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.

Gotabaya Rajapaksa in 2014
Gotabaya Rajapaksa

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).
    • Do not add sections for new dates. These are automatically generated (at midnight UTC) by a bot; creating them manually breaks this process.
  • 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pulled from the main page are generally marked with (Posted) or (Pulled) in the item's subject so it is clear they are no longer active.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]

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. accuse other editors of supporting, opposing or nominating due to a personal bias (such as ethnocentrism). Conflicts of interest are not handled at ITN.
  4. comment on a story without first reading the relevant article(s).
  5. 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)
Skip to top
Skip to bottom

Archives[edit]

August 8[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

2020 Belarusian protests[edit]

Article: 2020 Belarusian protests (talk, history)
Blurb: ​The largest protests since 1995 erupt in Belarus in the run-up to the 2020 presidential elections, which are met with an increasing crackdown by the Lukashenko regime. (Post)
News source(s): BBC, Euronews

Large scale significant protests in Belarus, ongoing for some time, gaining significant momentum and coverage in recent days.Abcmaxx (talk) 13:18, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

  • Support - article seems ready. Perhaps add it together with voting results tomorrow.--BabbaQ (talk) 14:21, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment The main article is 2020 Belarusian protests, I've added it to the blurb. Brandmeistertalk 14:48, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

August 7[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology
  • Reddit reports it was hit by a major hack, in which hackers took control of at least 70 of the most-popular subreddits and their respective moderator accounts to spam pro-Trump messages. A site spokesperson said an investigation is underway. (Wired) (CNet)

RD: Adin Steinsaltz[edit]

Article: Adin Steinsaltz (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [1]
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Prolific scholar and groundbreaking translator of the Talmud. Sir Joseph (talk) 18:09, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

  • Oppose tagged. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 18:19, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
    I removed the tag, the page did not need the full tag on the whole page. I see a few spare "when" but nothing that seems too major for such a large article. Sir Joseph (talk) 18:28, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose too much uncited material. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 22:51, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
    Coffeeandcrumbs, I have filled in more than enough to get it at RD. ("Of sufficient quality.") Sir Joseph (talk) 00:13, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
    I don't see his death mentioned and cited in the article and, if we don't have a source for his exact date of birth, it should be removed from the lead. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 02:42, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
    OK Folks. Added mentions of his death in the article. Added a few other references. Done. I think the top-of-the-fold section looks reasonably clean. Ktin (talk) 03:30, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) Air India Express Flight 1344[edit]

Proposed image
Article: Air India Express Flight 1344 (talk, history)
Blurb: ​An Air India Express Boeing 737 aircraft (pictured) with 191 people on board crashes at an airport in the southern state of Kerala, India, killing at least seventeen people. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​An Air India Express plane with 191 people on board overruns a runway at an airport in the southern state of Kerala, India, killing at least seventeen people.
News source(s): BBC, AP, Reuters
Credits:

Article needs updating

Nominator's comments: Developing. Sherenk1 (talk) 16:15, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

  • Support: 15 dead, 135 injuries ❯❯❯   S A H A 17:29, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
    the alt blurb is more accurate ❯❯❯   S A H A 18:02, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Weak Oppose Disasterous but the article currently has insufficient content.--AlphaBeta135 (talk) 16:44, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
    Support Now that article has a sufficient amount of info.--AlphaBeta135 (talk) 17:29, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
  • WaitReportedly two casualties, 30-40 injured. – Sca (talk) 16:49, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support - 15+ dead, article coming together nicely. Mjroots (talk) 17:05, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support hull loss, many dead. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 17:34, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Strong Support Dozens dead, possibly up to 200 potential deaths and injuries. Eternal Shadow Talk 17:35, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support. Per above notes. Someone knowledgeable about this topic, please feel free to update the blurb if there is a difference between 'crash' and overrunning runway / runway excursion. Also now that we know the number onboard, we perhaps update the nearly 200 onboard to the actual number onboard. Added Altblurb above.Ktin (talk) 17:53, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
    Ktin, overrun is appropriate. ❯❯❯   S A H A 17:55, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Causalities will likely climb looking at the wreakage alone. Support characterization as crash instead of runway excursion, since this will be complete hull loss and its well pass the runway in a valley. Albertaont (talk) 18:04, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support It just happened a couple of minutes ago. Plane fell into the valley and 15+ dead. 70.106.212.233 (talk) 18:27, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support - seems ready for posting.BabbaQ (talk) 18:31, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Marked ready. – Ammarpad (talk) 18:36, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Posted alt blurb. -- King of ♥ 21:07, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) 2020 Sri Lankan parliamentary election[edit]

Article: 2020 Sri Lankan parliamentary election (talk, history)
Blurb: ​Incumbent party Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna led by Gotabaya Rajapaksa claims a landslide victory in the parliamentary election. (Post)
News source(s): BBC, CNN, Al Jazeera
Credits:

Article updated

Nominated event is listed at WP:ITN/R, meaning that the recurrence of the event should in itself merit a post on WP:ITN, subject to the quality of the article and any update(s) to it.

Nominator's comments: Sri Lanka was the only country in the world without a functioning parliament for months amid COVID-19 pandemic and this is an importamt election to determine the stability of the ruling government. It is also important as Sri Lanka is the only South Asian country to have held election in the middle of a pandemic. Abishe (talk) 02:07, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

  • Comment This is ITN/R, so I have edited the nom to reflect that. The results section needs a prose update and the results should also be included in the infobox and lede, which incidentally is overly long and some of its material should be moved to the body. Bzweebl (talkcontribs) 02:26, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Just to clarify, the above was intended as an oppose on quality with the hope that the editors currently working on the article will fix the deficiencies I described, but I didn't think it would be necessary to make that explicit because I assumed succeeding !voters would agree that the article needs improvement. Bzweebl (talkcontribs) 03:44, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Some recent elections have gone stale on ITN, this is not one of them. Thanks again for the work so far, agree with @Bzweebl: article needs minor touch-up, but the substance is there.Albertaont (talk) 02:36, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support per nomination, and above points. Blurb looks good too! Ktin (talk) 03:00, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support - Looks good. Prose is there as well. Sherenk1 (talk) 03:37, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment a few uncited sentences at the end of paragraphs and in the timeline; consider this a support once those are addressed. – John M Wolfson (talkcontribs) 04:57, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Article looks good, with a few fixes needed. Major election in Sri Lanka. ~ Destroyeraa (talk|Contribs) 12:57, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment I hope I fixed those concerns mentioned above but hope the overall shape of the article is okayish. Cheers. Abishe (talk) 13:22, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Article looks better now. Thanks to Abishe and others for their efforts. Bzweebl (talkcontribs) 17:40, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support on the face of it, this looks ready. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 18:25, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Looks OK – Ammarpad (talk) 18:42, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Posted. SpencerT•C 02:29, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

August 6[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

(Ready) RD: Wayne Fontana[edit]

Article: Wayne Fontana (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Guardian, BBC, The Daily Telegraph, Standard
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: British singer best known for "Game of Love." P-K3 (talk) 17:56, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

  • Support Reasonably good coverage in article, everything seems to be sourced. Martinevans123 (talk) 07:09, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose' there are several singles which aren't showing any chart positions at all which means they are currently unverifiable, unless there's a general source somewhere in there for such flops. And where do I verify all those catalogue numbers? The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 09:52, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

RD Brent Scowcroft[edit]

Article: Brent Scowcroft (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NBC NYT
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Article has been updated recently but now has multiple cn tags —valereee (talk) 17:39, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

  • Support Looks like referencing issues have been addressed. SpencerT•C 02:26, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Looks good enough. cn tags have been removed. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 03:58, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Weak support decent article, the first three honours appear to be unreferenced, the rest seems satis. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 09:55, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support, if anyone has any concerns please specify them and we can see if we can get them addressed. KConWiki (talk) 14:49, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) Ram Mandir, Ayodhya[edit]

Proposed image
Article: Ram Mandir, Ayodhya (talk, history)
Blurb: Ram Temple construction officially starts after Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi performs the ground-breaking ceremony (pictured). (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​After it was first proposed in the 1980s, construction of the controversial Ram Mandir, Ayodhya temple begins in India, attended by Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
Alternative blurb II: Ram Temple construction officially starts after Prime Minister Narendra Modi lays the foundation stone.
Alternative blurb III: ​In India, construction of the Ram Temple on disputed land officially begins with Prime Minister Narendra Modi laying the cornerstone.
Alternative blurb IV: ​*Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi begins the groundwork of the Lord Ram temple at the disputed site which was the former location of the demolished Babri Masjid.
News source(s): (ALT Blurb II sources: CNN, Hindustan Times)
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Adding background/context, as requested in the comment section below: The temple construction started on 5 August 2020 in Ayodhya. It was followed by decades of legal and other battles. This is a very major and significant event in India and in the subcontinent. Time (magazine) has explained in an article why it matters. Deccan Herald prepared a note with 10 key facts. To know more about how it unfolded over the years, kindly read this The Times of India article.
Please feel free to suggest alternative blurbs. Titodutta (talk) 03:16, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

  • Comment This is not an area I know much about, would the nominator (@Titodutta:) be able to give some context about why starting construction of a building is significant in this case? Kingsif (talk) 04:03, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Greetings, I have added comments above. Regards. --Titodutta (talk) 04:20, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support in principle. From the links provided above, this is receiving international attention as a prominent and controversial religious matter that has spanned at least the last 30 years just about this temple, let alone the site it's on. Modi's attendance adds to the story. I haven't judged the article, yet, so this !vote could change if it's in poor condition. Kingsif (talk) 05:59, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • leaning Oppose - we did already post this story, when the supreme Court made the decision to allow the temple last November. [2] [3] So in effect this is just another development in the same story, much like the spacecraft returning to earth after earlier launching. Unless I'm missing something?  — Amakuru (talk) 07:09, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • leaning Support with a better blurb. Has shown up on ITN within the last year, but the Ayodhya dispute is an 80+ year saga that's had enormous ramifications on Indian society and politics. Its generally credited with kick-starting the now-dominant Bharatiya Janata Party for one thing. Given the length of time between events it doesn't seem unreasonable to mention again. --RaiderAspect (talk) 08:36, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Major event in one of the greatest controversies in Indian history and society. I recommend linking to Ayodhya dispute in the blurb to provide context for unfamiliar readers. This is at least equally significant to the court decision we posted last year. Bzweebl (talkcontribs) 09:25, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support, per Bzweebl. A better blurb is needed, however.—Brigade Piron (talk) 10:02, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support and added another blurb. – John M Wolfson (talkcontribs) 10:47, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Alt III. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 10:47, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose This seems similar to the Hagia Sophia story which wasn't posted. If this has already been posted once then giving it more exposure again so soon seems premature. The ceremony in this case seems mainly to have been a photo-op for Modi and doesn't seem to be getting much attention outside India. Better to wait until the temple is completed and officially opened when there will be an actual building to report. Andrew🐉(talk) 11:47, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
Andrew Davidson "Because x didn't get it, y shouldn't too" has been established to be an INVALID arguement. If you are going to oppose this, you're going to have to look at it on its own. Dantheanimator (talk) 15:22, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose per Amakuru this was posted last fall. The "ground breaking" is ceremonial. Nominate again when it's complete. --LaserLegs (talk) 12:12, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support - As per above supports. Sherenk1 (talk) 12:20, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose. The article states that construction has been underway for four months, so this ceremony does seem like a photo op rather than a substantial step. That doesn't seem major enough to post the same story twice. Furthermore, if the dispute over this temple has had widespread impacts, it really isn't obvious from the article. Modest Genius talk 12:25, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Article looks ok. I'm not a Hindu but this seems to have some importance in the faith so in that way it is significant. (Hinduism is 1 of the 5 major religions of the world). Dantheanimator (talk) 15:19, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose on quality. Neither the article nor any of the blurbs succeed in explaining the event's significance. Alt0 and Alt2 don't even pretend to. —Cryptic 15:23, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support - with Altblurb 4 that explains the events broader context. It is getting global coverage outside of India. The date chosen seem to have been the anniversary of the revocation of autonomy of Jammu and Kashmir, but that could be a coincidence.Albertaont (talk) 15:37, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment This is ready to be posted. Dantheanimator (talk) 18:15, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Posted Went with Alt 3, which IMHO explain significance best. --Jayron32 18:42, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Post-posting comment For those questioning the significance of this, my understanding from past reading on the dispute is that this is THE most important symbolic flashpoint of Hindu-Muslim tensions in India. The section in the bolded article on the ground-breaking ceremony should give a sense on how big a deal it was in the context of the overall controversy. The ceremony was broadcast and celebrated by Hindus all over the world. Bzweebl (talkcontribs) 19:09, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Post-posting feedback on blurb: Is it right to say "disputed", once the Supreme court gave its final verdict on this matter in November of 2019? My thinking is that prior to this time, it would be alright to say "disputed", but, post the supreme court verdict, we should not be using the phrase "disputed". Also, in perhaps a minor point, we might want to reconsider starting with "In India". This brings up the systemic geographic bias that was being discussed yesterday, and gives the impression that the center of our universe is somewhere in the western world. E.g. we didn't start the post about the Spanish king by saying, "In Spain, ...". I know getting consensus on a blurb is a challenging one, but, AltBlurb2 remains the most neutral. Cheers. Ktin (talk) 19:23, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
    • As the person who (mainly) wrote the blurb on the page, a) the Supreme Court case did not change that this is still the flashpoint of strained Hindu-Muslim relations, and b) we said that Juan Carlos was the "King of Spain" in the blurb, thereby providing geographical context, and given that most people in the Western world (this is the English Wikipedia, after all) are not privy to this dispute, adding "In India" is a brief yet effective way to provide needed geographic context. – John M Wolfson (talkcontribs) 19:28, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
      • Regarding a), I have added my notes below to Jayron32's comment. Regarding b), sure, please do what is best. I agree with you that whatever conveys the message in a succinct manner and with brevity, should be done. But, on a minor point, we should just be aware of our biases when we say "in the Western World (this is the English Wikipedia, after all)" -- ~87% of the Wikipedia traffic from India is to the English Wikipedia (source). So, the western world can not be the only preserve of the English Wikipedia, or vice versa. But, to give you the benefit of doubt, only ~10% of all Wikipedia traffic comes from India. So, maybe that is driving your thinking. Cool either ways. Cheers. Ktin (talk) 20:04, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
    • Per John M Wolfson, the dispute exists whether or not any legal conclusion was reached. The end of the dispute happens when there is no longer a significant dispute from opposition groups. The groups who were opposed to the temple construction still do, and the dispute is itself what makes this a major news event. Places of worship are under construction all over the world all the time, what makes this one newsworthy is that this one has been the source of tension in one of the world's largest nations. --Jayron32 19:31, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
      • Will let you guys decide the appropriate wording. You might know this better than me. But, "disputed" seems wrong, particularly when the it took the courts 28 years to end the dispute by providing a resolution. Now, will some parties to the dispute be aggrieved at the end of a verdict, perhaps yes, but, the whole reason a verdict was announced was to close a dispute, so to speak. Re: the second point, sure, please do what is best. Cheers.Ktin (talk) 19:37, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
        • I'm not particularly tied to one word in particular, if you have a word that better encapsulates the controversy without using "dispute", I'm open to changing it. I'm just not smart enough to think of one myself. --Jayron32 19:51, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
        • Also, I read this once more - the blurb clearly says building "on disputed land", I don't think the law would allow you to build on disputed land. If somoene were to do that, they would be breaking the law, and we don't want to be implying that the folks who are building are breaking the law. Cheers.Ktin (talk) 19:52, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
          • Jayron32, I must admit, I am in the same boat as well. Hence my thinking was that using Altblurb2 was the most neutral way to go about this one. Maybe pop in 'Indian' in between to give the geographical context. Thanks. Ktin (talk) 20:25, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
          • Ktin, in the context of the sentence, it can be reasonably inferred that by "dispute" it means "controversial". Also, consider the fact that "disputed land" is linked to the article, so any reader such as you can just click/hover over the link to learn more about the "dispute". You're interpreting "dispute" to politically, this is more of a socio-cultural thing from what I know (similar to the situation of East Jerusalem). If you want more clarification, just send me a ping and I'll be glad to make this clear for you. Dantheanimator (talk) 20:21, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
          • (edit conflict) Ktin, you just openly accused people of being racists here. You probably don't want to do that if you really are trying to convince people to help you out. Furthermore, I asked you for some help in crafting better wording. Your response was 1) to delete my request for help and 2) to go back to an earlier post of yours and edit it to accuse anyone who doesn't do exactly what you want to be a racist. Good luck with that. I'm done trying to be helpful to you. You can find someone else to do your bidding. --Jayron32 20:24, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
            • @Jayron32: Please let me admit that I am not accusing anyone of anything. There was a genuine edit conflict. Let me be the first one to apologize, if I gave anyone the impression that I was casting aspersions on them. Specifically, John M Wolfson, please accept my apologies, if that was what came out. I will stand down. Thanks everyone. Have a nice day. Ktin (talk) 20:30, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

August 5[edit]

Arts and culture

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

(Posted) RD: Horace Clarke[edit]

Article: Horace Clarke (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times; New York Post; New York Daily News
Credits:

Article updated

 Bloom6132 (talk) 13:17, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Hawa Abdi[edit]

Article: Hawa Abdi (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times
Credits:

Article updated

 Bloom6132 (talk) 15:13, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

  • Comment The DHAF site used as a reference for a couple statements is under construction. Hrodvarsson (talk) 21:04, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Pete Hamill[edit]

Article: Pete Hamill (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Associated Press; The New York Times
Credits:

Article updated

 Bloom6132 (talk) 11:24, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

  • Support pretty decently referenced article JW 1961 Talk 12:29, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Commment Fails MOS:ROLEBIO, listing everything but the kitchen sink in the lead sentence.Bagumba (talk) 13:24, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
    I got rid of "educator".[4] The rest might arguably be notable enough to stay.—Bagumba (talk) 13:31, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Well-referenced, looks ready.-- P-K3 (talk) 13:30, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • @Spencer, Stephen, and Amakuru: I think this is ready to go. —Bloom6132 (talk) 15:13, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Posted --Jayron32 18:34, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) Hurricane Isaias[edit]

Consensus against posting. Ignoring the never-ending bickering about US-bias, this event falls short of ITN notability by hurricane standards. Although effects were widespread, it's a run-of-the-mill low-end hurricane that will be forgotten in due time. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 01:40, 6 August 2020 (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: Hurricane Isaias (talk, history)
Blurb: ​Hurricane Isaias brings causes significant damage along the East Coast of the United States, spawning at least 10 tornadoes in an outbreak and killing 13+. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​Hurricane Isaias makes landfall in North Carolina and causes significant damage in much of the eastern United States.
News source(s): [5]
Credits:

Article updated
 ~ Destroyeraa (talk
  • Support in the news, thorough article, and storm during storm season does storm things is an established pattern here. Also deaths. --LaserLegs (talk) 19:56, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
    WP:POINT. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 22:34, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support For me a hurricane that causes significant impact to millions and leads to 10+ deaths is enough to post. Article is already in good shape. -- King of ♥ 20:04, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support in principle -- Question for folks who might know -- the article is worded "Hurricane Isaias was a category 1 hurricane" -- is that because the worst of the hurricane is behind us now? Also, is there a thumb-rule in this group about a category threshold above which a hurricane is relevant to be posted on ITN? E.g. Category 3 and beyond. I am assuming not. Ktin (talk) 20:08, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
@Ktin: Damage repairs and estimates are still ongoing. For second question: ni, only if it is notable and causes significant damage/kills people.~ Destroyeraa (talk|Contribs) 20:17, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
The hurricane itself is done. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:23, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
Got it. Thanks folks @InedibleHulk: and @Destroyeraa:. Hope everyone in the NE is safe. Ktin (talk) 20:39, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
Which one is the deadliest storm of this season? We should definitely post that one :) Ktin (talk) 20:31, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
Cristobal. Not even sure it got nominated. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 20:32, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
Got it. Seems like we missed it. We should not miss this one. Ktin (talk) 20:39, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
It was missed because it was non-notable, just like this. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 20:45, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
Very Interesting. Is there a numerical threshold to being 'notable'? Ktin (talk) 20:51, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
Well history tells us that around 30 to 40 deaths is the usual threshold for such storms to be considered worthwhile posting (I've only gone back as far as 2015 mind you). Setting the bar this low on a hurricane season would literally open the door to monthly postings of regular weather patterns in the US which fade away almost immediately. Perhaps we could add a new line to ITN during hurricane season in the US alone to publish all the various storms there for our audience. In the meantime, floods in India and China with far more impact on much less-developed countries are routinely dismissed as "standard weather for this time of year". Double standards anyone? The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 20:56, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
2020 Pacific typhoon season has caused 6 fatalities all year. China hasn't been hard hit by typhoons recently, there only having 1 fatality from that country in 2020.
2020 China floods were posted to ongoing last month for 11 days with no opposition.
2020 Assam floods weren't posted because the article wasn't updated enough. (It still is!) Only IndelibleInk opposed based on importance grounds. Howard the Duck (talk) 21:07, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
Indeed, and that's just this year. How many over the last five years ridiculed and objected to through systemic bias? Yet people support this trivial storm, the like of which happens several times per year in one isolated part of the world? Amazing. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 21:09, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
Thanks Howard. This is good to know. So, seems like with all of this, we should go ahead with posting this one. Let's move forward. Also, at the risk of stating the obvious, I do not think we should trivialize the less developed countries and their suffering as "standard time of the year". I am onboard that we should be posting those in a timely manner. Ktin (talk) 21:37, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
Yep. Typhoon Jebi (2018) killed 17 surely non-Caucasians and was posted. Good work, Wikipedia! Howard the Duck (talk) 21:16, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
That is outstanding research. Meantime in 2019 there were something like eight notable floods in India alone with death tolls in excess of 50, none of which were posted, most of which weren't nominated. Let's just run a US weather ticker under the Covid banner, that's much easier than all this silly debate. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 21:19, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
Without wishing to get into the debate above about deaths, as not every significant tropical cyclone causes a significant amount of deaths. We are currently trying to examine the way forward with meteorology articles at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Meteorology and User talk:Jason Rees/Flood articles. Comments are welcome while suggestions are vital.Jason Rees (talk) 21:33, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
Agree with Ktin. Cristobal didnt get posted bc we didnt know it caused 15 deaths till laye July! Always thought it caused only 5. ~ Destroyeraa (talk|Contribs) 20:54, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support. 13 deaths and affected 6 countries of Florida, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, Maryland and New York. We post ITNR entries that affect far less than 6 countries. Howard the Duck (talk) 20:39, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
    Sadly a relatively trivial number of people killed and infrastructure affected in almost all of those "countries". More people have been killed in the US by mass shootings in the same amount of time Isaias has been trundling along. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 20:45, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
    Those are states, not countries. Affected more than 6 countries - Dominica, Trinidad+Tobago, Dominican Republic, Bahamas, US, Grenada, Britain (territories). ~ Destroyeraa (talk|Contribs) 20:49, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
    Sorry. Those were Easter eggs linking to actual countries affected by this natural disaster. Even the queen's realms (plural!) were affected. Howard the Duck (talk) 20:52, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
Technically, the United States are 51 sovereign states, hence the name. And only seven people have died in mass shootings this month, from just six counties (encapsulating Mulholland Drive). There was one in a federal district, most recently, everyone lived. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:29, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
Exactly! 7 is 6 less than 13. The Rambling Man, you can keep Rambling about how it's not notable and that 13 deaths are nothing. This is notable. ~ Destroyeraa (talk|Contribs) 22:25, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
I don't follow you at all, but please stop trying to canvass votes. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 22:26, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
And sure, mass shootings in August in the US amount to seven dead, but it's only 4 August. More than 60 in July. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 22:29, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
(I clarified here, but it was destroyed, now TRM's pissed, so forget it. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:39, 5 August 2020 (UTC))
Um, if you mean "upset" then no, I'm just saying people killed in mass shootings in August (it's the 4th) nearly equates to the death toll here. And if you meant "drunk" then also no. I don't think your comment is very helpful at all and I'd urge you to strike it/explain it/apologise for a borderline NPA. Cheers. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 23:44, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose If death and destruction are what's hot, and the hotter one wasn't, this one's not. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:43, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose This was already nominated on Aug 1. Posting it then might have been sensible but it has dissipated now. Andrew🐉(talk) 21:07, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
    @Andrew Davidson: If it needs to be backdated, so be it. It's still more recent than the two 7/26 blurbs. -- King of ♥ 21:26, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
    It would make sense if it was a truly notable storm. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 21:27, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support After all, it did damage a lot of structures (and injure people) in the East Coast.--AlphaBeta135 (talk) 21:15, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
If it weren't going on after a whole lot of buildings (and people) were blown right away in Beirut, it'd be impressive; timing matters in the news. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:24, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose. While 13 deaths and loss of property etc is certainly tragic, it seems like that is not at the level which it would make sense to post, bearing in mind the frequency of expected events at that level. As an aside, re "Setting the bar this low on a hurricane season would literally open the door to monthly postings", I'm curious where this door is, which will be literally opened if we're not careful? Might be worth putting anotbet padlock on it.  — Amakuru (talk) 22:05, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
If you don't mind my asking. What is that 'level' where it would make sense to post? Re: your latter question, I am tagging The Rambling Man to give you the location of that door. Ktin (talk) 22:15, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
Standard door, it's got "systemic bias" just above the knocker. Cheers Ktin! The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 22:18, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
oh, that door. I know it well, and I've seen many people going through it in the past. It has a big red warning sign on it but is still left wide open for all to pass through.  — Amakuru (talk) 22:33, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
I think on this one, I am on the same page as you The Rambling Man. However, the way to fix it is not to oppose everything else, but, instead when we see systemic bias denying an action for a under-represented region, we should speak up. Cheers. Ktin (talk) 22:43, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment and now the canvassing begins. Honestly. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 22:21, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose as thankfully it was not a devastating hurricane as can be seen by the relatively low number of deaths and people losing power rather than losing everything. P-K3 (talk) 22:27, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment – How much damage is 'signficant,' and how does this hurricane rate on a scale of 1-10 compared to other hurricanes in this regard? (Personally, I find most weather news inherently boring.)Sca (talk) 22:28, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
    It's a "3 out of 10" based on my reading of the last six years of this hurricane season thing. This is relatively trivial even in the context of hurricanes, let alone the context of global encyclopedic events (such as Beirut). Posting this would be a sublime kowtow to systemic bias. But Donald the Orange would be happy to see the US winning again, while pointing to some graphs he knows literally nothing about! The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 22:33, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose, the article is in good shape, but in the grand scheme of things this is just a low-grade hurricane, which makes notability and systemic bias concerns certainly valid. Titoxd(?!?) 22:31, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Just look at what else is in the news. Half of the capital city of Lebanon has been destroyed by an explosion. A (former) king goes into exile! That would be huge news two centuries ago. Guyana now has a clear winner, five months after its election. (I really hope that doesn't happen to US's election ._.) And then an $11 billion scandal that took down a prime minister of Malaysia. All of these are major historic events. Isaias was a deadly storm, it spawned several tornadoes, and brought the strongest winds to large parts of the northeastern United States. Perhaps the power outage, as millions of people are without power. In June, Cyclone Nisarga left about 2.5 million people without power (more than Isaias), but it wasn't on ITN (as far as I know). Isaias doesn't seem like the kind of historic storm that the world has gotten used to in the past few decades. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:31, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
    Good analysis. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 22:35, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
    Don't forgot the literal, actual bus plunge we posted just last month. --LaserLegs (talk) 22:52, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
    Yes, the one where 21 people died in a flash in a under-developed country as opposed to where 13 people died in "the greatest country on earth" from typical weather. Bravo. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 22:56, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
    Well you bot the greatest country on earth bit right anyway --LaserLegs (talk) 22:59, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
    Certainly the greatest at killing its citizens with an orange leader advocating the use drugs which actively exacerbates Covid-19 deaths? You're welcome to it!!!! The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 23:00, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
    And "you bot"... you couldn't make it up! Like the CIA are trying to convert Wikipedia into their vessel! Brilliant. I go to bed a happy man, thanks LaseLegs, always up for it! The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 23:04, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
    Ha, your country thinks seven o' clock is bedtime! InedibleHulk (talk) 23:08, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
    What the actual fuck are you talking about?! Come back when you have something meaningful (and/or accurate) to say!! The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 23:10, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
    Given that it's currently 00:27 in the UK, that seems quite reasonable. What time do you sleep over there in the good 'ol USA? Black Kite (talk) 23:27, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
    It was supposed to be a lighthearted time zone joke. I'm Canadian. But fine, I'll kill myself, sheesh (no, not really). InedibleHulk (talk) 23:33, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
    Yes it is quite a burden having the most powerful, most important country in the world where the inept flailing of our leader demands international attention. There was a time when the inept leader of Great Britain would have demanded international attention but alas, the sun has set on that era. Too bad. --LaserLegs (talk) 23:10, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
    Ah, Trump is literally in a league of his own. And then you have Brazil's Bolsonaro. Our bonkers PM is way down on the list. Meanwhile the US is "winningest" at dead people from Covid and it's getting much much worse. "Mask debate" sounds like "masturbate" when y'all say it too. Brilliant. My life is nearly complete! The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 23:15, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

Just close this discussion bc the consensus is clearly against me. ~ Destroyeraa (talk|Contribs) 22:52, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

I was running against the wind. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:01, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment Seems like we are trending toward yet another "Unable to reach consensus" closure. This is not bad in and of itself. Speaks to the vibrancy of our debates. But, sometimes we should remind ourselves that this is "In the news" and not "In the olds" and show some bias to action. After all this section is not a "This day in history!". Cheers folks. Ktin (talk) 22:55, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
    Nice thought, but given this has been nominated twice, it's been tortuous and unnecessary. Probably worth knowing when a dead duck is a dead duck. The Rambling Man (Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 22:57, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose I don't see this in any news outside of the US. Doesn't seem like a very deadly or notable storm. Albertaont (talk) 23:14, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose Not even close to the biggest story in the US. 160,000 dead from COVID now, is it? Black Kite (talk) 23:23, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose This actually ended up being less of a story than I was expecting, which I suppose is probably for the better. Pie3141527182 (talk) 00:37, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose The impact of the storm in the Caribbean was mild enough to not post then, and in the US and Canada... a few COVID-19 testing centers closed (something which couldn't happen at any other time). Basically, it rained heavily for half a day in a few states. Suggest close based on the strong opposes above and the fact it's not a story, it's a minor weather pattern. Storms just exist, only their effects really give notability over other wind, and this had none. Kingsif (talk) 00:52, 6 August 2020 (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.

August 4[edit]

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

Law and crime

Politics and elections

(Closed) RD: FBG Duck[edit]

No consensus, at AfD. Stephen 04:24, 7 August 2020 (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: FBG Duck (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NBC News, New York Post, BBC, Billboard, Pitchfork
Credits:

Article updated
 —Collint c 00:38, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose for now. Someone mentioned a dead duck in the section above this one, and now, tragically, here's an actual dead duck. Anyway, the article text is 1118 bytes so it's pretty much a stub right now, it'll need to get above 1500 at least. A couple of unreferwnced claims in there too. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 06:56, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose For now also as plenty of unreferenced sentences and the whole discography section JW 1961 Talk 12:33, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Not only is this a stub, it was only moved to article space after they were killed [6]. They only released one EP and most of the references in the article are about the shooting. I don't think this person passes WP:BLP1E or WP:BAND. Modest Genius talk 12:41, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose per above. Dan the Animator (Commons Room) 01:31, 7 August 2020 (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: Daisy Coleman[edit]

Article: Daisy Coleman (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NBC News,BBC News,New York Times
Credits:

Article updated

 TJMSmith (talk) 20:31, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

  • Comment I don't know enough about this tragedy really to pass comment on this nomination other than to question if this individual really surpasses WP:BLP1E. I note her article used to redirect to the documentary about her and that was changed an hour ago. An AFD for her article in 2017 suggested her article redirect to Audrie & Daisy and I'm not sure I'm seeing any compelling evidence about Coleman in the intervening time to suggest she warrants a standalone article. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 21:33, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
Fair point. Coleman is the subject of her assault, and the aforementioned documentary, plus her untimely death is generating additional significant coverage. I think she meets WP:BASIC. TJMSmith (talk) 23:08, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support per TJMSmith, there is significant ongoing coverage that predates the documentary. The AFD is uninformative as there was no actual "article" at the time. GreatCaesarsGhost 11:29, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support per above; saw it in the news before coming to this, article as stands is fine and covers her previous activism and the documentary, so meets notability for an article. Kingsif (talk) 22:35, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support per above. Dan the Animator (Commons Room) 03:47, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Posted Stephen 04:20, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) 2020 Beirut port explosions[edit]

Article: 2020 Beirut port explosions (talk, history)
Blurb: ​A pair of large explosions cause extensive damage in Beirut (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​A series of explosions in Beirut, Lebanon kills over ten people, and causes extensive damage over the city
News source(s): BBC Reuters, AP, Al Jazeera, dpa (Eng.)
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Breaking news Andrew🐉(talk) 16:43, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

  • Wait till the cause is known. Also needs a map, background and reactions sections. --LaserLegs (talk) 16:53, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support. Massive explosion heard 250 km away in Cyprus. Count Iblis (talk) 16:57, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Wait for more details to emerge. From the videos being reported, this is a very big explosion and certainly seems significant enough to merit an ITN blurb. However there is very little reliable information available yet and the article is very short. Give it a few hours. Modest Genius talk 17:09, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support - Very clearly the most notable event of the day. --Posted by Pikamander2 (Talk) at 17:11, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support - Notable, widely covered in reliable sources. Article is being rapidly expanded, but that's to be expected, and it's semi-protected, so vandalism will be mitigated. Ganesha811 (talk) 17:15, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Wait a few hours. Article is still a stub and there are few details available yet.-- P-K3 (talk) 17:17, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support - Exteremly Important situation, being covered across multiple online sources, along multiple videos of the explosion(s) and continued coverage. –NicoARicoA (talk) 17:30, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support - Sky News showing several buildings have collapsed. Death toll likely to be much higher than 10. Significant event and ITN worthy. Article is fully referenced and will be expanded as info comes to hand. Mjroots (talk) 17:36, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
    • Comment - Sky ITN said that the explosion may have been on board a ship. We may need to consider a blurb with the explosion and ship if that is the case. Mjroots (talk) 17:38, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Top headline in major news sources, helped by existence of several incendiary videos. Article is a stub only due to lack of available information and will likely see significant expansion throughout the day. Bzweebl (talkcontribs) 17:41, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support. Might have to word the blurb appropriately or be ready to update the blurb a couple of times as more news comes available. Not sure what the guidelines about that are, in this group. Ktin (talk) 17:48, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support It will be a long time before cause is established, it doesn't make sense to wait for that. Mvolz (talk) 17:49, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Strong Support Big boom in Beirut is definitely gonna be in the headlines for days. Eternal Shadow Talk
  • Support - The blurb will need update(s), but, considering how big the media coverage and how notable the event is, I don't support waiting for more details before sending it to the main page. Ahmadtalk 17:54, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support - The images coming out of Beirut seem to be showing a much bigger magnitude then what offical reports are showing. This is going to dominate headlines for at least two days in the world. Albertkaloo (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:59, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support – in principle, but wait until extent of casualties becomes clearer. (Al Jazeera says 100s wounded.) – Sca (talk) 18:01, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support per above. Davey2116 (talk) 18:02, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Article is detailed enough, well referenced, and the topic is being covered by news sources appropriately. Checks all of the boxes. --Jayron32 18:17, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Posted – Muboshgu (talk) 18:22, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
Premature. ITN isn't a breaking news site. – Sca (talk) 18:25, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
Sca, I count 13 "supports" and a "strong support". The three "waits" came when the article was a stub, but it has been expanded since then. We have a quality (enough) article with references and the subject is quite literally "in the news" all over the world. What more do you need? – Muboshgu (talk) 18:35, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
Extent of casualties, and if available fairly soon something on the cause or perp. (Again, ITN is a fixture of an online encyclopedia, not a news site per se. NYT at 18:30 said "the extent of casualties was unknown.") – Sca (talk) 18:39, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
Aye, where and when are not enough (even that's approximated). InedibleHulk (talk) 18:41, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
Did someone suggest that we shouldn't add that information when it is known? I don't see anyone arguing we shouldn't? --Jayron32 18:45, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
Here we go again. That's not the point, and Jay knows it. – Sca (talk) 18:50, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
No, the point is that other people who are not you thought differently than you, and they had the consensus. That happens sometimes. Wikipedia does not do things solely on your say. --Jayron32 19:51, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
My point on Tuesday was that at the time of posting, insufficient information was available to answer the most salient of the "five W" questions. Thus, posting then was premature. My point had nothing to do with those who expressed support for posting at that time. Honest people may differ. – Sca (talk) 13:05, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
Post-posting support - In service to our readers, how could we not point to today's most important story? "ITN isn't a breaking news site" as a rationale for holding back is not rooted in policy. -- Fuzheado | Talk 21:22, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment no issues with posting this, but the blurb must mention the deaths. That's the headline, not "extensive damage". Mentioning property and buildings but not casualties is a terrible optic IMHO.  — Amakuru (talk) 18:52, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Post-posting support. It is the headline around the world, with countries pledging international aid and EU assembling its emergency workers. The magnitude of this explosion is not your "run of the mill" explosion. OhanaUnitedTalk page 16:10, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

August 3[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

(Posted) RD: Shirley Ann Grau[edit]

Article: Shirley Ann Grau (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Washington Post; The Times-Picayune/The New Orleans Advocate
Credits:

Article updated

 Bloom6132 (talk) 04:24, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

  • Support Only 2 kb of prose, but references all check out and are diverse, 'ography is complete, and notability is well established.130.233.3.21 (talk) 09:35, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support - looks good to go.BabbaQ (talk) 17:03, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support - looks good JW 1961 Talk 19:00, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Posted Short but satisfactory. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:04, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) Punjab alcohol poisoning[edit]

Stale. Stephen 23:24, 4 August 2020 (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: 2020 Punjab alcohol poisoning (talk, history)
Blurb: ​Over a hundred people die due to alcohol poisoning in Punjab, India. (Post)
News source(s): Reuters
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: A decent article about a tragic incident with a significant no. of deaths. Invisible Lad (talk) 17:41, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose (for now) per stubby article.--AlphaBeta135 (talk) 18:06, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
    • There's barely any expansion for this article within the past 2–3 hours.--AlphaBeta135 (talk) 20:55, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose – Already getting stale. – Sca (talk) 18:31, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment: A search through the archives show that 2 similar items nominated were not of sufficient quality for posting; the one that was posted: 2016 Irkutsk mass methanol poisoning. SpencerT•C 19:39, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose Article is too short and does not provide enough information, and is rightly tagged as a stub. Also, it appears the main part of the story, the inquiry and raids that took place, occurred on July 30 and August 1, and even going with the later date, would make this the second oldest blurb and would like roll off too fast to make it worth it. Given that the article is not good enough, and that the story is stale at this time, I don't think this is worth posting. If this had been a more extensive article, and had been nominated back on July 30 or August 1 when the most recent events occurred, I would have supported it. --Jayron32 19:45, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose but as noted per Jayron32, on its stubiness and staleness. This otherwise would have been an appropriate story (why I'm adding here just in case) for an ITN. --Masem (t) 19:49, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose We missed the boat on this one. Should have been picked up in the late July news cycle but didn't, so now stale. Albertaont (talk) 20:17, 4 August 2020 (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: Reni Santoni[edit]

Article: Reni Santoni (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Hollywood Reporter; Variety
Credits:

Article updated

 Bloom6132 (talk) 09:30, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

  • Support satis. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 13:18, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support all looks ok to go JW 1961 Talk 19:34, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose Resume in prose format; minimal depth of coverage at present about the subject's acting career besides a list of roles and films. SpencerT•C 19:36, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
  • WO struck. Still a little too "bare bones" for me to support, but I have no reason to oppose either. SpencerT•C 04:56, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
  • @Stephen and Amakuru: I think this is ready to go. —Bloom6132 (talk) 09:34, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Thin but fine. I am surprised to find that Rotten Tomatoes is explicitly NOT WP:USERG, when checking the uncredited appearances. Aren't users able to add/remove credits over there?130.233.3.21 (talk) 09:49, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose for now if what the IP says is true. Are Rotten Tomatoes filmographies user generated? If so we need to find a better source for his "uncredited" role in The Pawnbroker, it doesn't matter whether WP:USERG explicitly mentions it or not. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 10:40, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
  • @Amakuru: No, they are not user-generated. Here is what WP:USERG says: "Although review aggregators (such as Rotten Tomatoes) may be reliable, their audience ratings based on the reviews of their users are not." This article does not use Rotten Tomatoes to verify audience ratings. —Bloom6132 (talk) 10:46, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
    Is there anywhere that confirms that the filmography sections on the site are generated by the site's editors and not by users? Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 10:47, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
  • @Amakuru: Yes, their Help Desk says under "Edit requests": "Tell us about missing or incorrect movie or TV information by submitting a request via our Email Form." And even if that wasn't the case, ref 6 (from TV Guide) provides a back up. I've also added an extra source from Variety for good measure. —Bloom6132 (talk) 10:54, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Posted. Good stuff, thanks for the quick turnaround and responses, Bloom6132. All good now.  — Amakuru (talk) 11:17, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Ralph Barbieri[edit]

Article: Ralph Barbieri (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): San Francisco Chronicle; The Mercury News
Credits:

Article updated

 Bloom6132 (talk) 01:06, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

  • @Spencer, Stephen, and Amakuru: I think this is ready to go. —Bloom6132 (talk) 12:59, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support satis. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 13:16, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment: I would say this is almost there, but could use a couple sentences about the The Razor and Mr. T program itself (outside of being about sports, there's no description of the program, which is what the subject is notable for). SpencerT•C 14:58, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) Juan Carlos I of Spain[edit]

Proposed image
Article: Juan Carlos I of Spain (talk, history)
Blurb: ​The Spanish Royal Household communicates that Emeritus King Juan Carlos I (pictured) is leaving the country due to his involving in financial scandals. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Spain's Emeritus King Juan Carlos I (pictured) leaves the country to reside abroad due to his involvement in financial scandals.
News source(s): (The Guardian), AP, BBC, Reuters
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: The latest scandals of possible corruption by the King Emeritus have been featured on the news in Spain almost every day. This decision has shaken the country as he's the king who was key in the transition to democracy and the modernization of the country. Equally interesting is the simile of his grandfather's exile in 1931 when the Second Republic was proclaimed. But I'm interested to know what international impact / interest this can have and if it have place in ITN. Alsoriano97 (talk) 17:35, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

  • Support Big news, making international headlines. Update to the article is sufficient DUE coverage. Kingsif (talk) 21:46, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Wait This seems like the ongoing saga of the British Royals such as Prince Andrew, Prince Harry, Prince Philip, &c. who have all had to step down in some way recently. There is lots of press coverage of anything connected with royalty so ITN has to be fairly choosy to avoid seeming like Hello magazine. Rather than the Daily Mail, we need to see what serious papers like The Economist are saying about this. Here's their account of the matter. According to them, Juan Carlos fell from grace in 2012 and so the issue now seems to be an ongoing one of the status of the monarchy in Spain. It's what happens to the current King Felipe which seems to matter most so we should perhaps wait for some development at that level. Andrew🐉(talk) 21:46, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment Interesting reading in the Guardian report and I would say it would by worthy of ITN, but I would suggest it would be best to wait until King Juan Carlos actually does leave Spain. JW 1961 Talk 21:53, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  • per Bzweebl comment, changing to Support JW 1961 Talk 22:09, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Former sovereign of a major European country leaving in disgraced exile is definitely worthy of ITN. Is highly unusual and of general encyclopedic interest. Albertaont (talk) 21:55, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support- Unusual to see the exile of a transformative former world leader in a very highly developed country. Re Joseywales1961, a spokesperson said he has already left the country. Bzweebl (talkcontribs) 22:05, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment – Eighty-two-year-old Spanish ex-monarch chooses exile due to allegations of financial chicanery a decade ago. Fairly widely in the news, but not readily apparent that it's widely significant. – Sca (talk) 22:17, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Weak support 39 years or so as monarch of Spain, notable. Article needs a bit more work as a BLP, but otherwise it's alright. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 22:20, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support I agree with the others. An exile of a former monarch is not something frequently seen. Additionally, it appears to be a headline news in the media.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 23:33, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support A former and once very popular King, who was forced to abdicate and is now going into de-facto exile, is significant news. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:38, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment. I have added a possible more specific altblurb. The word "leaves", taken by itself, it too generic and may indicate a temporary trip, which apparently is not the case here. Nsk92 (talk) 00:58, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support altblurb for brevity and accessibility. BLP is fine, and the one CN is confusing; if it is contesting that Carlos praised Franco then it is absurd on it's face, if it is contesting "positive changes" then it is merely an expression of the editor's opinion of "positive", and not the content or intent of the praise.130.233.3.21 (talk) 07:08, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support - per Kiril Simeonovski. Mjroots (talk) 07:14, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Article looks fine. – Ammarpad (talk) 08:11, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose. He has not been head of state for more than half a decade, and has chosen to leave Spain rather than being exiled. —Brigade Piron (talk) 08:55, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Posted per the consensus above. 331dot (talk) 09:20, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Weak Post-Posting Comment The voluntary exile of a nominal king seems more like a vacation, or at most, a permanent relocation in retirement (if he wants). InedibleHulk (talk) 12:33, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
    • A powerless figure head king when the president of the government exercises actual authority over the country --LaserLegs (talk) 12:46, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
    Even the president only goes so far, off-paper, it takes thousands of people to actually run a country of millions. InedibleHulk (talk) 12:55, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
    And in Spain, none of those people are called "King" --LaserLegs (talk) 13:11, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
    A few are called "Reyes", though. InedibleHulk (talk) 13:43, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
    Yep, but the real king is his nipper. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:47, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
    Felipe Reyes says hi. Howard the Duck (talk) 17:37, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
    Haha. And he's the Real Madrid Captain. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:39, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
I agree that this seems rather trivial at first glance, but the universal support makes me thinking I'm missing some nuance. A sitting head of government fleeing prosecution is one thing, but a former royal figurehead moving to avoid mere criticism is another. GreatCaesarsGhost 17:38, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: John Hume[edit]

Article: John Hume (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Nobel Prize winner. Article needs work... The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 08:48, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) Iran COVID-19 cover-up[edit]

Lots of jurisdictions have been accused of either undercounting or overcounting COVID fatalities, some with more credibility than others. Combined with the presence of the banner, it does not appear that consensus will develop to post. – John M Wolfson (talkcontribs) 09:51, 3 August 2020 (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: COVID-19 pandemic in Iran (talk, history)
Blurb: ​In data leaked to the BBC, it is revealed that the Iranian government covered up tens of thousands of COVID-19 deaths in its public reports. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​Distributing information from a data leak, the BBC reveals a government cover-up of COVID-19 deaths in Iran, with the country's first death occurring almost a month before it even reported a case of infection.
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Minor update, working on it. I know it's COVID-19 and there's a box for that... but this is a major scandal either way. Kingsif (talk) 03:07, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose COVID-19 banner is that-a-way. --Masem (t) 04:09, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
    • Also far too early in the coverage of this to call it a "scandal". Just like the reported Chinese geocide, we need authoritative groups to verify and decide what actions are appropriate here, not the press making the call. --Masem (t) 04:11, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
      • I think the fact it's been reported in such detail means there's a scandal whatever happens. Kingsif (talk) 04:41, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose Most countries have failed to record or report COVID deaths accurately. Sometimes it's deliberate spin, sometimes it's just down to expedience, sometimes they just don't know. Picking on Iran for this does not seem fair and we're unlikely to have reliable data about the truth, whatever that is. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:33, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose basically per the same reason as Andrew. – Ammarpad (talk) 09:46, 3 August 2020 (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.

August 2[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

(Posted) RD: Leon Fleisher[edit]

Article: Leon Fleisher (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/02/arts/music/leon-fleisher-dead.html
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Discography section needs refs, but I own all of his recordings and can say the information in that section is 100% accurate. Zingarese talk · contribs 12:45, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

  • Support Discography completely referenced and rest of article is well-referenced. CaradhrasAiguo (leave language) 13:14, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
    Thank you. I didn't reference the recordings, so added Grimes2 to updaters, and noticed more helpers. That's great, because when I saw the article today, quotes were unreferenced, and the lead not even saying a word about his teaching. This was an iconic pianist, with the most unusual career, 50 years practically playing only one hand! Why do pop stars get featured articles at age twentysome, and such a great person such a poor thing when he dies?? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:22, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
They don't like to be called "pop stars" anymore, they insist we address them as our "influencers". And yeah, who can argue with the Wikipedian results? They're selling something right, even if it takes them six to eight hands to produce a single melody. InedibleHulk (talk) 15:16, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Kamal Rani Varun[edit]

Article: Kamal Rani Varun (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Hindu, Hindustan Times
Credits:
Article updated

 DTM (talk) 12:40, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) 2020 Guyanese general election[edit]

Article: 2020 Guyanese general election (talk, history)
Blurb: ​After five months of court challenges by the ruling alliance, the opposition PPP/C party is declared the winner of the 2020 Guyanese general election. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​After five months of court challenges to the Guyanese general election, the People's Progressive Party led by Irfaan Ali is declared the winner.
News source(s): NY Times
Credits:

Article updated

Nominated event is listed at WP:ITN/R, meaning that the recurrence of the event should in itself merit a post on WP:ITN, subject to the quality of the article and any update(s) to it.

Nominator's comments: Notable for the extreme delay between the election date (March 2) and the official result (August 2). At least the result has been accepted for now. Joofjoof (talk) 10:06, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

  • Support in principle the story seems "extraordinary" enough. I haven't looked at the article so cannot vouch for its quality. – John M Wolfson (talkcontribs) 13:31, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support This is ITNR, even if delayed. The article could use clean up but the prose is there and the sourcing is there. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 13:39, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support altblurb and I agree this qualifies under ITNR anyway (final results). The article is well referenced and seems to explain the very messy situation well enough. Modest Genius talk 16:28, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support' This is a rather close election with controversial results. LSGH (talk) (contributions) 17:13, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support- several of my major news sources of choice had been covering this in the run-up and aftermath as a particularly consequential election, and the article update is sufficient. Bzweebl (talkcontribs) 17:30, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support ITN/R but also an interesting case, with good updates. One cn tag in the whole article that I could see, but not at a key point. Kingsif (talk) 21:47, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support There was a special story to this one, and also good form to cover results of general elections. Albertaont (talk) 21:57, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose. A few cites to fix up, then after that it's good to go.  — Amakuru (talk) 23:26, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Looks OK now. – Ammarpad (talk) 04:22, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Posted Stephen 05:42, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) British Grand Prix[edit]

Vroom vroom.  — Amakuru (talk) 23:27, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Proposed image
Article: 2020 British Grand Prix (talk, history)
Blurb: ​Despite tyre failure at the finish, Lewis Hamilton (pictured) wins the British Grand Prix for a record seventh time. (Post)
News source(s): The Times; BBC; Hindustan Times; Standard
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Lewis Hamilton winning is not news so he's now doing it on just three wheels!
  • None of the current blurbs are ITN/R. R does not stand for rigid requirement. We can and do list other stories too. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:23, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
    Andrew Davidson, now you are doing it for the sake of it. Other stuff exists is not a reason; it is an excuse. Unnamelessness (talk) 10:31, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose per TRM. – Ammarpad (talk) 09:53, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose not on ITN/R; nice record, but better suited for DYK (especially with the flat tire). – John M Wolfson (talkcontribs) 09:54, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  • I'm working on something else for that but DYK is over-subscribed currently and so has to rotate every 12 hours to keep up with the volume. That's over a hundred articles every week, whereas ITN has had the same three blurbs for all of the last week. And the oldest of the three has been there for two weeks now. ITN is now quite dead. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:06, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose. We'll post the champion team & driver at the end of the season. Winning a race with a punctured tyre is unusual but hardly important enough for an ITN blurb. Modest Genius talk 13:05, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment suggest this is closed post-haste to stop any more time being wasted. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 22:20, 3 August 2020 (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.

August 1[edit]

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

(Stale) RD: Amar Singh (politician)[edit]

Article: Amar Singh (politician) (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Times of India, NDTV
Credits:

Article needs updating

Nominator's comments: Could do with a little updating and cleanup DTM (talk) 05:43, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

  • Comment It has an NPOV tag (from 2004) that should be taken out in the cleanup, will support later when updated to RD standards JW 1961 Talk 09:42, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose A significant number of contentious statements (and possibly BLP violations) are unsourced or poorly sourced. Black Kite (talk) 19:08, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose Article's a mess. – John M Wolfson (talkcontribs) 09:55, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose - not ready.BabbaQ (talk) 12:38, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
  • StaleBagumba (talk) 00:44, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

(Posted) RD: Wilford Brimley[edit]

Article: Wilford Brimley (talk, history)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CNN
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: The usual -ography problems as well as general sourcing throughout. Masem (t) 05:29, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

  • Conditionally Support once filmography is referenced. The rest of the article looks ready. Joofjoof (talk) 09:47, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  • @Joofjoof: It's already referenced with refs 38 (TV Guide) and 39 (Rotten Tomatoes) at the very top of the section. —Bloom6132 (talk) 10:04, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  • That works, comment updated.Joofjoof (talk) 10:11, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Support Now that article has been improved JW 1961 Talk 10:22, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Posted  — Amakuru (talk) 15:12, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

(Closed) Return of the SpaceX Crew Dragon Capsule from the ISS[edit]

No consensus to post. Stephen 05:33, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Proposed image
Article: Crew Dragon Demo-2 (talk, history)
Blurb: ​Astronauts Douglas Hurley and Robert Behnken return to earth in NASA and SpaceX Crew Dragon Capsule after a two month stay at the International Space Station. This marks the first private sector capsule to be transporting astronauts back to the earth from the International Space Station (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​American astronauts Douglas Hurley and Robert Behnken return to earth in the NASA and SpaceX Endeavour from the ISS, successfully completing Crew Dragon Demo-2.
Alternative blurb II: SpaceX Endeavour returns from the ISS after successfully completing Crew Dragon Demo-2.
Alternative blurb III: Endeavour makes the first splashdown in 45 years after successfully completing Crew Dragon Demo-2.
News source(s): Space.com, Fox News, BBC, AP, Reuters, NYT
Credits:
Nominator's comments: This is the first return trip from the ISS in an US vehicle after the Columbia space shuttle in the early 2000s. This is also the first human return from the ISS in a private sector vehicle. This will also be the first planned water splashdown for returning astronauts since 1975. Astronauts Bob and Doug will be leaving the ISS on Saturday, 2020-08-01 and reaching earth on Sunday, 2020-08-02, so this has to be timely.

Also, this is my first time trying this nomination process, so, I request your kindness in case I have missed a step or two in the nomination process.Kaisertalk (talk) 22:35, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Update 1: Parachutes have been deployed, and we are very close to splashdown. Kaisertalk (talk) 18:48, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Update 2: Splashdown successful! The astronauts, Bob and Doug, are safe on planet Earth!!! They have landed on the Gulf of Mexico. Kaisertalk (talk) 18:49, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Update 3: Recovery vessels are now approaching the capsule, and deploy the rigging equipment to help hoist the astronauts outside of the capsule. This marks the first water splashdown for US Astronauts since 1975. As others have noted below, this is the first US vessel to bring down astronauts from the ISS since the early 2000s. Weather has been extremely cooperative throughout the landing. Approx twenty to thirty minutes for the astronauts to be hoisted out. Kaisertalk (talk) 19:02, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Update 4: Approximately T+52 minutes post splashdown. The recovery team is currently evaluating levels of NTO before hoisting the astronauts out of the capsule. Kaisertalk (talk) 19:43, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Update 5 (last): Successful recovery completed. Astronauts make the first successful water landing since 1975! Kaisertalk (talk) 21:07, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Update 6: Elon Musk has sent a self congratulatory tweet --LaserLegs (talk) 23:27, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

  • Wait until the successful splashdown tomorrow. There's still stuff that can go wrong between now and then, obviously. --Masem (t) 22:48, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
    • Support as the end of the first successful manned operation of a commercial space vehicle to-and-from extended travel in orbit/the ISS. --Masem (t) 22:22, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
@Masem: Agree with the approach. Is there merit in writing the news as "...leaves the ISS on their journey back to the earth" today, and then tomorrow, post the splashdown, we change that to "land in earth post over two months at the ISS". Thoughts? Kaisertalk (talk) 22:55, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Weak Oppose we posted the launch, and the craft proved it's re-entry during Crew Dragon Demo-1. I'm fine with ITN/R for ISS turnaround flights since they're many months apart. Also the article is orange tagged for quality and is missing refs in the timeline. --LaserLegs (talk) 23:03, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment how is this ITNR? The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 23:05, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Wait Wait until the splashdown. They're still doing this amid Hurricane Isaias, which is pretty daring and a bit dangerous due to strong waves. I hope everything goes well. Anyway, wait until their landing is confirmed tomorrow. ~ Destroyeraa (talk|Contribs) 23:19, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose while I'm waiting on someone telling me how this is ITNR, I must oppose on quality grounds. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 23:21, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
  • I think we are getting into semantics here now, but, I would state that this covered by the first clause. How, you ask? Crewed mission - Yes. Orbital - Yes, in fact reverse orbital. Spaceflight - Yes. Launch - Yes. You launch off the ISS using microboosters to get away from the ISS and launch towards the earth. Kaisertalk (talk) 23:55, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
  • No, I think that's reeeally stretching what the ITNR wording means. Perhaps we need a clarification note to reinforce that this was about launches from Earth not not "microboosted" launches from space back to Earth. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 20:56, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Not ITNR, and not especially significant. We posted the launch, as indeed we should, but we don't post every detail that happens after that including the landing.  — Amakuru (talk) 23:29, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
Amakuru Appreciate your inputs, thanks. However, I just want to place on record a call against your note stating this is "not especially significant" and that "we don't post every detail". Launch and Return are the two most significant moments of a manned space mission. Cheers and Good Day. Kaisertalk (talk) 23:44, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
No, come on, is this ITNR or not? No-one has suggested how it is. And we don't post every ISS rotation. Next. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 23:48, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
Hello The Rambling Man. Yes, Wikipedia:In_the_news/Recurring_items#Space_exploration. Also, in a dispassionate manner, I will maintain that this is not another ISS rotation. Kaisertalk (talk) 23:51, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
Which clause? I've asked above. I don't see where the return of astronauts is covered by ITNR. Please be explicit. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 23:52, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
I think we are getting into semantics here now, but, I would state that this covered by the first clause. How, you ask? Crewed mission - Yes. Orbital - Yes, in fact reverse orbital. Spaceflight - Yes. Launch - Yes. You launch off the ISS using microboosters to get away from the ISS and launch towards the earth. Kaisertalk (talk) 23:55, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
Ok, it's not ITNR as was agreed. I'm out of here, this is corrupted. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 00:03, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
"You launch off the ISS using microboosters". Blimey, that's a stretch... Not what most people would regard as a launch. Do we usually post Soyuz returns to earth? If not, then I don't see a reason to mention this one. Sure, it's the first commercial one, but we already mentioned that in the launch blurb. There's no valid reason to post this, and the fact that items currently in the template are quite old doesn't change that.  — Amakuru (talk) 06:25, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Not ITNR, as they are not launching from the ISS. ITNR flag removed. Stephen 00:29, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Wait There's still quite a lot of flex in this trip as the de-orbit burn hasn't happened yet and the landing site can change. The article still needs work in several places to update from what was planned to happen to what actually happened and so it's best to wait for splashdown when the events will all be over and done. Andrew🐉(talk) 00:47, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Wait per all. – John M Wolfson (talkcontribs) 01:34, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Wait per above. Will Support when splashdown occurs per Kaisertalk. This is notable in itself and as notable as the launch (which got posted apparently). I oppose the blurb tho and added blurb 2, which is shorter. Dantheanimator (talk) 01:57, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
    The landing may well be "as notable as the launch", but the convention at ITN is only to post stories related to a single event once. For example we don't post an election result and then also post the inauguration of the new president, if the latter is significantly later. There's just nothing remarkable about this - once a launch happens with astronauts, it's guaranteed they'll come back to earth at some point (unless there's a tragic mishap, which of course would be a much much stronger story worthy of posting)  — Amakuru (talk) 06:33, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Splashdown We should emphasize the splashdown because news coverage points out that this will be the first one in 45 years. I have suggested another suitable blurb. We should also get a good picture too, as NASA will make these public domain. Andrew🐉(talk) 11:43, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment – Re (debatable) significance, BBC notes that a successful splashdown would mean the U.S. "once again has a fully serviceable ... means of getting its own people into orbit and back" – a capability "lost when the country retired its shuttles in 2011." – Sca (talk) 13:15, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
    True, and that's very nice, but we emphasised that point when we blurbed the launch. If this were the first time we were mentioning this mission I'd agree wholeheartedly, but we already posted it and there's nothing surprising about this further development.  — Amakuru (talk) 14:06, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
Well, a launch is one thing, but as we've discussed regarding the Mars probes completion is another. A successful splashdown would mean an accomplished fact. Just tossing this out as food for thought.... – Sca (talk) 15:50, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
Support Reentry is notable per above.  Nixinova T  C   19:36, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
Sorry for labouring this point, but it really isn't notable. We never post Soyuz landings, so why would we post this one? Seems like all missions should be treated the same way.  — Amakuru (talk) 21:08, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose – Wait for Crew-1 launch for next posting. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 20:21, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
  • SupportDown and safe. – Sca (talk) 21:11, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose again as there appears to have been some re-factoring of the blurbs to splashdown rather than a bizarre attempt to claim the "launch" from ISS to be INTR. Would have supported if it hadn't made it back, but as noted, space travel is now humdrum and this test flight is just that, run-of-the-mill. What goes up must come down, and we posted what went up, no need for the other. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 21:36, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
    I'm genuinely baffled by this one. Often I disagree with something but I can also see why others support it, that's fine. But nobody has offered any explanation as to why we would break our convention and post this same story twice, when we don't for any other space mission. Just lots of WP:ILIKEIT votes and other miscellaneous peculiarities such as the "microlaunch" from the ISS.  — Amakuru (talk) 21:54, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
    For a moment let's keep the ITNR flag aside. Let's look at why this article might be notable in and of itself. Here are some of my reasons:
    1. First return back for human / astronauts from the ISS back on the Dragon Capsule, a capsule that is being built out and evaluated (explains why there is a demo in its name)
    2. First private sector vehicle being used for the human mission to the International Space Station
    3. First US vehicle to bring back astronauts from the ISS since the early 2000s when the space shuttle program ended
    4. First water splashdown return from a space program since 1975.
    Kaisertalk (talk) 22:34, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
    We posted the launch. The return was absolutely inevitable unless it went wrong. This isn't "buy one get one free" time. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 22:36, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment – What do those who said wait have to say now that it's done? – Sca (talk) 21:40, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Not a real first. WaltCip-(BLM!Resist The Orange One) 22:03, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Strong Oppose The fact that this has been posted previously on launch and then subject to 5 updates in the nomination alone makes this seem more like a NASA ticker. Same goes with the twice repeated attempt to post ITN for Perseverance. Albertaont (talk) 22:25, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
    • Greetings @Albertaont:. I am the one who kept posting those updates (1 through 5). I seek pardon if that is frowned upon. The reason I posted was to bring attention to the timeliness of the event, i.e. splashdown was in the process of being completed and then eventually completed. Also re: the ITNR, I was the one who marked the flag as yes, based on my (subjective) read of the ITNR guidelines, and specifically the section that spoke about space launches. Stephen unmarked the flag based on a call that this is not ITNR, which is perfectly fine. I totally respect your views to oppose, or strongly oppose. My only request of you is to consider the notability of the event independent of any procedural actions from my side. As mentioned, this is my first nomination, and I am sure, I will learn the procedures soon enough. Good Day. Kaisertalk (talk) 22:44, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
      • Greetings @Kaisertalk: Not a problem, don't take it personally from my end. Its just when 5 updates are posted in a row, it makes it more like an unusual attempt to promote an article which naturally invites greater skepticism. I understand your enthusiasm for the event. Albertaont (talk) 01:05, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose as we already covered the launch so we'd effectively be running the same story again. P-K3 (talk) 01:49, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose per above. We've already posted this story. -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:25, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose We have already posted this. No need for chronicling – Ammarpad (talk) 09:51, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose posting the same story twice, just two months apart. Definitely not a launch; trying to argue this is covered by ITNR is completely bizarre. Modest Genius talk 16:32, 3 August 2020 (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) Unsolicited seeds[edit]

Consensus to post this will not develop. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:10, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Proposed image
Article: Brushing (e-commerce) (talk, history)
Blurb: ​Shipments of unsolicited seeds (sample pictured) are suspected to be a scam (Post)
News source(s): Guardian; CNN; Fortune
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: No-one seems to be quite sure about this yet so I have another theory: "From the seeds came pods which had the power to ...Andrew🐉(talk) 09:41, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Super Strong Support They come in peace and promise a better world! InedibleHulk (talk) 10:06, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose a jolly little trivial story which would be much better suited to another section of the main page. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 10:40, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
  • The bottom blurb in ITN currently is about another scam – what's the difference? And notice that that older story is over two weeks old now. ITN is so slow and stale now because such negativity and nitpicking is stifling the process. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:46, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
  • As noted about four times in the past few days, if you think the process is failing, raise an RFC to amend it. In the meantime, continually browbeating and condemning it is becoming somewhat boring. Also, what John said below. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 11:10, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose trivial. (Also, that the news cycle is slow is not an argument to make a non-notable story a notable one.) – John M Wolfson (talkcontribs) 10:51, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment Will support if Trump uses this as another reason to delay the election. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:09, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
Don't you get it? They're in control now! Whatever sprouts from Trump's sunlit spout next is just nature's way of saying "you're welcome, America." InedibleHulk (talk) 11:38, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
  • We're doomed Count Iblis (talk) 12:23, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment – I planted one in my back yard ystdy and it's already grown into a 90-ft.-tall beanstalk. – Sca (talk) 13:03, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose is this a joke? Alsoriano97 (talk) 14:03, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
What makes you think that?Sca (talk) 14:46, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose suggest close Probably one of the least notable news stories of a month that just started today, congratulations. People think businesses might be shipping seed packets at random to make it look like they have more business? I'm not sure trading standards will even care that much. Kingsif (talk) 17:30, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
But a-ha! This happened in July. Lasting impact, these pods. InedibleHulk (talk) 18:07, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Wait until the biological/astronomical origin of the seeds is confirmed. Once confirmed will change to support. Thanks Andrew Davidson for the reference, a big fan of the film though I don't think were having a Capgras pandemic. Dantheanimator (talk) 17:59, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
Good idea, they may have been fired by one of the Mars probes. – Sca (talk) 18:04, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
  • ...the article shows they tested the seeds, the story is the maybe-a-scam, not the alien origins. Kingsif (talk) 18:02, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
Kingsif according to the article, the DEFRA and USDA, both government agencies, tested the seeds. Maybe the aliens are scamming us but the government doesn't want us to know? Dantheanimator (talk) 18:52, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose not important enough for ITN. Joseph2302 (talk) 19:02, 1 August 2020 (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) Hurricane Isaias[edit]

Thankfully not as bad as expected. Stephen 05:32, 4 August 2020 (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: Hurricane Isaias (talk, history)
Blurb: ​Hurricane Isaias brings significant flooding and wind damage to much of the Caribbean, killing three people with more missing. It is currently lashing the South Carolina with hurricane-force winds and threatening much of the United States East Coast. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​Hurricane Isaias threatens North Carolina and much of the eastern United States.
News source(s): [7]
Credits:

Article updated
 ~ Destroyeraa (talk)
  • Oppose Storm causes wind, rain, little damage, two deaths. Not a major hurricane by the looks of it, mostly at sea. The article is also a mess of tagged sections, uncited sensationalist language, with a long lead and gaps in coverage in the body. Kingsif (talk) 01:48, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment Though consensus will be against this at first, impact reports will likely be flooding in later on August 1 or August 2 as the storm makes landfall in Florida. That way, the article will have much more information, not just some poorly formatted info with maintenance tags. ~ Destroyeraa (talk|Contribs) 02:05, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Then nominate it when it hits Florida if it has an impact. Kingsif (talk) 02:12, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
  • @Kingsif: It will have an impact because it is a high-end Category 1 hurricane. Probably will hit the Carolinas, Delmarva and New Jersey/NYC too. ~ Destroyeraa (talk|Contribs) 02:18, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Wait until it reaches the East Coast of the US and we'll see how significant it is.-- P-K3 (talk) 02:08, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Wait per all. Right now it's just a storm doing storm things. – John M Wolfson (talkcontribs) 02:23, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Wait – Until "Isaias" (EE'-sah-EE'-us) blows over and bows out. – Sca (talk) 13:06, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose -> "storm brings wind and rain". Just because it happened in Amurica, it doesn't mean it's special. The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 22:56, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
If it happened somewhere in the far-flung British Empire, it'd be nooz. – Sca (talk) 22:21, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
It hasn't actually made landfall in the US yet. WaltCip-(BLM!Resist The Orange One) 20:19, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
No, noted. This whole nomination is a bit ... pre-emptive perhaps? The Rambling Man (Stay indoors, stay safe!!!!) 22:26, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Oppose for now. No indication that this is a big deal or likely to become one. I'm open to reconsidering if that changes, but we can't post every tropical storm. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:58, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
Looks like Isaias turned out weaker than expected. Still expected to make landfall in SC as a Cat 1. If it doesn't cause much damage, then close this discussion. ~ Destroyeraa (talk|Contribs) 01:00, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

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

References[edit]

Nominators often include links to external websites and other references in discussions on this page. It is usually best to provide such links using the inline URL syntax [http://example.com] rather than using <ref></ref> tags, because that keeps all the relevant information in the same place as the nomination without having to jump to this section, and facilitates the archiving process.

For the times when <ref></ref> tags are being used, here are their contents: