Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:In the news  (Redirected from Wikipedia:ITN/C)
Jump to: navigation, search
For administrator instructions on updating Template:In the news, see Wikipedia:In the news/Admin instructions.

This page provides a forum for editors to suggest items for inclusion in Template:In the news (ITN), a protected Main Page template, as well as the forum for discussion of candidates. This is not the page to report errors in the ITN section on the Main Page—please go to the appropriate section at WP:ERRORS.

This candidates page is integrated with the daily pages of Portal:Current events. Under each daily section header below is the transcluded Portal:Current events items for that day (with a light green header). Each day's portal page is followed by a subsection for suggestions and discussion.

Shimon Peres, former Israeli President and Prime Minister
Shimon Peres

How to nominate an item[edit]

In order to suggest a candidate:

  • Update an article to be linked to from the blurb to include the recent developments, or find an article that has already been updated.
  • Find the correct section below for the date of the event (not the date nominated) in UTC.
    • Do not add sections for new dates. These are automatically generated (at midnight UTC) by a bot; creating them manually breaks this process. Remember, we use UTC dates.
  • Nominate the blurb for ITN inclusion under the "Suggestions" subheading for the date, emboldening the link in the blurb to the updated article. Use a level 4 header (====) when doing so.
    • Preferably use the template {{ITN candidate}} to nominate the article related to the event in the news. Make sure that you include a reference from a verifiable, reliable source. The suggested blurb should be written in simple present tense.
    • Adding an explanation why the event should be posted greatly increases the odds of posting. For recent deaths, please state why the person is notable enough to post - merely having a Wikipedia article is insufficient.
  • Please consider alerting editors to the nomination by adding the template {{ITN note}} to the corresponding article's talk page.

Purge this page to update the cache

There are criteria which guide the decision on whether or not to put a particular item on In the news, based largely on the extensiveness of the updated content and the perceived significance of the recent developments. These are listed at WP:ITN.

Submissions that do not follow the guidelines at Wikipedia:In the news will not be placed onto the live template.

Headers[edit]

  • Items that have been posted or pulled from the main page are generally marked with [Posted] or [Pulled] in the item's subject so it is clear they are no longer active.
  • Items can also be marked as [Ready] when the article is both updated and there seems to be a consensus to post. The posting admin, however, should always judge the update and the consensus to post themselves. If you find an entry that you don't feel is ready to post is marked [Ready], you should remove the header.

Voicing an opinion on an item[edit]

  • Format your comment to contain "support" or "oppose", and include a brief (or detailed!) rationale for your choice. Comments and other objections are welcome, but this is the basic form.
  • Some jargon: RD refers to "recent deaths", a subsection of the news box which lists only the names of the recent notable deceased. Blurb refers to the full sentences that occupy most of the news box. Most eligible deaths will be listed in the recent deaths section of the ITN template. However, some deaths may be given a full listing if there is sufficient consensus to do so.
  • The blurb of a promoted ITN item may be modified to complement the existing items on the main page.

Please do not...[edit]

  • ... add simple "support" or "oppose" !votes without including your reasons. Similarly, curt replies such as "who?", "meh", or "duh!" are usually not helpful. Instead, explain the reasons why you think the item meets or does not meet the ITN inclusion criteria so a consensus can be reached.
  • ... oppose an item because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. This applies to a high percentage of the content we post and is unproductive.
  • ... accuse other editors of supporting, opposing or nominating due a to personal bias (such as ethnocentrism). Conflicts of interest are not handled at ITN.
  • ... comment on a story without first reading the relevant article(s).
  • ... oppose an item because it is not on WP:ITN/R.
  • ... oppose a WP:ITN/R item here because you disagree with current WP:ITN/R criteria (these can be discussed at the relevant Talk Page)


Suggestions[edit]

September 28[edit]

Portal:Current events/2016 September 28
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
Politics and elections

RD: Max Walker[edit]

Article: Max Walker
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): ABC, Sydney Morning Herald
Nominator: Athomeinkobe (talk • give credit)

Article updated

Per this RFC, the nomination of any person with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article.

Nominator's comments: Played 34 cricket tests for Australia, plus was a very good Aussie Rules footballer. Article sourcing needs improvement, but there are plenty of obituaries this morning that can be used as sources, so I will start addressing that. I don't know who to list as the "updater" because many IPs have made small contributions. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 01:20, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

  • Oppose Target article is almost completely unsourced. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:30, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose sad death but the article needs more references to be suitable for ITN. - Yellow Dingo (talk) 03:29, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose on lack of citations. Whole sections are unreferenced. MurielMary (talk) 03:54, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Comment I have fully-sourced the article and expanded the lead, but I do not wish to remove the tags myself. Inviting Ad Orientem, Yellow Dingo and MurielMary to take a second look. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 05:50, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

[Posted with blurb] RD with blurb: Shimon Peres[edit]

Proposed image
Article: Shimon Peres
Blurb: Former Israeli President and Prime Minister, and Nobel Peace Prize winner Shimon Peres dies at the age of 93
News source(s): NY Times, The Atlantic, The Guardian, CNN,
Nominator: EdChem (talk • give credit)

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Not sure who to credit as updaters - maybe me and others? EdChem (talk) 02:30, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

  • Parts of the article still require more citations. On the question of whether there should be a blurb, I tend to think that Peres falls just short of the threshold. He was certainly a very important Israeli leader, but I would not say he stands out as obviously more significant than other recent Israeli leaders, such as Rabin, Sharon, Netanyahu and Olmert. At his age, there was also nothing unexpected about his death. Neljack (talk) 02:59, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Comment Oh man. This really needs to be posted at least to RD and I think a credible argument can be made for a blurb. Unfortunately, once again, we are confounded by crappy referencing. Sigh... -Ad Orientem (talk)
  • Oppose blurb even with sourcing. I don't think he rises to that level. – Muboshgu (talk) 03:15, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Support blurb with sourcing Peres was often known as a founding father of Israel, and had huge impact on the entire region. Definitely reaches Lee Kuan Yew level of notability. EternalNomad (talk) 03:20, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Support blurb sigh. I know he's not American, not from an English country, and he only won a Nobel Peace Prize rather than starred in Bicentennial Man. I just think it's sad In the News used to have genuine international stories, and now it's beneath the level of market tabloids. Ribbet32 (talk) 03:43, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
ITN has its problems but I'm not sure that's a fair shot. The only reason this may not get posted is because of the lack luster quality of the article. ITN is not a news feed. It exists to highlight good quality articles whose subjects are topical by reason of current news coverage. -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:11, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose in current state due to lack of citations. MurielMary (talk) 03:53, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • A separate article about his death and state funeral could be plausibly be written, so this could get a blurb. (Though I don't really expect anyone to bother, given the woeful state his main article was in, though that's at least improving.) The way to do get it there is the same way to get it to RD: proper sourcing in the article, not frivolous complaints about other articles that were acceptably sourced. —Cryptic 04:02, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
Maybe, but I think it would be begging for an AfD nom as a content fork and per NOTNEWS. He died of natural causes at 93. And state funerals almost never get their own articles. -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:11, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
There is no requirement that for a blurb to be supported that a separate article on the death/funeral have to be made. --MASEM (t) 04:16, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Support on improvements, RD for sure, general support for blurb - Some weak sourcing but this can be fixed. A former elected leader of a major nation should be given a blurb, the nobel prize pushes it further, but I would like to see a better article for that blurb to be supported. --MASEM (t) 04:16, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
In what sense is Israel a major nation, Masem? It is a mid-size country, albeit one that receives a lot of attention due to its geopolitical situation and controversy. We must be wary of systemic bias. And even in the case of countries that clearly are major nations, I'm not convinced that every former elected leader would warrant a blurb - would you really say that every former Prime Minister of Italy or Japan (and there are lots of them, some of whom held office for quite short periods), and every former President of Mexico or the Philippines, warrant blurbs. That would seem a big change from our current practice. Neljack (talk) 06:57, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Support blurb - He was a tremendously important figure in 20th century history. The sourcing issues can be easily fixed. -- Notecardforfree (talk) 04:21, 28 September 2016 (UTC) Update: it looks like several editors have already resolved most of the unsourced statements. -- Notecardforfree (talk) 04:34, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Support blurb - Major figure and internationally known. Article needs some touch up, but nothing major. EvergreenFir (talk) 04:40, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
by precedent we posted yitzak shamir (I did the update) and he was head of govt and sate. just reword blurb to remove nobel OR title as its too wordy. (btw- nobel deaths are also precedent here).Lihaas (talk) 04:44, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Support blurb. Article seems to be in better shape, includes important historical details, and uses nearly 70 citations.--Light show (talk) 04:47, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Comment: I have been adding sourcing as have some others. Happy to try to find a suitable source for anything still felt to need it. I would ask earlier commenters on sourcing to please re-evaluate and identify / tag anything still needing work. As for the blurb issue, I'm obviously in favour as a Nobel Laureate who helped to found Israel, was a leader for 50+ years, negotiated their nuclear program, was an instigator of the Suez war, etc. Have a look at his description in the New York Times. EdChem (talk) 04:53, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
PS: Would someone experienced with ITN please see who deserves credit as updaters? Thanks. EdChem (talk) 05:02, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Support blurb once referencing issues have been addressed. Significant Middle-East politician. Mjroots (talk) 05:35, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Support blurb. Very long political career (66 years!); probably the last major figure of the Israeli founding generation; Nobel Prize shows international significance. Article needs some work, but nothing precluding posting. Neutralitytalk 07:12, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Posted with blurb. Dragons flight (talk) 07:40, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Post-posting support of blurb. High international significance, given his impact. 331dot (talk) 08:41, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

September 27[edit]

Portal:Current events/2016 September 27
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Health
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Sports

Interplanetary Transport System[edit]

Article: Interplanetary Transport System
Blurb: Elon Musk from SpaceX introduced Interplanetary Transport System, which is purposed at first to make manned Mars flights.
Alternative blurb: Elon Musk from SpaceX introduced Interplanetary Transport System for manned Mars-flights.
Alternative blurb II: Elon Musk from SpaceX introduced Interplanetary Transport System project for manned Mars-flights.
Alternative blurb III: Elon Musk from SpaceX introduced Interplanetary Transport System system for manned Mars-flights.
News source(s): NASASpaceflight
Nominator: Usp (talk • give credit)

Nominator's comments: This is "the" project launch from the major "new space" company that has already delivered and there is already something done-ish about this also, like Raptor-engines. Usp (talk) 00:26, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

  • Oppose good faith nomination. Unless I am misreading this, what we have here is the latest progress report on a long term plan to colonize Mars. While the whole thing sounds fascinating, we don't really post these kinds of reports. If/when this thing actually is launched with Mars as its destination, I can all but promise we will post it. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:04, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose - if I understand the sources right, nothing is actually happening yet or will happen for a very long time. It sounds like just plans - intricate plans perhaps, but still only plans. If and when the spacecraft is built and launched, then we can post it. Banedon (talk) 01:13, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose though we should certainly post the launch in 2018 if it happens. - Floydian τ ¢ 03:21, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose; though the first launch of its rocket would be ITNR when it happens. 331dot (talk) 08:42, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Leaning support this guy has kept his words in the past so this IS going to happen as long as he doesn't die. Nergaal (talk) 08:56, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose as a purely aspirational announcement. We can feature this spacecraft if/when it actually launches. Can't say I'm holding my breath. Modest Genius talk 10:11, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose until and unless there is an actual launch. -- KTC (talk) 11:17, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

[Closed] Three-parent baby[edit]

Soft Close This nomination and the proposed target article have far too many issues that need to be addressed before this can be seriously considered at ITN. This close is without prejudice and any editor who believes the issues identified in the discussion have been corrected should feel free to re-open the nomination. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:50, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

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: Mitochondrial donation
Blurb: World first three-parent baby has been born.
News source(s): (New Scientist), (BBC), (The Time)
Nominator: Jenda H. (talk • give credit)

 Jenda H. (talk) 18:03, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Tentative support but the article needs some cleanup. This is a big achievement. --Tone 18:20, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose on article quality. The article has not been updated since July and does not reflect the story in the blurb. Additionally there are orange tags. The issues reported need to be addressed and the tags removed before we can seriously consider this at ITN. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:21, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Comment. Aside from the issues Ad Orientem brings up, unless I'm misunderstanding something, the BBC article makes clear that this is the first successful use of a new mtDNA-donation technique, not the first 'three-parent baby'. Espresso Addict (talk) 18:38, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose accodrind to the linked article this has been achieved in 2000 with Alana Saarinen. Nergaal (talk) 18:41, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose per Nergaal. It's incumbent on ITN to avoid falling into pop-science puffery, as in most cases the press release findings tend to be exaggerated.--WaltCip (talk) 18:44, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

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.

Loma Fire[edit]

Article: Loma Fire
Blurb: A wildfire starts in the Santa Cruz Mountains
News source(s): CBS San Francisco, ABC7 News
Nominator: DatGuy (talk • give credit)

Nominator's comments: Not sure if this should be considered ongoing or not. Seems like it's spreading according to sources. Dat GuyTalkContribs 16:19, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

  • Oppose posting the mere beginning of a wildfire, which are quite common in California and the Western US. If there are things like very large scale evacuations, large amounts of damage or casualties, etc., something to hang our hat on, I would reconsider. Reporting on this seems limited as well. I would add Ongoing would only be appropriate if the article gets regular incremental updates that individually would not merit posting on their own, but would collectively. Lastly, the blurb would need to be globalized a bit, many readers might not know where the Santa Cruz mountains are. 331dot (talk) 16:21, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose good faith nom for now, per 331dot. Not at all clear this is going to become a major story. Also the article is a stub and would require significant expansion with solid sourcing to be seriously considered for ITN. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:26, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

September 26[edit]

Portal:Current events/2016 September 26
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
  • A gunman opens fire at a Houston shopping center injuring nine people before being shot dead by police. (Fox News)
Politics and elections
Science and technology

[Posted] Ongoing: Aleppo offensive[edit]

  • Aleppo offensive (September 2016) has seen some of the fiercest fighting recently and there are all kinds of diplomatic tensions. I believe ongoing is in place at the moment, since I can't think of a good blurb. There are day-to-day updates. --Tone 13:12, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Weak Support The article is not very long but it is also fairly new. It's also decently sourced and is, at least for now, getting regular updates. And of course this is major news. So yeah, let's give it a shot and see if it works out. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:58, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Weak Support per Ad Orientem. Aleppo has been a significant part of the Syrian Civil War. Somebody inform Gary Johnson. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:06, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
Glad he's not going to be our President!--WaltCip (talk) 18:34, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Support infinitely more historically significant than the current ITN items "Rugby Championship" and "chess olympiad". 20:01, 26 September 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thue (talkcontribs)
  • Support little point in comparing chalk with cheese, this stands out as something which is receiving regular news coverage and has an article up-to-date too, so a few days at Ongoing won't do any harm. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:59, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Posted. Espresso Addict (talk) 22:56, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

September 25[edit]

Portal:Current events/2016 September 25
International relations
Law and crime
  • A Muslim preacher from a local mosque shoots and kills Jordanian writer and cartoonist Nahed Hattar in front of a courthouse in the capital Amman. Authorities take the gunman into custody.(CNN)
  • A gunman kills one person and injures three others in Malmö, Sweden. An explosion occurs later. (Express)
Sports

RD:Jean Shepard[edit]

Article: Jean Shepard
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): Washington Post
Nominator: MurielMary (talk • give credit)

Article updated

Per this RFC, the nomination of any person with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article.

Nominator's comments: article seems comprehensive and well sourced; is rated "C-class" MurielMary (talk) 06:37, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Conditional Support Overall not in bad shape. But there are a few too many unsourced claims to post right now. I've added a few CN tags. Fix those and we should be good to go. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:12, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

[Posted] FAST telescope[edit]

Article: Five hundred meter Aperture Spherical Telescope
Blurb: The Five hundred meter Aperture Spherical Telescope (FAST) begins operations.
News source(s): Many in article, e.g. also [1] [2]
Nominator: Banedon (talk • give credit)

Article updated

Nominator's comments: In light of the fact we have a dearth of new blurbs (and only four remaining) as of time of writing. Banedon (talk) 01:47, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

  • Tentative support. The article says "It is currently undergoing testing and commissioning.". It should be a bit more precise. --Tone 07:01, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Support, but please add a link to first light (astronomy) in the blurb. This is a significant milestone in the world's largest single-dish radio telescope, and the best opportunity to feature it on ITN. Telescope commissioning is always a gradual process, taking years to ramp up to full efficiency and operations. First light is the milestone, and that's what FAST has done. Modest Genius talk 11:44, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Support wooo, USA, USA! Nergaal (talk) 14:04, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Support And this is a blurb that include one of the images of the telescope. --MASEM (t) 14:15, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
    Do we have an image of the completed telescope? All the ones in the article are of various stages of construction, which are rather uninformative views of steel girders. Modest Genius talk 17:29, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
    At least to me, even the current one at the top of the FAST article gives an idea of the scale of this thing, even if the dish isn't in place. (obviously a completed picture would be better). --MASEM (t) 20:01, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Support per above. Though I wonder why they don't call it the 500AST or the FHMAST.--WaltCip (talk) 17:08, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Posted. I've modified the blurb to link first light per Modest Genius. Espresso Addict (talk) 18:29, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

RD: Arnold Palmer[edit]

Article: Arnold Palmer
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): CBS Pittsburgh
Nominator: Calidum (talk • give credit)

Per this RFC, the nomination of any person with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article.

Nominator's comments: Professional golfer who won seven majors. News is just breaking now. Calidum ¤ 00:36, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

  • Oppose for now. Well this is just a crappy day in the sports world. This should be a no brainer for RD but sadly the article quality is well below community standards for linking on the main page. Referencing in particular is very poor. The article needs a serious tune up before we can post this. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:51, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Support pending article quality update - Definitely worth including in RD but I think a blurb may be necessary here. He was a very important figure to the game of Golf and turned it from an elite sport to one the common man could play and enjoy. Andise1 (talk) 01:03, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Support pending significant improvements Far too much unsourced prose for a recognizable figure. I would throw out the potential of a blurb given how much of a role Palmer made on the sport, but the article's going to take a lot of work to just get to RD, much less a blurb-quality article. --MASEM (t) 01:31, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Support RD subject to article quality conditions being met. Mjroots (talk) 06:40, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose probably doesn't need reiterating, but a woefully referenced article for such a golfing icon. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:02, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
    For those users "confused" by my opposition, it is based on the quality of the article. We no longer debate the notability of the individual (nor have we done for a couple of months now). I understand that many individuals are happy to post sub-standard articles to the main page, but our current ITN guidelines advise against it, hence my decision. For it to be taken out of context and used against me is really, really low. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:01, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose for now I'll reiterate it anyway, TRM. It's surprising that the bio of such an important figure is in such poor shape, even the day after his death. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:13, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
    • It seems the extent of referencing is usually judged only during RD nominations. Just like Curtis Hanson, for example, Palmer hasn't been orange-tagged before RD nomination. Brandmeistertalk 18:23, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
      • As the editor who attached the orange tag, I will note in my defense that I never had reason to visit this article until now. And the general condition of articles, including referencing, is certainly a relevant subject when discussing whether or not to link them on the main page. I don't see GA or FA as reasonable criteria, but an article should certainly be decently sourced with no glaring gaps if we are going to promote it to our readers. That is clearly not the case here. And I have a long track record (annoying to some editors) of beating the drum about crappy sourcing on articles. Not too long ago I proposed at the Village Pump that all new articles should be required to cite at least one RS source in support of at least one claim of fact in the article. It was shot down in flames but my point is that concern about poor sourcing is not a new or selective hobby for me. This project claims to be an encyclopedia. But whenever we tolerate articles that are poorly referenced, or all too often articles with none at all, we damage the credibility of that claim. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:35, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
        • I agree with that. My point was really that golf fans who edit Wikipedia should've done a better job on the article of one of the most important golfers, whose article I have no reason to visit. On the other hand, I'm a big fan of baseball and I've had a major part in José Fernández (pitcher), which was in good enough shape to post before I even woke up to hear the news of his death. It's sad to see such an important article (tagged as vital) in such a shape. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:40, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Support. The article seems to have two main areas: one dealing with his early and personal life, popular culture stuff, and the body text which is mostly minutia about his various tournaments. The other, and probably most important sections, include massive and well-made charts of all his tournaments. I think that the charts alone make the article valuable. I scanned the body text and it's mostly trivia about some of those tournaments, so even without cites, the details are not that important. --Light show (talk) 02:21, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
There are around 10 CNs sitting on the page. It's nowhere close to ready. The prose is there but it is not sourced, and that simply does not work for front page posting, even if it just an RD. If it is trivia, then it should be removed (but my read, it is far from trivia but emphasizing key victories he took that led to his success). --MASEM (t) 02:28, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
The solution, IMO, is pretty simple. Note Jack Nicklaus's article, which is twice as large, has I'd estimate about 20-times as much unsourced trivia, since the body text is so massive, yet has no CN's. I'd therefore just remove Palmer's CNs for everything equally trivial. After review Nichlaus, I could go through and easily add 75 CNs for uncited facts. Just look at the ends of paragraphs, most without sources. 10 trivia CNs should just be removed. --Light show (talk) 02:34, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
(edit conflict) I have to respectfully disagree with your analysis. What you refer to as minutia are claims of fact that are not backed by citations to RS sources. Some of the tables you refer to are not clearly sourced. There is an orange tag and a plethora of CN tags all over the article. That alone is usually a showstopper here. There is a longstanding consensus that we do not promote articles on the main page that are not in reasonably good shape. And while it pains me to say it, for an article about such an iconic figure, the referencing is shockingly poor. This article cannot be linked on the main page in its present condition. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:36, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
Let me re-iterate: the CN tags were added after this RD nomination (likely to push editors to fill in the information). If Nicklaus died today, we would have the same problem with lack of sources. (There's no sign of Nicklaus' article being an GA or FA). Further, we should not be sweeping out that much track of information just because no one interested can be bothered to find the references needed; the information while unsourced does appear factually true and significant towards Palmer's notability, so removal just for posting to RD is a terrible option. --MASEM (t) 02:38, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
Yes, we would have the same problem. Because we do not post articles with crappy sourcing on the main page. I added at least some of those CN tags when I was reviewing the article as part of the RD nominating process. And I will object strenuously to any attempt to remove them or the ref improve tag until those issues are resolved. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:41, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
I mostly agree. But an example of kind of trivia that's tagged is the first one: "His win in the 1954 U.S. Amateur made him decide to try the pro tour for a while, and he and new bride Winifred Walzer (whom he had met at a Pennsylvania tournament) traveled the circuit for 1955.[citation needed]" I mean, that kind of trivia didn't need a tag IMO. In fact the sentence could be removed without harming the article, which I noted, is half the size of Nicklaus's. Another option is for each of us to just pick a CN and fix it. Heck, I can go in there and fix the article but I'd need to get paid double for overtime. What's 2 X $0? --Light show (talk) 02:49, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
I have no objection to removing unsourced material from the article. I have done it myself a few times in order to get an article up to scratch for ITN. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:59, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
I took care of the CNs, although anyone can review for any errors. I also think a golfing image like this one would look good for the lead. It seems to meet all PD requirements with dates on the reverse. If anyone wants to review it and give the OK, I can upload it to commons. --Light show (talk) 03:54, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Support Arnold Palmer was a major sports figure and cultural icon of the mid-20th Century, not just in golf. I find the linkage between that historical life and the quality of his biographical article here at Wikipedia to be absurd. This lack of common sense and proportion is just another case of Wikipedia's inability to not distinguish the forest for its own ill-planted trees.Marcd30319 (talk) 10:42, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Support RD, oppose blurb. The article isn't brilliant but it meets our minimum standards; we've certainly posted worse RDs. Nowhere near the wide impact required for a blurb though. Modest Genius talk 11:18, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

[Posted] RD: Mel Charles[edit]

Article: Mel Charles
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): BBC
Nominator and updater: EchetusXe (talk • give credit)

Per this RFC, the nomination of any person with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article.

 EchetusXe 17:10, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

  • Support Article looks solid and reasonably well sourced. The Honours section near the bottom needs a cite and one of the tables is not clear on its source. But overall I think it's good enough to link. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:31, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Support sources looks ok. good for RD.--BabbaQ (talk) 20:32, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Weak support there was one thing I tagged as it was mildly contentious, but other than that, this is exactly what the new RD criteria are all about. Decent article, recent death, no bitching over his notability, just some minor quibbles over some tweaks required. Excellent. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:30, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Support. So, is it good to go then? Rhodesisland (talk) 01:45, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Marked as Ready to Post. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:54, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Posted --Jayron32 02:06, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

[Closed] [Posted to RD] José Fernández[edit]

Posted to RD, it does not seem we will get a consensus for a blurb. The discussion about baseball details can be carried out elsewhere, closing this one. --Tone 09:30, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

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: José Fernández (pitcher)
Blurb: All Star Major League Baseball pitcher Jose Fernandez dies in a boating accident.
Alternative blurb: Miami Marlins pitcher Jose Fernandez dies in a boating accident, at the age of 24.
News source(s): ESPN LATimes
Nominator: Calidum (talk • give credit)
Nominator's comments: All Star MLB pitcher killed at the age of 24 in a boating accident. Calidum ¤ 13:55, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Support blurb This is one of the best players in all of baseball. Truly shocking news that is blurb-worthy. --Tocino 14:02, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • (edit conflict) Support RD Blurb Very sad news. The article is solid and well sourced. Given his age, fame and circumstances of death this might be a candidate for a blurb. -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:06, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
I have added a blurb to the nomination, which I support per my above comment. -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:21, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Strong support for blurb. Internationally notable news. — Crumpled Fire contribs 14:12, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Support alt blurb as my preferred wording. — Crumpled Fire contribs 14:31, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Support RD but oppose blurb I don't think its readily possible to assert a player that's only had 3 seasons as significant to the sport as some about have indicated. The article is not at the level of an FA where I would reasonably consider a blurb. I do recognize the death is surprising so I do see the value of the blurb on that but I don't see enough to consider this a shocking-enough death that will affect the baseball industry (or beyond it) for a blurb. --MASEM (t) 14:50, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
Almost all of the sources I am reading are referring to him as one of the top pitchers in the game. He was Miami's ace. -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:54, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Support for at least RD He was one of the top young pitchers in baseball. While his death was tragic and unexpected, I'm on the fence about a blurb.Canuck89 (have words with me) 15:05, September 25, 2016 (UTC)
  • Support for RD obviously. As for a blurb, I would personally support a blurb due to the unexpected nature of the death, but I do understand this MLB pitcher doesn't quite reach the Mandela-Thatcher status that ITN's regulars seem so infatuated with.--WaltCip (talk) 15:40, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
That "standard" is really intended for people whose deaths are not entirely unexpected and/or the result of natural causes. While we only rarely give a blurb to notable figures who have died one of the generally recognized exceptions is when the subject is extremely well known, often in the top tier of their field, and their death is highly unexpected or even shocking. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:22, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Posted as RD, for which there are no issues. --Tone 15:43, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Post-posting support RD, weak oppose blurb The article is in decent condition, so RD is no question. A blurb would be a case of systematic bias IMO, since other athletes of similar or greater notability who died in similar conditions (such as Estelle Balet, who was world champion the two years before her death) usually don't get blurbs. EternalNomad (talk) 15:52, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Support blurb Arguably baseball's most shocking death since Thurman Munson. He was at the time one of the top 10 players in the sport. Major ripples in the sports world, top story in almost every American news website. Prevan (talk) 16:56, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Support blurb. Massive news story, article looks good. Nohomersryan (talk) 17:14, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Support blurb – Unexpected death of a star player in a top-level sport. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 17:15, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose blurb. As EternalNomad suggests, there is a systemic bias issue here in that we likely wouldn't do this with other similar athletes in other sports. I suspect few outside of baseball would be familiar with this athlete and his career was not long; despite the unexpected nature of the death, I think RD is sufficient here. 331dot (talk) 19:15, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
Question I am curious how you reconcile your above comment with your support for a blurb in the case of Jules Bianchi, whose claim to notability was nowhere near as strong as José Fernández? Not trying to be snarky, just wondering. The two positions don't seem to be compatible. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:35, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
No 'snarkiness' taken. Primarily the difference between this and your example is that injury that caused Bianchi's death was during a competition, while in this case it was a boating accident. If this baseball player had gotten struck by a batted ball and died, that is a rare event that would merit posting(extremely rare from what I am aware of). 331dot (talk) 21:19, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose blurb As unfortunate as this is, it isn't unprecedented. You don't even have to look back to Thurman Munson or Roberto Clemente; Nick Adenhart and Oscar Taveras died in similar circumstances in recent years. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:51, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
    • You can't compare Fernandez's death with Tavaras or Adenhardt. Both of those players were promising prospects killed so soon, but haven't done much in their mlb careers before dying. Fernandez was one of the best players in baseball when he was killed. Here is a case of a top player dying so shocking and suddenly that an entire sport is in mourning. I can add many links attesting to this fact but I am on my phone so I can't until tomorrow. From what itnc criteria says, if its an unexpected death from a top figure, then it should be posted if the quality is right. This easily qualifies. Prevan (talk) 22:29, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose blurb fails the "Death of ...." test in so far as in a fortnight, no-one will be talking about this, nor in year, or decade or a century. Not a Bowie, Mandela, not even a Paul Walker even though that was one hideous mistake we should never repeat. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:32, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose blurb, the readers who care will just be looking for a place to click. To many people, Wikipedia is the place to do a quick lookup of a fact. For example, someone might dimly remember that he played on the same youth team as some other Cuban defector, and just want to get to that article. Abductive (reasoning) 00:23, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Death of José Fernández is a redlink, would be immediately taken to afd if created, and would be deleted there. This isn't close to blurb material. —Cryptic 01:00, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose blurb per above. Wizardman 02:50, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose blurb. Quoting Ad Orientem above, "Almost all of the sources I am reading are referring to him as one of the top pitchers in the game. He was Miami's ace." "one of the top pitchers" implies there are other top pitchers, which makes it less appropriate to post this. Can't support a blurb under these circumstances I'm afraid. Banedon (talk) 08:13, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
    If you are going to express an opinion about his significance to baseball, you might want to know at least a little something about baseball. Considered the top league in the world, MLB has only 30 teams hosted in 17 US states, 1 Canadian province, and the District of Columbia. A clue might have been that "Miami" is not a state. The state of Florida, in fact, has two teams. So, no, there is not a comparable player in every state or every country. At the time of his death he was considered the third best starting pitcher in the MLB [3] (based on 2016 performance) out of ~150 MLB starting pitchers (and not counting the lower tier of ~200 MLB relief pitchers). Dragons flight (talk) 08:55, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
    Fair point. Amending the oppose rationale. What you wrote does not change my opinion though, only the specifics. Instead of 50 states there are now 30 teams, which is still a large number; further you write that he is the "third best starting pitcher" which means there are two pitchers better than him, which also does not help the case for a blurb. Banedon (talk) 08:59, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

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.

September 24[edit]

Portal:Current events/2016 September 24
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
Politics and elections
Science and technology
Sports

September 23[edit]

Portal:Current events/2016 September 23
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
  • Marriott International and Starwood Hotels and Resorts merge into one company with Marriott International purchasing Starwood for $13 billion and making Marriott the largest hotel company in the world. (USA Today)
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime

[Closed] Volkswagen wins the Ig Nobel Chemistry prize[edit]

Doesn't go anywhere. Brandmeistertalk 07:35, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

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.

Articles: Volkswagen and Ig Nobel prize
Blurb: Volkswagen wins the Ig Nobel Chemistry prize
News source(s): BBC
Nominator: Count Iblis (talk • give credit)

 "Chemistry Prize - Volkswagen, for solving the problem of excessive automobile pollution emissions by automatically, electromechanically producing fewer emissions whenever the cars are being tested." Count Iblis (talk) 00:56, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose Fully recognizing the satire of this award, we've already coverd the VW situation on ITN. --MASEM (t) 01:05, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Support if we can park this until April 1st. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:10, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose - The Ignobel prize is a satirical one, making this hard to post. Banedon (talk) 01:18, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose - don't be silly, unless you'd like to post the similar ones from every other manufacturer from 2017, 2018 ... Black Kite (talk) 23:50, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

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.

September 22[edit]

Portal:Current events/2016 September 22
Armed conflicts and attacks
Law and crime

[Posted] Yahoo! data breach[edit]

Articles: Yahoo! data breach and Data breach
Blurb: Yahoo! confirms that in a major data breach data on at least 500 million user accounts was hacked in 2014
Alternative blurb: Yahoo confirms that in a major data breach at least 500 million accounts were hacked.
Alternative blurb II: Yahoo! confirms that in a major data breach information of at least 500 million user accounts was obtained in 2014
Alternative blurb III: Yahoo! announces that personal information of at least 500 million user accounts was compromised in a 2014 data breach it suspects to be "state-sponsored".
News source(s): The New York Times, Bloomberg
Nominator: Fixuture (talk • give credit)
Updater: Ad Orientem (talk • give credit)

 Fixuture (talk) 21:46, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

  • Comment I am not going to vote since I created the article but I will make a few observations. I believe the article is reasonably well written and solidly sourced. The topic is clearly in the news. However while I have hopes of expansion, right now it's still a stub. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:03, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • While still a bit brief, the article has been expanded to the point where I believe it is no longer a stub. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:28, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Support This is important news of direct relevance to a large fraction of the people who will read this as they may have a Yahoo account. Count Iblis (talk) 00:51, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Support on improvements Something potentially affecting between 5-8% of the world population is significant. Right now I am concerned with the amount of hyerpbole/"scare" writing in the article but that's just a matter of re-toning what's there. --MASEM (t) 01:07, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Support - it's not the "post me!" kind of news, but it is something, it affects lots of people, and it's also been quite a while since we had a new blurb. Banedon (talk) 01:19, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Support original blurb and particularly alt II. Article is slight but contains the basics. The blurb should definitely mention 2014, but I'd hold off on "state-sponsored" till more information is released. Espresso Addict (talk) 12:46, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
oppose as its ages ago and "potentially affecting" has no ramifications. (yet)Lihaas (talk) 18:10, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
If we consider where an average story of this type gets coverage (as we have to do with announced business deals being at the point they are announced rather than the point they are completed), the point where a massive data breech like this is at the point of public revealing, not at the point where it happened or the point where damage is done (the latter which would be an extremely slow tail if there is that much compromised). --MASEM (t) 18:12, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Support Major news covered on most mainstream news outlets. Likely of interest to readers. Original blurb seems good. EvergreenFir (talk) 18:24, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Support - possibly the largest data breach in history. Neutralitytalk 18:47, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Q Is there sufficient consensus to post this? -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:12, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Posted. Espresso Addict (talk) 22:38, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Post-posting mild support but only because it's a well-written article, unlike much of the dreck that makes its way to the main page. Unconvinced that's in a major story though. Black Kite (talk) 23:52, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
    I'm a rather uninvolved and lazy observer of this page, but my observation is that the emphasis, here, is shifting toward featuring quality instead of mere buzzworthiness (though the story should be "in the news", but then a lot of them are). If my impression is right, then I think you should make your opposition against posting dreck be heard, as it is likely to resound among the regular voices heard here. (If, however, you are referring to other things, outside ITN, that make their way to the main page, then ignore this post). ---Sluzzelin talk 00:06, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

[Closed] Nazi symbology on Blenheim Palace[edit]

Closing good faith nomination, but we don't usually post 'controversies', and leaving that out, there isn't much here to hang our hat on. 331dot (talk) 20:27, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

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.

Articles: Blenheim Palace and Transformers: The Last Knight
Blurb: Controversy erupts when Blenheim Palace, home of British WW2 Prime Minister Sir Winston Churchill, is dressed in Nazi symbols for the filming of Transformers: The Last Knight''
Alternative blurb:
WW2 veterans outraged as Winston Churchill's birth place, Blenheim Palace, is turned into Adolf Hitler's headquarters for Transformers: The Last Knight filming
News source(s): Shoard, Catherine (23 September 2016). "Anger as Churchill's home is turned into Hitler HQ for Transformers 5".
The Guardian. 
Lawrence, Derek (September 23, 2016). "Michael Bay responds to criticism over Nazi flags on Transformers set". Entertainment Weekly. 
Couch, Aaron (September 23, 2016). "'Transformers: The Last Knight' Under Fire for Flying Nazi Flags at Winston Churchill's Birthplace". The Hollywood Reporter. 
Syson, Neil; Kempsall, Ross; Willetts, David (September 22, 2016). "War veterans fury as filmmakers stage Nazi invasion at Sir Winston Churchill's home". The Sun. 
Nominator and updater: EdChem (talk • give credit)
Other updaters: Josephlalrinhlua786 (talk • give credit)

Both articles updated

Nominator's comments: Not sure if this will be judged suitable. Update to Transformers article more extensive, will add some to Blenheim article shortly (Now done) EdChem (talk) 15:25, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose storm in a tea-cup, not a proper news story. ITN doesn't post "controversy erupts" blurbs or the like. BencherliteTalk 16:08, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose per above. This is a minor outrage news story, and the weight devoted to it in the Transformers article is probably undue. Nohomersryan (talk) 16:18, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose good faith nom. But yeah this does not rise to ITN standards. It's more of what could be charitably described as Entertainment Tonight fodder. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:31, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose something that would be ideal for Daily Mail readers to become fixated and vexed by, but trivial at best in encyclopedic value terms. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:48, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

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.

September 21[edit]

Portal:Current events/2016 September 21
Armed conflicts and attacks
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
Science and technology

[Closed] Shooting of Keith Lamont Scott[edit]

Strong consensus against posting at this time. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:42, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

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: Shooting of Keith Lamont Scott
Blurb: The Governor of North Carolina declares a state of emergency for Charlotte following protests of the shooting of Keith Lamont Scott.
News source(s): LA Times, BBC
Nominator: Muboshgu (talk • give credit)
Updater: Epson Salts (talk • give credit)

Nominator's comments: Black Lives Matter. This one has escalated to violent protests and a state of emergency. It's in the news, so I'm nominating it. – Muboshgu (talk) 04:19, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose per my oppose vote at the recently nominated "Shooting of Terence Crutcher" (Sept 16). Another day, another controversial police involved shooting. These things are far too common here in the United States. We did post Ferguson because that was a very rare case with huge ramifications. This is not Ferguson. If that changes I will reconsider. -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:27, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose all too frequent. The Rambling Man (talk) 05:55, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose as routine, both the shooting and the riots. Although, if someone were hanging out in front of my home with a gun, I wouldn't describe the police response as "controversial".128.214.53.104 (talk) 08:09, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose. I don't know if I would use the word 'routine' but this is hyped in the press much more than it probably should be. I don't think declaring an emergency is sufficient to post this; we would need at a minimum Ferguson-scale riots, as Ad Orientem suggests. 331dot (talk) 09:35, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Wait Rioting is entering its second day on this one; the "We posted Ferguson because it went beyond the initial shooting and a short protest" appears to be bearing out in this one case. I agree that we shouldn't post every one of these tragic and horrific events, but this one may yet have legs that others do not always have. The knee-jerk "we should never post U.S. shootings because Americans are just all murderous gun-toting racist maniacs" response we get to these isn't usually helpful, especially in differentiating between stories that don't have lasting impact on the news cycle and those that do. This one may or may not; but given that the protests and riots and retaliations seem to be increasing rather than dissipating does mean this bears monitoring rather than merely dismissing off-hand. We may find that by tomorrow this goes nowhere, but I think we should leave ourselves open to the possibility that if this does reach Ferguson-level newsworthiness, we still consider posting it. --Jayron32 12:07, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Yes, this is another police shooting of an unarmed black man in the U.S., and another shooting in general in the U.S., an occurrence which has now become as routine as Walter Cronkite reporting the number of dead GI's in Vietnam. I'm willing to entertain Jayron's idea that this story may have some lasting, long-term effect, but considering how the last shooting, and the shooting before that, and the shooting before that, and the shooting before that, etc., all had no long-term effect? I'm not holding my breath.--WaltCip (talk) 12:11, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
    • HOWEVER, I do think we could make a case for posting this as an ongoing item considering how frequent these stories have become and how there is a central core issue of racism in the police.--WaltCip (talk) 12:17, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Hmm, black policeman shoots an armed black individual refusing to listen to police requests and neighborhood goes crazy. Remind me again which part of this is of encyclopedic value? Nergaal (talk) 13:13, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
    Remind me again of a time when being a dismissive prick with a superiority complex was useful? --Jayron32 13:15, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
    Careful Jayron, you might get that golden envelope with an invitation from Arbcom if you're lucky...! The Rambling Man (talk) 13:17, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
    It's so much more than that. This is just another incident capping off a series of systemic racism from the police against African-Americans. If you're not aware of the bigger picture by now, you never ever will be.--WaltCip (talk) 13:40, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppose This type of event is unfortunately too common in the USA for it to have enough national or international significance IMO, especially given that no one died in the protests. Statewide impact is not sufficient for ITN. EternalNomad (talk) 15:18, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Oppoose – Regrettably, I have to agree that this sort of event has become too common in the U.S. to meet the notability standard – particularly when it involves only one person. Sca (talk) 15:37, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

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[edit]

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: