Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
For administrator instructions on updating Template:In the news, see Wikipedia:In the news/Admin instructions.
Shortcut:

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.

Nicholas Winton

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 adding the blurb to Portal:Current events (the green box at the top of the date section) at the same time.

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.
  • ... complain about an event 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.


Suggestions[edit]

July 5[edit]


Greek referendum result[edit]

Article to update: Greek_bailout_referendum,_2015
Blurb: In a referendum, Greek voters reject bailout conditions proposed by the European Commission, the European Central Bank and the IMF.
Nominator: 98.248.181.22 (give credit)

Article needs updating

  • To be updated when the result has been tallied (~2pm Eastern Time today) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.248.181.22 (talk) 23:40, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
    • Complete result expected by 18:00 GMT (9pm local Greek time). Martinevans123 (talk) 17:56, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support - It's been huge news for weeks (even here on the other side of the world), and it could have far-reaching impact. Adpete (talk) 01:10, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support - Big international news, obviously. Target article has a neutrality tag at present, though the Talk page reveals the issue may be resolved. Jusdafax 01:22, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • I'd support this, but for the orange tag. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:06, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Two Concerns First, the article has long detailed paragraphs with numerous claims, almost all cited to just one source. Second, isn't this symbolic, since Greece has already defaulted, and the referendum is not in any way binding on the Eurozone? If the actual first default ever of a first-world country wasn't posted, I am not sure what significance posting the results of the referendum gets us beyond the ongoing story we already have in place. Either an end to the crisis, when it comes, or the "Grexit" when it comes will be news. Interim manoeuvering can simply remain covered by the sticky. μηδείς (talk) 02:10, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support conditional on article improvement for reasons too obvious to bear repeating. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:14, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • I share Medeis' concerns, and would also point out that if the referendum retains the status quo, isn't it really just much ado about nothing? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 03:17, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • I'd go so far as to support posting it as "too close to call" and then updating it when known. I think the result of the vote itself is noteworthy, regardless of which way it goes. – Muboshgu (talk) 05:01, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
    • But my earlier comment about the orange tag... it's still there and needs to be dealt with. – Muboshgu (talk) 05:02, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support. Also a no-vote would be much more newsworthy than a yes vote, and exit polls strongly suggests the No-campaign has won. So, this is already big news, it's likely to cause turmoil on the financial markets in about 7 hours when the markets in Asia open. While Greece has formally defaulted to the IMF, that's not a big deal, because you then get a few weeks more to pay back. The IMF is used to dealing with problem countries, they have enough reserves to deal with problems, their intervention is aimed at containing problems. But other defaults may have a snowball effect. I'm sure that the Norwegians won't be happy about this. Count Iblis (talk) 17:51, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Obvious support following article improvement, given that the no campaign seems to have won. This shouldn't even need debating. The people who think this isn't newsworthy should maybe read a newspaper once in a while. Fgf10 (talk) 18:33, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
What's a "newspaper" – ?? Sca (talk) 21:14, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
You know, what you get to wrap your doner and chips. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:22, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
Make mine currywurst & frites. Sca (talk) 21:35, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support If this is not news, then I don't know what is. Zwerg Nase (talk) 19:39, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support conditional on the article being free of maintenance tags and updated adequately. As Zwerg notes, this has been all over European news for four or five days. It's certainly ITN-worthy, we just need a quality article to back it up. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:02, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support, especially as the result is now clearly "No". Black Kite (talk) 20:04, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment – Of course it's news, big news. However, like several colleagues heard from above, I can't support a blurb linking to that avalanche of an article – even as pared to a 'mere' 15,000 words. (A good target total would be 2,500 to 3,000 words, IMOEO.) Nor am I qualified to fix it. Alack and alas. Sca (talk) 20:47, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose This is another incident in the Greek debt crisis which we already have as an ongoing entry. Whatever the result, this is going to go on through more stages and the point of having the ongoing entry is to avoid covering it blow-by-blow. Andrew D. (talk) 21:21, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • I've taken the liberty of amending the blurb to add the European Commission to the institutions that proposed the bailout. This reflects the referendum question. Anyway, support. Neljack (talk) 21:43, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

July 4[edit]


Tour de France[edit]

Updated article: 2015 Tour de France
Blurb: The Tour de France begins.
News source(s): BBC NBC
Nominator: Presidentman (give credit)

Article updated

Nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, meaning that the recurrence of the event is generally considered important enough to post on WP:ITN subject to the quality of the article and the update to it.

Nominator's comments: To add to the ongoing section. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 19:02, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Support Major sporting event, ITN/R and well updated article. Zwerg Nase (talk) 19:36, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose I believe ITNR means that we post the result of the Tour, but I have to admit that it's not definitively stated there, perhaps we need to clarify that? The Rambling Man (talk) 20:04, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose per TRM. This will be posted upon conclusion when we have a winner. Resolute 20:05, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose Not in the ITN/R for openings, only for closing, so therefore this has to wait. Donnie Park (talk) 20:49, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Wait until it's over - 3 weeks from now. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 21:37, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

2015 Copa América Final[edit]

Proposed image

Article to update: 2015 Copa América Final

Blurb: Chile beat Argentina to win their first ever Copa America.
Alternative blurb: Chile beat Argentina to win their first ever Copa America.
Alternative blurb II: In association football, Chile (captain Claudio Bravo pictured) win the Copa América, defeating Argentina in the final.
Nominator: [[User:120.62.18.219 (talk) 23:21, 4 July 2015 (UTC)|120.62.18.219 (talk) 23:21, 4 July 2015 (UTC)]] [[User_talk:120.62.18.219 (talk) 23:21, 4 July 2015 (UTC)|(give credit)]]
Updater: [[User:HaEr48 (talk) 11:55, 5 July 2015 (UTC)|HaEr48 (talk) 11:55, 5 July 2015 (UTC)]] [[User_talk:HaEr48 (talk) 11:55, 5 July 2015 (UTC)|(give credit)]]

Article needs updating

Nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, meaning that the recurrence of the event is generally considered important enough to post on WP:ITN subject to the quality of the article and the update to it.

 120.62.18.219 (talk) 23:21, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Oppose unless expanded. 1175 B of prose is not enough. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:44, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
    • It's now updated. Support ITN/R. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:51, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose not sufficiently updated. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:51, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • How about making 2015 Copa América the main (bolded) article instead? It's sufficiently expanded. HaEr48 (talk) 11:46, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment - final now suitably updated '''tAD''' (talk) 14:17, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support. Since it's updated now, and a listed recurring event, and arguably already decided to be posted on conclusion when discussed at the beginning of the event, here Cato censor (talk) 18:41, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support as per above. Even though this nomination clearly does not seem to come from a neutral POV... Zwerg Nase (talk) 19:38, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
Agreed, I think the third blurb is the most neutral, wikipedia-like Cato censor (talk) 20:11, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Tupou VI now crowned King[edit]

Proposed image

Article to update: Tupou VI

Blurb: Tupou VI (pictured) is officially crowned as the King of Tonga within three years of his reign.
Alternative blurb: King Tupou VI (pictured) is given a formal coronation within three years of his reign.
News source(s): BBC
Nominator: George Ho (give credit)
Updater: ScottDavis (give credit)

Article needs updating


Note: Needs updating and additional sources

Nominator's comments: Now is the time to nominate the official coronation of this man. George Ho (talk) 05:17, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Oppose. He has been king since 2012. Calidum T|C 05:20, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose per Calidum. Not a new title. -Kudzu1 (talk) 05:31, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Why did more than three years pass between his ascendance to the throne and his coronation? Is this long delay customary? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 05:36, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
Added altblurb. George Ho (talk) 05:38, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Coverage seems limited; has been King for three years already. 331dot (talk) 08:47, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support (pending article update) - a coronation is a major event in any country, it's certainly a big event in Tonga (one person here says "Once in a lifetime")[1], and it's not often Tonga is on ITN. The fact that it's 3 years from his ascension is not really relevant. I'm guessing that, for the US president, both the election result and inauguration are in ITN. The article does need updating though. Adpete (talk) 09:20, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
The inauguration of the US President isn't usually posted; an exception being Obama's first one due to its historic nature. Generally inaugurations/coronations are not posted, because they usually occur much closer to the choosing of the successor(and barring some unfortunate event are a certainty to occur) and/or receive much less coverage. 331dot (talk) 09:23, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
I'm guessing we'll post every inauguration of a *new* US president, and Obama 2009 is the only time that has happened since ITN existed. As for gaps between ascension and coronation, it's not unheard of, it was 16 months' gap for Queen Elizabeth II. This is a major cultural event in a small country, exactly the sort of thing ITN should be covering because we try to have a global focus. Adpete (talk) 10:16, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
I wouldn't support posting the inauguration of a "new" President, as their election would have been posted per ITNR a few months prior.(Here the difference is a few years.) Obama's first was an exception as the first black president- I don't think subsequent black presidents would merit posting necessarily. If Hillary Clinton is elected hers would be posted as the first woman. We will have a lot of double postings if we consistently post both elections/successions and inaugurations/coronations of all countries, at least without weighing news coverage(which, in this case, seems limited.) 331dot (talk) 01:32, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support, per my comments when this was first suggested a week ago. Smurrayinchester 10:26, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak support on the principle we did not post when he was actually named king some years back (not even an ITNC). We are talking the leader of a country here and I think we can make the exception here, but be more attentive when other king-namings are done at that point as we would have done with election results. --MASEM (t) 15:22, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support. Coronation of a king, even if he's held the role for some time already, is a significant moment in the history of a monarchy. Resolute 16:24, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support per WP:IAR and WP:COMMONSENSE. Royal coronations are extremely rare events and a big deal. To the extent that this is not recognized by the guidelines, they are deficient and should be ignored or set aside until they can be amended. For the record, I almost never invoke IAR, tending towards the view that with apologies to one of our former presidents, it should be safe legal and rare. But this would seem to be the sort of situation that it was made for. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:22, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose this is an oddity, the coronation is simply a big party, three years after Tupou VI actually became Tupou VI. It changes nothing as far as I can see, it's been mildly reported (in somewhat guarded reports) so is in the news, but it's hardly significant. That Ad Orientem claimed that "royal coronations are extremely rare events and a big deal", I went looking for our own article on List of coronations and drew a blank. Further investigations revealed that they certainly don't happen every day, but mainly they happen in a timely manner, normally following the death of the predecessor. All that notwithstanding, the article is a shambles and is nowhere near good enough for main page inclusion. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:56, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment As mentioned above, Queen Elizabeth II became queen in February 1952 and only had her coronation in June 1953, well over a year later. I would imagine both her death and (presumably) Charles' coronation will be instantly posted, regardless of the delay. Three and a bit years for Tupou does seem extreme, as far as I can see the previous king of Tonga ascended in September 2006 and had his coronation in August 2008 (nearly two years) and his predecessor ascended in December 1965 and had his coronation in July 1967 (a year and a half). A reasonable gap isn't that uncommon, though this does seem more than usual. Rejecting it by saying "he's been king for years already" or comparing it to the two month delay for US Presidents do seem to be missing the point. --86.188.96.158 (talk) 20:15, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
    • The U.S. president isn't officially elected until the electoral college vote is counted in Congress in early January. So the official delay is less than 3 weeks. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 20:24, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
      • We don't post the US President at the 'official' election; we do when the electoral college is chosen, as they almost never change their votes. 331dot (talk) 01:34, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
        • Regardless, the claim that it's a 2 and a half month gap is incorrect. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 03:18, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
          • What matters here in when it is posted, not technicalities of the election process. News and the public generally see the EC vote as a formality. 331dot (talk) 11:43, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support, ofcourse. a crowning of a king is ITN worthy.--BabbaQ (talk) 21:41, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Not big news, given the years of delay. Jusdafax 01:12, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose We don't post inaugurations of presidents, so coronations shouldn't either, especially not for the minor monarchies. Nergaal (talk) 20:56, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

July 3[edit]


RD: Boyd K. Packer[edit]

Updated article: Boyd K. Packer
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): AP The Salt Lake Tribune
Nominator: Kudzu1 (give credit)

Article updated

Nominator's comments: President of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (a top Mormon religious leader, basically) since 1994. Article seems to be in good shape. Kudzu1 (talk) 02:52, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Support If I understand the Mormon hierarchy correctly he was the #2 man in the church and heir presumptive to the top job. That qualifies for RD. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:19, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support on importance. Article seems mostly fair-minded and establishes his significance as a major figure in the LDS church. I tagged a sentence in the article as wanting clarification: the article says that he died "a martyr" of old age, and I'm not sure how that works. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 04:06, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support - A mere name mentioning is fine. I've never seen one of influential figures like this man. And the quality is nice. --George Ho (talk) 04:36, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose Yes, a long-serving member of the old guard, (From the article: Packer advocated that LDS historians should refrain from discussing history that does not promote faith. In a 1981 speech to educators in the LDS Church Educational System, he cautioned, "There is a temptation for the writer or teacher of Church history to want to tell everything, whether it is worthy or faith promoting or not. Some things that are true are not very useful.") but no recognition outside the church beyond being interviewed for a PBS documentary. If there's more that justifies his recognition as an influential figure it should be in the article. μηδείς (talk) 17:53, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
    This doesn't seem like a meaningful oppose. Putting the guy on RD isn't an endorsement of who he was or what he said, simply an acknowledgement that a notable person (who was clearly significant enough to merit coverage in a wide range of reliable sources, not just Mormon or Utah outlets) has died and we happen to have a biographical article for him that is in decent enough shape to post. I think those qualifications are met. -Kudzu1 (talk) 18:53, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
That's a straw man. Point to where he was influential or recognized outside the church. He has one building in Utah named for him. The most notable thing about him seems to be that quote, which I did not add to the article or go looking for. If he's somehow important outside the LDS higher bureaucracy, let's hear it. μηδείς (talk) 19:39, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
Setting aside the notion that him being a longtime leading figure in one of the largest and fastest-growing churches in North America doesn't qualify him as notable -- his comments on homosexuality and feminism certainly got some play in the media: [2] [3] -Kudzu1 (talk) 20:20, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak support despite my personal disgust for this individual, whose beliefs appeared to be somewhat aligned with Nazism, there's no doubting his death is in the news, and no doubting his article is adequate. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:44, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment I am not grasping this person's notability or influence outside of being a senior bureaucrat in the LDS. The misunderstanding my simply be my own. Challenger l (talk) 20:40, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Questionable - Not the actual leader of the LDS, but of an organization within the LDS. I'd like to see some evidence that he was widely known outside the LDS. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 20:54, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment – For what it's worth, I've never heard of Mr. (Dr.?) Packer – although the eastern corner of my state is adjacent to Utah and heavily LDS. (Presumably if I were LDS I would have heard of him.) Sca (talk) 21:27, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

RD: Jacobo Zabludovsky[edit]

Updated article: Jacobo Zabludovsky
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): The Wall Street Journal, Haaretz, Latin Times, Reuters
Nominator: Tocino (give credit)

Article updated

Nominator's comments: The leading TV news anchor in Mexico for almost three decades, viewed as a staunch supporter of the former long-running PRI government. --Tocino, 09:45 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Weak Support for RD. I'm not seeing a lot of awards or anything of that nature. Further the article is quite brief. However, he does appear to have been very prominent in his field and I think he meets the guidelines for ITND (#2). -Ad Orientem (talk) 13:22, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose The article points out his being criticized as a government shill and mentions allegations he took bribes from drug lords, but I am not seeing major awards or recognition. μηδείς (talk) 15:41, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak support on notability, but the article needs some help, as it seems to have a pretty obvious bias against its subject. -Kudzu1 (talk) 17:04, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose not really seeing any evidence that he was important in his field. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:57, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Phil Walsh killed[edit]

Updated article: Phil Walsh (Australian footballer)
Blurb: Adelaide Crows coach Phil Walsh is killed in a domestic incident involving his son.
News source(s): (ABC News Australia), every other Australian news source
Nominator: Athomeinkobe (give credit)
Updater: Jevansen (give credit)
Other updaters: Connormah (give credit) and WWGB (give credit)

Article updated


Note: Details on his caree r are not referenced. I will attend to that today.

Nominator's comments: I am unsure about bringing this here, but I think it is worth discussion. I think it is safe to say that Australian Rules football is the biggest sport in Australia. To have the head coach of one of the elite professional teams allegedly murdered is certainly a newsworthy event within Australia, but its impact probably does not extend far outside of the country. Then again, many items that appear in ITN are domestic events. Based on his career as a player and coach, he would not qualify under the recent deaths criteria. So my feeling is that it has to be either a blurb or nothing. The article's references are not up to scratch at the moment but can be easily fixed. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 04:16, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Oppose blurb, weak oppose RD: I definitely don't see how this event, no matter how tragic, meets notability criteria for ITN. And Walsh could qualify for RD as a coach of a well-known pro sports team, but I don't think he meets muster in terms of accomplishments. -Kudzu1 (talk) 04:23, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support. Walsh was the current coach of the 7th-ranked team in the most popular football code in Australia. If the 7th-ranked coach in the NFL was murdered, it would be an automatic inclusion in ITN. WWGB (talk) 04:32, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
    • Says who? Don't make strawman argument. – Muboshgu (talk) 05:51, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
Nope, that's entirely true, it would be on here in hours. However, that doesn't make it right, and I don't see how hits belongs on ITN. Fgf10 (talk) 07:05, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
I disagree; I would not support such a hypothetical situation. 331dot (talk) 09:22, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
Nor would I, which is why we should debate this case on its merits and not set up strawmen. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:09, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose If you take away the unusual means of death, he likely would not qualify for an RD, so I can't see how what may be killed in domestic dispute would merit a blurb. --MASEM (t) 06:00, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose breaking news in Australia, but no long term or international notability for ITN. --ELEKHHT 06:38, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support RD - He would have been a wonderful coach if not for his death. Sure, his career didn't attract international attention or wasn't long-term. However, I learned that being notable in mainly Australia shouldn't prevent him from being mentioned in RD. As for the blurb, let some sleazy journalist sensationalise the murder case, especially in Wikinews (no offense). Not in Wikipedia's ITN though. A mere mention of his name is enough, so let's not make his obituary a spectacular one. George Ho (talk) 06:44, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
On second thought, oppose. Maybe he should have gained more attention while he was alive. George Ho (talk) 06:46, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose. As said already, he likely wouldn't qualify for RD based on his career. 331dot (talk) 09:25, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose blurb/weak oppose RD Definitely does not rise to ITN blurb level. There is an argument that he might meet RD standards under criteria #2 but I think it's a stretch. -Ad Orientem (talk) 13:18, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support blurb. I can't claim enough familiarity with the subject to judge how it fits the RD criteria but I suspect it is a bit of a stretch. No such problem with the wider assessment criteria for a blurb which allows us to consider the circumstances of the death too. As such I support this because I believe there will be a significant level of interest in the story - it may be subject to a heavy regional bias but the anticipated interest justifies posting. 3142 (talk) 15:29, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
Minor additional - I this does go up (which I admit looks unlikely) I would modify the blurb to avoid implicating the son. Sure, the news media is doing so but I don't think a necessarily brief blurb can address that in the appropriate context. 3142 (talk) 15:34, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose not due to the item being local to Australia (the same people who complain above the American items are always posted routinely oppose items simply because they are American) but on the Pistorious precedent. If we didn't post his much higher profile arrest on murder charges, I can't see how this warrants greater coverage. μηδείς (talk) 15:37, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose He played for a few years, coached for one, with what appears to be an unimpressive career, so he doesn't meet RD criteria. I see a few news sources on the killing, but I don't see how this meets our criteria. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:11, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support RD per Medeis' bad faith oppose. Also, because of his apples and oranges comparison, given someone being arrested is not the same as someone being murdered. Even then Trial of Oscar Pistorius was posted at verdict. Resolute 17:13, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
So, if you weren't sniffing my butt, resolute, you wouldn't have bothered to wipe your own? There's nothing bad faith about my oppose, although your vote reeks of it. We'd never have posted this as RD, we don't post crimes before trials, we didn't post Pistorius when the murder was in the news. The judgment here is very easy if put in perspective. μηδείς (talk) 19:51, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Neutral not a significant person in the history of the game, death is shocking, sure, but really not blurb or even RD par. Mind you, we did post a college-level basketball coach who didn't die in such circumstances and who had won very little, so perhaps this aligns with that level of notability?The Rambling Man (talk) 20:06, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose (and I'm from that city). I'm sure mid-level professional sportpeople die from time to time and I've never seen it in ITN, unless they die playing the sport (like Phillip Hughes) or are so famous that their death would be ITN anyway. For instance, wasn't there a gun death of an active NFL player comparatively recently? I might be thinking of Jovan Belcher, who died during the 2012-2013 NFL season, and there's nothing on his Talk page about being on ITN. Adpete (talk) 03:38, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

July 2[edit]


RD: Charlie Sanders[edit]

Article to update: Charlie Sanders
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): Detroit Free Press, ESPN
Nominator and updater: Muboshgu (give credit)

Article needs updating

Nominator's comments: Pro Football Hall of Famer, member of the 1970s All-Decades Team. Article needs work – Muboshgu (talk) 01:35, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Oppose Very small article, third-round draft pic, good to middling career but nowhere near the top. μηδείς (talk) 02:17, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
    • Tom Brady was a sixth round pick, he'd tell you that didn't get in the way of his career. Also, HOF = "good to middling"? – Muboshgu (talk) 16:31, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
      • First pick or round would count for him. Third does not, nor does being one among 287 in the Pro Football Hall of Fame. μηδείς (talk) 19:56, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
        • I still don't see how his draft slot from 1968 is relevant. Nor the number of players in the hall. His being in the hall marks him as "very important" in his field. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:06, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
          • There are various trophies and records he might hold but doesn't. Again, I think he had an above-average career. But 4 TD's a year on average doesn't bring one to the same level as Tom Brady, even if the latter had shrunken balls. Muboshgu has done a good job of doubling the size of the article, and should be commended. I still can't support this at all, but I am not in the position of attacking it either. μηδείς (talk) 21:50, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support RD conditional on article improvement. Sourcing is a little weak. That said a Hall of Fame football player satisfies the guidelines in ITND. On a side note there seems to be a misconception among some editors that one must be at the pinnacle of a given field to qualify for RD. That is not true. The guidelines reads... "2. The deceased was widely regarded as a very important figure in his or her field." A Hall of Fame athlete certainly meets that criteria. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:41, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak Oppose Along the lines of Medeis. If this was an important player, our article does not reflect that beyond calling out the Hall of Fame. --MASEM (t) 02:56, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak Support on the merits but oppose on quality. The honors in his sidebar would seem to suggest he his important to football, if not the most important, but the article is not in shape for posting. 331dot (talk) 09:27, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
    • @331dot:, what do you think of the quality now? I've done some work. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:48, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
      • It seems much improved. Thanks for your efforts. :) 331dot (talk) 20:16, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Neutral I'm shocked that one of the top 250 American football players of all time has such a woefully brief article. But it meets the minimum required for RD. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:08, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support - Thirty-seven touchdowns in nine years... That's a decent amount, even if not a lot, id est four touchdowns per average year. The sport is not internationally well-known, but his record was good, making his name worth mentioning. Also, he became a sports commentator and was given a Hall of Fame. --George Ho (talk) 21:07, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
The Super Bowl is the second most watched annual sporting event worldwide- hardly "not well known". 331dot (talk) 09:08, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak support: NFL Hall of Famer, probably meets notability criteria. Article is acceptable. -Kudzu1 (talk) 20:53, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • This seems ready with a rough consensus in favor of posting, so I'm marking it as such. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:54, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Tied for 217th Sanders is tied for 217th in career touchdown receptions. (A glance at the top twenty receivers shows somewhere between 8 and almost 20 a year; 4&1/9ths TD receptions per season is nowhere near notable.) I have no idea what 331dot's mention of the Super Bowl is for, since he never played in one. We need more of a consensus and one based on facts to post this. μηδείς (talk) 02:25, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
    • I mentioned the Super Bowl to show George Ho that football is indeed known internationally to counter his claim that it isn't. 331dot (talk) 02:33, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
    • He's also one of only eight tight ends in the Hall of Fame (Sanders, Dave Casper, Mike Ditka, John Mackey, Ozzie Newsome, Kellen Winslow, Jackie Smith, and Shannon Sharpe. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:56, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
      • Every single one of whom had more career touchdowns. In fact, if our article info box is correct, Sanders had 31, not 37 career touchdowns. This is beating a dead horse with a fake whip. I am removing the ready given the lack of basis for the claims. If an admin wants to post this on the quality of the update that's one thing, but the stats simply aren't there. μηδείς (talk) 03:42, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment. He had an above-average career, played in the Pro Bowl for 7 of the 10 seasons he was a player, and made it into the Hall of Fame. He retired with (according to the HOF's website) numbers that put him at or near the top of the game back in 1977. He worked with the Detroit Lions off and on after that, sometimes as a commentator, sometimes in the office. My issues with the article are the length of it - it's a short, stubby article, and the fact that it completely summarizes his career and life - instead of actually giving details, the way (IMO) an article here really should. I am also very ambivalent about his notability, since he did retire nearly 40 years ago, but hasn't had the influence and notability of say, Dick Butkus or John Madden. Challenger l (talk) 14:16, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

July 2015 Sinai clashes[edit]

Article: July 2015 Sinai clashes
Blurb: At least 17 Egyptian army soldiers and 100 ISIL militants are killed during clashes at the Sinai peninsula.
News source(s): Reuters Ahram
Nominator: George Ho (give credit)


Note: Can be also proposed as "ongoing"

Nominator's comments: This is more militarily tragic, which not yet involves civilians. George Ho (talk) 21:10, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

  • support - significant number of deaths. notable.--BabbaQ (talk) 21:49, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support Major events in that part of the world with lots of geo-politcal implications. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:41, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
Care to elaborate some of those "geo-political implications"? HaEr48 (talk) 17:29, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
Islamists attempting to destabilize the military/secularist government of the most powerful country in the Arab world. If they succeed it could undermine the governments of many of the other moderate Arab states in the region and threaten the oldest peace treaty between an Arab state and Israel. -Ad Orientem (talk) 03:56, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
If they managed to topple Egypt's rulers, sure. But it seems to me the clashes are local and have very slim chance to destabilize Egypt nationally. If, say, the opposition staged a huge protest or civil disobedience like 2011, that would have the destabilizing effect you mention. But this is entirely different and more isolated. HaEr48 (talk) 16:14, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support per Ad Orientem's rationale. --GGT (talk) 08:57, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose not convinced of the significance, see my response to Ad Orientem above. HaEr48 (talk) 16:14, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

[Closed] Howard Stern to leave America's Got Talent[edit]

Snow close. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:32, 2 July 2015 (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

Articles: Howard Stern and America's Got Talent

Blurb: Following the tenth season, Howard Stern (pictured) plans to resign as judge from America's Got Talent.
News source(s): Daily News
Nominator: Gary noine (give credit)

Nominator's comments: Large coverage. Gary noine (talk) 19:11, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Strong oppose - Celebrity news and not even of A-list talent. --MASEM (t) 19:19, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • SNOW close. Thanks for the nomination, but the makeup of a TV show judging panel will simply not be posted; this isn't a celebrity news ticker. Please review the page about ITN for more information on what is being looked for. 331dot (talk) 19:21, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Snow close We wouldn't post the glorious day when Antonin Scalia resigns from the Supreme Court of the United States, and that actually matters to human society. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:22, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
Does he have performing dogs? Martinevans123 (talk) 19:28, 2 July 2015 (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.

Deepwater Horizon oil spill settlement[edit]

Article: Deepwater Horizon oil spill
Blurb: BP agrees to pay a $18.7 billion fine to the United States Justice Department and several U.S. states regarding the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.
News source(s): The Guardian Reuters, Deutsche Welle, New York Times
Nominator: Everymorning (give credit)

Nominator's comments: The Guardian describes this as the "largest environmental fine in US history," while Reuters says it is "the largest corporate settlement in U.S. history." Thus this seems significant. However, the update to the article on the spill is minimal (one sentence), and so should be expanded. Everymorning talk 17:39, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Support Technically should be closure on this matter, and major settlement costs. I'm not sure how much expansion there can be on the settlement unless there are additional terms beyond the funds. --MASEM (t) 17:56, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support and concur with Masem's thoughts. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 18:00, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose target article has a maintenance tag slap-bang at the top, plus given its girth, I'm finding it difficult to see the update that must have been applied to cover this? The Rambling Man (talk) 18:02, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
    • The update is presently (when I last looked) one last sentence at the end of the Lawsuit section. It should be reflected in the lede. On that maintenance tag, it is basically asking for a re-writing of the lede to summarize better which is far from a severe problem (compare to the greek debt crisis that had a huge lead section). It can be fixed but its far from sourcing issues. --MASEM (t) 18:04, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
      • Update inadequate, understood. I would expect to see this story summarised or at least covered in the lead, after all that's where our readers land when they click on the link from the ITN section of the main page, and if it's so significant, it should be therefore be covered in the lead. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:28, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment I've slightly tweaked the blurb to clarify this isn't a kind of settlement when one pays just to avoid legal prosecution. Brandmeistertalk 19:40, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose BP gave the Obama Administration $20 billion at the time of the spill, for the feds to dispense as they saw fit. This is anticlimactic and getting almost no coverage. μηδείς (talk) 00:18, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
    • That was them realizing what deep shit they were in so they gave a large amount of the money for the purpose of public relations. The scientists researched the long term effects and the oil lawyers spent 5 years haggling the amount they spilled down to 3.1 million so now they finally figured out the final amount. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 01:29, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support High international significance and broad global media coverage. --ELEKHHT 07:02, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support - assuming the huge target article is fixable or a postable target is identified. Jusdafax 10:51, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

[Posted] RD: Val Doonican[edit]

Article: Val Doonican
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): BBC
Nominator: Mjroots (give credit)

Nominator's comments: Described by the BBC as Ireland's "Bing Crosby". Long career, although article does need a bit of sourcing. Mjroots (talk) 12:13, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Weak oppose: From the chart positions, looks pretty darn close to a one-hit wonder. No apparent international impact beyond his native British Isles. No awards or significant honors to speak of. Him having his own variety show on British television is probably the biggest thing he's got going for him in the notability department, but the show doesn't even have its own Wikipedia article and there's almost nothing in his biography here about it. -Kudzu1 (talk) 14:46, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak support: By all accounts a very genuine and warm individual. Did enjoy chart success and even one series on USA TV. Was a UK TV "Doon-icon" for over 20 years. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:06, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak support: Article is in OK nick. As for the bloke himself, he seems to have been very popular in the 1960s (he knocked the Beatles off number 1). Maybe more should be written on his 20 years presenting on the telly. '''tAD''' (talk) 18:18, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak Support - The article has a big old maintenance tag, but I'm aware that much work has been done today; if it meets sourcing requirements then a RD post is probably worthy. Pedro :  Chat 
It now has 12 different sources and they all seem to be reliable. Only one paragraph remains without any refs. "Big old maintenance tags" would be much more useful if accompanied by a Talk Page summary of where attention was needed? One might even suggest that as a policy, lol. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:05, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
When I say "big" that's subjective. When I say "old" I really mean old [4] Pedro :  Chat  20:14, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment I've only been alive two score years plus nought but Doonican was proper household name for most of my life. Like many nominations, this therefore stumbles into "well-known" territory, which is oft cited in many other RDs we see passing through. I guess my score is based on the fact that when I saw it noted on the BBC homepage I was "saddened". The article is reasonable and nobody gets bumped from RD if we post Val, so, like the above, I'm in weak support of this nomination. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:35, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
Aww. Tell us another one, Rambler. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:38, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
well ... ---Sluzzelin talk 19:41, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
Listen, the love you get is equal to the love you give. The end is nigh. Simple. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:44, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
It's only me pursuing somethin' I'm not sure of... Martinevans123 (talk) 21:22, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support Far more famous as an individual entertainer than Chris Squire who's currently heading RD. Andrew D. (talk) 21:40, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support Seems to meet criteria 2 in ITND. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:47, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support - An iconic and internationally famous entertainer. AlexTiefling (talk) 09:59, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Posted. SpencerT♦C 15:04, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

July 1[edit]


[Closed] Ace Limited acquiring Chubb[edit]

Non-admin snowclose. -Kudzu1 (talk) 04:58, 4 July 2015 (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: ACE Limited and Chubb Corp.
Blurb: ACE Limited announces that it will acquire Chubb Corp. for US$28.3 billion.
News source(s): Reuters Wall Street Journal New York Times
Nominator: Everymorning (give credit)

Nominator's comments: In terms of value, this seems moderately large. For example, at $28.3 billion, it is larger than the Nokia deal posted in April, which was worth only $16.6 billion in US dollars. Also, the New York Times link above says that Chubb is "a well-known brand among businesses and wealthy individuals in the United States," which seems to mean that its being acquired is significant. The main problem here seems to be that the Chubb article is a stubb (sorry, couldn't resist) and so will need to be expanded before this can be considered postable. Everymorning talk 20:20, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose Other than big sum, I'm not sure whether these two companies are trendy. Both sell insurances which is not the same as producing foods or electronics, for example. Brandmeistertalk 21:41, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose Chubb Corp article was only three paragraphs before today, and has only two refs before 2015 - even with updates, it's not a strongly public/consumer facing company, meaning it's not as much of interest to average readers than consumer facing companies.-- Aronzak (talk) 00:57, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose This is yet another consolidation which will end up with middle management getting shafted. The effect on the public will be nil. μηδείς (talk) 00:24, 3 July 2015 (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.

[Closed] US/Cuban embassies[edit]

Consensus seems to be in favour of re-nominating this once it actually happens. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:17, 2 July 2015 (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 to update: Cuban Thaw
Blurb: The United States and Cuba announce the reestablishment of full diplomatic relations as they set to reopen embassies.
News source(s): BBC
Nominator: Muboshgu (give credit)

Article needs updating

Nominator's comments: I'm ambivalent about this going up, as the "Cuban Thaw" has been posted here before. But, the actual reopening of embassies is a major step that we should discuss highlighting. The embassies will be reopened on July 20, so perhaps this should wait until then? Or maybe we should post the announcement. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:42, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Wait per nom. Significant, but news will be when embassies do open. -Kudzu1 (talk) 17:44, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Waiting is not an unreasonable proposition, all things considered. Pandeist (talk) 18:18, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Wait for the opening, which should get decent coverage then(unlike other announcements). 331dot (talk) 22:17, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • We already got this posted twice if I remember correctly. I think whatever happens there should not be any more than another entry for this saga. Nergaal (talk) 02:55, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Wait until it happens. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 03:03, 2 July 2015 (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.

[Posted & closed] RD: Nicholas Winton[edit]

It was given a blurb per consensus, and it's staying that way. Time to move on the the next story. Mjroots (talk) 06:12, 2 July 2015 (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

Updated article: Nicholas Winton

Blurb: Nicholas Winton (pictured), dubbed the British Schindler for saving more than 600 mostly Jewish children from the Nazis, dies at 106.
News source(s): ABC News Maidenhead AdvertiserBBC News
Nominator: Kudzu1 (give credit)

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Famous British philanthropist best known for arranging the rescue of hundreds of Jewish children during the Holocaust. The BBC News had just come out with a report today following up on the lives of some of the children he saved. He was 106. Kudzu1 (talk) 14:59, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support The British Schindler. A truly great man whose fame extended well beyond his own country. If someone wanted to argue that he rates a blurb on ITN I doubt I would oppose it. Memory eternal. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:05, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support Importance is super-clear, article is in good shape without any sourcing issues. --MASEM (t) 15:21, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support a rather interesting case, very good article for us to feature. μηδείς (talk) 15:34, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Proposing ITN blurb I think he warrants it. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:53, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support Blurb - significant figure in modern British and Jewish history, deserves a blurb. Mjroots (talk) 16:16, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support for RD, under the criteria of very important to the field of life-saving. Mamyles (talk) 17:01, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support blurb - Saved many lives during WWII and has a great impact and truly significant figure. Blurb-worthy! --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 17:42, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support blurb, this man definitely deserves the attention of the mankind. Vejvančický (talk / contribs) 18:04, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support Blurb - well known figure - the 1988 TV program is famous, and this is influential in the history of refugees and internally displaced people. -- Aronzak (talk) 18:11, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support Blurb In this case his age is a pro, not a con, for significance, as there are sadly not many persons with such an active hand in WWII still alive. - OldManNeptune 18:19, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support Blurb, a hero blessed with the precious gift of humility. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:08, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Posted The Rambling Man (talk) 20:23, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Pull. Not a head of state and nowhere near meeting the ITN criteria. Tadeusz Nowak (talk) 21:27, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
Are you joking? The man is universally recognized as one of the great humanitarians of the last century. We post blurbs for the death of top notch film stars like Robin Williams but Nicholas Winton doesn't qualify? Remind me again, how many lives did Williams save? -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:49, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
Williams influenced a far larger number. Nergaal (talk) 21:56, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
@Tadeusz Nowak: There is no guideline limiting ITN to heads of state. 331dot (talk) 22:20, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
Williams sudden death by suicide (the death was "interesting" per ITN standards) is why he had a blurb, not solely because he was a famous comedian. --23:00, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
There is no requirement to be a head of state for a blurb - the man is an inspiration as a humanitarian, someone who went against the policies of the government of his day. -- Aronzak (talk) 01:01, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Pull wth? I didn't think we would somebody who got famous for doing something 70 yrs ago, but did not do something else since that got him recognition. Schindler maybe would have deserved it, but not somebody titled [insert country]'s Schindler. That is why we have RD, for notable cases that might not necessarily reached popular culture. Nergaal (talk) 21:52, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
Also, the article itself is not very clear about his exact role, what did he do to he help save the 600+ children. Nergaal (talk) 22:11, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
He used his Jewish contacts in London to secure homes that would be willing to house 669 children, and , to put it bluntly, he bribed officials and fabricated travel documents to get the kids out of Czechoslovakia as quickly as possible - right before the outbreak of war. -- Aronzak (talk) 01:01, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
"doing something" - he worked to save the lives of 669 children - not just "something".-- Aronzak (talk) 01:01, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Pull Debatable whether he should even be on RD, but in any case, this is the sort of stuff RD is made for. 82.21.7.184 (talk) 22:16, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Post-posting support blurb. Was honored by two countries for his actions, as stated in the article. Seems to be a tip-top humanitarian, and blurbs do go to those at the tip-top of their field. 331dot (talk) 22:23, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support RD, pull blurb - Clearly notable, but since it is simply a death from old age, it should go to RD. There is no reason for a blurb. Fgf10 (talk) 23:06, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support - A great hero. And dying at 106 is not your everyday "old age". ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 01:26, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • support RD only. per Nergaal. This is way short of blurb standard, regrettably --Johnsemlak (talk) 01:49, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Post Posting Strong Support for RD - definitely among the most notable for humanitarian actions - over six hundred human beings owe him their lives. The comparison to Schindler is an apt one, but I do not see the rationale for a blurb - he was not a head of state, nor did he die during a freak accident or tragedy - he simply died of old age. Challenger l (talk) 03:30, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Post Posting Support To Keep Posted As a Blurb because dying of old age doesn't necessarily disqualify one from deserving a full blurb. Christopher Lee got one just a few weeks ago. Calidum T|C 03:36, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Post posting support RD and Oppose Blurb - Unsurprising deaths from natural causes should only receive blurbs when the death itself makes an incredible impact in news coverage. While I 100% agree that Winton was an incredibly important figure, his death has not been covered as breaking news -- indeed, it's already off the front page of the BBC.--Yaksar (let's chat) 03:45, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support blurb - top humanitarian, inspirational story, "happy" news. starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 04:29, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support RD, Pull Blurb Death from extreme old age. Clearly highly qualifies for an RD, not a blurb. Jusdafax 04:36, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Nominator comment: I say this a lot, but I don't like blurbs for people whose death doesn't rock the world. I'd prefer to see the blurb pulled and RD (for which there can be no doubt that Winton qualifies) posted. -Kudzu1 (talk) 04:43, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Post-posting support blurb - A story like his needs to be better known, and he has had considerable impact even as he tried to avoid the limelight. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 04:45, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Leave blurb as is. The decision in favor of a full blurb was quite reasonable, as this is an extraordinary story; and in any event, sometimes we just need to make a decision and move on. Newyorkbrad (talk) 04:49, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
After thinking about it, I have to agree - I hadn't realized it was already posted until most of the way through my own thoughts on it. A tremendous contributor to our world's history, I'd say. Challenger l (talk) 05:06, 2 July 2015 (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.

June 30[edit]


[Closed] Sweden wins UEFA European Under-21[edit]

UNILATERALLY OPPOSED:

I must close this before there will be more !oppose votes. --George Ho (talk) 05:04, 1 July 2015 (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.

Updated article: 2015 UEFA European Under-21 Championship
Blurb: Sweden wins the 2015 UEFA European Under-21 Championship final against Portugal after a penalty shootout.
News source(s): [5], [6],[7]
Nominator: BabbaQ (give credit)

Article updated

 BabbaQ (talk) 23:32, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment. Youth tournaments do not do well here, primarily because they are not the top level of the sport. Can you explain why this should be an exception? 331dot (talk) 23:36, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Well, the tournament are not like just a few years back. It has grown in popularity, and is hosted like a regular European Championship nowadays. Reported on world wide. I would say that it is beyond "just a youth tournament", several players in Portugals team are already top players and so are the swedish. Some of the portugese players have contracts worth more than 100 million dollars etc. Most of the players in both teams could just as well already play for their respective national teams.--BabbaQ (talk) 23:46, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Some of the portugese players contracts worth more than 100 million dollars [sic]. I highly doubt any Portuguese footballers in their early twenties are currently earning roughly the same amount as Messi and Ronaldo. Feel free to source it though. Fuebaey (talk) 02:11, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose as a standard regional youth sport tournament. That some players also play for their senior teams doesn't convince me otherwise. 2015 UEFA European Under-21 Championship Final is more relevant, but currently underdeveloped. The prose about the final, in both articles, consists of two sentences and one reference to the match report. Fuebaey (talk) 02:11, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose. We rejected the youth World Cup earlier this month, and this (as a regional tournament) has an even lower notability. HaEr48 (talk) 02:14, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Consensus is strongly opposed to posting youth competitions. Abductive (reasoning) 03:38, 1 July 2015 (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.

[Posted] 2015 Indonesian military plane crash[edit]

Updated article: 2015 Indonesia Hercules C-130 crash
Blurb: At least 141 people are killed when a Lockheed C-130 Hercules crashes into a residential area of Medan, Indonesia.
News source(s): BBC
Nominator: The Rambling Man (give credit)

Article updated

 The Rambling Man (talk) 13:35, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Support on article expansion/update - Incident is clearly important, but would like to see the article expanded beyond 2 sentences (which I'm sure will come in time). Once more details are established, I think it would be good for the blurb to separate out those riding on the craft, vs civilian deaths on the ground. --MASEM (t) 14:18, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Conditional support pending some expansion with more definitive data. The news I've read now mention 91 bodies. Indonesian air force commander said that although 141 body bags had been sent to morgues, some might contain only body parts, so the actual death count could be somewhat lower. Brandmeistertalk 06:56, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
    The BBC are reporting officials saying "141 bodies have been recovered". The Rambling Man (talk) 09:57, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Marking ready The article has been expanded to surpass the three prose paragraph minimum, is well written and refernced, and the incident clearly notable. μηδείς (talk) 15:28, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support: Notable event, article already expanded. HaEr48 (talk) 20:10, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Posted Stephen 01:01, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

[Closed] Kobanî → June 2015 Kobanî attack[edit]

STALE:

--George Ho (talk) 07:14, 2 July 2015 (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.

I did nominate the article, June 2015 Kobanî attack, for deletion. Consensus unilaterally opposed. The current blurb is "ISIL forces attack the Syrian city of Kobanî, killing more than 140 civilians." To make up my blunder at AFD, I propose modifying it into "ISIL forces attack the Syrian city of Kobanî, killing more than 140 civilians." The stand-alone article about the massacre has improved since I quickly withdrew the nomination. I welcome your opinions please. --George Ho (talk) 09:46, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

WP:ERRORS is the best destination for requests to modify blurbs that are already on the main page. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:07, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
How is this an error? This is a proposal. --George Ho (talk) 10:08, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
You know what? I'm going to propose this at the Errors section, even when it looks like forum shopping. --George Ho (talk) 10:17, 30 June 2015 (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.

June 29[edit]


[Closed] Donald Trump NBC[edit]

UNILATERALLY OPPOSED:

Nevertheless, if you want to vote !support, feel free to revert closure. The nature of the story makes the posting unlikely though. --George Ho (talk) 23:02, 29 June 2015 (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: Miss Universe and Miss USA
Blurb: NBC and Univision cancels airing of Miss Universe and Miss USA after the owner Donald Trump is fired from NBC for derogatory comments about Mexican immigrants.
Alternative blurb: Donald Trump is fired by NBC after making derogatory comments about Mexican immigrants.
News source(s): [8], [9], [10]
Nominator: BabbaQ (give credit)

 BabbaQ (talk) 21:32, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose Political noise of no broad or lasting significance. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:05, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
    Sorry, but you have no idea about lasting significance. Broad, it is reported world wide. --BabbaQ (talk) 22:07, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose "Idiot says racist things, loses platform to say them on". – Muboshgu (talk) 22:10, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose. NBC exercising its right to associate with whom they wish is not significant. Britney Spears having children was reported worldwide, too. 331dot (talk) 22:11, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose Tabloid commentary frankly. It's not "broad" that I can see - it's not currently on either the BBC or CNN website front pages for example. Per Muboshgu as well. Pedro :  Chat  22:13, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
    It is actually on BBC right now, but that's beside the point for me. -- KTC (talk) 22:24, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
    Yep, just seen it at about number 8 of "most read" so good point; even so hardly "across the media" and I agree with your statement below. Pedro :  Chat  22:29, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose I don't see how this fulfil any points of Wikipedia:In_the_news#Purpose. If Trump were elected President, sure, but an organisation saying they don't want to associate with him anymore, no. -- KTC (talk) 22:24, 29 June 2015 (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.


[Posted] RD: Josef Masopust[edit]

Article: Josef Masopust
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): Sports Illustrated Reuters Česká televize
Nominator: Kudzu1 (give credit)


Note: Article is in need of additional references and a more substantial death update, if possible.

Nominator's comments: Accomplished Czech footballer and coach who led his team to the 1962 World Cup final. Generally considered to have been the best Czech football player of all time. Voted European Footballer of the Year in 1962. Kudzu1 (talk) 15:03, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

  • support - top player. RD is appropriate.--BabbaQ (talk) 21:54, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose on quality – inadequate presentation of career, and a massive unsourced section. It's a shame that due to recentism, players of this calibre go unnoticed to editors, while ten-a-penny disposable and forgettable current players get pristine articles. Ho hum '''tAD''' (talk) 06:07, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
    • Now support: Improved to an acceptable standard. Achievements speak for themselves, I never doubted notability '''tAD''' (talk) 13:10, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Support: voted top player in Europe. I have also tried to improve the article re: the concerns mentioned above. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 09:30, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Support meets notability, and article seems acceptable. Zwerg Nase (talk) 10:37, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose certainly notable, but the article is full of hagiography so needs work. E.g., phrases like "was an indispensable player", "The only flaw in his capabilities came from...", " a workhorse of his team, who toiled away in obscurity crafting and building fresh attacks for the front line", "he made up for this deficit with massive reserves of stamina and pace, allowing him to be a tireless engine", "Many of his Dukla teammates also played for the national team, which gave them a greater understanding than many of their opponents." etc etc need real work. Also, basics like formatting "their national olympic football team" correctly, avoiding raw URLs, using reliable sources (is "national-football-teams.com" reliable? And "eu-football.info"? They may be, but I'd like to see evidence of that). The Rambling Man (talk) 19:34, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment: It appears the hagiography has been pared down and sound references are now in place. Is this ready to post? -Kudzu1 (talk) 15:33, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
    What about the sourcing concerns? The Rambling Man (talk) 20:24, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • I have removed the two dubious sources you mentioned. Jmorrison230582 (talk) 09:13, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support - The man who helped the Czechoslovakian team win two FIFA Cups. Marking as ready. --George Ho (talk) 17:29, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment: He played at two World Cups, losing one final, but never won it. If the article suggested he won two World Cups, it needs copyediting, so it can be clear to any reader '''tAD''' (talk) 19:00, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
Looks plenty clear to me. I'm sure George Ho just misspoke. -Kudzu1 (talk) 19:01, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
My bad. At least he performed well in the Cups. George Ho (talk) 19:07, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

[Posted] Hisham Barakat assassinated[edit]

Article: Hisham Barakat
Blurb: Hisham Barakat, Egypt's top prosecutor, is assassinated in a bombing.
News source(s): Al Jazeera BBC
Nominator: Meno25 (give credit)
Updater: Noel baran (give credit)

Nominator's comments: Egypt's Prosecutor General Hisham Barakat was killed today in Cairo in a car bomb. Al Jazeera The death of such a high rank official is a rare event, so, I propose adding Hisham Barakat to the RD section. Egypt is currently in a state of instability after the 2013 Egyptian coup d'état. I admit that the article still needs to be expanded but I will leave this task to others who are more knowledgeable about the incident than me. Meno25 (talk) 14:37, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

Other sources: BBC News The Guardian Reuters --Meno25 (talk) 15:00, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Oppose: Article is a stub. If Barakat is a very internationally notable figure -- and we have passed over cabinet officials, governors, generals, etc., from many countries for ITN purposes -- then the article doesn't convey it. -Kudzu1 (talk) 15:14, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Support on article expansion: There is probably a lot more that can be written on him; the BBC article I just added to sources explains he had been involved in the conviction of many Islamic militants following the deposition of the former President, so there's a reason he might have been targetted, that all can fill out the article. Also blurb should mention that there were ~dozen some injured by the blast, though obviously the focus on Barakat's death being key. I note that I'm speaking to this less as being a RD and more as news event that happened to target a notable individual. --15:25, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
    • To follow on PrimeHunter's point Support blurb focusing on the attack/bombing of a national official, and less about the person as a person. --MASEM (t) 15:42, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose RD but support full blurb pending article improvement. It's the assasination of the office holder and not the death of the individual that is the notable story. RD only says somebody died and should only be used for more notable figures. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:32, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Support blurb pending article expansion; oppose RD (the incident itself is more notable than the victim). Political assassinations of high-ranking officials are quite rare in Egypt. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 15:54, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Support blurb conditional on article improvement. Clearly a significant event. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:18, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Support blurb upon article improvement because the death was sudden and unexpected; clearly a notable event. 331dot (talk) 20:14, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Support blurb per 331dot.--BabbaQ (talk) 21:35, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Support blurb. This would be as if Eric Holder got assassinated. This is the guy who prosecuted Morsi and all those other Muslim Brotherhood guys and got them sentenced to death. Abductive (reasoning) 04:19, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
    I don't see that in the article, it would certainly help improve the nomination if that detail was added. The Rambling Man (talk) 06:59, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
    Except that Holder is the former AG, while this guy was the current officeholder, right? Has any group claimed responsibility? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 14:11, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
    As of 12 hr ago, not yet, but Egyptian officials are certain it is one of the groups aligned with the insurgency going on there. And yes, they did confirm this was a car bomb triggered remotely as Barakat's car drove by, so clearly signs of an assassination attempt. --MASEM (t) 14:22, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Unmarking ready: Article is still a stub, even if the "stub" tag has been removed. It needs substantial expansion before it's ready to post, per the apparent consensus here. -Kudzu1 (talk) 14:56, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Marked ready - There's am adequate 2-paragraph update now. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 18:56, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

June 28[edit]


[Closed] 2015 Clinton Correctional Facility escape[edit]

Speedy close of good faith nom per WP:SNOW. This is not going to be posted. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:21, 28 June 2015 (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: 2015 Clinton Correctional Facility escape
Blurb: David Sweat, one of two inmates who escaped from a prison in New York on June 6, is shot and taken into police custody.
News source(s): New York Times The Guardian BBC CNN
Nominator: Everymorning (give credit)

Nominator's comments: This escape sparked a massive manhunt that has just now, with this story, come to an end, and has been a very high profile story in the United States for some time now. Everymorning talk 22:14, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose - No, just no. Shall I explain further? George Ho (talk) 22:16, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Questionable - Very high profile story, but not necessarily likely to have "legs". ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:23, 28 June 2015 (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.

[Posted to ongoing] Greek debt crisis[edit]

Article: Greek government-debt crisis
Blurb: The European Central Bank announces it will not continue to provide funds to help bail-out Greece from its debt, causing the Greek government to order all banks closed.
Alternative blurb: The Greek government orders all banks closed after the European Central Bank refuses to subsidize further debt bail-outs.
Alternative blurb II: Greece defaults on 1.6 billion euros ($1.8 billion) in loans from the International Monetary Fund.
News source(s): NYTimes
Nominator: Masem (give credit)


Note: The main article is in good shape overall for posting but I'm not 100% sure if it is properly updated

Nominator's comments: Seeing this appear in a lot of news stories; there might be other events in the week related to the Greek debt but this seems to be significant given the drastic action being taken. MASEM (t) 17:19, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Comment - "Criticism of Germany's role" section is tagged as undue and non-neutral. Also, the article is tagged as too long and overly detailed. Same for its introduction. Shall there be improvements? George Ho (talk) 17:45, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
On the other hand, oppose blurb, but support ongoing. Modern Greeks haven't been Ancient Greeks for... ten or twenty centuries? Also, the EU is responsible for this. --George Ho (talk) 20:17, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose - a very significant news story, but the quality of the article is subpar. Varianceinvain (talk) 18:07, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Support conditional on major improvements in the article, which as noted above, is not ready to be linked on the main page. That said, this is a very big story and if the article can be gotten up to scratch it should be posted. Supporting Ongoing for now per TRM's comment below. If and when Greece actually exits the EU that would be sufficiently important to merit an independent blurb on ITN. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:26, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose this is "ongoing" and a perfect example of something that needs to be covered there. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:58, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
    It's worth noting that the Greek government-debt crisis article is plastered with a maintenance tag that would render it ineligible for ITN in any situation. Please resolve the major problems with the article before sending it to the main page. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:18, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
    Support ongoing. Zwerg Nase (talk) 19:55, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Support - I'll support either an ongoing or a blurb, but that big article tag has to be dealt with, obviously. Big international news and could get even bigger. Jusdafax 19:59, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Support blurb on notability, notable as failure of a part of the Eurozone, but no need to go "ongoing" until there's an update after the blurb ages off the queue. μηδείς (talk) 20:51, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment The article currently has three top orange-tag issues, appears to be tagged recently. Brandmeistertalk 21:23, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Wait: This will surely be ITN material when either a last-minute deal is reached or, as appears far likelier, Greece defaults and/or is forced out of the eurozone. -Kudzu1 (talk) 21:40, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Wait - Nowhere near over yet. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 21:56, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment - The problem with this is if Greece defaults, the item should be on the defaults which is much more significant and definitely ITN worthy. If a last minute deal is reached however, then it's only worth of ongoing which the bank closure and capital control are part of. -- KTC (talk) 00:47, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • We can always update the blurb based on new developments, but the bank holiday is already in effect. People will be coming here for this now, and if the article is in good shape we should have a link now. μηδείς (talk) 01:57, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose on article quality. The lead is ten paragraphs long, for one. Abductive (reasoning) 06:46, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Wait Comment – Agree with Kudzu1, KTC. The damoclean sword hasn't fallen yet. Sca (talk) 13:05, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Considering every Greek is limited to 60 bucks a day these days, you might say the sword has already fallen quite significantly for a lot of people. Might be a reason to make this ongoing. Zwerg Nase (talk) 13:08, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Worse, $55.80US. That's 20,381 per year. Oh wait, it's 60 euros, not 50. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 15:00, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
The big story will be Grexit: yes or no. If and when such occurs, a separate, succinct article will be needed. (The current target article is a maelstrom of 30,000 words = about 140 pages of typescript. No one is going to read such a bloated, semi-polemical exposition.) Sca (talk) 13:46, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
So what speaks against putting this on ongoing and make a blurb once the Grexit comes? (except for maybe too many references in the article... has one ever seen anything like that before??). Zwerg Nase (talk) 14:42, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Strongly support ongoing on topic, oppose this specific article. I think ongoing would clearly be best for the next week at least, and probably more. This is a big deal, coming to a head, and blurbs will have a hard time keeping up. Greek government-debt crisis seems a little too sprawling an article to link to, and is likely to have near-constant edit warring and orange POV tags about who's to blame. Perhaps link to Greek debt crisis timeline#2015 instead, which has the benefits of:
    • Easily and quickly updated
    • Timeline format seems to me to match an "ongoing" section better
    • Will be very clear what new thing happened in the last day or two
    • Won't have to keep changing what section to link to
    • Timeline links to other appropriate articles that go more in depth
    • This page will be much less likely to have POV tags and unstable edit warring
--Floquenbeam (talk) 15:28, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Support – OK, Zwerg, support ongoing only. (Wait above changed to comment.) Sca (talk) 17:40, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Post this already. Nergaal (talk) 17:47, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Support ongoing, as there will likely continue to be many updates to this important event in the near future. Mamyles (talk) 19:10, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Support ongoing This is a major developing story and a blurb would probably have to be updated a few times. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:17, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Has to be "ongoing" - As noted above, this is changing daily. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 19:27, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Support ongoing, if possible also including a link to next Sunday's Greek bailout referendum, 2015 as well as to one or both the previously mentioned articles (the timeline article and the debt crisis article), with wording something like "Ongoing:..., Greek debt crisis and July 5 Greek bailout referendum" (unless that's in violation of some long-established ITN/Ongoing convention about referendums of which I'm unaware). Tlhslobus (talk) 21:11, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Shouldn't this be a blurb? 108 minutes ago Greece became the first developed country to default on its international obligations. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 23:48, 30 June 2015 (UTC) [11] Remember how huge this was during the heart of the Great Recession? I guess everyone succeeded in dragging this out long enough for the world economy to recover first. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 23:56, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Because none of these were developed? Dragons flight (talk) 23:59, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Don't blame me, blame one of the three headlines that popped up when I Googled Greece default: [12]. One also said first IMF default and maybe they mean something nitpicky like inflating it away doesn't count or only agreements with another sovereign govt. or supernational NGO counts or defaulting only their citizens doesn't count or communists don't count (second world) or if the Industrial Revolution hadn't finished yet in that country it wouldn't count or debt restructuring and anything other than the other side saying "fuck you, not a compromise more" doesn't count or something like that? I'm to lazy to read that article. Really any sovereign nation could just print money to pay back any bond so if true it might just be cause developed countries giving up the ability to print their currency is new. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 01:17, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
First EU country to default on the IMF, not the first country to do so. -- KTC (talk) 10:54, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
CNN says the first developed country period to default on the IMF. I remember the Economist acting like Grexit (or default too?) was unspeakable and loony fringe and by now it seems like Grexit might be the lesser evil for everyone involved. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 12:55, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Admin comment. Greek government-debt crisis seems like the best candidate for ongoing because of its extensive coverage, but it is currently ineligible for posting due to multiple NPOV section tags. Other suggestions: Greek debt crisis timeline#2015 is probably the best second choice but not a great choice due to the brevity of its updates, while Greek bailout referendum, 2015 doesn't really seem broad enough to speak to the whole issue (though might make an good ITN blurb once the result is known). Any chance people may resolve those NPOV tags in the near future? Otherwise, is there additional input on the choice of target article for ongoing? Dragons flight (talk) 00:16, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Support ongoing – With link to Greek debt crisis timeline#2015 – at least it's something. Sca (talk) 12:58, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
PS: AP says banks reopened – hence Altblurb 2 above, in case of need. Sca (talk) 13:05, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • It's pretty evident by now that this isn't blurb-worthy at this time, and that an "ongoing" post is required. Please, an uninvolved admin, assess this for inclusion at Ongoing. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:25, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Posted to ongoing It's obvious we need something as this is near the top of most news headlines. We have a bloated NPOV article or a lightweight timeline, so I'm going with the latter in the hopes that more is added. This could be replaced by a full blurb over the weekend as the referendum results become known. Stephen 00:52, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

2014–15 Formula E season[edit]

Proposed image

Article: 2014–15 Formula E season

Blurb: In motorsport, Nelson Piquet Jr. (pictured) wins the inaugural Formula E championship.
News source(s): ITV
Nominator: Mjroots (give credit)

 Mjroots (talk) 16:13, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Oppose I don't really think this is significant enough. A radio presenter on TalkSport had never even heard of it, and thought it might have been a typo. Beyond that, the article has not been updated to reflect the end of the season (tenses etc) nor does it really contain much prose beyond the background stuff. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:17, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
    • Article now updated. Mjroots (talk) 17:32, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Limited coverage of a new event, which likely has not yet attained significant notability. 331dot (talk) 16:36, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Support If we post the Tour de Suisse, then this is just as significant. But I might be a little biased, since I enjoy this a lot (enough to produce this GA nominated article, who everyone is welcomed to review btw). Zwerg Nase (talk) 19:54, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
    I couldn't stand the sound of the engines. I liked the idea. Is there any real notability, the Suisse tour has history... The Rambling Man (talk) 20:19, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
    Notable as the first all-electric world car racing series. Mjroots (talk) 21:58, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
    I would also consider that more notable than the 79th edition of a B-class bike race... Zwerg Nase (talk) 22:08, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Support The participants are all blue links, and what I saw were pretty well developed articles. I also noted quite a number of nations' flags, and I doubt they ran an entire season of races with nobody watching. Only thing this doesn't have going for it is history, but that could just as easily be read as that this is a significant first. - OldManNeptune 23:28, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • The article itself could probably do with expanding. At the moment, it seems to be just tables of result with not much else. Otherwise, I would support posting this. FE is a significant and by indication successful development in the world of motor racing, recognised by the FIA, a world championship of 11 races in 9 different countries. -- KTC (talk) 00:42, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak support - I tried watching auto racing, but I'm not amused by it. At least this race is not US-centric as NASCAR. And it's full of racers from all eligible nations, like the US and the UK. I'm pleased to see marginally-notable Tour de Suisse to be on front page. I will be pleased to have this race posted. Hopefully, no remaining issues with the article. George Ho (talk) 01:02, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose the electric cars were identical models, not competing designs. This was more of a publicity stunt than any sort of mature competitive sport. μηδείς (talk) 01:54, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • @Medeis: there are many motorsport formulae where all drivers have the same car. It allows driver skill over a season to shine through, rather than a more skilled driver having a weaker car. Mjroots (talk) 04:50, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
Understood, but one can't have it both ways. The event is portrayed as notable because it features a new class of racing vehicle; but then there's no actual competition between vehicles, since they are identical. It's like a fashion show where all the models wear identical outfits. μηδείς (talk) 16:15, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
I don't care whether this is notable enough to be posted but NASCAR hardly has any competition between manufacturers anymore either. If a golf league started with identical nanotube superclubs then it would depend on how notable the league is. It's not surprising that manufacturers don't want to spend money on an arms race when they didn't even known how popular it'll be yet. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 17:22, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose the media coverages of this compared to the other ITN/R series is pretty weak, plus not helped that its a new series and I can't be certain if it will like all other heavily hyped up motorsport series (A1GP, Superleague, GP Masters) in the next 5 years, join them in the new formula graveyard (unlike the ITN motorsport series who have a 50 plus year history) but then I wouldn't really mind it being on ITN since we included the Tour de Suisse, a "B-grade" cycling event and The Boat Race, which is a school boat race consisting of names who we really couldn't really care about. Donnie Park (talk) 12:27, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Conditional support I'd be tempted to support this as an inaugural racing season, but I'd like to see some sort of season summary covering the eleven rounds/standings first (not necessarily as long, but something along the lines of 2014 Formula One season#Season report). At the moment, it's mainly tables and a single sentence update stating the winner. Fuebaey (talk) 02:42, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

[Posted] RD: Chris Squire[edit]

Updated article: Chris Squire
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): [13] [14] Rolling Stone
Nominator: Floydian (give credit)

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Widely regarded as one of the most influential bass players in rock music, if not the most influential in progressive rock. Floydian τ ¢ 15:30, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Support pending article improvements - Was on way to add this as RD. However, article does need some sourcing improvements, and while I don't doubt the statements made, I'd like to see a better source to affirm this, likely will come in the next few hours. --MASEM (t) 15:33, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
    • Rolling Stone has now reported it, so concerns on the reliability of this news are satisfied. --MASEM (t) 17:11, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Support pending article improvements nothing to add to Masem. Zwerg Nase (talk) 16:06, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Support per the above, article has large unreferenced sections which need improvement. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:21, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak support on notability; founding member of a well-known band, although never a frontman or a driving creative force. Article has been improved; could probably still use a bit of work, but my eyes are starting to glaze over combing through ancient album reviews and magazine interviews trying to nail down whether he's properly credited on whatever side work he did. -Kudzu1 (talk) 17:06, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose - Notable independently, and article in good shape. Not on top of field, however. Also, no notable songs done in solo or without the band, Yes. We can post a name of a last surviving member or ex-member, but this guy ain't last. George Ho (talk) 19:10, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • He is, however, the only consistent member throughout the bands history. - Floydian τ ¢ 20:24, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Support - Notable member of a notable band. Article decent. International news. Jusdafax 19:44, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Support on notability per above. Yes's place alone and his place in it merit his posting. μηδείς (talk) 20:48, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Support - on the basis of writing this alone. A very underrated solo album "IMHO". Martinevans123 (talk) 21:23, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Posted to RD. --Bongwarrior (talk) 22:37, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

[Posted] SpaceX CRS-7[edit]

Proposed image

Updated article: SpaceX CRS-7

Blurb: SpaceX CRS-7 fails after the Falcon 9 exploded after launch while carrying the Dragon to the International Space Station
News source(s): [15][16]
Nominator and updater: Winner 42 (give credit)

Article updated

Nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, meaning that the recurrence of the event is generally considered important enough to post on WP:ITN subject to the quality of the article and the update to it.


Note: My first nomination, criticism is welcome for the blurb

Nominator's comments: This appears to be the standards as a "Launch failure where sufficient details are available to update the article" Winner 42 Talk to me! 15:55, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Weak oppose I marked this as ITNR because it is a launch fail, right now it's weak on details though. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:23, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
    Already better, but the use of Twitter is dubious, neutral for now. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:31, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
Removing twitter and replaced it with a CNN source. The press conference is ongoing as I type this, so more reports will be out in an hour or so. Winner 42 Talk to me! 17:04, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Support per ITNR, update is sufficient, good work. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:44, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose - The most exciting astronomical stories are moon landings, planet landings, and universe. As I hate to admit, rocket or spaceship explosions happen occasionally and have been posted. This story ain't rare or unusual. Also, re-reading this article, I don't see what's so special about this mission. The story of Russian rocket explosion was posted probably because... Westerners fear(?) Russians maybe. I don't see the point of posting the failed resupply mission other than to move out older stories. George Ho (talk) 19:33, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
    It's on ITNR so unless you believe the update to be inadequate for that purpose, I suggest you nominate failed launches for removal from the recurring stories list. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:44, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
    Tony Awards is on ITNR, but this year's Tonys wasn't posted ITN. Even some others from ITNR haven't been posted, I believe. George Ho (talk) 19:46, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
    Indeed, mainly based on their failure to meet the update requirements. Does this item fail to meet the update requirements? The Rambling Man (talk) 19:49, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Support - INTR, international news, a significant failure that is a good ITN choice. Jusdafax 19:52, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment Spencer, Black Kite, etc, we have a good article ready to go here, can we post it please? The Rambling Man (talk) 20:55, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
Spencer is on vacation until August. George Ho (talk) 22:32, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Posted - I also made some modifications to the blurb. --Bongwarrior (talk) 22:53, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
I added the image for preview, just in case. George Ho (talk) 23:21, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

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: