general election, Shehbaz Sharif is appointed Prime Minister of Pakistan although the PTI-backed independent candidates winning a plurality of seats.
Alternative blurb VI: ​ Following the general election, Shehbaz Sharif is appointed Prime Minister of Pakistan, forming a coalition government between the PML-N and the PPP.
News source(s): Reuters, Al Jazeera, Express Tribube
Credits:

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

Ainty Painty (talk) 08:59, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support altblurb, OR altblurb IV The election has faced allegations of rigging, supported by numerous reputable sources [can be found on election page]. These allegations have prompted the creation of a standalone WP page dedicated to documenting the irregularities at Allegations of rigging in the 2024 Pakistani general election. so It's crucial that WP highlight these concerns about the election integrity. Altblurb can be re-worded though. --Saqib (talk) 09:17, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Is it necessary? There has been elections before with allegations of rigging but that was not featured in the alt blurb. Like USA 2020 or Russian interference in the UK 2019 election. Haris920 (talk) 10:36, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes it is. Reports from both local and international media have highlighted significant allegations of rigging, to the extent that there's now a standalone WP article dedicated to documenting it. Here's the gist: PTI declined to form a government, despite coalition offers from PPP. --Saqib (talk) 11:07, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rigging has been happening for years in Pakistan. The rigging in this election makes no major difference. Every election gets rigged and manipulated. Did Zad really win in 2008? Nawaz 2013? PTI is only complaining as this is the first time they are on the wrong side of the rigging. Haris920 (talk) 16:08, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
While it's true that past elections hav been marred by rigging but I would say we shouldn't dwell on history and focus on this election because each and every election has its own unique circumstances & this one is no exception. For me, the pre-poll rigging was particularly unique or rather interesting this time around. one of the largest political parties barred from contesting, and its leader jailed and despite this, the party or its candidates emerged with the most seats in the parliament yet still was not unable to form a government. Sounds 1970 Pakistani general election to me. My comment might imply a biased agenda, which is not my intention as I'm neither a voter nor a supporter of PTI. However, it's important to acknowledge the extensive and ample coverage backing up the claims of rigging in this election by independent reliable sources, despite the prevalent censorship in Pakistan. Therefore, it's equally important for us to reflect this accurately. --Saqib (talk) 20:18, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note By the way for those who don't know this ITN was proposed right after election last month> Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates/February_2024#(READY)_2024_Pakistani_elections. --Saqib (talk) 11:27, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support original blurb Unless elections are truly undemocratic, we don't include anything about it in blurbs, just name the successor, to prevent any politicising/any appearance of political POV. (I.e. he's in charge now, it would be wrong to use wikivoice to suggest anything at all about the appointment, not least that it might be illegitimate.) Kingsif (talk) 11:09, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's a coalition government though. and original blur should reflect that--Saqib (talk) 11:29, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support altblurb as it captures the essence of the event in a clear way. The rigging is certainly sigificant, given the existing political crisis, there is no reason not to mention it. Article should be good to go. Pksois23 (talk) 13:16, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment We absolutely should not include the allegations of rigging in the blurb as those are exactly what's being said, allegations, not confirmation. Its a territory that needs the context of a full article to get into, not something that is appropriate for a blurb. --Masem (t) 15:55, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Proposed and Support Alt4. This acknowledges the PTI aspect of the election, but does not include the "rigging" concerns, which, like with elections that we consider to not be "free and fair", this information will be in the article and we can let the readers come to this conclusion organically. DarkSide830 (talk) 16:52, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It does have the word "despite" which, in a contextless blurb, can read as Wikipedia having a view of the outcome. Kingsif (talk) 18:48, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support original blurb: As it is most neutral and concise. Rigging allegations have been part of almost all Pakistani elections in the past. Sheriff | ☎ 911 | 19:22, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support ALT4 Despite the rigging allegations being an important part of the news, we’ve posted plenty of non-free/fair elections without such wording, and now’s not the time to change that. PTI note is good to include though, seeing as Sharif’s party is not the largest party in parliament. The Kip 19:33, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose mentioning rigging as these are only allegations for now, and that's not a wording we usually go with. Oppose the wording of alt4 (which is factually wrong, they did not win a majority) and alt5, but would support mentioning that this is a coalition government (thus why "winning a plurality" doesn't necessarily matter), ie support alt6. If that's not possible, support original blurb. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 19:52, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support alt6, oppose on quality This seems to me to be the most factually accurate of the blurbs, and we don't need to mention allegations (not confirmation) of electoral fraud. That being said, the article currently has a mostly unsourced awards section, making it not ready to go. It might be good to mention the allegations of fraud in conjunction with protests due to the allegations. So far, I don't think they are notable enough, as there is only a medium-sized section about them. Gödel2200 (talk) 20:34, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Gödel2200: Thanks for the heads up. Check out Allegations_of_rigging_in_the_2024_Pakistani_general_election#Protests --Saqib (talk) 22:18, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the expansion. However, I think we should only mention the protests if it is clear that they have had significant impacts (which the article currently doesn't indicate), and ideally if they get their own article. Gödel2200 (talk) 22:49, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • oppose alts III–V as grammatically incorrect (‘winning majority seats’, ‘although…winning’); further oppose the inclusion of any definitive claim that the PTI won a majority, including alt IV as presently unsourced (although I personally think the claim is plausible); and support some mention of vote-rigging allegations and/or the PTI’s winning a plurality of seats. Docentation (talk) 20:46, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Stephen 22:35, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Stephen, the blurb needs correction as "PML-N President Shehbaz Sharif, who is the joint candidate of the newly-formed eight-party alliance" — Dawn | Mfarazbaig (talk) 07:25, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Stephen: Mind breaking this down for me. --Saqib (talk) 09:51, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What are you on about? Stephen 10:26, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I meant you removed the mention of coalition. --Saqib (talk) 11:44, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Question: shouldn't it be 're-appointed', since he previously held the position? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 20:59, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

March 2

March 2, 2024 (2024-03-02) (Saturday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Politics and elections

(Posted) RD: Mark F. Giuliano

Article: Mark F. Giuliano (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Washington Post; The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
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: First reported today (March 4); died on March 2. —Bloom6132 (talk) 00:42, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Jim Beard

Article: Jim Beard (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): People
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.

240F:7A:6253:1:151D:C1A1:E591:E51F (talk) 09:23, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • This wikibio has 600+ words of prose, but the first footnote is at the end of the final sentence on the subject's death????? Discography after the prose is also unsourced. Please add more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 13:20, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose correctly orange tagged as needing lots more sources. Joseph2302 (talk) 20:20, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Tim Ecclestone

Article: Tim Ecclestone (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NHL.com; The Atlanta Journal-Constitution; MLive Media Group
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.

Canadian professional ice hockey left winger and coach. 65.94.213.53 (talk) 07:14, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Janice Burgess

Article: Janice Burgess (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NY Times, USA Today
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.

Nickelodeon executive notable for creating The Backyardigans, death announced on March 5th. Mr. Lechkar (talk) 14:06, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Jaclyn Jose

Article: Jaclyn Jose (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Philstar, Manila Bulletin, GMA 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.

Cannes Best Actress awardee in 2016 for Ma' Rosa, but better known in the Philippines for her roles in the TV series Mula sa Puso (1997–1999) and Mundo Mo'y Akin (2013). Died on 2 March, but her death was only reported on 3 March. Article looks to have been significantly improved compared to its state a few days ago, although some {cn} tags remain and some sections need to have additional citations. Vida0007 (talk) 18:02, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose There's an orange tag, a CN tag and the filmography and awards section need citations. Scientia potentia est, MonarchOfTerror 20:02, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • So many short paragraphs with three sentences of less, but zero footnotes. So many boxes after the prose in need of sourcing. Please add more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 09:50, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Brit Awards 2024

Consensus will not form to post this. Schwede66 02:15, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Proposed image
Article: Brit Awards 2024 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Brit Awards 2024 concludes with Raye winning a record six Brit Awards in 2024, including artist of the year and Album of the Year (Post)
News source(s): Brit Awards Official website
Credits:
Heatrave (talk) 21:54, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Article doesn't have enough prose on the ceremony itself, and anyways, I'm not sure if these awards are at the standard of the Grammys (currently the only music awards show listed at WP:ITNR). The Kip 22:06, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @The Kip a few days ago, Oppenheimer was featured in ITN as it won the British Academy Awards so i don't think the Grammy standards should apply here. If that's the case, then only news EGOT will apply. Heatrave (talk) 08:39, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - I believe the 2024 Brit Awards concluded two days ago [8]https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-68458923 (BBC article updated two days ago), and the Wikipedia article itself states the awards were 2 March 2024 Staraction (talk | contribs) 22:11, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I believe this has been posted before, but this article is in no shape to appear on the main page, as apart from the multiple lack of citations, there is actually no prose about the ceremony itself, which is probably best as it was pretty much universally panned for being generally terrible. Black Kite (talk) 22:18, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose As per above, the article has no prose about the event, and has various sourcing issues. Gödel2200 (talk) 00:48, 5 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.

(Posted) RD: Søren Pape Poulsen

Article: Søren Pape Poulsen (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Reuters Berlingske Copenhagen post
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.

Danish politician. Scientia potentia est, MonarchOfTerror 20:22, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Eugene Wijeysingha

Article: Eugene Wijeysingha (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/former-raffles-institution-headmaster-eugene-wijeysingha-dies-at-90
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.

– robertsky (talk) 09:13, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Support The article is sufficiently well-sourced, but it is short. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 11:54, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support - short, but sourced and probably good enough Pksois23 (talk) 13:19, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: John Okafor

Article: John Okafor (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Pulse, Punch
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.

Popular Nollywood actor. There are still a couple of passages marked as needing citations. gobonobo + c 22:20, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - poorly written and poorly cited article Pksois23 (talk) 07:36, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Looks like CN tags are addressed and is now very-well sourced Jmanlucas (talk) 02:17, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Sinking of the Rubymar

Good faith nomination, however this is covered by ongoing. (non-admin closure) NW1223<Howl at me•My hunts> 00:15, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Proposed image
Article: Sinking of the MV Rubymar (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ During the Red Sea crisis, the ship MV Rubymar becomes the first ship to be sunk by Houthi militants, leading to an ongoing environmental disaster (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Oil leaking from the sinking MV Rubymar causes an environmental disaster in the Red Sea.
News source(s): [9] [10]
Credits:
I'm not the best at making blurbs so i wouldn't mind alt blurbs Abo Yemen✉ 15:05, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as this is covered by the Red Sea crisis item in ongoing. Gödel2200 (talk) 15:11, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose covered by ongoing. The Kip 15:15, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. The military bit is covered by ongoing as mentioned by Goedel2200 and The Kip, true, however, I feel this is newsworthy as an environmental situation. I boldly therefore propose the altblurb for everyone's consideration. --Ouro (blah blah) 15:28, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Besides from the fact that the article is a stub, this environmental disaster is actually also covered by ongoing (it is listed in the same paragraph in the Red Sea crisis article where the sinking of the ship is listed). I am also concerned that the altblurb misrepresents where the word "environmental disaster" is used by RS's. As far as I can tell, the only RS's listed that use "environmental disaster" in the article for the environmental impact of the Red Sea crisis were from before the sinking (actually, the sinking isn't even mentioned in the environmental impact article). Gödel2200 (talk) 16:19, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Covered by ongoing. GenevieveDEon (talk) 15:32, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment This article is nommed for DYK, as an alternate if the ITN nom is covered by ongoing. Fritzmann (message me) 15:31, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    While I think there is an argument for ITN, I do think that the subject would make for an interesting DYK blurb that is also not clickbait or shock value, and that DYK could probably do with more of those. So, if the two parts of MP want to work together, I might suggest focus on the DYK. Kingsif (talk) 16:05, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose covered by ongoing, Editor 5426387 (talk) 16:14, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose first blurb by ongoing, oppose altblurb on quality of the article linked, would support if it was made an article about that specific sinking's environmental effects rather than the weird one-section general topic article it currently is (which mentions the previous attack on the ship but not the current sinking). Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 17:38, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Non-notable ship (likely due to its small size), and event should be covered by ongoing. Because of the non-notability of the ship, I question the need for the article rather than a summary of the sinking in an appropriate location within the ongoing article, but that's not an issue to resolve here. --Masem (t) 19:08, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Good faith nom, but covered by ongoing. I'd support this in DYK per Kingsif. Moncoposig (talk) 20:17, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose This is covered by “Ongoing”. However, it could be a good article for “DYK”. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 23:02, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as this is covered by Ongoing. --MtPenguinMonster (talk) 00:09, 3 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.

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. ^ "James A. Hedges". The Herald-Mail. March 6, 2024. Archived from the original on March 7, 2024.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates&oldid=1212694813"