Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

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.

Ural Airlines Airbus A321 in 2013
Ural Airlines Airbus A321 in 2013

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 secondary source. Press releases are not acceptable. 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.
  • Please consider alerting editors to the nomination by adding the template {{ITN note}} to the corresponding article's talk page.

Purge this page to update the cache

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

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

Headers[edit]

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pulled from the main page are generally marked with (Posted) or (Pulled) in the item's subject so it is clear they are no longer active.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

Voicing an opinion on an item[edit]

  • Format your comment to contain "support" or "oppose", and include a rationale for your choice. In particular, address the notability of the event, the quality of the article, and whether it has been updated.
  • Some jargon: RD refers to "recent deaths", a subsection of the news box which lists only the names of the recent notable deceased. Blurb refers to the full sentences that occupy most of the news box. Most eligible deaths will be listed in the recent deaths section of the ITN template. However, some deaths may be given a full listing if there is sufficient consensus to do so.
  • The blurb of a promoted ITN item may be modified to complement the existing items on the main page.

Please do not...[edit]

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

Suggestions[edit]

August 21[edit]


August 20[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Health and enviornment

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

Giuseppe Conte[edit]

Proposed image
Article: Giuseppe Conte (talk, history)
Blurb: Giuseppe Conte resigns as Prime Minister of Italy.
News source(s): CNN, BBC, NYT, AP, WX Post

Article needs updating

Nominator's comments: Another Italian government kicks the bucket. Davey2116 (talk) 16:38, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

  • Comment If I am reading these articles right, this is the announcement of the plan to resign. If that's right, let's wait until he actually does. --Masem (t) 16:49, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Weak Oppose (for now) I agree with Masem: when he actually does announce, this would be better to post (pending the update of his wiki article) --mike_gigs (talk) 17:15, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose As I understand things, this is just a formality preliminary to a general election. The election and any change in government is what we would post. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:21, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Removed the ITNR tag - "Changes to the head of government are discussed on their own merits." GreatCaesarsGhost 17:36, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment – He's "tendered his resignation," but has been asked to say on as a caretaker PM until ... the ice cream melts?
    A separate article on 2019 Italian Political Crisis would be appropriate. – Sca (talk) 20:31, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose local politics; userbase bias. Italy is a country of 60 million people and is not a great power. We can't possibly post every time some government resigns in some country somewhere in the world. 5.44.170.9 (talk) 21:27, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
    Of course we can. Opposing based on population and perception of "great power"ness is absurd. This will, however, be posted once a new head is elected. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 22:34, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Interstellar iron-60 detected in Antarctic snow[edit]

Article: iron-60 (talk, history)
Blurb: ​Interstellar iron-60 detected in Antarctic snow
News source(s): PRL, CNN

Article updated

 Count Iblis (talk) 12:00, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

  • Oppose. Interstellar 60Fe on Earth was discovered 20 years ago [1] and has been confirmed several times e.g. [2]. Finding it in Antarctic snow rather than sea floor sediments does not justify an ITN blurb. Modest Genius talk 12:13, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose per MG. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 12:57, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose per Modest Genius. The discovery on Earth would have been ITN-worthy but confirming its presence in the snow of Antarctica is not.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:22, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

August 19[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

RD: Guo Zhenqian[edit]

Article: Guo Zhenqian (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): The Paper

Article updated

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Article is fully sourced. Died on 13 August, but announced on 19th. Zanhe (talk) 07:39, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

  • Comment The article appears to be in good shape, however, 3 of the 4 sources are in Chinese with no obvious translations available. It would be appropriate that a native bilingual check before posting.130.233.3.115 (talk) 07:51, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
  • He is mentioned in plenty of English sources, but I haven't added them because they're not detailed enough. See this book, for example, which does mention some of his major positions. -Zanhe (talk) 08:17, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

RD: Mohammed Zahur Khayyam[edit]

Article: Mohammed Zahur Khayyam (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): NDTV

Article updated

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Start Class article. Sourcing needs work. Music composer. DBigXray 18:25, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

  • Oppose Entire paragraphs are unreferenced, including the entire Early Life section as I am aware. You are indeed correct that sourcing needs work. --BoothSiftTalks 00:15, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Notable singer of India who left a good legacy. However, I agree that paragraphs need sourcing as person is recently passed away.— Harshil want to talk? 07:33, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose nowhere near ready. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 08:05, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support One of the best known music composers of India who has received state funerals and numerous national awards during his career Manish2542 (talk) 19:42, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
    No-one is questioning the notability, but the article is junk. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 22:35, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

RD: Jagannath Mishra[edit]

Article: Jagannath Mishra (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): The Hindu

Article updated

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Start Class article with good sourcing DBigXray 08:36, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

  • Weak oppose sourcing poor in some areas. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 08:46, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose Tense problems and general language issues throughout. Many terms ("lahks[lots?] of teachers", "mince his words", "the Center", "draconian", etc.) are not understood outside of India, editorial, or otherwise problematic. Many of the claims, especially in the lede, seem hagiographical, and I am not in a position to know whether they are true because there is no source for them. I assume that the suffix "-ji" to a name indicates then unsuffixed person in the Bihar Press Bill section; this makes for rather confusing reading. The Publications section is lacking entirely. It's a little suspicious that someone with so long a publication history would not have a single reference to even one.130.233.3.115 (talk) 10:14, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
 Working 130.233.3.115 thanks for reviewing. I have removed lakhs (FYI lakh =0.1 million). The suffix ji is honorific, and I have removed them. Lack of sources may be attributed to Internet WP:BIAS. I am working to fix your other concerns as well. Some help in copy editing will be appreciated. --DBigXray 10:30, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

August 18[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

International relations

Politics and elections

RD: Jack Whitaker[edit]

Article: Jack Whitaker (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): ESPN NBC

Article updated

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Start Class article. I am working to improve the sourcing. DBigXray 05:34, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

RD: Kathleen Blanco[edit]

Article: Kathleen Blanco (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): NYT, CBS News

Article needs updating

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: American politician, former governor of Louisiana (2004–08) dies at age 76. Article needs lots of work. Davey2116 (talk) 00:06, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

2019 Canary Islands wildfires[edit]

Article: 2019 Canary Islands wildfires (talk, history)
Blurb: ​8000 people are evacuated from their homes due to the second wildfire within a week in Gran Canaria, Spain
News source(s): BBC, Euronews, Sky News, El País, AP, Guardian, AFP

Article updated

Nominator's comments: This is a significant event in Spain; it is being covered by all national news outlets as well as significant international ones. In addition, the Canary Islands are a popular summer tourist destination, although tourism has not yet been affected by the events. Vishal dh (talk) 10:03, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

  • Oppose local event that happens commonly, without casualty figure or anyother reason that makes it notable of blurb. --DBigXray 10:10, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment – Some 8,000 evacuated; fires said to be "out of control," spreading. (Two sources added.) – Sca (talk) 13:37, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose Should this cause significant damage then it would make sense to post, but just the existence of wildfires or the evacuation order isn't sufficient for posting. --Masem (t) 16:42, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Wait As of right now it has not yet caused sufficient damage to be internationally notable. However, if the fire threatens a major population centre, or if the fire destroys the UNESCO site on Gran Canaria, then that would change. And I will note that the fire is rather close to both of those. NorthernFalcon (talk) 18:13, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Wait per Masem & NorthernFalcon. Modest Genius talk 18:22, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Wait – No fatalities (yet), but this 24,000-acre (38 sq. mi.) wildfire remains out of control despite 1,000 firefighters and 14 water-dropping helicopters and planes. By any standard – including those of the Western U.S. – that's major. Let's keep an eye on it. – Sca (talk) 14:01, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
PS: Possibly a candidate for Ongoing. – Sca (talk) 14:05, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Didn't take long for the California fires to be posted, as I remember that was before reports of people dying, and I think a good part of an entire island with threats to a WHS is more important internationally and historically than celebrities' houses, as sad as any kind of destruction is.
And I'm pretty sure the Tenerife fire on the 18/19 was actually within the Teide UNESCO WHS already. Kingsif (talk) 17:26, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

August 17[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Politics and elections

Science and technology

RD: Cedric Benson[edit]

Article: Cedric Benson (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): CNN

Article updated

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: C Class article with good sourcing DBigXray 08:59, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

RD: Kip Addotta[edit]

Article: Kip Addotta (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): THR

Article updated

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Comedina frequently on Carson, but probably his legacy is the pun-filled song "Wet Dream". Article is almost there, releases need sources. While died on 13th, family only just announced his death on 17th. Masem (t) 15:46, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

(Posted) 17 August 2019 Kabul bombing[edit]

Article: 17 August 2019 Kabul bombing (talk, history)
Blurb: 63 non-British/American people were killed in Kabul bombing.
Alternative blurb: ​At least 63 people are killed in a bombing of a wedding in Kabul, Afghanistan.
News source(s): Al Jazeera, AP, BBC, Guardian, AFP

 Abutalub (talk) 10:44, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

  • Support alt blurb. This news is the headline of every news site across the world. --DBigXray 11:22, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support - headline news.BabbaQ (talk) 12:48, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support – in principle due to high mortality. However, two-thirds of the current article consists of comments from assembled notables, while descriptive text is a spare 170 words. Further, the article's statement that "there were no immediate claims of responsibility" is misleading, as RS reports from AP, BBC, the Guardian and AFP say the local 'IS' affiliate claimed responsibility. – Sca (talk) 14:06, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support - High casualty, hence notable as well - Sherenk1 (talk) 13:04, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Weak support - not the most comprehensive article imaginable but covers the bases satisfactorily. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 14:14, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Posted - Article may be short but that's about as much as major sources are reporting this morning, so should be fine. --Masem (t) 15:17, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
    Masem Don't link Afghanistan please. Common geographical location. Plus, consistency in the template too. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 15:24, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
    Fixed. --Masem (t) 15:27, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
  • What a terrible blurb. Who proposed this first blurb? – Ammarpad (talk) 15:36, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
Snide. – Sca (talk) 20:48, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Post-posting comment – Still quite thin. – Sca (talk) 20:52, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
    • I spot checked the latest news on this and there's not much else to say, that doesn't get into politicizing the incident (which is mostly speculation on the current US-Afghanistan talks, which we shouldn't post.) --Masem (t) 20:56, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Damodar Ganesh Bapat[edit]

Article: Damodar Ganesh Bapat (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): NDTV

Article updated

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Start Class article with excellent sourcing. Indian social worker. DBigXray 08:33, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

The Rambling Man thanks for the feedback, I have further expanded the article. --DBigXray 16:05, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support - looks fine. -Zanhe (talk) 01:49, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
  • SupportAmmarpad (talk) 03:37, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Posted Stephen 05:17, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

August 16[edit]

International relations
Law and crime
  • Death of Jeffrey Epstein
    • The death of accused sexual trafficker Jeffrey Epstein is ruled a suicide by hanging by the New York City Office of the Chief Medical Examiner. Epstein's attorneys say they will be conducting their own investigation into his death. (CNN)

RD: Richard Williams (animator)[edit]

Article: Richard Williams (animator) (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): BBC

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Multiple award-winning director. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 17:02, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

  • Oppose. Filmography needs more sourcing and there's no prose about his death, just a single reference in the lede. Spengouli (talk) 18:44, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

RD: José Nápoles[edit]

Article: José Nápoles (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): ESPN

Article updated

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Boxing legend. " one of the greatest fighters of all time". Start Class article, sourcing needs some volunteers. DBigXray 15:16, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

RD: Peter Fonda[edit]

Article: Peter Fonda (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): NBC News

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

 Masem (t) 23:23, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

  • Comment I can see someone arguing for a blurb here , but before we go that road, this is a poorly sourced article. And if someone tries to sweep the filmography (unsourced) to a separate article, that's not appropriate per recent discussion on the ITN talk page. Let's get this up to RD quality first before we talk a blurb. --Masem (t) 23:24, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose far from ready, but never a blurb in any situation. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 06:10, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
WP:DENY.--WaltCip (talk) 16:13, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
  • Support RD, support blurb We've posted some black woman writer I've never heard of a few weeks ago simoply because she was a black person with a Nobel prize (in literature!). Fonda clearly deserves a blurb then. 5.44.170.9 (talk) 07:51, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
I don't see the criteria that says if 5.44.170.9 hasn't heard of someone, they can't be posted. I think it's also mildly offensive that you indicate Morrison was posted because she was "some black woman" who received a Nobel prize. 331dot (talk) 10:03, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
Find me another nobel prize in literature winner who's death was posted as a blurb on english wikipedia over the past 10-15 years. It's self evient she was only posted because she was 1) woman 2) black for anyone who isn't lying to themselves 5.44.170.9 (talk) 11:33, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
P.S. The fact that my comment is considered to be "offensive", and was even removed as such speaks volumes about the state of this website in 2019 as well as confirms what I said. No wonder the vote succeed, if all opposition is declared offensive and is immediately removed/banned from the website. 5.44.170.9 (talk) 11:36, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
We would have blurbed the first white man to win the Nobel Prize in Literature when he died too! Does knowing that make you feel better? --- Coffeeandcrumbs 11:55, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
If you don't like the state of Wikipedia, perhaps you should find somewhere else to spend your time and make your offensive statements. 331dot (talk) 12:07, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
@331dot and Coffeeandcrumbs: The IP is trolling. I deleted their original comment for race baiting, but was reverted. -Zanhe (talk) 19:36, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
The IP seems to be making a WP:POINT. If someone who knows how comes along it would be worth collapsing this convo.--Trans-Neptunian object (talk) 22:06, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose blurb This blurbed death thing is getting out of control. Not every really famous person gets a blurb just because you like them. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:09, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
To note, I would be against this as a blurb myself, but was only cautioning here because of how his death was being handled in newspapers as "oh gosh, a major loss!", and wanted to address the major block to that point first. --Masem (t) 19:47, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
Masem, I wanted to do the same thing. RD only. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:57, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose both Unsourced early life chunks, disproportionate Twitter beef, just OK in his field. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:01, August 17, 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose blurb As per Muboshgu--BoothSiftTalks 20:34, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose blurb – In view of the subject's somewhat checkered film oeuvre. – Sca (talk) 20:47, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose blurb I'm not seeing blurb-level fame here. Should be RD.--Trans-Neptunian object (talk) 22:06, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment The article is locked, but I've left my suggestions for CN resolutions on the talk page. It's a shame to see RD half-filled with barely-not-stubs of completely un-notable people, while a widely-recognized name gets left off. Oppose blurb, died of natural causes. I take that other IPs point, though, I think it better to not repeat mistakes.130.233.3.115 (talk) 06:50, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Felice Gimondi[edit]

Article: Felice Gimondi (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): Sport Sky

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: One of only seven cyclists to have won all three Grand Tours of road cycling (Tour de France, Giro d'Italia, and Vuelta a EspañaHolapaco77 (talk) 18:44, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

RD: Princess Christina of the Netherlands[edit]

Article: Princess Christina of the Netherlands (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): NL times

Article updated

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Start Class article. DBigXray 15:07, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

  • Oppose Early life section looks to be entirely unreferenced, and other issues thereafter. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 15:13, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose for now. Article needs some spit polish in several areas. In the realm of referencing, there are many more inline cites needed. While some stuff is uncontroversial and easily verifiable (like the fact that she had three sisters, etc.) other stuff which is more open to interpretation or not readily available in the public record, like "Christina was a bright and happy child, with a considerable talent for music. She also had a capacity for languages and as a young girl delighted the visiting President of the French Republic, René Coty, by conversing fluently with him in French." and the information on the faith healer, and several other places, needs direct inline citations. Furthermore, the article is woefully incomplete, it looks like she did nothing of note between changing her name in 1963, getting married and having children in the 1970s, and dying in 2019. Surely in four decades there's something worth reporting that happened in there? It does need some work. --Jayron32 15:24, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Lets get people looking this article and fixing it! All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 22:41, 16 August 2019 (UTC).
  • Weak Oppose A few missing citations left in a couple of sections, as editors above have pointed out. If this is resolved, please ignore this !vote or consider it a support !vote.  Vanilla  Wizard  💙 05:02, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
Fixed all major issues. A lot of good work has been done by several editors to improve this. It needs a review again.--DBigXray 17:13, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose Still missing citations for some areas. Kingsif (talk) 17:35, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

August 15[edit]

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

(Posted) RD: V. B. Chandrasekhar[edit]

Article: V. B. Chandrasekhar (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): The Times of India

Article updated

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Former India Cricketer dies Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 18:37, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

(Posted) Ural Airlines Flight 178[edit]

Proposed image
Article: Ural Airlines Flight 178 (talk, history)
Blurb: ​All 233 people on board Ural Airlines Flight 178 survive as the aircraft crashlands in a cornfield following a bird strike in both engines of the Airbus A321 (aircraft pictured) operating the flight.
News source(s): BBC, AP

Nominator's comments: Not quite the Miracle on the Hudson, but close. Mjroots (talk) 15:40, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

  • Oppose - I know it's refreshing to see an airline story that isn't a catastrophe for once, but "plane lands safely" is not really newsworthy.--WaltCip (talk) 16:00, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose. A successful emergency landing with no casualties isn't a significant story. Modest Genius talk 16:04, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
    • Comment - The Miracle on the Hudson was a "plane lands safely" "with no casualties" story and it was posted. Mjroots (talk) 16:09, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
      • Over a decade ago. I'm not convinced it would meet today's ITN criteria for that exact reason. Modest Genius talk 17:15, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support. When was the last time pilots made an emergency landing of a large wide-body jet on rough terrain with full fuel tanks after both its engines failed and managed to avoid any deaths or serious injuries? This is a miracle on Hudson-tier event, IMO 5.44.170.9 (talk) 16:11, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Given the distance and angle from the runway, it seems that the plane did not climb to any significant height or yaw/turn from the "liftoff vector" (pardon my terminology). As such, a successful ditch is not nearly as remarkable as that if 1549. GreatCaesarsGhost 17:31, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose. It is good that there were no fatalities, but a successful emergency landing does not quite make it to the INT level. There are several other Russia stories, such as the 9M730 Burevestnik situation and the current mass protests in Moscow, that are a lot more significant. Nsk92 (talk) 17:46, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support I think the idea that "if they'd only all just died, this would be postable!" is pretty nonsensical. Banedon (talk) 19:08, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
    "Nonsensical" is quite a strong word here. You can simply disagree with the opposers without it. Our opposes are based on the fact on the ground not because we relish death. If they indeed all died, the story would have been completely different. The Russian government, Aviation stakeholders, US and Airbus would have issued series of statements. Media would have gone agog with scoop and images, flights would be delayed/canceled. A high-level investigation panel would have been established, technical investigators would have been imported from US/France to start studying the remnants of the plane. That's a STORY and what differentiate the others with this. There are almost 10 air crashes that happened after the last one we posted here. This one is not different from them. – Ammarpad (talk) 14:01, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose per WaltCip. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:34, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose – A nice "brite" (as they used to say in the noozbiz), but not really significant. – Sca (talk) 21:59, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support per Banedon. I believe this is notable enough for ITN and the article is good. Davey2116 (talk) 22:44, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose per above. The article is good, but I believe this is not notable enough for ITN. MSN12102001 (talk) 23:24, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose it's a good news story but is already getting stale. Not much of encyclopdic long-term value, aircraft routinely suffer bird strikes, we won't be learning an awful amount from this incident other than a tick in the box for the pilot and for Airbus. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 06:15, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose per others above--BoothSiftTalks 06:25, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support. This would be like not posting Apollo 13 because the astronauts lived. Sometimes a "successful failure" is still notable. 331dot (talk) 07:56, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
I would further add the points that there were more injuries here than with the Hudson River event, and we don't often post things related to Russia. 331dot (talk) 08:20, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
I think comparing a bird strike (daily occurrence) and successful controlled descent into terrain (from a few hundred metres) with Apollo 13 (the third ever attempt at a moon landing, tens of thousands of miles in space, 50-odd years ago, employing the scientific minds of NASA to find a solution....) is the biggest stretch of imagination I've seen today. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 08:30, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
I was not making a direct comparison other than the fact that people do not have to die for something to be notable. Please link to stories on double bird strikes that brought down commercial aircraft from each day of the last week(since these occur daily). 331dot (talk) 08:42, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
Apollo 13 was not heavily followed by the public until the astronauts were in danger. 331dot (talk) 08:43, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
Then why bring up Apollo 13? There are dozens of aircraft crashes in the past few years where nobody died. We haven't posted any of them. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 10:05, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
And if you read my comment correctly, you'll see I said that bird strikes are a daily occurrence. This was a bird strike. It has no long-term encyclopedic value, will have no impact on flying and hence my weak oppose. It's great that everyone survived but it's happened plenty of times. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 10:07, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
Bird strikes do happen daily. Bird strikes that take out all engines of an airliner and result in a crash landing in which everyone survives is pretty much a "less than once in a decade" event. Mjroots (talk) 11:31, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
Sure, but ultimately it was a controlled descent into terrain in which everyone survived. That has happened more than one a decade. You can intersect as many different aspects as you like to make it unique, but ultimately it's just crash from which everyone escaped but nothing will change, the EV is very low. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 11:36, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
What definition of EV are you using? 331dot (talk) 12:21, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
Clearly one that's wildly different from you as this is in no way comparable to Apollo 13. This is a minor story with no long-lasting impact, it's borderline trivia. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 12:40, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
And FYI, some light reading which demonstrates that on any given day in the US alone, seven years ago there was an average of 28 bird strikes per day. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 13:05, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
But that does not mean that 28 commercial airliners are brought down in cornfields with injuries every day. So, since this isn't notable, I guess the Hudson River incident article should be deleted. Maybe they should take the plane out of the museum, too. 331dot (talk) 15:19, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
Sure, other stuff definitely exists. I guess after a point we stop making a fuss over things that are relatively routine. Or we don't make a fuss about it at all because it happens in other countries. Who knows? As you know, they even made a movie about Sully, so it's unlikely that the Hudson page will be deleted. And also unlikely that this will be deleted either, but as for EV and newsworthiness, it's down at the bottom end of the scale. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 15:21, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
I have not kept track about how often things related to Russia are posted in INT. But this story is really small potatoes compared with several other Russia related stories that are happening now. The 9M730 Burevestnik story, nominated below, is a much more significant event, both nationally and internationally. But by far the biggest story in Russia now is the ongoing protests related to the 2019 Moscow City Duma election. Thousands of people have been arrested, and the protests have spread significantly beyond Moscow. These are the largest protests in Russia since 2011-2013[3]. If any current Russia story deserves ITN posting, it is that one, rather than a story about an aircraft birds strike. Nsk92 (talk) 08:51, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support per 331dot. Also, there is precedent as 5.44.170.9 points out above, with US Airways Flight 1549 which was posted to ITN when it happened. Regards SoWhy 08:01, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support per 331dot and SoWhy. ——SerialNumber54129 08:26, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Weak Oppose A passenger plane crash in which everyone survives is quite common. For example: [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] and this only includes large passenger aircraft since 2018. At least one of those stories involved a plane landing in the water similar to the Miracle on the Hudson. I will grant that of these six crashes, this story is the most notable because it involved the largest aircraft. However, while it is a heartwarming story, I don't believe it is notable within an international context. NorthernFalcon (talk) 08:59, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose Opposing this is not easy because it may sound like expressing some pessimistic thought because no one died. But a plane crash in which everyone survives is really not news and would be forgotten soon, in a matter of weeks at most. Whereas those with heavy fatality tend to make lasting impression to the families of victims, affect government procedures and aviation industry in general. That's why we post them, not because we relish fatality. It's just how human mind perceive events since time immemorial, we cannot change this here on Wikipedia. I've to add that, the analogy to old posting (10 years ago) is not relevant here. The same thing would not be posted if it were to be judged with today's criteria. – Ammarpad (talk) 09:47, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment An American plane, with American passengers, landing on an American river would not be reported these days? Don't make me laugh. Complete fiction. Leaky caldron (talk) 09:53, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose Mostly per Ammarpad, though I disagree on 1549. There's a big difference between a control descent 60 seconds after liftoff on your original trajectory and maneuvering an engine-less A320 to avoid crashing into a dense urban area. I would agree it was much fluffed up by having occurred in the "capital of the world." GreatCaesarsGhost 13:20, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support on the principle that we have posted near-disasters in aviation before, and otherwise meets quality and newsworthiness, and that its clear if we didn't at this point, we are showing bias. It's still being considered a major accident in terms of aviation - it is being given the same thorough investigation that a crash would have had (for those asking about lasting impact). Even if the "difficulty" of the safe landing between this crash and the 1549 flight is far different, it still was fast action to save a large number of lives. --Masem (t) 14:00, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Per 331dot, basically, but I'd more like to point out that this is definitely on the news from what I've searched, so there is at least a notability aspect to it. Plus, it was still an accident, so it's not like nothing happened, though I wouldn't call it an Apollo 13. Pie3141527182 (talk) 18:32, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support A large commercial airliner landing in a cornfield is not a routine occurrence. That there were no fatalities should not be a bar to it being significant or newsworthy. -- KTC (talk) 19:57, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
Bandera Federación Rusia, 2016.gif
  • Comment – Now he's officially a Hero of Russia – demonstrating that hype knows no borders. What next – a jaunt to the ISS? He was just doing his job, for which he evidently was well-trained. – Sca (talk) 20:20, 16 August 2019 (UTC) Asterisk TimesNewRoman.png
  • Support – NPOV. Precedent shows that if this happened in U.S., France, UK, Australia, or Canada, we would have posted it. We should set our personal feels aside and post this. It is in the news and the Hero of the Russian Federation is a nice kicker showing high notability. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 21:09, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
    Please AGF - the rationale given in opposition is perfectly reasonable, there is no cause to imply bias. And only one prior nom has been provided for precedence, and it is 10 years old. ITN has changed a lot in that time. Read that discussion; its crazy it got posted. GreatCaesarsGhost 23:25, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
    I include myself in bias and bias is not bad faith. It is a fact of life. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 03:53, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Marking as ready - article in good shape, awards of Russia's highest civilian medals to crew adds much weight to notability, its in the news and Russia is generally under-represented at ITN. Support reasons seem to outweigh oppose reasons. Mjroots (talk) 07:11, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
    You should know much better than to mark your own nomination as ready. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 07:31, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
    Marking one's own nomination as ready is allowable, as an independent admin can either post it or overrule. What is an abuse of admin tools is to post one's own nomination, especially where there are opposes. You will notice that I have not done this. Mjroots (talk) 09:14, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Posting. --Tone 09:46, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
    Wait, what? I understand that a simple majority is not enough to be considered consensus, but how can consensus exists when the majority of editors are in opposition? 75.188.224.208 (talk) 17:53, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment can we switch the image please? The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 12:22, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Post-posting commentAsterisk TimesNewRoman.png "I really don't feel like a hero," Capt. Yusupov said. "I did what I had to do." – Sca (talk) 15:17, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Vidya Sinha[edit]

Article: Vidya Sinha (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): Hindu

Article updated

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Start Class article with decent sourcing I am working on the filmography now excellent sourcing. DBigXray 15:33, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Fixed The sourcing issues have all been fixed now. The Rambling Man please review again.--DBigXray 07:34, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
Support satis. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 14:38, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
thanks Tone, can someone post the credits. regards.--DBigXray 12:35, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
now done by Tone.--DBigXray 15:11, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

August 14[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Health and environment

Law and crime

Politics and elections

(Posted) RD: Frank Tsao[edit]

Article: Frank Tsao (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): Straits Times, SCMP

Article updated

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: multinational shipping magnate. Died on August 12, announced on August 14. Zanhe (talk) 00:46, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

  • Support Short but adequate. One could wish for a few more references for diversity of coverage, but the ones cited appear to be RS and the article is acceptably cited. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:02, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support. It would be preferable to have a couple more sources since ref [1] goes up to [r] but otherwise fine.  Nixinova T  C  06:51, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
@Ad Orientem and Nixinova: I've added more sources and content, including several published books. I've only included sources with in-depth coverage of him. -Zanhe (talk) 19:42, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

(Closed) August 2019 Philadelphia shooting[edit]

AGF nom that won't gain traction. Six injuries and no deaths isn't notable in the grand scheme of things in the US. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 03:37, 15 August 2019 (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: August 2019 Philadelphia shooting (talk, history)
Blurb: ​In the United States, six Philadelphia police officers are shot.
News source(s): CNN, NBC News

Article needs updating
 Davey2116 (talk) 23:26, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose Limited long-term impact. Given the US's history of shootings, article doesn't make it clear how this event stands out among the dozens of other ones that have happened this year. SpencerT•C 01:45, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose Fails WP:BODYCOUNT. Mass shootings are far too common in the US to post all but the most serious. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:49, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment The article is nowhere near ready for the main page as of now. But lets be honest, people don't shoot at cops every day in the U.S. This is not normal. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:50, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose This looks like they got shot while on duty, responding to a general gang shootout. While sad, this is equivalent to military personnel dying in aircraft accidents. It's nowhere close to the previous shooting events. --Masem (t) 01:57, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose no deaths (Thank God!), and as said earlier not really newsworthy in the U.S.. – John M Wolfson (talkcontribs) 03:28, 15 August 2019 (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) Nyonoksa evacuation[edit]

Closed in favor of #9M730 Burevestnik. – Ammarpad (talk) 18:26, 14 August 2019 (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: Nyonoksa (talk, history)
Blurb: ​In the wake of an unexplained explosion at a nuclear testing facility near Nyonoksa, Russia, local residents are ordered to evacuate by Russian officials.
News source(s): New York Times, The Independent,
Nominator's comments: May need a better target; there's enough on Google to create a new article if needed. Jayron32 16:53, 14 August 2019 (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: Ningali Lawford[edit]

Article: Ningali Lawford (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): ABC

Article updated

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Start class article. Death reported on 14 August. DBigXray 06:11, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Polly Farmer[edit]

Article: Graham Farmer (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): The Age

Article updated

Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: The article is currently the subject of a Requested move from Graham Farmer to Polly Farmer. The latter is the person's clear common name and is already a redirect. HiLo48 (talk) 03:34, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

  • Oppose A few unsourced patches, but the article is not far off. Hrodvarsson (talk) 04:54, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
@Hrodvarsson: I have added a couple of references that cover his awards, and membership of premiership teams. Are there other concerns? (Maybe you could cn them.) HiLo48 (talk) 06:40, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support he is probably one of the first Excitement Machines of the VFL and WAFL. — Bronwyn Gannan (talk) 08:12, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support a notable Australian Rules Footballer recognized as such across Australia. Dan arndt (talk) 09:47, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose a sprinkling of [citation needed] tags in there which must be resolved before posting. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 09:50, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
All fixed. OK now? HiLo48 (talk) 11:43, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
Support good to go. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 16:12, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support blurb - Literally considered a Legend in his field.--WaltCip (talk) 15:36, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
Not sure that Aussie rules is a big enough field though.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 15:42, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
Waverley Park's field was originally 200 metres long and 160 metres across. That's a big field in my book.--WaltCip (talk) 15:51, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
@Pawnkingthree:, yes, it's a sport you're obviously not familiar with. I suggest you have a look at the attendances at games. See List of sports attendance figures#Top 10 leagues in average attendance. HiLo48 (talk) 22:23, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
It was never going to get a blurb, HiLo48, that was the only point I was making. Attendances have nothing to do with it. Pawnkingthree (talk) 23:59, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
You made no point that I could see, and it was a typical comment from someone not familiar with a particular sport, and consequently denigrating it. And you're still doing it. HiLo48 (talk) 08:42, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Support RD referencing issues appear to have been resolved.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 15:46, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Posted to RD  — Amakuru (talk) 18:14, 14 August 2019 (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: