Jump to content

英文维基 | 中文维基 | 日文维基 | 草榴社区

Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates/April 2021

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is an archive and its contents should be preserved in their current form;
any comments regarding this page should be directed to Wikipedia talk:In the news. Thanks.

April 30

[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Sports


(Posted) RD: Anthony Payne

[edit]
Article: Anthony Payne (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Telegraph
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: London composer, died shortly after his wife, soprano Jane Manning who appeared in RD. - Good obit in the Telegraph, was just not used enough. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:24, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Eli Broad

[edit]
Article: Eli Broad (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NYT
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Looks about ready to go. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 01:22, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Soli Sorabjee

[edit]
Article: Soli Sorabjee (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Times of India
Credits:
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Former Attorney-General of India Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 05:10, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: K. V. Anand

[edit]
Article: K. V. Anand (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Hindu
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Breaking now. Indian Tamil language film director and cinematographer. Additional details will be available soon. Article requires work including fixing references and citations before being ready for homepage / RD. RIP. Edits and citations expanded. Seems to meet hygiene expectations for homepage / RD for a film-linked personality. RIP. Ktin (talk) 04:29, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Israel stampede

[edit]
Article: 2021 Israel stampede (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ 44 people were killed and hundreds more injured, in a stampede at the annual Meron pilgrimage during Lag BaOmer (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ the joint-deadliest non-military accident in the history of the country
Alternative blurb II: ​ At least 44 are killed during a stampede in Meron, Israel.
Alternative blurb III: ​ In Israel, at least 44 people are killed in a stampede at Mount Meron during a celebration for the annual Jewish holiday Lag BaOmer.
Alternative blurb IV: ​ In Israel, at least 44 people are killed in a stampede at a religious festival in Mount Meron.
News source(s): The New York Times,The Wall Street Journal, AP, BBC, Guardian, Reuters
Credits:
Hebrew Main Page currently using this one. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 08:32, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Can someone suggest an italicized (pictured) parenthetical for the blurb and a caption for the pitcture itself?—Bagumba (talk) 08:46, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That picture is from 2016. It would probably be misleading to post it in association with this year's situation. --Jayron32 11:34, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. It says it's people "dancing"? Martinevans123 (talk) 11:40, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That picture very well might be dancing, singing and dancing are often done at Lag BaOmer celebrations. --Jayron32 11:54, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think there should be a picture, particularly one from a different year and particularly not one showing people in the usual celebratory. This is a disaster story, and we don't usually post pics unless there's a very obvious encyclopaedic and not-too-gory shot of the incident itself.  — Amakuru (talk) 12:19, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I mean the picture shows people so crammed together than any dancing is not easy to infer. My point was more that an image of people dancing would be singularly inappropriate for an event with mass fatalities. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:26, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure where I lead you to believe that I disagreed with you on any of that. --Jayron32 14:34, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You did not. I thought you might have read my comment as disbelieving that dancing occured. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:39, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
We now have a photo of the aftermath. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 04:17, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
also, both this photo and this photo illustrate how crowded the event was, although neither appears to have been taken after the incident. dying (talk) 14:52, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

April 29

[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Sports


(Posted) RD: Madeline Davis

[edit]
Article: Madeline Davis (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Buffalo News
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Activist who taught first college course on lesbians in US, was first open lesbian delegate at DNC, coauthored notable book on lesbian hisory. Entry had a great deal of unsourced detail and for a couple days I’ve been trying to reference—I think what I’ve salvaged gives a strong overview of her life. Innisfree987 (talk) 02:25, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[fixed nomination heading. dying (talk) 03:59, 5 May 2021 (UTC)][reply]

RD: Billie Hayes

[edit]
Article: Billie Hayes (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Yahoo!
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Lidsville scared the living c*@p out of me as a kid. CoatCheck (talk) 21:51, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Byron Seaman

[edit]
Article: Byron Seaman (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CBC News (Canadian Press); Calgary Sun; NHL.com
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Only announced and reported today (April 29). —Bloom6132 (talk) 12:32, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Mantfombi Dlamini

[edit]
Article: Mantfombi Dlamini (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The South African, Reuters
Credits:
Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Queen regent of the Zulu Nation dies one month after the king. Joofjoof (talk) 02:36, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Anne Buydens

[edit]
Article: Anne Buydens (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): AP
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Philantropist and centenarian. Widow of Kirk DouglasJoofjoof (talk) 00:48, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Robert Slavin

[edit]
Article: Robert Slavin (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Washington Post
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Only announced and reported today (April 29). —Bloom6132 (talk) 01:13, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Chelato Uclés

[edit]
Article: Chelato Uclés (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CNN
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Football coach, major public personality in Honduras Soman (talk) 00:59, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose Lots of referencing to be done, lots of short stubby paragraphs to be fixed, and not sure about the illustration in the infobox either (looks odd).-- P-K3 (talk) 18:07, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Ronnie Govender

[edit]
Article: Ronnie Govender (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): IOL(South Africa)
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Tamil South African activist and playwright. Article is currently a stub and is not ready for homepage / RD. Sufficient information available online to expand the article. If someone wants to give this a shot before me, please go ahead. Else, I will get to it later tonight. Edits and expansion done. Article has shaped up to a nice C-class biography. Good to go to homepage / RD. Nice work Joofjoof. Ktin (talk) 01:39, 30 April 2021 (UTC) Ktin (talk) 21:06, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Re-posted) Tianhe launch

[edit]
Proposed image
Article: Tianhe (space station module) (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ China launches the Tianhe space station module (pictured) on a Long March 5B rocket, the first module in the upcoming Tiangong space station. (Post)
News source(s): AP, BBC, SpaceNews
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Although not a crewed launch, the first module of an upcoming space station is probably newsworthy. osunpokeh (talk) 15:51, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have cleared all the CNs. STSC (talk) 12:12, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Again, we're not just removing the tags, but providing references to the material. A single citation[2] has been provided for the 2nd and 3rd paragraphs, but it only covers the material in the second. The third graph topics (history of docking ports, service life of TCM, benefits of modular stations) are not in that ref. GreatCaesarsGhost 13:54, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I'll look into it. STSC (talk) 15:00, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Done, I believe the article meets the "minimum standard of quality" for ITN. STSC (talk) 15:43, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Re-posted Adequately referenced now. SpencerT•C 16:38, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • question: i admittedly don't know what the protocol is for nominations reposted after they have been pulled, but should STSC receive some kind of credit, considering that STSC was largely responsible for getting the article up to posting quality after it was pulled? dying (talk)
Anyone is free to give credit to anyone they think deserves it. Usedtobecool ☎️ 04:31, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
oh, i had not realized that. thanks for letting me know. dying (talk) 05:36, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

April 28

[edit]

Arts and culture

  • Pope Francis accepts the resignations of Ecuadorian Bishop Julio Parrilla Díaz and Monsignor Gerardo Miguel Nieves Loja of the Diocese of Riobamba after reports of poor governance, financial mismanagement and moral failings. (AP)

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

Law and crime

Politics and elections


RD: Shunsuke Kikuchi

[edit]
Article: Shunsuke Kikuchi (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Gulf News, Yahoo! Japan, and others
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Legendary anime music composer (Dragon Ball Z, Doraemon, Kamen Rider, etc.). His death wasn't announced until the 28th. The article could still use a bit of work, but there are a lot of references there.  ❯❯❯ Mccunicano☕️ 15:10, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) 2021 Kyrgyzstan–Tajikistan conflict

[edit]
Article: 2021 Kyrgyzstan–Tajikistan conflict (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Clashes on the Kyrgyzstan-Tajikistan border leave at least 31 people dead and 20,000 civilians displaced. (Post)
News source(s): BBC, Guardian, RadioFreeEurope
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Been simmering on for a few days and a ceasefire now seems to be holding but the latest casualty figures of 31 dead and hundreds wounded (note Tajikistan are not forthcoming on their casualty figures) and the number of Kyrgyz civilians evacuated makes this more significant. The Guardian states this is the worst clash between the two countries in the post-Soviet era. Article needs some work - Dumelow (talk) 10:35, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Items in ITN are placed in chronological order of occurrence, not of posting? Jim Michael (talk) 11:02, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
yes, i believe that is correct. dying (talk) 01:28, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Thomas R. Berger

[edit]
Article: Thomas R. Berger (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CBC
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Needs work on cites. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 01:32, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Think cites are OK now. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 18:39, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Charles Strum

[edit]
Article: Charles Strum (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Only announced and reported today (April 28). —Bloom6132 (talk) 08:35, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: El Risitas

[edit]
Article: El Risitas (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ABC, La Vanguardia
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Famous Spanish comedian and Internet meme. Article is ok. Reallylazy (talk) 20:13, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Side discussion
  • Tentative support, if it is not removal, but addition. Because what is "RD"? Is it so hard to write out somewhere what "RD" means?? Therefore, if it's about including the note regarding the death of El Risitas on the frontpage, then I support that. -Mardus /talk 06:16, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This is written out somewhere, on the top of the page: Some jargon: RD refers to "recent deaths", that being inclusion in the "recent deaths" section on the Main Page. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 06:22, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If the explanation really were at the very top of the page, then it would have been positioned before the table of contents, which contains so many entries with "RD", that it discourages further searching. -Mardus /talk 06:26, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
OK, but you're literally the first person I've ever seen have an issue with this. I intend no disrespect by this: if you are in the process of !voting on something that you aren't sure what it is, please try to figure it out before you press send. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 06:30, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted blurb) Michael Collins

[edit]

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: Michael Collins (astronaut) (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Michael Collins (pictured), command module pilot for Apollo 11, dies at the age of 90. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Astronaut Michael Collins (pictured), command module pilot for Apollo 11, dies at the age of 90.
News source(s): [1]
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Apollo 11 was one of the biggest achievements in the past century, so this might be worth a blurb – Compy90 (talk) 12:13, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Two space flights in his career. --LaserLegs (talk) 17:15, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
How many space flights have you had? WaltCip-(talk) 17:28, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
How many will it take for me to get a blurb at ITN when I die? --LaserLegs (talk) 17:35, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure. Maybe somebody should make WP:MINIMUMSPACEFLIGHTS. WaltCip-(talk) 17:44, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I somewhat disagree. If an article far exceeds the normal quality threshold for posting, then that should be something to consider. The purpose of ITN is partly to showcase good articles, and in this case a blurb accomplishes this better than RD does. Of course I'm not saying every FA must be posted, but it should be a point in favor when there's disagreement about whether the subject is notable enough, as is the case here. Davey2116 (talk) 18:50, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Surprised that this is being opposed. How old are the opposers? I asked a friend recently how his generation felt about humans walking on the Moon, and he kind of brushed it off and said it was before he was born. Normal for him to grow up knowing that we've been there (done that). Collins, the first human to be out of sensory communication with the Earth, was in those ticker-tape parades for a reason. Randy Kryn (talk) 17:51, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm in my early 20s, part of a generation where spaceflight is becoming more normal and not blurb-worthy (think the Shuttle/ISS astronauts). That might explain at least some of my opposition, but I would still blurb Aldrin.  – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 17:56, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • Thanks for answering a more-or-less rhetorical question. Please take a look at the point-of-view from 1969 (a few people from then are still alive). Apollo 11 ranks with the greatest human explorations and accomplishments in history, and Collins was essential to it. Randy Kryn (talk) 18:05, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        • A blurb is not a special honor bestowed on people who are more worthy than others. A blurb is there to explain extra information about a death that needs elucidating, like a person died by assassination, or by suicide, or in an unusual accident, or that there was a state funeral, or something we need to tell someone about rather than that just "they died". ITN is not an award, and blurbs are not recognition. They are sources of information. --Jayron32 18:23, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support full blurb Anything less for this Featured Article is quite frankly lunarcy... Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 17:58, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • As Black Kite said above, being a Featured Article has no bearing on blurbworthiness (Main-Page quality being a rather bare minimum); only whether Collins was significant or "important" enough, which is being debated now.  – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 18:00, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • Yep, don't get me wrong, it's great to have FAs featured on the MP (I often fiddle about with OTD templates so that FAs appear), but it shouldn't be a reason why a certain person gets a blurb whereas others don't. Black Kite (talk) 18:04, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb Not only A11 but also instrumental to the Natl Air + Space Museum after his astronaut career. Plus, the overall quality of the article is extremely helpful to show why he was top of his field and leaves little to question. (this is where being an FA helps, to demonstrate why he was top of field (and not just as a reason to post) per the debate just above this post) --Masem (t) 18:05, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb We posted blurbs for the deaths of Neil Armstrong as the first man who stepped on the Moon and Alexei Leonov as the first men who conducted a space walk. I don't think being on board of the first spacecraft that landed on the Moon is significant for a blurb. There are other more important and influential cosmonauts who would deserve a blurb such as the first woman in space.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:13, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Collins was not just a passenger. He was the pilot, an integral part of the mission. 331dot (talk) 18:17, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I'll support a blurb for Valentina Tereshkova when she dies. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:59, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

April 27

[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections


RD: Aristóbulo Istúriz

[edit]
Article: Aristóbulo Istúriz (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Europa Press
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Venezuelan politician and senior official. He died in office while he was serving as minister of education. NoonIcarus (talk) 12:05, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RD: David Beriain

[edit]
Article: David Beriain (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Reuters, El País, BBC
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Spanish journalist, specialized in armed conflicts and violence. Killed while filming in Burkina Faso. NoonIcarus (talk) 11:57, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Miroslav Fryčer

[edit]
Article: Miroslav Fryčer (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): TSN Toronto Sun
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Hockey player who defected from Czechoslovakia to play in the NHL. Article has been expanded and sourced. Yeeno (talk) 🍁 05:13, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Leela Nambudiripad

[edit]
Article: Leela Nambudiripad (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Hindu
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Indian Malayalam language author of children's books. Kerala Sahitya Akademi and Kendra Sahitya Academy Award winner. Article is almost there and should be ready for homepage soon. Edits done. Article has shaped into a decent C-class biography. Meets hygiene expectations for homepage / RD. Ktin (talk) 00:25, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

April 26

[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections


(Posted) RD: Jagdish Khattar

[edit]
Article: Jagdish Khattar (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Indian Express
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Indian bureaucrat and executive. Article is not ready for homepage in the current form. Will require edits including removing the yellow box. I will get to it, but, if someone wants to go ahead before me, please feel free to. Regards. Edits and rewrites done. Reasonable quality for homepage. Ktin (talk) 20:17, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) COVID-19 in India surge

[edit]

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 in India (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: India reports a world record number of new cases of COVID-19 for five consecutive days. (Post)
News source(s): BBC CNN
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Yes we have it in ongoing, yes they're both arbitrary "records", but the situation over there is unlike anything in the west even at the height. Hospitals are full. Makeshift crematoriums. Police escorting medical Oxygen tankers. This is what an actual crisis looks like. Propose a different blurb, different target, whatever or shoot me down if you want but it feels like even with 18 months of COVID-19 news this has surfaced as a big deal. LaserLegs (talk) 12:50, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

RD: Tamara Press

[edit]
Article: Tamara Press (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): L'Equipe (France); ABC (Norway)
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: RD. Triple Olympic champion, world record holder. Article is short, and needs some careful attention whether the controversies are adequately and neutrally worded. Fram (talk) 11:07, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) RD: Kent Angus

[edit]

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: Kent Angus (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [10]
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Canadian businessman and international ice hockey personality. Flibirigit (talk) 19:28, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Posted) RD: Vassos Lyssarides

[edit]
Article: Vassos Lyssarides (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CNN.gr
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: An important Cypriot politician. I've been improving his article, but the work isn't finished yet. A revision of the orthography may be necessary. Alsoriano97 (talk) 18:25, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment per request from nominator, I have done a whole-article CE, and language and MOS issues should now be resolved. There are two paras in Political career which end on an unreferenced assertion (now CN tagged). This information might be found in previous references in the same paragraph (a convention that other lang Wikis have). Consider this a Support once these two CNs are resolved.130.233.213.199 (talk) 05:05, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

April 25

[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Businesses and economy

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections


PM of Albania is re-elected

[edit]
Proposed image
Article: 2021 Albanian parliamentary election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Edi Rama wins the re-election to Prime Minister of Albania. (Post)
News source(s): AP News Al Jazeera
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Rama's candidacy won a landslide victory in the parliamentary elections and he is already considered to be re-elected. The article on the elections seems to be complete, although prose is missing in the results section. Alsoriano97 (talk) 14:40, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Nom. Comm. It seems that the results have not yet been published by the Central Election Commission, but it will be a matter of days, or hours. Even so, journalistic sources on the latest vote counts give a more than evident victory. Right now I'm finishing fixing the election article. Alsoriano97 (talk) 15:03, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment: I did create this article, but I hardly updated it after doing so. There are a few election articles where I put in a lot of effort; this isn't really one of them. Credit for updating ought to go to someone else, I think. jp×g 17:29, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: The counting of party votes is over but they are being recounted again due to preferential votes for the candidates. Exceptions are invalid votes that will not be recounted if there are no complaints from parties. Also from the recount may emerge other invalid votes that may have escaped the first count. According to a press statement (and its account in Twitter of the commissioner, the turnout is 46.32% but does not match the 46.29% presented on the official website of the CEC for very little. Anyway I would suggest expanding the "Background" section based on several different articles and the OSCE-ODIHR preliminary report.Bes-ARTTalk 18:11, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment general elections are ITNR --LaserLegs (talk) 17:33, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for now, same general problem with many of these articles as being long on tables and light on readable prose. General expansion of actual text is needed, especially in areas of background and of results, as well as the lead, which is basically nothing. As a side comment, the blurb should mirror in format similar parliamentary elections that we have posted in the past "In such and such election, the so-and-so party, led by Prime Minister Whoever, retains a majority in the parliament" or whatever. This is not an election of a President, it's a parliamentary election. But the article needs a lot of work before it is main page ready. If it gets cleaned up, and we get a proper blurb, then we can post it. --Jayron32 17:43, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Denny Freeman

[edit]
Article: Denny Freeman (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Austin American-Statesman; The Austin Chronicle
Credits:

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

 Bloom6132 (talk) 08:58, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) RD: Harry Setyawan

[edit]

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: Harry Setyawan (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): New York Times
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Highest ranking officer in KRI Nanggala (402) when it sunk. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 15:50, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi GreatCaesarsGhost, if you feel that the article fails WP:1E please nominate it for deletion. Let us discuss it there. --Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 03:07, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It is appropriate and standard to discuss the notability of newly created articles in this space. I prefer not to AfD an RD nom, as it can have the effect of killing it with bureaucracy. If others here disagree with me, the can support the nom and it will be posted. GreatCaesarsGhost 10:38, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This isn't being nominated for a blurb. As per policy, if it passes GNG, it can be posted. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 23:29, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The quote I gave is an 'or' statement - it can either get a blurb or an RD, and his death is already covered in an existing blurb. The blurb was promoted to the top of ITN when the deaths were confirmed, so de facto a blurb has already been given. Uses x (talkcontribs) 23:35, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The policy you're quoting is explicitly on "blurbs for recent deaths." Setyawan was an individually notable victim of a high-casualty incident that was posted without reference to him. This is not what that policy was meant to entail, and trying to make it fit here is quite a bit of a stretch. I do not think your reading of this policy should supersede the RfC on recent deaths. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 23:40, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
To be more clear: that policy is supposed to explain why when, for example, Prince Philip's death was given a blurb, his name should not also be listed among recent deaths simultaneously. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 23:42, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Can you quote that in the RfC? From the closure (and as I already quoted above): "if a person's death is only notable for what they did while alive, it belongs as an RD link." (emphasis not mine), and he is not only notable for what he did alive. It's an odd one, but I think it's clear and necessary to avoid duplication of content. Anyway, I don't think we'll change each others minds on this, and we've made our points, so I won't reply further. Uses x (talkcontribs) 23:52, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Simply this: that all people are eligible for RDs if "not currently nominated for deletion or speedy deletion" and "of sufficient quality to be posted on the main page, as determined by a consensus of commenters." AllegedlyHuman (talk) 23:57, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Uses x, there is a precedent for this. Mulyadi Tamsir was a victim of SJ 182 and both appeared in Main Page as RD and blurb, respectively. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 03:14, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Article is in good shape and gives a good overall summary of his career. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 23:33, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Rare case of arguable BLP1E with article created after (presumptive) death. The event that killed him is currently a blurb. There is glancing, local reporting of him before his death. Much of it reports unremarkable actions of a commissioned officer. "Seaman seafares". Being colonel at 45 is not an effusive statement from his own navy. However, the BLP aspects of the article are very good.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.233.213.199 (talk) 05:20, 27 April 2021‎ (UTC)[reply]
Again, as Jeromi Mikhael said, if you believe it fails BLP1E then AFD would be the appropriate place to raise that concern. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 05:25, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose If a missile were to hit the U.S. Capitol and kill hundreds of people who have articles, would we post every single one of them as RDs? Probably not, we would just post the event as a blurb and leave it at that. Same principle should apply here. The fact that only a single person on that submarine has an article shouldn't change the calculus. Mlb96 (talk) 05:36, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Your hypothetical case might be a plausible WP:IAR reaction to having, say, 30 RD candidates all at once. In this case, it's only one RD.—Bagumba (talk) 06:57, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as already covered by the blurb. Didn't we use to have a rule that an article had to exist prior to the death to be eligible for RD? Or was that just ITN/C convention? This was moved to article space on 26 April. Either way, I suspect this doesn't meet WP:BIO1E (which is distinct from WP:BLP1E). Modest Genius talk 13:59, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • We allow articles created after death to be nominated for RD, but it should be clear the person was notable before their death and we (wikipedia editors) failed to have created that article prior to that point. That is, there should be a decent amount of secondary sourcing beyond obits to support that newly created article. If we're mostly using obits and weak primary sources, that's likely more a BLP1E, notable-only-for-death situation. --Masem (t) 14:23, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as already covered by the blurb, and repetition in WP:ITN is not warranted. This was a mass casualty event. Suggest that this new article would be a great WP:DYK. 7&6=thirteen () 14:12, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose This definitely feels like a BLP1E issue; if the sub hadn't sunk, we'd likely not have an article on him in the first place. --Masem (t) 14:23, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment And FWIW, we have posted the names of notable individuals that have died in mass casualty events in the past, but usually when those number from 1-3 (top of my head: that S.American helicopter crash that killed three soccer players; a Middle Eastern military aircraft that killed a civilian leader that was also on board) And on LaMia Flight 2933, we just noted that the crash killed the Chapecoense team without naming individuals. But again, these are usually integrated with the blurb and not made separate. --Masem (t) 14:31, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Damn this. Sorry for creating and nominating this in the first place. I have wasted my own time for creating this and wasted your time for commenting here. I shall proceed to AfD. --Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 14:55, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Posted) RD: John Konrads

[edit]
Article: John Konrads (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): AD (Netherlands), Guardian (UK), L'Equipe (France)
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: RD, former Olympic champion Fram (talk) 14:15, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) 93rd Academy Awards

[edit]

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


Articles: 93rd Academy Awards (talk · history · tag) and Chloé Zhao (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ At the Academy Awards, Nomadland wins Best Picture while Chloé Zhao wins Best Director, the first woman of color to do so (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ At the Academy Awards, Nomadland wins Best Picture while Chloé Zhao wins Best Director, the first woman of Asian descent to do so
Alternative blurb II: ​ At the Academy Awards, Nomadland wins Best Picture.
Alternative blurb III: ​ At the Academy Awards, Chloé Zhao's Nomadland wins Best Picture and Zhao wins Best Director.
News source(s): Hollywood Reporter, USA Today,
Credits:

One or both nominated events are listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: The awards are still going (as I write this) and the usual ITNR for Best Picture is not yet named, but the big story already hitting headlines already are Zhao's win as Best Director and being the first woman of color to do so (and the 2nd woman to win it), so I'm preping this to include that part of the entry. Should Nomadland win best film, we can reword things a bit. I will point out the article is updated/being updated with ceremony info as it goes along to avoid being just a table of winners and nominees. Masem (t) 01:33, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It's listed at ITN/R. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 02:06, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I've added altblurb 3 which is acceptable for me. I'd like Zhao's article to be bolded, but there are a few uncited bits. The bolded article is fully cited and has the necessary info, anyway. Uses x (talkcontribs) 05:04, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree with the IP user in scrapping "the first woman of color to do so", instead because it's just trivia, and her skin colour isn't relevant to her winning the award. She's not the first woman to win, and she's not the first person of colour to win, so there's no reason to get specific just to invent sensationalism (that's not what ITN is for). Uses x (talkcontribs) 04:07, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    But nearly every major publication focused on her win as a woman of color, moreso than other facets of the awards. If they weren't making a big deal of this, I wouldn't have brought it up in the first place and just go with the standard Best Picture win. --Masem (t) 04:24, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @Masem It's safe to say those publications are getting more clicks (and so, money) with that headline, which is why they chose it. There's precedent for avoiding "the first ..." in blurbs, as anything can be phrased in a way to be the first in whatever region/event/time; to phrase it differently, "Woman of color Chloé Zhao wins Best Director" is just off, which I hope emphasises why her ethnicity or gender shouldn't be the focus.
    Instead, I think the space is better used focusing on her work, or just left free. People who are genuinely interested will figure it out from her name or just read it in the article. A suggestion I have is making it clearer she is also the director of the Best Picture rather than them being two separate things, as it appears right now. Uses x (talkcontribs) 04:50, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    However the phrase "woman of color" could be redone is one thing, but I will point out, back at the Nationals, when the jockey that won was the first female and news sources focused on that, that was made a significant enough detail to be part of our blurb ([11]). Now, I don't know if news sources at the BAFTA's overlooked the same point then as they are making (the same "first" does apply), and I would agree if the news around the BAFTA's mentioned that and we didn't include it (we didn't, I checked), then we can drop that first. But as long as the film won best picture, there is zero harm to also mention her as best director alongside it. --Masem (t) 05:38, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    For The Masters recently, we didn't post that the winner was the first Japanese male to win, when it was in every major headline. It doesn't appear the demographic of editors here is too comfortable mentioning race. For BAFTA, we just parenthetically mentioned that Zhao was the writer and director and included her photo.—Bagumba (talk) 06:21, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    It could be simply that in terms of the media, the Oscars have been having problems in the last few years with proportion of awards to non-whites, and so the media's focus on a race-based first makes sense. I can see that for WP, its far easier to definitely call out a first female win (gender biases transends all racial bounderies), while first racial aspect can start getting nitpicky and something ITN's not well suited for, as a possible rule-of-thumb going forward here. --Masem (t) 12:52, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I also agree with this. The event is ITN/R; we would have posted it if it was another white man, the notability is already agreed upon regardless. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 05:01, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose including racist trivia into ITN. It would be weird to have ITN devolve to endorsing racist language that denotes "of color" anything that is "not white", although black is not a color, and plenty of people "of color" have lighter shin features than a good chunk of "white people". 205.175.106.86 (talk) 03:55, 26 April 2021 (UTC) - It's fair to oppose blurb wording, but not with the argument that it's racist merely to call a light-skinned WOC a WOC. Kingsif (talk) 04:42, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Note: the IP user above added the Alternative Blurb. Uses x (talkcontribs) 04:13, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    "woman of color" is the language being used by sources, rather than "non-white". --Masem (t) 04:24, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Unlike "colored person," "person of color" isn't considered derogatory in its usage. Wouldn't you know it, but this encyclopedia has a page on exactly that. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 04:43, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This is trivial hair-splitting which looks extremely weird, almost fetisch, from non-English speaking perspectives. Putting a blurb up with "colored person" is racist but "person of color" is celebratory. Truly Kafkaesque.130.233.213.199 (talk) 05:06, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, I don't make the rules, society at large does. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 05:08, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Not in rural high-speed internet communities, it dunnint! InedibleHulk (talk) 09:02, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It likely depends on one's view of white privilege.—Bagumba (talk) 10:33, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Posted) RD: Alber Elbaz

[edit]
Article: Alber Elbaz (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): New York Times BBC The Guardian Vogue
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Fashion designer of Lanvin died of COVID-19 Trillfendi (talk) 15:29, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Armenian PM resigns

[edit]

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: Nikol Pashinyan (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Prime Minister of Armenia Nikol Pashinyan resigns. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Prime Minister of Armenia Nikol Pashinyan resigns ahead of June parliamentary election.
News source(s): France24, Bloomberg
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Not sure if we should wait until June elections for his successor, so nominating now. He's now interim PM and all members of his cabinet have also resigned. Brandmeistertalk 10:41, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Posted) Baghdad Hospital fire

[edit]
Article: Baghdad hospital fire (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ An oxygen tank explosion causes a hospital fire in Baghdad. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Minister of Health Hassan al-Timini is suspended by the Prime Minister of Iraq following the Baghdad hospital fire.
Alternative blurb II: A fire at a COVID-19 hospital in Baghdad kills at least 82 people.
Alternative blurb III: A fire at a COVID-19 hospital in Baghdad kills at least 82 people and injures 110.
News source(s): CNA, The Globe and Mail, AP, BBC, Reuters, dpa
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Not sure if this should wait, given the article's stub-status. Aknell4 (talkcontribs) 13:54, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Posted. El_C 01:20, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

April 24

[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology


(Posted) RD: Christa Ludwig

[edit]
Article: Christa Ludwig (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [ The Telegraph] and many others
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Legendary mezzo-soprano, opera from 1946 to 1994, home at the Vienna State Opera, known internationally - obits in many languages. - When I looked at the article I was shocked by a practical absence of references, but Grimes2 found many, and I added a few. There could be much more detail (concert repertory, Met archive, recordings, acknoledgements), but I need sleep. Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:44, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yakikaki, I've changed it to a quote box: is that more manageable? AllegedlyHuman (talk) 07:29, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It's fine, though I basically don't see what it adds to the article. But as I said, it does no particular harm either, so I'm ok with it and support this nomination for RD. Yakikaki (talk) 08:15, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Indonesian submarine sunk

[edit]

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: KRI Nanggala (402) (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ 53 crew are killed after the Indonesian submarine found off the island of Bali (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ 53 crew are presumed dead after the Indonesian submarine KRI Nanggala (402) is located off the island of Bali
News source(s): Kompas CBS News
Credits:
Nominator's comments: the KRI Nanggala (402) was founded to be sunk and killing 53 crew. I believe the previous blurb need to be updated with new information. 36.69.61.79 (talk) 13:02, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
PS: According to this, at a depth of 2,800 feet (850 meters) of salt water, the water pressure exceeds 1,200 pounds per square inch. – Sca (talk) 16:25, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • CommentSunk and other forms of sink would be inadvisable, as that's what submarines do. It's their nature. "Is lost with all 53 aboard" or something similar would be preferable. However, at this point, given the body of coverage, there's no point in splitting hairs over "presumed." It's patently obvious they're deceased, regardless of what the Indonesian Navy says. – Sca (talk) 16:06, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support It's pretty clear it has been sunk. The Associated Press says it, NPR says it, NBC News, Al Jazeera, the Indonesian Navy, the U.S. Secretary of Defence Lloyd Austin [tweet], etc. The article is updated, and it's already a blurb so updating that blurb to reflect the current information isn't a problem for me. Uses x (talkcontribs) 16:56, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • And push down my nomination? /s I'm not sure about the actual procedure, but I'd say the update so far isn't long enough that it'd warrant a blurb alone anyway, so instead this is more of a "correction" to an existing blurb because more information is out. Uses x (talkcontribs) 17:25, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Posted) RD: Milva

[edit]
Article: Milva (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Repubblica, Deadline Hollywood
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Milva, La Rossa - article is good shape, only small things missing - I hope we can do it together. Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:09, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think the songs should be sourced in [151]. Grimes2 (talk) 10:54, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
They are. But there, they're neither "quoted" nor italicized, just underlined. I don't know how it works in other languages, I'll defer to whoever does. InedibleHulk (talk) 11:01, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
News orgs tend to use quotes; books tend to use ital. (Perhaps the difference goes back to the days when lead type was set by hand and the standard newspaper 'job case' didn't contain italic letters.) – Sca (talk) 14:13, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Songs are typically quoted per MOS:MINORWORKS. At any rate, not an ITN showstopper.—Bagumba (talk) 18:26, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That's a relief. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:34, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Greenfield University kidnapping

[edit]

Nominator's comments: The kidnapping happened on 20 April 2021, three of the kidnapped students were executed by the kidnappers on 23 April 2021 —Nnadigoodluck 02:37, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

????? Are you rambling here? --Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 12:22, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Just on tilt, heading for DIVA for the third (or fourth?) time perhaps. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 21:42, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Terrence Clarke

[edit]
Article: Terrence Clarke (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): WKYT, NY Times
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Article is very good. Therapyisgood (talk) 01:36, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) U.S. President Joe Biden (or the United States) recognizes Armenian Genocide

[edit]

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: Armenian Genocide (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ United States President Joe Biden recognizes the massacres of Armenians by Ottoman Turks as genocide (Post)
Alternative blurb: Joe Biden becomes the first sitting United States President to recognize the Armenian Genocide
Alternative blurb II: ​ The United States recognizes the Armenian Genocide
News source(s): Reuters Associated Press BBC Deutsche Welle CNN El Mundo (in Spanish)
Credits:
Nominator's comments: The even is highly significant for international relations and I think the Armenian Genocide article is in pretty good shape. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 01:00, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"Those who protect the land", at least ostensibly, America is superpowerful. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:57, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't consider Alt2 to be appropriate as the U.S. Senate has already recognised it as a genocide. The blurb needs to be explicit that the update is the Biden administration now recognises it. Uses x (talkcontribs) 04:36, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Many senators come and go, presidents represent America, as a whole. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:52, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@InedibleHulk You can look at any RS and they're all explicit that it's the Biden administration with the change in policy. To me, the "The United States recognizes" would require a bill to pass the House, the Senate, and then be signed by the president. Uses x (talkcontribs) 05:00, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
And President of the United States describes the role, responsibility and function in geopolitics. Like a spokesman. Genocide explains why that word matters. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:05, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Accepting the premise that both blurbs are correct for a moment, does it hurt anything to clarify that this was Biden's statement? AllegedlyHuman (talk) 06:33, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In international relations, a nation is more important than one person, though it's not wrong that America's representative here is Joe Biden, on behalf of the congress and citizens. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:14, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose the US is kind of late to the party here, and Congress already handled this two years ago with a veto proof majority. --LaserLegs (talk) 01:53, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, given the historic nature of this announcement. Wizardoftheyear (talk)
  • Support, it's the leading international news story in many countries. AntiVan (talk) 02:49, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose There's no dedicated article, literally just a one-line update (and any longer is not suitable for the article, either, considering its focus). People clicking would want to read about it, and the consequences of it, and that's not possible when the Armenian Genocide article is the bold. As well as that, it's just an announcement with likely no consequence, and the U.S. Senate had already voted to recognise it, so there's no change in U.S. policy. If something actually happens as a result of this (which I doubt), it's worth reconsidering then. Uses x (talkcontribs) 03:52, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree that would be a better target article even though a huge amount of work needs to be put into it. Still, looking into the whole thing a bit more, it seems the whole thing is just semantics; Donald Trump's administration didn't say it's a genocide, but instead said it's "one of the worst mass atrocities of the 20th Century". [1] Really, it's just the same policy with more direct wording, so I have to directly disagree with the claims it's historic and will have any implication beyond a "strong reaction". Uses x (talkcontribs) 04:52, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Now seen in Alt II. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:57, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Alt 2, this is an announcement with pretty significant geopolitical implications. That said, I concur with @Spencer to use United States recognition of the Armenian Genocide in the blurb. As for why Alt 2 over Alt 1, although Biden's announcement is the one making the news, there's a lot more than just Biden pushing for recognition. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Osunpokeh

(talkcontribs) 04:17, 25 April 2021 (UTC) EDIT: As always, I'm a moron and forgot to osunpokeh (talk) 08:40, 25 April 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Note: An editor has expressed a concern that editors have been canvassed to this discussion. Post-close strikethrough, as the intention is to flag the issue, not accuse the nominator of any rule-breach. Uses x (talkcontribs) 04:54, 28 April 2021 (UTC) [reply]

This isn't on you, but I'm unsure why you were added as an updater (which pinged you) as with all respect you've contributed 1,230 characters to the article in total, with your last addition being over 12 months ago.
Notification is intended for "Editors who have made substantial edits to the topic or article" (emphasis mine), and if that isn't met you should be uninvolved in the topic, as per Wikipedia:Canvassing. Of course, the ping probably isn't intentional (and again, it wasn't your choice), but I wanted to flag this as you'd be a reliable Support vote due to your involvement in the article, and I assume you wouldn't be aware of this discussion without that. Uses x (talkcontribs) 05:43, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In terms of total edits to the article, the editor you are replying to is 2nd on the list, having contributed 17.9% of total edits to the article. I understand that the article has gone under substantial revisions over time (a single editor currently gets the blame/credit for 84.8% of characters on the page), but it's pretty clear that EtienneDolet has contributed substantially to the article over the life of the page. Are you seriously implying that I'm canvassing here? — Mikehawk10 (talk) 06:13, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Can you share that info? XTools authorship, the official tool, states they only contributed 1.6% of the article. [1] I'm not accusing you of canvassing because it'd have to be intentional to be canvassing, and I don't think it is. Uses x (talkcontribs) 06:27, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If you're not making an accusation of canvassing, you should probably strike the initial comment. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 06:31, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's the best way to flag it. An admin is free to remove it as well as my comments on it if I'm wrong, but if not I think the vote should be ignored for the reasons I've stated. Uses x (talkcontribs) 06:43, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Uses x: Xtools also has a metric on the top editors over time (both by number of edits and by quantity of text added). Buidhe is obviously the editor that gets the most credit for the current status of the page via XTools' authorship metric, though admittedly the way the algorithm works is not super clear to me. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 06:59, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Mikehawk10 Sorry for not being clearer about my intention, as I was only interested in flagging the issue rather than trying to make any accusation. Anyway, it seems the whole thing is moot anyway, as Biden wasn't the first president to recognise it as a genocide, Reagan was. I've added that info to the United States recognition of the Armenian Genocide article. Uses x (talkcontribs) 07:10, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Uses x: I understand the intention now, though since the comment has a bluelink to WP:CANVASSING I would respectfully ask that you strike it unless you have a concern that I am actually canvassing. Regarding the second part of your reply, it looks like these very same RS are acknowledging the international significance of Biden's announcement (which even the NYT source you've provided below calls the first such announcement by an American President). I don't think that this request has been mooted, though I think you have made a good point about alternative blurb 1 not being a good option given the facts about Reagan's tangential comments in 1981. Nevertheless, this still appears to be internationally significant moment, as reflected in the reporting from reliable sources. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 07:34, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It's conceivable that one could fill out {{ITN candidate}} and credit updaters without intending to canvass. The template is somewhat open-ended about the criteria for an updater.—Bagumba (talk) 07:15, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, both the House and the Senate recognised it already. Reagan did recognise it as a genocide [1] [2], and Trump was more diplomatic about it describing it as "one of the worst mass atrocities of the 20th Century" instead. Uses x (talkcontribs) 06:49, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The first source is a WP:NEWSBLOG written by opinion contributors to The Hill, so it doesn't appear to be a reliable source. The source from The New York Times states that "At the risk of infuriating Turkey, President Biden formally announced on Saturday that the United States regards the killing of 1.5 million Armenians by Turks more than a century ago to be a genocide — the most monstrous of crimes. Mr. Biden was the first American president to make such an announcement, breaking with predecessors who did not wish to antagonize Turkey, a NATO ally and a strategically pivotal country straddling Europe and the Middle East" (emphasis added). The NYT source acknowledges Reagan's comment that you are referring to and frames it as a tangential statement, writing that President Ronald Reagan tangentially referred to the “genocide of the Armenians” in an April 22, 1981, statement commemorating the liberation of the Nazi death camps.Mikehawk10 (talk) 07:09, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
... "calling it a “genocide” -- a word no U.S. leader since Ronald Reagan has used to describe the event for fear of alienating NATO ally Turkey." [Bloomberg]. Nice spot on The Hill, even if the info is correct, but really this is shut. Uses x (talkcontribs) 07:18, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Reagan was speaking for himself, not "the United States", his own opinion. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:28, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
He was literally speaking at a Holocaust commemoration, reading from a prepared statement signed "by the President of the United States of America", at a time he was President of the United States. Uses x (talkcontribs) 07:38, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
But he didn't literally speak for America by referring to it as "we", its beliefs and principles as "ours" and all that. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:43, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Either way, Alt blurb I isn't very accurate. As for Alt blurb II, we need to decide who is a better representative of the United States,the President or Congress? Scaramouche33 (talk) 07:49, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The president is elected by way more people, generally, and this one holds that record (81.2 million nodding right along). InedibleHulk (talk) 07:59, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sources distinguish this from Reagan by using "formally" or "official" or saying it is now U.S. policy.—Bagumba (talk) 07:37, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Semantics, isn't it? The House and the Senate have already voted yes, and even Trump agreed with the spirit of it. Uses x (talkcontribs) 07:41, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I was only relaying how the sources distinguished it from Reagan. Not a statement on its merits as a blurb.—Bagumba (talk) 10:10, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
LOL Trump was not "more diplomatic about it" he was pandering to his autocrat pal Erdogan by deliberately not using the word "Genocide". --LaserLegs (talk) 10:45, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"He soon backtracked under pressure from Turkey, the successor state to the Ottoman Empire, which collapsed after the end of World War I." [14] --LaserLegs (talk) 11:43, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There were 3 separate references to it on the Main Page yesterday. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 14:54, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

April 23

[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

  • Russian opposition leader and activist Alexei Navalny announces that he will end his three-week-long hunger strike in order to seek medical care, four days after being moved to a hospital due to the damage that the strike had inflicted on his body. (NPR)

Science and technology

Sports


(Posted) RD: Dan Kaminsky

[edit]
Article: Dan Kaminsky (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Register Hacker News
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: The issues yesterday with reliable coverage of his death have been resolved. The article is start-quality at best (and still receiving updates) but appears fully referenced. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 19:28, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

He was a security hacker. Most of those guys intentionally live pretty private lives. I doubt much information about his early life or personal life is publicly known. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 05:25, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Fully cited, thanks to AllegedlyHuman. Marking ready. Uses x (talkcontribs) 08:43, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ktin, I've gone through and added quite a bit from the NYT obit. An interesting person and a very in-depth article. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 06:01, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good AllegedlyHuman. There are two [citation needed] tags that I still see. Can you take a pass at fixing them? Should be ready to go right after that. Ktin (talk) 15:29, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Ktin, CN tags have been addressed. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 19:11, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Looks good for homepage / RD. Nice work by AllegedlyHuman. Ktin (talk) 19:49, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Adrian Garrett

[edit]
Article: Adrian Garrett (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Chicago Sun-Times (Associated Press)
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Only announced and reported today (April 23). —Bloom6132 (talk) 09:27, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Mario Meoni

[edit]
Article: Mario Meoni (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [2]
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Argentina's minister of transport, killed in a car accident. Johndavies837 (talk) 03:35, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) 2017 New York City attempted bombing

[edit]

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: 2017 New York City attempted bombing (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Akayed Ullah is sentenced to life imprisonment for the bombing of Times Square station in New York City (Post)
News source(s): BBC, NY Times, WaPo, The Courier
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Akayed Ullah convicted for life for the Times Square subway bombing. Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 02:48, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm pretty sure "never heard of it" is not a valid reason to exclude something from ITN. -- Rockstone[Send me a message!] 10:08, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

April 22

[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology


RD: Shock G

[edit]
Article: Shock G (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: US rapper. Article is somewhat better than the one below, but still needs quite a bit of work. Black Kite (talk) 18:50, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Les McKeown

[edit]
Article: Les McKeown (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Singer from the Bay City Rollers. Article is utterly terrible, but dropping it in here in case anyone fancies a go at it. Black Kite (talk) 18:09, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Mars Oxygen ISRU Experiment

[edit]
Article: Mars Oxygen ISRU Experiment (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ On Mars, the Mars Oxygen ISRU Experiment in the Perseverance rover produces oxygen from the Martian atmosphere, the first extraction of a natural resource on another planet for human use. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Atmospheric oxygen is produced on Mars by the Mars Oxygen ISRU Experiment in the Perseverance rover.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Oxygen is produced from carbon dioxide in the Martian atmosphere, by the Mars Oxygen ISRU Experiment in the Perseverance rover.
News source(s): Irish Times USA Today NPR ABC News
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: There's an uncited paragraph about the chemistry of the mechanism, which I'll work on. Direct quote citing what the blurb says: the feat marked the first experimental extraction of a natural resource from the environment of another planet for direct use by humans. [1] Uses x (talkcontribs) 20:27, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

*Oppose on article quality and on article notability. This is better suited as a DYK nomination. 141.157.254.136 (talk) 20:33, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • What input do you have on the article quality? For notability it's in the news, so I don't see that as valid.
    What leads you to believe it's more suitable for DYK? I think this is pretty historic (ITN isn't just for politicians and disasters), and WP:DYK: "the hook should refer to established facts that are unlikely to change, and should be relevant for more than just novelty or newness", while further experiments will be done so that won't hold up. Uses x (talkcontribs) 20:53, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose We've posted the successful landing, and the successful powered flight. There's likely many other "firsts" expected here and we can't post them all. --Masem (t) 21:00, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @Masem You can see the list of instruments and experiments on board here: Perseverance_(rover)#Instruments. The rest of the experiments involve analysing the atmosphere and collecting and analysing samples, so it's unlikely any more news will get out beyond niche circles. This is significant which is really what matters (probably more so than the powered flight), and it'd be pushing off the powered flight blurb anyway. Uses x (talkcontribs) 21:21, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Fair enough, considering we're replacing the other Mars story. I'll support this as I'm not seeing any problems with the article. --Masem (t) 23:30, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. No problems on quality. Making oxygen on another planet is not routine. Levivich harass/hound 22:50, 22 April 2021 (UTC) Adding: Alt2 is my favorite blurb of those three, but I don't think "for the first time" is necessary, as that's sort of implied/obvious to me. Also I think the more-recognizable "Moxie" should be included: "Oxygen is produced from carbon dioxide in the Martian atmosphere by the Mars Oxygen ISRU Experiment (MOXIE) in the Perseverance rover." But I support with or without my suggestions. Levivich harass/hound 00:32, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support in principleSupport, but needs a blurb that doesn't sensationalize it - I recommend something like the following: Atmospheric oxygen is produced on Mars for the first time by the Mars Oxygen ISRU Experiment in the Perseverance rover. - it's not going to be used by humans as none are there, and I think "atmospheric oxygen" clarifies well enough that it could be used by humans had they been there (and right next to the rover, and only needed a fraction of one breath one time). -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 23:56, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Berchanhimez: Thank you, something felt off with the first blurb but I couldn't put a finger on it, so I've added two altblurbs without the human use thing. Uses x (talkcontribs) 00:13, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I would also suggest adding that the oxygen was produced from carbon dioxide (which implicitly confirmed a chemical conversion rather than a separations process), if that can be worded in. --Masem (t) 00:22, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Done, is alt2 good? I feel that's the one that needed it. Uses x (talkcontribs) 00:30, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to be so picky, but may I suggest (with links as appropriate): The Perseverance rover's Mars Oxygen ISRU Experiment demonstrated the production of oxygen from carbon dioxide in the Martian atmosphere? My links may be off and maybe there's a way to improve it further to not have sea of blue links at the beginning there, but I think that may be a good compromise? With the blurb reworking, I'm confident enough that this will be fleshed out to be ITN acceptable so I'll change to be fully supportive. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 00:50, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ooh, I used to love those; tasty little cheese crackers. They stopped making them back in the early 1990s. I miss them. --Jayron32 17:19, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
How do you feel about Cheez-Its? – Sca (talk) 14:25, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'll share my thoughts on this idea as a complete layman – I don't personally feel as if I understand enough of the relevant area to !vote or comment on most science-related noms. I feel pretty confident in my knowledge of, say, geopolitics, but I also think an average joe's understanding of that subject goes farther than it does with science, to where people have a generally better indicator of what's important and what's not, whereas on science I simply have no clue. Just speaking for myself here, but if others feel the same way, then that self-selection bias may help explain a lot of what you're talking about, Sdkb. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 07:26, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Are you suggesting we have a Mars-centric bias here on ITN/C? WaltCip-(talk) 17:53, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment ITN used to have a concept called "minority topics" of which science and technology were included where the notability criteria was softened. It's gone now though. --LaserLegs (talk) 16:19, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

UK House of Commons unanimously votes to recognize Uyghur genocide

[edit]
Article: Uyghur genocide (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The House of Commons of the United Kingdom unanimously passes a non-binding motion declaring China's human rights abuses in Xinjiang as a genocide. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The United Kingdom House of Commons votes unanimously in favor of a non-binding motion to recognize the Uyghur genocide.
News source(s): CNN BBC The Guardian Reuters The Financial Times Axios Associated Press (via Global News) Australian Associated Press (via The Canberra Times) United Press International Sky News
Credits:

Nominator's comments: This is a globally significant development in the international response to the ongoing Uyghur genocide. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 01:41, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

April 21

[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Sports

  • The Super League
    • Following the withdrawal of most of its founding member clubs, The Super League announces that it is suspending the project, three days after it was officially announced. (ESPN)

(Closed) Blurb: Russian protests

[edit]

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
Alexei Navalny
Articles: 2021 Russian protests (talk · history · tag) and Alexei Navalny (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In Russia, over 1,000 people are arrested during protests following the imprisonment of opposition leader Alexei Navalny (pictured). (Post)
News source(s): CNBC, The Independent, NYT, WaPo
Credits:
Article updated
Nominator's comments: Nominating separately as a blurb on advice from the closer in the discussion for ongoingAllegedlyHuman (talk) 00:47, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Two genocides are potentially appearing soon, remembering one living prisoner of 1,000 is relatively nothing, especially to quickly roll off two genocides over. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:14, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose one sentence stubby update. Write a paragraph or two somewhere about Navalny's hunger strike you might get that through. --LaserLegs (talk) 16:18, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per LaserLegs above, and this a routine turn of events. Additionally, I live right next to Russia, work with Russians and read news from Russia. You'd think with all the fury that this case has generated in *checks sources* CNBC, Independent, NY Times and WaPo, that it would also be topical amongst actual Russians. And you'd be wrong.130.233.213.199 (talk) 05:40, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, I wonder why mass arrests during an anti-government protest haven't been widely covered in Russian state-run media. (FWIW, there are plenty of Russian sources in the articles linked, I just didn't add them here as I'm not personally familiar with what's considered an RS.) AllegedlyHuman (talk) 06:02, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Pardon my POINT but you might misunderstand which direction state-run media is slanting this.2001:708:20:1300:0:0:0:1650 (talk) 08:26, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Posted) RD: Thomas Fritsch

[edit]
Article: Thomas Fritsch (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Tagesspiegel and MANY others
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Actor who was the idol of teens in the 1960s, and matured to The German Voice of Scar (Lion King) and Diego (Ice Ige). There was only a list yesterday. - Couldn't find refs for awards yet, and have to go for today. Much more in German. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:38, 23 April 2021 (UTC) Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:38, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Fixed Grimes2 (talk) 18:08, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Håkon Brusveen

[edit]
Article: Håkon Brusveen (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NRK
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Norwegian cross-country skier and sports broadcaster, Olympic champion 1960. Oceanh (talk) 23:08, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Russian protests

[edit]

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: 2021 Russian protests (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
News source(s): CNBC, The Independent, NYT, WaPo
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Has recently seen a stark upsurge following reports of Alexei Navalny's deteriorating health in prison. More than 1000 arrests todayAllegedlyHuman (talk) 22:51, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • ITNC may not be the point to discuss this, but we've posted soooo many protests of late and without speaking to which are reasonable and which are not, these always seem to remain sticklers in terms of when they get pulled due to lack of updates (either in the actual protests and/or the article(s) themselves). I am wondering if we should try to start an example of posting protests as a blurb (even if they've been ongoing, posting at a significant even like here, with 1000+ arrested), and then making the call after a few days when the blurb is about to role off if the protest is significant to keep on going, rather than to post as a blurb and let that "float" indefinitely. Or another way to view this; large-scale protests are nowadays far too common (like bombings in war-torn countries or shootings in the US), and rather than focusing on just the fact there is a protest, we should make sure ITN helps readers understand why there is a protest happen, so that we're ideally covering the major news event as well. I'm not against posting this, but basically, can we start with a blurb first and then talk ongoing? --Masem (t) 23:00, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
As the nominator, I would support a blurb; however, what I generally see from the community on these kinds of nominations are complaints about the event being an arbitrary point of a larger, ongoing event. If it's blurbed, I'd recommend linking Navalny as well, since that's in pretty good shape. A blurb might look something like this (it won't let me add it to the nomination while it's marked as ongoing): In Russia, over 1,000 people are arrested during protests following the imprisonment of opposition leader Alexei Navalny. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 23:10, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'd support a blurb, even periodic blurbs for stories that get updates. Ongoing used to be for things like the Olympics and World Cup and now it's used as a parking lot for poor quality articles festering in the box long past their prime. IMO the OG criteria ought be for things which are routinely getting "blurb-worthy" events but we can that that to WT:ITN if you want. Either way, I'd support a blurb for the protests that start when Navalny dies for sure. --LaserLegs (talk) 23:39, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sometimes on these protests, they will have been going on for a while, and then there's a spark that makes them bigger or more important. The Indian farmers protest or the Hong Kong protests fall into that, as well as this. Its rarer that the protest is tied to the immediate event that generates it, such as the George Floyd riots last year. Either way, having ITN give what that spark is to give context to the protests as a blurb can only be more helpful than just dropping the protest into ongoing w/o context. (Events like World Cup or Olympics do not need that). --Masem (t) 00:03, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I agree that a blurb would be better, at least for now. According to the article there are large gaps between when the protests occur (and therefore, updates), so if that trend continues it'd be removed from ongoing fairly quickly. If Navalny dies that might result in more regular protests, but that's just a hypothetical, however likely. So, I think it's not suitable for ongoing. Uses x (talkcontribs) 23:49, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Uses x, would you support the blurb I've provided above? AllegedlyHuman (talk) 03:16, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Posted) Indonesian submarine missing

[edit]
Proposed image
Article: KRI Nanggala (402) (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Indonesian Navy submarine Nanggala (pictured), carrying 53 people, goes missing in the Bali Sea. (Post)
News source(s): The Independent, BBC, Reuters, AP
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: No standalone article for the event or submarine but it's been added to the Cakra-class article - Dumelow (talk) 11:22, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An article has since been created at KRI Nanggala (402), I've changed the link in the blurb above to direct here - Dumelow (talk) 12:38, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
👍 Like --Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 13:04, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Changing to Wait. We need to wait for the exact fate of the ship. Let us wait until RS figured out what happens. --Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 15:15, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Diving klaxon!!!!! --LaserLegs (talk) 14:51, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Possibly fewer spectators (even though not on the River Ely River Great Ouse near Ely). Martinevans123 (talk) 15:06, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
One assumes you mean River Great Ouse but hey. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 15:07, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I am empathetic towards posting this since we don't get many stories from Indonesia, and we've certainly posted other sub sinkings, but we explicitly don't post other military fatalities such as air crashes. --LaserLegs (talk) 14:59, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@LaserLegs: Apologies, what is the difference between military fatalities and non-military fatalities in peace time? --Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 15:17, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
None? I don't know. What I do know is that military air crashes are routinely rejected here --LaserLegs (talk) 15:59, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@LaserLegs: - they are not routinely rejected, the 2017 Myanmar Air Force Shaanxi Y-8 crash was posted for example. Threshold is higher than for civil aircraft accidents though. Mjroots (talk) 05:42, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The significance criteria is met because reliable sources are covering this topic. The quality criteria is also met because the target article, while short, is as comprehensive as can be at the current time. Checks all of the boxes for me. --Jayron32 15:01, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It's a curious aspect of human nature that people tend to be fascinated by anything that goes amiss deep beneath the waves.
Sca (talk) 18:40, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
[reply]
Agree. The putative loss of this submarine is an event that as of 15:30 Wednesday hasn't been confirmed and hasn't necessarily occurred. – Sca (talk) 15:39, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The oil on the surface doesn't bode well. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:42, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah this isn't the Red October -- she's gone. In that depth, they may never find the wreckage. --LaserLegs (talk) 15:52, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment We posted the disappearance of MH 370 even though 7 years later we've still not confirmed it crashed. There are many possibilities for what happened so while it's fine to debate the significance and the article quality and what-have-you please lets not pretend that we need to wait for "confirmation" to post. --LaserLegs (talk) 16:03, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    A plane that can only stay in the air for so long going missing is not quite the same as a submarine that's designed not to be detected going missing. The window where something's wrong but everyone could still turn out to be okay is signficantly longer for a sub. I did not suggest only posting if they find wreckages. I specifically included if it's missing so long that the sub is declared presumed lost. I'm not pretending we need to wait for confirmation that it's at the bottom of the ocean. It is my opinion that it's premature to post at the moment. Others, as you obviously do, are free to disgaree. -- KTC (talk) 16:14, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Show me an airplane that has been continually, without landing, on air for seven years. I'll wait. --Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 16:17, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I actually found one! But before I share, go ahead and show me a submarine that suddenly reappeared in tact and with the crew alive after being declared missing. Now, I'll wait. --Warmest possible regards, --LaserLegs (talk) 23:34, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm yes, maybe the sub has been captured by the USA and flown to Diego Garcia. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:36, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Let's remember that ITN is not a spot news site, and we're not reporters. The vessel may well have been lost, but Wiki isn't in a position to say "presumed lost" unless someone says so officially. All we know is what we read. – Sca (talk) 18:35, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, this is In The News, is already of great significance (irrespective of the eventual outcome) and the article is decent. There's no need to prognosticate how this will turn out. We can update as information arrives. One purpose of ITN is to show Wikipedia as a dynamic resource. --LukeSurl t c 19:52, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid you're in over your head, mon ami. We're not journalists, we're not there, and we don't know any more about it than what the media report. Period. Full Stop. – Sca (talk) 21:07, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
PS: This user is a former journalist. – Sca (talk) 21:07, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: M. Narasimham

[edit]
Article: M. Narasimham (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Business Standard (India)
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Indian banker. Father of banking reforms in India. Article meets hygiene expectations for homepage / RD. Ktin (talk) 00:18, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Monte Hellman

[edit]
Proposed image
Article: Monte Hellman (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [19] [20]
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: American film writer and director. Given cult following, is likely of interest for many on the en wiki. Babegriev (talk) 00:10, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

April 20

[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Sports


(Posted) George Floyd case verdict

[edit]

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: State v. Chauvin (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Former police officer Derek Chauvin is found guilty of the killing of George Floyd. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Former police officer Derek Chauvin is found guilty on two counts of murder and one count of manslaughter relating to the killing of George Floyd.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin is found guilty of the murder of George Floyd.
News source(s): CNN, AP, Mpls. Star-Trib, St.Paul Pioneer Press, Guardian
Credits:
Article updated
 Count Iblis (talk) 19:34, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Rockstone35:, you obsiously have a strong biased in this matter, especially with your comment of "Thank God for the conviction.". I would suggest you not comment to anyone else in this discussion to maintain a Wikipedia's no bias as an editor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elijahandskip (talkcontribs) 21:15, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm pretty sure my opinions are irrelevant. I would have supported a blurb regardless of the verdict. -- Rockstone[Send me a message!] 21:17, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You would be surprised. I have had admin noticeboards against me for showing my opinion on Wikipedia. My message was more of a heads up to not show it anymore. But either way, after you said your support statement, saying your opinion is actually really bad on Wikipedia, especially in discussions. Just be careful and tread lightly in the future. Elijahandskip (talk) 21:22, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"Editors are allowed to have personal political POV, as long as it does not negatively affect their editing and discussions." Rockstone gave a reason to support the blurb, then his opinion. No issue. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 23:24, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Glad for your support !Vote, however, I can't believe I am about to say this, but Muboshgu, I know you are an admin, but I highly recommend you don't comment anymore here due to that !vote comment of "WOOOOO!". Shows a decent bias and the last thing needed for a discussion is high biased. Elijahandskip (talk) 21:17, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Please stop policing other users comments. Users have every right to express their feelings. Polyamorph (talk) 21:39, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
And I've always been open and honest about my beliefs outside of article space. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:41, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"Don't comment anymore here" is a bit much. I would recommend that all users provide a reason for their !votes, though. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 22:20, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Dead soccer player in six minutes --LaserLegs (talk) 21:27, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support post-posting. Obviously the biggest story in the United States of its kind in decades, and making headlines worldwide. -- Fuzheado | Talk 21:26, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The blurb does not mention the country in which this case was heard. Chrisclear (talk) 21:26, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Reposting as mine got removed in an edit confict before posting - this is an internationally reported story and is clearly in the news, which is what this is. The three articles are also high quality with not one citation needed tag between them. Uses x (talkcontribs) 21:30, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why Chauvin’s conviction matters - Vox – Muboshgu (talk) 21:42, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support If we posted Philip but not this then somethings wrong with this site. Moneytrees🏝️Talk/CCI guide 21:45, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting comment (pull/support) - I think that this, as it was the trigger for many protests and was ITN originally, likely merits an ITN posting with the result. That being said, I do not feel the posting was prudent as it needs to be discussed for more than an hour or so before it is posted, and the current blurb is... lacking at best. An eventual blurb should include information as to why this trial result is important to worldwide news, and as such, I support it being pulled until such time as it is fleshed out here. WP:DEADLINE applies here - there is no "urgent need to post" or anything that would mandate us posting this before the blurb is fully fleshed out. I also recognize that it is unlikely that any administrator is going to be willing to pull it, and as such, I support continued discussion and improvement of the blurb here. I think trouts are due all around for those who encouraged the early posting, the admin who did the posting without allowing at least a couple hours of discussion, and those who, from my viewing, supported this without evaluating the blurb as a whole. As to my suggestions for improving, I think a link to George Floyd protests (piped in some way to flow in the sentence(s) of the blurb) is necessary, as is a link to police brutality (in the US if that article is up to ITN standards) as that's the important thing here. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 21:46, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question 1: if the posting survives, can the image at Murder of George Floyd be used on the Main page? Question 2: can these verdicts be appealed? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:46, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Martinevans123 re:q2, yes they can be appealed, most convictions can but in this case it's unlikely to go anywhere if an appeal is filed. TAXIDICAE💰 21:51, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Martinevans123 That image isn't suitable. First, it's fair use when it needs to be freely licensed to be used on the front page, and if it's shrunk down to the 120px you just can't tell what's going on. Uses x (talkcontribs) 23:07, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. This is clearly one of the more significant guilty verdicts in recent history, as demonstrated by the coverage in reliable sources. Mz7 (talk) 21:47, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting Support I've been getting into edit conflicts since before this was posted. I know it's unprofessional, but just this once I'm going to have to join Muboshgu in publicly celebrating this: 🦀 CHAUVIN IS GONE 🦀 —— now it's out of my system. On a more serious note, this is obviously relevant worldwide as his murder sparked protests across the planet. It's not just a domestic story, there were George Floyd protests from from Minneapolis, MN to Almaty, Kazakhstan. This is one of the rare instances where it's not an exaggeration to say that the whole world was watching. We can keep Idriss Deby as the image for a while before changing it to an image relating to this story, of course.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 21:47, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pulled (edit conflict) - let more time for a clearer consensus to post to develop. -- KTC (talk) 21:51, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There is already consensus. --Bongwarrior (talk) 21:52, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't oppose because of a single country blah blah blah. Read the oppose again. You know the drill. Banedon (talk) 23:26, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"Far as I can tell, black-white race tensions are a uniquely US thing." Serious question: have you heard of apartheid? If not, you should really look into it, crazy thing. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 23:21, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Fair point. That makes it unique to a few countries in the world, which conveniently answers WaltClip's objection from a different angle. I might change my opposition if, and only if, it stays in the news in non-US countries such as South Africa for some time. Banedon (talk) 23:31, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Banedon: It's currently at the top of UK version of The IndependentBagumba (talk) 02:36, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Removed) Ongoing Removal: Myanmar Protests

[edit]
Article: 2021 Myanmar protests (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item removal (Post)

Nominator's comments: Proposal to remove Myanmar Protests from ongoing. They may or may not still be happening, and may or may not be being covered by news sources, but the article at Wikipedia is not being updated adequately to reflect this. The last update was 18 April, which involved a minor increment to the casualty numbers. Before that was a 3 sentence update on 16-17 April about an upcoming ASEAN summit. Before that was a single sentence about an arrest on 15 April. Before that was a 2-sentence update about a statement by a UN official. It's been since the 9-10 April that there have been any major protests reported in the article; everything else is just incremental updates of numbers, and brief statements by random officials. It's probably time to take this one down now. If and when the article (or another article) starts receiving significant, substantive, and sustained updates, we can post it then. It just isn't now, this article has been moribund for more than a week. Jayron32 19:00, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose The last update was 18 April. Not every day needs to make headlines, and that was literally only two days ago. A few things happened today alone (formation of interim government by protesters, the junta publishing lists of wanted journalists, the EU widening sanctions, ...) so it'll get updated and it won't be a problem in a few hours. Uses x (talkcontribs) 20:28, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait I'm running the content diffs now if y'all can wait a day we can evaluate content changes instead of edit counting. --LaserLegs (talk) 21:20, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Removal there is often a spike in updates when an article is nominated for removal, but the Ongoing_section criteria is to is to maintain a link to a continuously updated Wikipedia article. This article is about protests but the most recent updates are WP:PROSELINE snippets about some random arrests, politicians forming opposition parties, various international agencies condemning the uprising. Scrolling through, I don't see any content updates about protests in over two weeks. Stale article, time to come down. --LaserLegs (talk) 23:09, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose At this time, I don't think the situation merits a removal; it's only been two days without an update. Perhaps we revisit the question in a week or so? Wizardoftheyear (talk) 23:17, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Would you link to the update about protests? I must have missed it --LaserLegs (talk) 23:23, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      @LaserLegs There's plenty of recent information on the consequences of those protests, which is perfectly valid and relevant as an update. If the protests weren't happening, the sanctions wouldn't be applied, ASEAN wouldn't be covering the protests during a summit, etc.The chronology of the protests (a common complaint in the previous requests for removal anyway) was moved to a separate article, and it died there, and the article now instead focuses on the implications of the protests as it should.
      I think your suggestion would be better dealt with through suggesting a rename. Taking it down because the article has evolved beyond the protests themselves just doesn't make sense to me, and it certainly won't improve the article. Uses x (talkcontribs) 23:38, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • Well, no, I'm looking at the content changes of the article for signs of actual protests and not finding any. I'm seeing political machinations which happen in every country all the time and aren't particularly noteworthy so I'll ask again: Would you link to the update about protests? I must have missed it --LaserLegs (talk) 00:53, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support removal Ongoing is an extremely privileged section of the Front Page, because it is the only section that does not cycle off periodically. As such, the bar for articles here is higher than for simple blurbs, DYK hooks, anniversaries and so on, and the risk for article rot is very high. The nominator has taken the onerous work to sift through the updates, and I agree that these are not substantive updates, and that the article should come down. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.233.213.199 (talkcontribs)
Could someone identify who added this !vote? At least sign as anonymous if you don't want to be known. --Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 18:02, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It was an IP editor, many who do forget to sign if they don't contribute frequently. --Masem (t) 18:12, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Chadian president Idriss Déby killed in action

[edit]
Proposed image
Articles: Idriss Déby (talk · history · tag) and Northern Chad offensive (2021) (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: President of Chad Idriss Déby dies of injuries at the age of 68. (Post)
Alternative blurb: President of Chad Idriss Déby is killed during a rebel offensive.
Alternative blurb II: President of Chad Idriss Déby is killed during a rebel offensive.
News source(s): France 24, BBC, AP, Guardian, Reuters
Credits:

Article updated

 Hektor (talk) 11:01, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment The death of a national leader is blurb-worthy, but four citations are needed. The details are also very light right now with only the army spokesperson confirming the death, so I suggest waiting for confirmation anyway. Uses x (talkcontribs) 11:06, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb2 The article is in good condition now with only two citation needed tags, which is fine as they're not particularly controversial and they're not out of character for him. Anyway, he's influential and he died unexpectedly while serving, so blurb-worthy. Uses x (talkcontribs) 13:55, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
And going by US presidential terms, Merkel is in her 5th130.233.213.199 (talk) 12:03, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted RD): Walter Mondale

[edit]
Proposed image
Article: Walter Mondale (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  Former Vice President of the United States Walter Mondale dies at the age of 93. (Post)
News source(s): CBS, AP
Credits:

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

 pbp 01:02, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose Some orange tags that need addressing. Would support a blurb when fixed. Support blurb now that issues have been addressed. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 01:07, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb the only reason he would be considered for a blurb is having been US Vice President, and the article spends only 2 paragraphs addressing that tenure. I think most people know him better for losing to Reagan. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 01:15, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Walter Mondale was an important part of American history as Jimmy Carter's Vice President. If Wikipedia puts Alcee Hastings on "Recent Deaths", they should put him on "Recent Deaths" at least. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Djprasadian (talkcontribs) 01:40, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
NB first edit today, 2nd edit overall Bumbubookworm (talk) 02:17, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Bumbubookworm. I think it would be a lot better for community-building to welcome this new user instead of obliquely casting aspersions. --MZMcBride (talk) 05:12, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Djprasadian, please see the notice at the bottom of the tan box. Thank you. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 05:52, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
From the source for the prior sentence, it looks like it simply means Mondale was present, possibly photographed nearby or something. Specifically, when Al Franken was sworn in, Mondale and Klobuchar escorted him into the Senate chamber: "Franken was escorted down the Senate floor by former vice president Walter Mondale and fellow Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar, who praised Franken and his readiness to work before Franken was sworn in." Doesn't look to be that important, IMO. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 06:03, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The opposes related to article quality make no sense to me. Part of the purpose of highlighting these articles on the Main Page is so they get additional views and edits. That's how Wikipedia was and is built. --MZMcBride (talk) 05:16, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    By the letter of the law, though, that template says ITNRD rules. And it says "sufficient quality" is up to a "consensus of commenters". So if you think it's good enough already, saying so is considerable enough. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:28, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    It's also the requirement of any content that is featured (read: bolded) on the main page. Having numerous "citation needed" tags among other warnings is not an example of our best work. --Masem (t) 05:37, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    The purpose of the main page is to showcase Wikipedia's finest work. Putting this article on the main page in its current state would be embarrassing. Mlb96 (talk) 05:39, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This is in fact precisely what we shouldn't do. The Main Page is the most outside-facing page we have; the elbow grease required to get articles to a presentable level can go on behind the scenes. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 05:49, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Citation needed tags are fixed and the article is of decent quality. Uses x (talkcontribs) 22:40, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose RD for now, as per Uses x. And Oppose blurb.

Wasn't he married to Betty Ford??[FBDB] Martinevans123 (talk) 09:45, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose blurb I don't think a former vice-president and a presidential candidate who is (in)famous for his utter defeat merits a blurb. There's also not much ado about his death in the media.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:08, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD only. Made history when he chose a female vice-presidential candidate, but time fades. -- Alanscottwalker (talk) 10:28, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not ready for RD - numerous unreferenced paragraphs and even those with references often have just one citation at the end of a long paragraph. Oppose blurb as nowhere near significant enough. Modest Genius talk 10:39, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD, oppose blurb Article quality is good enough for RD, but he really is not getting the level of media coverage necessary for somebody who isn't covered under ITNR to get a blurb. ( Prince Phillip had way more coverage than Mondale is getting, and even he barely got a blurb.)Jackattack1597 (talk) 10:55, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose RD Eight unsourced paragraphs remaining that are tagged.—Bagumba (talk) 11:22, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb, support RD It is being unknown outside the United States, notably in non-English-speaking countries and the Commonwealth. 36.77.95.2 (talk) 11:34, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD only Mondale was certainly not transformative in his roles to merit a blurb; his death at 93 is certainly not under extraordinary circumstances. rawmustard (talk) 11:39, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment He is also known abroad for his role in the history of astronautics. He was pretty much against human spaceflight, a position US politicians are not often very vocal about, when they share it. Hektor (talk) 11:41, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Blurb - not a transformative figure on a global scale, no lasting legacy. (Notably, in contrast to Idriss Deby, who played a key role in shaping relations in the Sahel region...) Ok for RD. --Soman (talk) 11:44, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Blurb - one-term Vice President whose term is summarized in his own article within a single paragraph. Not on the top of the "most influential US politicians" list for me. Juxlos (talk) 11:47, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Blurb, Support RD – needs more references, after that it will be fine Vacant0 (talk) 11:52, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment 8(!) CN's remain. I challenge anyone supporting a blurb to make a better one than the proposed blurb. "Former Vice president" doesn't convey any impact to the wider world, and his own article doesn't even cover it in detail. Were I not already familiar with the subject, I would think the blurb violates UNDUE.130.233.213.199 (talk) 11:53, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support RD Walter Mondale is remembered in his own right, and we should at least put him in the RD section. Although the article has some issues, which would invalidate it from blurb, he is fairly important. --Aknell4 (talkcontribs) 12:12, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • If you look at the actual context, instead of the count, you'll see that many of the tags are either on things that while unreferenced, are pretty clearly true - or things that are relatively minor in terms of the article. The vast majority of biographical information is referenced. Elli (talk | contribs) 13:37, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

April 19

[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

Sports


Patrick Marleau sets the record for most games played in the NHL

[edit]
Proposed image
Article: Patrick Marleau (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Patrick Marleau plays in his 1,768th NHL game, breaking Gordie Howe's record for the most games played in the NHL. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Patrick Marleau plays in his 1,768th NHL game, breaking Gordie Howe's record for the most games played in the NHL, which Howe had held for 59 years.
News source(s): San Francisco Chronicle, NHL
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Marleau broke the record for most games played in the NHL, which Gordie Howe held for 59 years. Howe held the record for the most games played in his sport longer than any other player in the four major professional sports leagues in North AmericaBlaylockjam10 (talk) 11:15, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think it’d make the most sense to bold Marleau’s article, so I did that. I’ll work on adding references, but I didn’t see many citation needed tags when I nominated the article. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 12:50, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, I see this just as some kind of statistics. Impressive indeed, but not ITN-level impressive. --Tone 12:08, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Article is in good shape, reliable sources are covering it. This is not a frequently-broken record and represents a unique milestone; these kind of longevity records are rare and frequently celebrated. --Jayron32 13:53, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose. I think this would be better suited to DYK, though that would require getting one the articles up to GA standards. As a hockey fan, I find this an impressive record, but it's purely statistical. No-one thinks Marleau is the greatest hockey player just because he's been around for ages. If he'd broken Gretzky's scoring record then maybe, but games played just isn't that exciting. It's also not a fair comparison to look at only NHL regular season games. In Howe's day, the regular season was 70 games and a maximum of 14 playoff games; he played several seasons (hundreds of games) in the rival WHA league. Marleau has spent his whole professional career in the NHL, during which the regular season has been 82 games (excepting the two lockout years) and playoffs up to 28 games. Modest Genius talk 13:59, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per both quality and per Modest Genius. Longevity is not really a great sports record for ITN, compared to actual in-game achievements like most goals or blocks or something akin to performance. --Masem (t) 14:05, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose This is great personal achievement with no lasting impact on the sport and we don't have a practice to post mere statistics. Jaromír Jágr, a real legend and one of the greatest players in the sport, plays a record 33rd career season but that's also not something worth posting.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 17:39, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Just trivia, really. Uses x (talkcontribs) 18:55, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Sports records can be worthy of blurbs, but I wouldn't include longevity records.—Bagumba (talk) 08:57, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support obviously per WP:MESSI --LaserLegs (talk) 13:42, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Not comparable. To quote Modest Genius, No-one thinks Marleau is the greatest hockey player just because he's been around for ages.-- P-K3 (talk) 13:44, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Messi is this years greatest, Ronaldo or whatever before him, someone before him and so on. Exactly the same thing actually. This is also a pretty big deal in ice hockey. Gordie Howe is sort of an NHL legend so this record being broken is significant. --LaserLegs (talk) 13:46, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per above. The Messi thing was nine years ago, and most likely wouldn't pass today. In fact, even at the time it had a substantial opposition. Oh, and at least that was an achievement record. The story under consideration here is simply a record for taking part. His longevity doesn't prove he's in any way amongst the elite.  — Amakuru (talk) 13:57, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Jim Steinman

[edit]
Article: Jim Steinman (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Rolling Stone, Fox News, USA Today
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Songwriter for several famous bands/singers. Article is not quite the worst I've seen, but it isn't close to good. -- a lad insane (channel two) 19:37, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Miguel Díaz-Canel

[edit]
Proposed image
Article: Miguel Díaz-Canel (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Miguel Díaz-Canel (pictured) is elected First Secretary of the Communist Party of Cuba, succeeding Raúl Castro. (Post)
News source(s): RTÉ
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: He has been formally elected to the position now. All three articles have citations needed before it can be posted. Uses x (talkcontribs) 15:41, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If the CPC and the CPSU are any indication, these will get far more interesting the farther Cuba gets from the original dynasty --LaserLegs (talk) 17:23, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
He looks like Paul Drake. – Sca (talk) 13:38, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Mars Ingenuity (helicopter)

[edit]
Proposed image
Article: Ingenuity (helicopter) (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ NASA's Ingenuity helicopter (pictured) makes the first ever controlled flight on another planet (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The Ingenuity helicopter (pictured) flies on Mars, the first powered flight of a spacecraft on another planet
News source(s): The Independent, BBC
Credits:

Article needs updating

Nominator's comments: We featured this article when it first landed but this seems like a significant step. Article not yet updated - Dumelow (talk) 11:14, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Sumitra Bhave

[edit]
Article: Sumitra Bhave–Sunil Sukthankar (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ref
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Please note that the article is on the duo Bhave and Sukthankar. Care to be taken to only mention Bhave's name when displayed on main page. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 08:39, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment - @Dharmadhyaksha, The article seems well sourced and would surely be eligible for posting if it was on Sumitra Bhave only. I'm not sure of the protocol for duo, and in my knowledge it hasn't been done before. The Rambling Man, do you know what to do in this scenario. In my view, the best course of action is to create two separate pages and then post. -Sitaphul (talk) 10:58, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Just for sake of posting, i don't agree with forking out pages. And are you suggesting we keep repeating same info on two pages because it was to stay on main page for 2 days? There are plenty duos who dont have to die together to be placed on main page. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 11:16, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

April 18

[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Sports


(Posted) RD: Wayne Peterson

[edit]
Article: Wayne Peterson (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Washington Post
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Only announced and reported today (April 18). —Bloom6132 (talk) 02:46, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Iain Gallaway

[edit]
Article: Iain Gallaway (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Radio New Zealand; The Dominion Post
Credits:

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

 Bloom6132 (talk) 17:30, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) European Super League

[edit]

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: European Super League Company, S.L. (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In association football, twelve clubs from England, Italy and Spain announce the formation of a breakaway European Super League. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In association football, Arsenal, Atlético Madrid, Barcelona, Chelsea, Inter Milan, Juventus, Liverpool, Manchester City, Manchester United, Milan, Real Madrid and Tottenham Hotspur announce a breakaway European Super League.
Alternative blurb II: ​ In association football, twelve clubs from England, Italy and Spain announce the formation of a breakaway European Super League amidst large condemnation and disapproval by FIFA, UEFA, ECA and other football associations.
Alternative blurb III: ​ In association football, an announcement about the formation of a breakaway European Super League leads to widespread condemnation, protests, and the cancellation of the new league.
News source(s): Guardian BBC
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: The clubs are threatened with disqualification from their national leagues and from the UEFA Champions League - if that happens, that should definitely be part of the blurb, but so far it's just a threat. Smurrayinchester 07:26, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for now. It's a huge European-wide sporting prospect which is upsetting a vast number of people (even causing the UK PM to comment) so it's certainly newsworthy, but at this stage it needs to be paused until it's all in place and actually a reality. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 08:56, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait Obvious ITN post if it happens, but an announcement isn't equivalent to it actually happening. Black Kite (talk) 09:42, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait there will likely be some ramifications of this which will become ITN worthy. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:52, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose because the bold article does not explain why this is significant. This is your pan-continental competition right? It's supposed to "replace" the champions league? Like the EPL isn't going away, this is the thing the top three EPL and whatever other country teams play at the end of the season to decide who is bestest? But it's not the conference cup? What is actually going on here? Y'all Europeans lose your minds over this soccer business and if it's in the news we ought post it (instead of whining about it being parochial or some nonsense) but you can't just assume people are going to understand it. "Obvious" indeed. Is this another XFL (2001)? --LaserLegs (talk) 10:49, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Don't be daft, it's not "pan-continental", the clue is in the name "European". It's not replacing anything, it's another league competition. If you read the article it would help you understand. It's hardly "parochial" as it is about the world's most popular sport across a continent. But hey, don't worry, we're bound to get another riot/shooting nomination in the next few days to get us back on track. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 10:53, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I did read the article, but it doesn't explain the hysteria. This is a case where the controversy is the story, and the target needs a "Controversy" story otherwise it's just more soccer bother. Yes, very Euro-parochial I agree. Proposals for a European Super League in association football is an orange tagged mess that did a better job explaining the outrage than the current bold linked article. --LaserLegs (talk) 10:56, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Answer this for me: Does Manchester United and Liverpool FC leave the EPL to play in this super league or is it just another end-of-season romp like the champions league? --LaserLegs (talk) 10:57, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Nobody know, which is why it's too soon to post. There will likely be some ramifications from it, and those ramifications may well be ITN worthy at that time. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:00, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Fair enough, just remember you have to make it make sense for Canadians and other countries that don't know or care about soccer. If the teams that routinely dominated the Champions League are breaking away to form their own version of the exact same thing then there has to be a reason and the article needs to explain it. If they're bailing on their national leagues to form a continental league without relegation, well, that's what happens when you let Americans into the cupboard --LaserLegs (talk) 11:06, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    No, we don't have to make it make sense to people who don't care about it, that's not the point of ITN. Your discourse here is all very interesting but as you can see, we don't have the detail and we don't have any consensus to post, so perhaps focus all that nervous energy on improving some articles? The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 11:46, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    It's not the point of ITN, it's the point of Wikipedia and the article isn't "minimally comprehensive" unless it explains the significance. That's just how it is I'm afraid. --LaserLegs (talk) 13:02, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    In case you didn't notice, there's no consensus to post. You're raging against the wrong item. Still, plenty of articles to improve, like XFL (2001), have at them! The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 13:11, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    It'll go up, it probably should go up, once the significance of the new league it's clarified in the target article I'll even withdraw my oppose. --LaserLegs (talk) 13:33, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as, err, not actually being a thing. ——Serial 10:56, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Noting that it's even less of a thing now: no English clubs remain, and two Italian clubs about to pull out. Five clubs do not a Super League make. Anyone still supporting this after 00:01 UTC this morning is floating around in their own super league :D ——Serial 09:38, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. This is A Big Deal for European soccer. Major ramifications especially for the game in England. The story is still developing but the big event is its announcement with 12 clubs. I can't see anything other than its collapse fundamentally changing the item we'd post (apart from increases on the 12 number which is easy to implement). This has happened now and that's noteworthy, it's less good for ITN to retroactively decide there's been sufficient ramifications a few days later. --LukeSurl t c 11:03, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait Timing of the announcement suggests muscle flexing in view of the proposed reformed Champions League, which would have come into effect from 2024. Under the proposals, 36 teams would play in one league in a “Swiss model” - with each team playing 10 games. A knockout stage would then follow. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:10, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - As far as I can tell, it's currently a proposal. If a league is actually formed, competitive matches take place and/or football authorities such as FIFA and UEFA take action, such as kicking the clubs involved out of their leagues, then we can revisit this. Mjroots (talk) 11:31, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment There's talk of clubs being kicked out of the Premier League today. As I'm not going to be on Wiki for a fair while from ~09:00 UTC, should this happen, then my !vote can be considered a Support. Mjroots (talk) 06:46, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral. This is huge news for the sport, and a massive controversy. But I do wonder if it's actually going to happen, or if it gets negotiated away... As they're talking about starting this August, I can see a case for waiting until the first game happens. On the other hand, the article is a decent introduction to the topic and there's huge reader interest, so posting now would also be acceptable. Hence my !vote. Modest Genius talk 11:50, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • The more I think about this, the more I wonder if it's a threat to force UEFA to renegotiate the new Champions League format. If so, it's possible it never happens, though perhaps the two sides are already irreconcilable. I'm leaning more towards wait to see if it actually happens or was just a very big bluff. Modest Genius talk 14:16, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - I'm from a country which isn't football crazy. I didn't quite understand what was the reason for the split - it's not mentioned clearly in any of the related articles. But I'm not denying its significance. Such a split definitely would be a turning point in any sport - it would be big news if that happened in my country's favourite sport league. The Wikipedia page would be much better if someone wrote the reason for the split. Thanks. --Sitaphul (talk) 12:10, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment At what point should this story be posted? The first day of play, or the first point in which one of the domestic leagues expels an ESL member, which would be appealed by the most prominent lawyers in the world? The only big new league I can remember in the Wikipedia age is cricket's Indian Premier League, was that posted? In any case, that was a completely different kettle of fish, as all the teams were new. Unknown Temptation (talk) 12:22, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • A perusal of the article's talk page shows that the Indian Premier League was not posted at ITN. Mjroots (talk) 12:39, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • IPL wasn't a breakaway of existing clubs to form their own league - it was a new competition in a new format of the sport, founded by the existing national authority with new franchises. We had no idea how important it was going to become years later. I can't think of a good parallel to the current situation, where existing clubs are founding their own competition outside the current national and continental structure, but still trying to remain in the other competitions. Modest Genius talk 12:47, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. This European Super League is the biggest sports story of the year so far. The formation of any league would not make the requirements to be post in ITN, but with how much there is at stake, the widespread opposition, and the influence of the team and clubs in the league, it should be posted. Not only the clubs would be affected, but players will also, with as of right now being banned from all international competitions. Also, with an actual article for the Super League up, which looks well referenced, the first blurb is ready to be posted. --Awestruck1 13:54, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait as others have suggested. If the league is actually formed, it does appear significant and will impact assc. football in Europe, but this is a planned announcement and could be a negotiation tactic at this stage. --Masem (t) 13:58, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. This certainly seems like a big deal, given all the press coverage it has received. As for waiting to post, I'm not entirely sure what we are actually waiting for. It appears the 12 teams are not merely proposing this league, they have already formed it, though games might not start for a few months. -- Calidum 14:12, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Article is of sufficient quality; legitimate news sources are currently covering this story in sufficient depth. That checks all of the boxes. --Jayron32 14:21, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The way this goes, we may as well end up with posting "PSG wins the UEFA Champions League after the other three teams are disqualified for joining the Super League". Since the Champions League is ITNR ;) --Tone 14:21, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait. Even though this story is major enough to be picked up by NPR's Morning Edition (when that program typically doesn't feature sports stories in general), there's still all the details to work out. (E.g. there's lots of money, but we don't even know how media rights will shake out.) rawmustard (talk) 14:23, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support if it's actually happening akin to the formation of the Premier League.  – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 16:51, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I think the blurb has to include something about the condemnation of the idea by FIFA, UEFA, ECA, the domestic football associations and even politicians because it makes bigger news. I've therefore added another alternative blurb.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 17:58, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support regardless - the story is either a new major sports league or international government condemnation at the attempt, or both. Both would be worthy alone. Kingsif (talk) 18:37, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose there's no guarantee this will actually go ahead.-- P-K3 (talk) 18:49, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait with the governing bodies actively against this, it's hard to really specify what has happened at this stage. GreatCaesarsGhost 19:05, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Any announcement, in any field, broadly construed. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 19:17, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. It's a huge story now, e.g. the top international story here in Denmark. It will probably gradually get less attention with some fluctuations. Don't wait for a threshold event at a time with less interest. It may or may not actually happen but the blurbs correctly say "announce". The 12 announced teams include 6 of the 7 non-American teams on Forbes' list of the most valuable sports teams, 9 of the top-10 at Forbes' list of the most valuable football clubs, and all 12 are in the top-18. They may all be disqualifed from national leagues and other international competitions if they go ahead, and the players may be disqualified from national teams, seriously weakening many countries in their most popular sport where continental and World championships are enormous events. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:44, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Do you know how immensely hard it is for European soccer to make news -- let alone front-page news -- here in the States? --WaltCip-(talk) 00:42, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support since it is a major new development within a major world sport, and a very controversial one. Yakikaki (talk) 09:26, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Turns out Sca was right again. I propose to wait and see if this will actually materialise or not. Right now it seems it won't, and in that case, this is just a footnote in football history. Yakikaki (talk) 09:15, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Posted) Table Mountain Fire (2021) and Mostert's Mill

[edit]
Proposed image
Articles: Table Mountain Fire (2021) (talk · history · tag) and Mostert's Mill (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A fire on Table Mountain, Cape Town, destroys historic monuments including Mostert's Mill (pictured) and the University of Cape Town's main library. (Post)
Alternative blurb: Mostert's Mill (pictured), the only working windmill in South Africa, is gutted by a wildfire that started on Table Mountain.
News source(s): [27], [28]
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Significant fire and impact on cultural properties Mike Peel (talk) 17:27, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

April 17

[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime


(Posted) RD: Johnny Peirson

[edit]
Article: Johnny Peirson (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NHL.com; Boston.com; McGill University
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Only announced and reported today (April 17). —Bloom6132 (talk) 11:37, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak support Would prefer to see more of a season-by-season summary of what he accomplished in his career, especially in seasons he was an all-star or went to the Stanley cup, rather than summaries of "he did X in these years". Additionally the sentence "He retired in 1958 after his "legs sort of disappeared"." could probably be more specific-- was it issues with fitness? Otherwise, just listing when he retired would make more sense. Otherwise article is thorough and referenced, and article is otherwise ready. SpencerT•C 20:55, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Spencer: I've added more detail to his season-by-season accomplishments. No other source I've come across mentions fitness/injury as a factor for his retirement. I'm intending to use the "legs sort of disappeared" sentence for a DYK hook fact, so I'll leave that in there – hope that's alright. —Bloom6132 (talk) 15:01, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Frank Judd, Baron Judd

[edit]
Article: Frank Judd, Baron Judd (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: British Labour Party politician. KingOfAllThings (thou shalt chatter!) 00:25, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Black Rob

[edit]
Article: Black Rob (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Complex
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: American rapper, 51. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 23:20, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Charles Geschke

[edit]
Article: Charles Geschke (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Adobe press release
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Co-founder of Adobe Systems Inc. Just announced today. Joofjoof (talk) 07:13, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Vivek

[edit]
Article: Vivek (actor) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Times of India
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: News just breaking. RIP Vivek. Article might require one pass at ensuring readiness including some citations for the awards. Referencing completed. Seems to meet hygiene expectations for homepage / RD. Ktin (talk) 02:07, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Kakarla Subba Rao

[edit]
Article: Kakarla Subba Rao (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Hindu
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Indian radiologist. Padma Shri awardee. A tad on the shorter side. Will work on some edits based on available obits and share an update. Edits done. Article has shaped into a decent C-class biography. Meets hygiene expectations for homepage / RD. Ktin (talk) 00:54, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed it, the article seems good to go now. Sitaphul (talk) 04:44, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Funeral of Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh

[edit]

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: Death and funeral of Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh's funeral takes place in St George's Chapel at Windsor Castle (Post)
News source(s): CNN, The Guardian
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: A high-profile member of the British royal family, consort to the Queen. A funeral for a member of the royal family, something rarely seen now. Aknell4 (talk) 16:33, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • As from previous discussions, he was a consort, not born into blood into the Royal family, and had zero possible chance of assuming any position in the Commonwealth's governance. --Masem (t) 17:05, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

April 16

[edit]

Arts and culture

Business and economy

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology


(Posted) RD: John Dawes

[edit]
Article: John Dawes (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC Sport; The Guardian; Associated Press
Credits:

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

 Bloom6132 (talk) 07:01, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Liam Scarlett

[edit]
Article: Liam Scarlett (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC News
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Former Choreographer for the Royal Ballet. Just announced today. META: Can someone please help with the formatting issue here? I’ve never done a nomination before, and I’m not sure how to fix this.  Wizardoftheyear (talk) 23:47, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Ranjit Sinha

[edit]
Article: Ranjit Sinha (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): NDTV
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Former chief of India's Central Bureau of Investigation. Article has an yellow box that will need to be fixed before it can be ready for homepage. I will take a pass at the article here in a bit. Ktin (talk) 18:37, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Conditional support Article could use some copyediting/cleanup and once done, has my support. Examples of issues for fixing include use of italics for quotations instead of quotation marks; talking about his children before his birth in "Early Life"; unclear abbreviations (IAS, IRS) that are not spelled out or linked (or others spelled out after usage); and some grammatical/wording fixes. Appropriate depth of coverage and referenced. SpencerT•C 01:03, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted, quality seems sufficient per above iteration. --Masem (t) 03:19, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Roger Soloman

[edit]
Article: Roger Soloman (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CBC News; The Guardian (Charlottetown)
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Only announced and reported today (April 16). —Bloom6132 (talk) 12:47, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed - Wait) Raúl Castro

[edit]

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: Raúl Castro (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Raúl Castro resigns as First Secretary of the Communist Party of Cuba. (Post)
News source(s): NYT, AP, Guardian
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Not ITN/R because the President of Cuba is the head of state, but the First Secretary is the de facto leader of the country, more powerful than either the President or the Prime Minister. Also the first time a Castro isn't the leader of Cuba since 1959. Davey2116 (talk) 21:23, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Raúl Castro has too much unreferenced content to post, so while we wait for a replacement to be announced, the supporters can get it post ready. --LaserLegs (talk) 22:46, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait for the resignation and turnover of power to happen. I agree on that this is a case not readily covered by the ITNR but nearly all sources I see reporting on it treat the resignation as if the US Pres. or UK Prime Minister had stepped down, particularly as related to past Communist rule in Cuba. But right now, he still is in this position, he appearently has to name a successor to do this. --Masem (t) 22:45, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, what would be significant would be a change in the political system, but I haven't seen anything indicating that's in the offing. As it is, the titular occupant of the top political post is of only passing interest. 'Cuba without a Castro' is still the Cuba we've known for the last 60 years. – Sca (talk) 14:11, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    That feels a little misleading; like stating that the hypothetical replacement of Xi Jinping with an ideologically aligned person wouldn’t be a major story because it’s the same system, or that the hypothetical succession of Kamala Harris to the presidency wouldn’t matter because she’s the same party as Joe Biden. Wizardoftheyear (talk) 17:45, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nope. The key difference is that Cuba is a one-party state. Thus, it doesn't materially matter who succeeds Mr. Castro. It will remain a one-party state, and policies (by all appearances) won't change – at least not soon. (Besides, Raúl more or less inherited the top party post from his brother Fidel, founder of Communist Cuba.)Sca (talk) 22:10, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hence the China comparison. Wizardoftheyear (talk) 23:25, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Posted) RD: Vartan Gregorian

[edit]
Article: Vartan Gregorian (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): New York Times Carnegie Corporation of New York
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Looks ready to go. Varavour (talk) 18:42, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Helen McCrory

[edit]
Article: Helen McCrory (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Needs some updating. 109.249.185.34 (talk) 16:01, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Andrew Peacock

[edit]
Article: Andrew Peacock (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ABC News, The Sydney Morning Herald, The Guardian
Credits:
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.

Nominator's comments: Former national leader of the Liberal Party of Australia (LP), Former Ambassador of Australia to America JMonkey2006 (talk) 12:08, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

April 15

[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

  • Divers arrive at the scene of lift boat MV Seacor Power, which capsized and partially sank off the coast of the state of Louisiana in the United States. Rescuers suspect crew members may be trapped. Since the accident, six crew members have been rescued, one has died, and twelve remain missing. (KATC-TV)

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime


(Closed) Indianapolis FedEx shooting

[edit]

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: Indianapolis FedEx shooting (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A mass shooting at an Indianapolis FedEx leaves nine dead and six injured. (Post)
News source(s): (CNN), (AP News), (NY Times), BBC, Guardian
Credits:
Nominator's comments: 9 dead and 6 injured is a fairly large mass shooting, even for the US. Elijahandskip (talk) 14:23, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Bro. 15 casualties at a single shooting isn't "another day in the US". At max, 10 casualties in a single location would be typical, but more than that is big news. This is top news in 90% of major news sources. Elijahandskip (talk) 15:47, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"Bro", nearly 13,000 people have been killed in gun violence this year in the US (and it's only mid-April). This is nearly the 150th mass shooting of 2021. It's just not news. It's like reporting that bombs have gone off in a war. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 15:50, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Where are you getting these numbers from? You're either making it up or wildly misciting somebody's statistics. Levivich harass/hound 00:31, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Gun Violence Archive has 12,422. Stephen 00:47, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If that's the source, that would be misciting statistics. GVA is reporting 12k deaths, not homicides. Similarly they report ~147 "mass shootings" this year but 11 "mass murders". And their definitions don't match other sources' definitions anyway. This hasn't happened 13k or 150 times before or anything even close to that. This is not a routine event, and I wish people would stop misciting statistics in their arguments. "Lies, damn lies, and statistics," I guess. Levivich harass/hound 01:16, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Where are you getting the number 15 from? All recent sources (including the article) list the death count as 9. Gex4pls (talk) (lack of contributions) 16:01, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Gex4pls, "casualties" include non-fatal injuries. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:12, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Muboshgu Oh, I assumed they meant deaths alone, thanks for the clarification. Gex4pls (talk) (lack of contributions) 16:14, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Closed) United States racial unrest

[edit]

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: 2020–2021 United States racial unrest (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
Credits:
Article updated
Nominator's comments: Nominating after proposal at Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates#Daunte Wright protestsAllegedlyHuman (talk) 21:18, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose all just run of the mill stuff at the moment. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 21:26, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose (pending significant developments) in accordance with previous reasons in Daunte Wright protests below. Osunpokeh (talk) 21:38, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    @Osunpokeh Anything specific? I can't see anything that applies to this nomination considering this is a list of all protests (which undeniably are notable and have a high impact), rather than a single element of that list. Uses x (talkcontribs) 21:57, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support It's ongoing, it's certainly in the news, the overall impact (both domestic and international) is high, and the article is high quality. The comment about the protests being routine (which I agree with) doesn't apply to a collection, so there's no issue with that in this nomination. Uses x (talkcontribs) 21:44, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per Uses X mostly. I'm unconvinced by the not a (insert country name) ticker - civil unrest is well established as notable enough for Ongoing. We should apply the same standards that we ought apply to others: pull it down when the story is stale or the article is trash. --LaserLegs (talk) 21:52, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support it's significant, the nature of these protests is not run-of-the-mill at all, and the article is in great shape. Events are likely to continue in this direction as today we see the release of a video of a 13 year old Hispanic male shot while his hands were up. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:56, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support none of this is run-of-the-mill, despite the misinformed protestations to the contrary. -- Rockstone[Send me a message!] 22:11, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Wrong. That's why we have an article detailing literally dozens of protests after the literally hundreds of people who have been killed by the US police in the last few months. It's almost as common as mass shootings. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 09:05, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support There is no valid argument against this year-long event being significant. Rather the argument is that several hundred mass protests occurring in a short span are distinct unrelated events, such that a) they must qualify individually and b) the vast number of protests make the them commonplace. Cynical as hell, but typical anti-American bashing from the usual suspects. GreatCaesarsGhost 22:18, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I guess we just run a "racial unrest" ticker and a "mass shootings" ticker then, as both are commonplace and completely unremarkable these days. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 15:31, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The problem is, given the nature of this article is being constructed, there's no proverbial end to this, and it would remain in ongoing indefinitely (In contrast, we know there will be a point we can eventually remove COVID once it no longer is seen as a worldwide threat). If we post this, we might as well post something along the lines of "gun violence in the United States" - a major news topic but one that has no clear "end". --Masem (t) 22:22, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Guaido still thinks he's president of Venezuela, students in Hong Kong are still antagonizing the CPC, in fact there are still weekend protests in Belarus all those articles were in ongoing and are no longer. Prying stuff out of OG is a gigantic hassle around here but that isn't a reason not to put things into OG. Brexit popped in and out as it flared up. The Myanmar protests are in the box right now and that mess is a monument to WP:SYNTH. I empathize, but relax, we'll be fine. --LaserLegs (talk) 22:41, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Masem and The Rambling Man. I do not believe that several riots that may coincide temporally and causally is something of such importance as to be "ongoing". Police brutality + protests is usual in the US. Catalonia has experienced something similar (bridging the gap) in recent years in the context of the territorial crisis with Spain, with riots for days and I would not even think of nominating it. Although honestly I am not going oppose if a consensus is reached to support it. Alsoriano97 (talk) 22:32, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Its a notable series of ongoing protests, and I would support Catalonia protests being ITN, tooJackattack1597 (talk) 00:20, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Since at least 2011, there have been reliable protests/unrest/riots in American cities every Summer. Whether you're sympathetic to the professed motivations, yet another year is hardly unique, unusual or comment worthy outside of larger effects. Putting them in Ongoing is like putting Crime in the US in Ongoing; it's part and parcel of living there.130.233.213.199 (talk) 06:02, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Adding, individual events are much better suited for blurbs, and I would (and have) support(ed) them previously. The linked article is narrative spinning from disparate events that are sometimes not even thematically related.130.233.213.199 (talk) 06:04, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per Uses x and Muboshgu, and per RS (e.g. those cited in the article), which write that the protests 2020-present are quite different from previous 21st-century protests. (How long did it take before Occupy Wall Street was added to ongoing?) Levivich harass/hound 06:07, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose mostly because the article is blown up with every incident of larger scale that occurred in the country over the past year (What does the 2021 storming of the United States Capitol have to do with race without clear explanation in the text?). I also notice events that were posted either with a blurb or to ongoing on their own so the target article is definitely not something to support on the main page. In my opinion, 2020–2021 Minneapolis–Saint Paul racial justice protests could be a better fit in place of Daunte Wright protests and the proposed one just waters down notability (Yet, the article on Daunte Wright protests is not updated with yesterday's events, implying descending significance as time goes by.).--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:30, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • This is sorta what I was getting it in my oppose, while it is clear the concept of long-term racial instability is there, this feels like an OR-created topic that doesn't reflect how the news frames this. Connections are being made between the George Floyd protests and these events, sure, but they aren't seemingly calling it connected event. --Masem (t) 14:02, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment/Musing -- Having thought on this some more, I think we should probably wait until after the verdict for Derek Chauvin. These protests may rapidly die, or they may become as big as the protests in 2020. We don't know yet. -- Rockstone[Send me a message!] 08:41, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Then that won't be an "ongoing" news story, it will be a story directly related to the most recent police killings so will be a blurb. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 09:10, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose My first thought was a blanket oppose, since the other nom is still open and this feels like a classic way to skirt around opposition there, but I read through all the comments, particularly TRM and LL, and I still feel that the Minnesota riots article would be a more appropriate target (and that the new? article probably shouldn't exist at all) but have been convinced a blurb would be more appropriate given the often disparate nature of the protests/riots/whatever. Kingsif (talk) 10:36, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – Too broad a topic, impossible to manage in a way that treats incidents equitably, inevitably producing a mishmash. – Sca (talk) 12:54, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Racism in the United States has been going on for a long time and this topic isn't current (this is my understanding, since I'm not from the US). If it's about a specific protest or unrest like the George Floyd protest, I'm okay with it. But not this. --Sitaphul (talk) 14:00, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Before anyone says I'm anti-American, I've supported the Daunte Wright protest nomination Sitaphul (talk) 14:12, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Albertaont: See here. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 18:46, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per Uses x and Muboshgu. It's certainly getting a lot of coverage. Collectively they're notable enough and show no signs of fading, so it's suited for ongoing. Davey2116 (talk) 21:49, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Anyone who claims that this is "run-of-the-mill" either categorically dislikes when United States affairs get put on the front page or doesn't know anything about the United States (or in TRM's case, both). The changes that have been sweeping the nation since last June are unprecedented. Monuments getting taken down, actors retiring their roles, the Redskins finally changing their name, etc. Mlb96 (talk) 05:31, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Furthermore, this article covers every protest since last June. Look at this list of race riots in the U.S. Prior to June 2020, there hadn't been a race-related protest in four years. And with the exception of 2014-2015, there was an average of one race-related protest per year. Since June 2020, we've had multiple race-related protests per month. To claim that these kinds of protests are common is absurd. If they seem common now, it's because the racial unrest is LITERALLY on-going. This frankly should have been put into on-going months ago, but better late than never. Mlb96 (talk) 05:45, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      You mean there wasn't any protest in 2019 like this one? Hawkeye7 (discuss) 06:56, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      Hah, by all means try to insult me Mlb96 but you just make yourself look silly really. Racial unrest has been ongoing for years and it's not newsworthy, it's just "a way of life" in the US, just like mass shootings. Nothing changes, nothing of true encyclopedic value comes from these protests or shootings. Once the balance tips and someone actually does something to prevent more than 1,000 people being murdered by the US police per year or reduce hundreds of mass shootings to nearly zero, then we can get genuinely interested in a news story. Until then, it's business as usual. I feel very sorry for the thousands of people killed every year in each of these circumstances in the US, but that doesn't mean we need to overwhelm this global encyclopedia with protest/mass shooting tickers. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 08:14, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      TRM, I'm trying assume good faith, but I feel that your anti-American bias is shining through, and it's annoying. -- Rockstone[Send me a message!] 09:46, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      No, I'm just saying it as it is. The rest of the world is dog tired of being inundated with "riot" and "mass shooting" stories from the US, in particular when literally nothing ever is done about it. I discovered 'No Way To Prevent This,' Says Only Nation Where This Regularly Happens today, sums it up perfectly. This isn't about anti-American anything. If someone kept suggesting we post minor casualty events from a war zone then I'd continually oppose those as well. This is no different. But I appreciate your attempts to AGF. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 10:59, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      I'm in full agreement with TRM here and I'm American - this is unfortunately the situation in America for more than a decade or two. What's happened in the last year and calling it a special period is inappropriate WP:SYNTH. Further, this type of story belies the purpose of ongoing, where we know that there will be a reasonable endpoint that we expect to pull the event; there is no sign that this unrest will end in the US; if it ends (likely due to legislation that is passed) the means by which it ends would be a story. --Masem (t) 14:14, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nonsense. If '20-21 racial unrest in the US is synth, then AFD the article. But of course it's not synth; the RSes themselves, in their own voice, explicitly, state that the protests of the past year are unique. (Those RSes are cited in that article.) These protests are not business as usual; they are larger, more frequent, more widespread, longer lasting, and more violent (on both sides), than any protests in the US probably since the seventies. Even bigger than OWS. (Was OWS in ongoing?) Definitely the biggest in my lifetime, and probably the biggest in your lifetime, too. If not, name the last time we had sustained year-long nationwide protests. Even OWS didn't last a year. Levivich harass/hound 14:32, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It's just a low-level collection of angry people who are continually angry about things that don't change. This isn't news. That's the point. There is nothing to be gained for our readers on seeing low-level protest after low-level protest after low-level protest added to that article of low-level protests. The world is bored of this, nothing changes, nothing gets to a point of real noteworthiness. It may come to a shock to those people in the US who think this is of anything more than a passing interest, but these shootings and riots just roll off the news with regularity. There's no interest. This is a global encyclopedia, focusing ITN on mass shootings and protest after protest is not its mission. And since when was 2021 storming of the United States Capitol about racial unrest? Jesus. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 14:53, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Referring to millions of American protesters as "just a low-level collection of angry people who are continually angry about things that don't change" is your anti-Americanism showing again. You really need to curtail this here. If "this isn't news" then why is it all over the news? Also, you do not speak for "the world". "The world" does not have a single opinion on anything. Your comments here are 100% just your opinion and no one else's. Levivich harass/hound 15:14, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oh give it rest. Half the items in that article featured dozens, not millions, of people protesting and many of those had nothing to do with "racial unrest". Once you have a suitable argument other than the half-baked "anti-Americanism" bollocks, I'll listen. I'm actually anti-police-murder and anti-mass-shooting, I have no opinion on the United States, having been there several times it offers literally nothing. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 15:58, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, per Mlb96. Nothing "run of the mill" about the racial protests that have been taking place over the last year since the George Floyd death in the U.S. They absolutely are qualitatively different from the protests that have occurred before, and they have already resulted in significant changes in attitudes towards race and policing, comparable to the impact of the Me Too movement. Saying that the rest of the world is dog tired of being inundated with these stories is a perfectly good reason to put them into a single 'ongoing' item. Then each time an individual story of this kind gets nominated for a blurb, there will be an immediate counter-argument: we already have an ongoing item for this topic and let's keep it there. Nsk92 (talk) 14:05, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose way too broad and disparate. A lot of that article is just disparate protests in response to isolated events that might've had something to do with racism. TBH, it might actually be original research to group these all together as part of some cohesive movement, in the way that article is doing (distinct from some kind of list article), unless there's some RS doing the same (not immediately obvious). But, and WP:CRYSTAL notwithstanding, possibly in the future there may be a suitable nomination relating to the Chauvin trial. But not sure this is it. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 15:14, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as too broad, in line with what several others have pointed out above. Yakikaki (talk) 19:04, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • This strikes me as rather amorphous. I'm not completely ready to dismiss it because it is generating significant and ongoing coverage, though. pbp 22:56, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - This is a cultural paradigm shift, and so in effect is actually too newsy for ITN. At the rate things are going, this would probably never come down off ongoing if posted.--WaltCip-(talk) 14:27, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Closed) Kerch Strait closure

[edit]

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: Kerch Strait (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Russia announces its decision to close the Kerch Strait in the Black Sea to "warships and other state vessels" until October. (Post)
News source(s): NY Post, Plymouth Herald, Ukrinform
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Likely a notable development in the ongoing tensions with Russia, Ukrainian Foreign Ministry has responded. Brandmeistertalk 21:08, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Announcement. Might be relevant when it actually happens. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 21:12, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Just an announcement, and not in the news much. The update would also need to be longer, giving the impacts of it, etc, as right now there's only the background. Uses x (talkcontribs) 21:20, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose It's not significant - if we were to nominate every military activity then the list would be huge Sitaphul (talk) 14:05, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I think Russia announcing it's doing a thing is the same as Russia doing that thing. I rather doubt anyone is going to test them. --LaserLegs (talk) 22:52, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment This is related to the back-and-forth between Russia-Ukraine-US, and is a minor development about equal to the US sailing destroyers through the Dardanelles, or Zelensky's visit to troops. The article is actually pretty nice. I'd rather post good articles with a topical update than the usual "event" article, but some more information in the blurb is needed to give readers context. And we should wait at least until next week when this is no longer merely an annoucement.130.233.213.199 (talk) 06:14, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

April 14

[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime


(Posted) RD: Michel Louvain

[edit]
Article: Michel Louvain (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CTV News / Canadian Press; Montreal Gazette
Credits:

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

 Bloom6132 (talk) 01:15, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Ahmed Usman

[edit]
Article: Ahmed Usman (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Premium Times
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Former Military Governor of Ondo and Oyo States in Nigeria. Article is referenced and has appropriate depth of coverage. SpencerT•C 15:38, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted to RD) RD/Blurb: Bernie Madoff

[edit]

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: Bernie Madoff (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination
Blurb:  American financier Bernie Madoff (pictured), who operated the largest Ponzi scheme in history, dies at the age of 82. (Post)
News source(s): Guardian, AP, BBC
Credits:

Article updated
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Financier and fraudster
Both of you are going to have to provide a rationale...-- P-K3 (talk) 14:11, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Pawnkingthree: To be fair the comments were posted before I added the template - it previously just read "Bernie Madoff" with no context. Black Kite (talk) 14:14, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, ok.-- P-K3 (talk) 14:15, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, my bad. I was just bewildered that it didn't have a template. Fakescientist8000 (talk) 15:33, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Closed) Daunte Wright protests

[edit]

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: Daunte Wright protests (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Nightly unrest is now in its third day. 2600:1700:5890:69F0:1D21:C59E:DB08:A777 (talk) 04:41, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The article is improved and the AFD has closed. On a second review the article could go up. The point made by TRM below is a very good one, though. Protests and riots in the Upper Midwest (and in many of the places listed in the Events elsewhere section) have become commonplace over the last few years.130.233.213.199 (talk) 04:57, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yet another Ongoing nomination has been made for this event (above) which links to a much weaker and frankly poorly composed article. In the interest of getting something up on this topic, I'd suggest to make a blurb nomination along the lines of Protests and unrest stemming from the death of Daunte Wright enter their Nth day. The article here is good enough, and that blurb formulation we have used many times previously.130.233.213.199 (talk) 10:58, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose because it's nowhere near important enough. The article is up for deletion. Jim Michael (talk) 08:25, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. It's pretty clear that this isn't like the George Floyd matter. 331dot (talk) 08:31, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Re-opened The AfD has been speedily closed with a result 'Keep' so the discussion here can continue.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 16:07, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    For the record, the AfD was closed as "no consensus".—Bagumba (talk) 16:29, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes indeed but 'no consensus' to delete has the same effect as 'Keep', which is more spot on in relation to this nomination.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 16:59, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I've never seen a speedy close with no consensus before- seems like that is being used solely so people can re-open this nomination. Joseph2302 (talk) 19:09, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    The nominator themself withdrew the nomination, but a speedy keep was technically not possible because one editor chose "Delete" before the article was expanded to a reasonable length (see WP:WITHDRAWN). Other than that, it was between a keep and a merge, and a merge isn't reasonable considering the size of both articles. There's no conspiracy. Uses x (talkcontribs) 19:53, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support It would be inconsistent of me to have supported posting the Northern Ireland protest but oppose this one. Mlb96 (talk) 18:14, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • It should be considered that often when there is a "white cop shoots black person" incident which happen with rather troubling frequency, there are protests, some more significant and/or violent than others; the Floyd protests clearly surpassed a level of being "routine". These protests may be just tipping past "routine" with the events of last night but they still aren't at the same sense of scale as the Floyd ones. In contrast, the protests in N. Ireland aren't anywhere close to routine occurances, and the events that led to those unusual (beyond the ususual tension between N. Ireland and the rest of the British Isles). As such, it didn't have a baseline to compare to so was posted for that reason. Its why we do consider events relative to their scope and scale for similar events within the same region for posting, and how that would filter up to the international scale. --Masem (t) 18:20, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose along the lines of Masem's explanation above. Like mass shootings, these protests are now commonplace, and realistically it needs to not be "routine" for it to be something we should consider at ITN. Those arguing about the N'Iron posting need to realise that riots there (in this day and age) just don't (didn't) happen. Trying to equate these regular riots with a rarity is not a reasonable comparison. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 20:07, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Effects? Which ones? Where? Alsoriano97 (talk) 21:31, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
City under a state of emergency, professional sports teams cancelling games, protests around the country. These things rarely accelerate as quickly as this one has. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 21:48, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – Per Jim Michael, TRM – The shooter and the police chief have resigned, and the shooter has been charged, hopefully defusing this incredibly bizarre event.
PS: This user grew up in Minneapolis, and can hardly believe the stuff going on there – but I left a long time ago.Sca (talk) 22:16, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In the context of U.S. mass shootings, this singular one seems less than significant, though it has a bizarre aspect. – Sca (talk) 14:51, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That's true, but that's not a qualification for not posting. Correct me if I'm wrong Sitaphul (talk) 18:24, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per above, but I think a broader racial unrest ongoing would be better, per the arguments in that thread, and tonight is the first Adam Toledo protest... these protests are only growing with no sign of dissipating. Levivich harass/hound 03:38, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

April 13

[edit]

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

Law and crime


(Posted) RD: Conn Findlay

[edit]
Article: Conn Findlay (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Associated Press; The Washington Post
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Only announced and reported today (April 13). —Bloom6132 (talk) 20:28, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Bobby Leonard

[edit]
Article: Bobby Leonard (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Indianapolis Star; Associated Press
Credits:

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

 Bloom6132 (talk) 23:55, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Peter Warner

[edit]
Article: Peter Warner (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Sydney Morning Herald
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Australian captain. Article covers key aspects of the subject's life in appropriate detail; referenced. SpencerT•C 15:46, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Japan's cabinet approved dumping of radioactive water

[edit]

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.


Template:ITN candidate

  • Nominator comments: This is the first time since 2011 the Japanese government makes it clear to the world on how Japan would deal with the radioactive water. Reading the comments on the ITN nomination of #(Closed) Fukushima disaster cleanup (which was a different article), my responses are as follows.
  • (1) Part of the "consensus" on rejecting #(Closed) Fukushima disaster cleanup was based on the poor focus and the poor quality of that article, not on the importance of the news per se. This is a different, new article, entirely focus on the water.
  • (2) Some users voted "opposed" by claiming this is "old news". In fact, news on this before 13 April 2021 was just speculation by tabloids. The cabinet approval was handed down on 13 April 2021.
  • (3) While some users rightly pointed out "the cabinet approved the dumping to happen two years later, not to happen now", being the "first ever cabinet decision on the matter" grants this news importance.
  • -- love.wh 15:13, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose and speedy close. We just had a discussion on this that closed as a clear consensus not to post. The fact that a new separate article has been created doesn't change the consensus. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:03, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Significant global news, must read. STSC (talk) 15:06, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose New article is a hopeless mess of WP:SYN about various dumping events. I'm not even sure why this is a distinct article from the Fukushima clean-up article. It takes a scatter-shot approach to reporting on the events, and there's little in the way of narrative flow that makes the article very hard to follow, and not up to the standards I would expect for the main page. --Jayron32 15:27, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Closed) Fukushima disaster cleanup

[edit]

Template:Atop


Template:ITN candidate

Template:Abot

April 12

[edit]

Template:Cot Portal:Current events/2021 April 12 Template:Cob


RD: Galen Weston

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

(Posted) RD: Ady Steg

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

(Posted) RD: Shirley Williams

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

Template:Replyto I posted the one above, but I can't post this one as I nominated it, and Spencer has commented on it as well. Black Kite (talk) 13:55, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I might have guessed. It's like the old boys club round here! Maybe mark as Attention needed? Martinevans123 (talk) 13:59, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Ongoing: Northern Ireland riots

[edit]

Template:Atop Template:ITN candidate

  • I think the point is things are still happening, so judge by article updates. The repeated comments that there's nothing in X newspaper aren't helpful (though yours was quite funny) Kingsif (talk) 16:34, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Largely absent from main RS sites Monday. – Sca (talk) 18:46, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sorry about that. I didn't know about the new Minnesota riots. Now that's why the Timberwolves game was postponed and left many fantasy NBA pissed pissed. Either way, the Myanmar civil disturbances are putting every rioter in shame, but not enough for it to be posted here. Howard the Duck (talk) 21:13, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't seem to understand your objections. It is currently posted on the main page. It says "Myanmar protests" right there! Right now! This isn't new; it has been on the main page for weeks. --Jayron32 16:56, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • A few weeks ago, there was a day where Myanmar killed 100 of its people during the protests. This was rejected at ITN/C because it's already ongoing. That was a poor decision as that would've "unpinned" the article from ongoing and we would not be needing another discussion to remove it if it becomes stale. Howard the Duck (talk) 17:04, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • So you're upset that the Myanmar protests are still on Ongoing? If that is the case, you should start a direct discussion to remove it. I see you haven't done that yet. --Jayron32 17:25, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm upset that the Myanmar protests weren't promoted to a standard blurb when the state supposedly killed 100 of its own people, because it is "ongoing" (and some downplayed or doubted the event). I suppose there's no !rule preventing an article in ongoing being promoted back to a blurb (and being removed from ongoing) but people have used that non-rule to prevent articles in ongoing promoted back to blurbs. Howard the Duck (talk) 18:00, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Let it roll off. This was pretty borderline to add in the first place, and I agree with GCG above. Modest Genius talk 10:59, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose According to the article itself, the last significant, widespread, rioting occurred on and around April 7-8, with isolated incidents of vandalism and hooliganry occurring sporadically since then. Not as widespread as it was 5-6 days ago, and with little worth reporting since then, it seems like this is not really "ongoing" anymore. If it becomes sustained and widespread again in the future, with clear evidence of such in the article writing, I'd be perfectly willing to reconsider at that point. But as of now, it's not there. --Jayron32 16:50, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You don't have to wait until the whole Northern Ireland is burning. The article has been "regularly updated with new, pertinent information", that's the real criteria for "ongoing". STSC (talk) 18:12, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Abot

(Posted) Guillermo Lasso elected President of Ecuador

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

Done. Alsoriano97 (talk) 17:49, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Template:U: the results section needs a prose summary of the second round voting results, and once that is done, I'm willing to support. SpencerT•C 17:54, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Template:U I have made some progress. If you think it's not enough, I'll get to it after dinner. Alsoriano97 (talk) 18:53, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Template:U! Alsoriano97 (talk) 21:03, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Severe Tropical Cyclone Seroja

[edit]

Template:Atop Template:ITN candidate

Don't they all leave "a trail of damage"? So far the impacts in Australia aren't really noteworthy enough to post, and this is especially reflected by the article. So what if it's the "strongest to hit X town in X many years", these records are set and broken every single year. Gex4pls (talk) 19:04, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly. If the loss of life isn't there, then the damage would have to be pretty significant for us to post, like if this had completely demolished the Syndey Opera House (I know, wrong coast, but trying to come up with local example). --Masem (t) 20:19, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Abot

April 11

[edit]

Template:Cot Portal:Current events/2021 April 11 Template:Cob


RD: Massimo Cuttitta

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

(Posted) British Academy Film Awards

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

(Posted) RD: Enzo Sciotti

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

Template:Reply to "but well-referenced" - ??? Uses x (talkcontribs)
Template:Re Your ping didn't work, but I looked to the ref list when I saw missing inline cites and the Guardian article there is good (the way it's been added as a source but not inline is an old ref format that just needs sorting). If information from it can be taken and added to the article, it should be mostly fine. Filmography might be on BFI but that's the real issue. If I had an hour I wasn't dedicating to something else, I'd do it. Kingsif (talk) 19:16, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support With the update it's more comprehensive and fully cited. Template:Reply to ping in case you don't see it. Uses x (talkcontribs) 09:00, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) 2021 Masters Tournament

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

If "new records" don't often happen, they won't often appear in blurbs, but look at the current Grand National one. Kingsif (talk) 07:38, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:ITN: Template:Tq Perhaps the Grand National was an WP:IAR for one of the two gender assignments, while there are many more nationalities. That said, the headlines consistently allude to his nationality: "Hideki Matsuyama victorious at Masters, becomes first Japanese man to win major" ESPN, "The Masters 2021: Japan’s Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga leads celebrations after Hideki Matsuyama’s historic win" The Independent, "Hideki Matsuyama Wins the Masters With a Groundbreaking Performance" The New York TimesBagumba (talk) 07:44, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose mention of ethnicity/nationality as the event is ITN/R – plenty notable result without the need for qualifiers. Also, the way in which we would have to frame it to be a record (e.g. "first Japanese man" "first Asian-born champion") reeks of sensationalism. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 09:35, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
≈50% of the world's population vs. ≈1.6%? AllegedlyHuman (talk) 03:37, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
But No. 3 in world GDP. —Bagumba (talk) 09:37, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Ongoing: Uyghur genocide

[edit]

Template:Atop Template:ITN candidate

I can't change that it wasn't on ITN in the past. The fact of the matter is, as you said, that it's ongoing. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 11:38, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, ongoing like the Israeli–Palestinian_conflict and Darfur genocide and Rohingya genocide and Somali Civil War and War in Afghanistan (2001–present) and Syrian Civil War...let's permalist all those too. Yes the world is a dark place. TarkusABtalk/contrib 18:57, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support – This has been a significant news item over the past week. Turkey summoned the Chinese Ambassador and issuing what at least one expert called the "most public rebuke of China in more than a decade." (For context, Erdogan accused China of committing genocide against the Uyghurs in 2009). China released a musical as a part of an intense propaganda campaign to deny its human rights abuses against ethnic and religious minorities in Xinjiang (a quote used in the NYT article was declared to be the NYT Quotation of the Day.) China has been intensifying its attacks against Uyghurs and Uyghur allies overseas, China has sentenced Uyghur officials to death, France is seeing a court case filed against multinationals relating to labor rights abuses in Xinjiang, and there are public discussions among the United States and its allies regarding whether or not to boycott the Winter Olympics, earning a response from Beijing. The Uyghur genocide is indisputably in the news, and it is one of the biggest stories currently. I believe that the article would be certainly fitting for inclusion here. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 08:45, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The article is high quality and fully cited, but I have to question the word "genocide", as it's not completely agreed on (the BBC article states it's an allegation, for example), and it's not comprehensive enough about what's happening; I think the term "persecution" should be used for the title instead. Is there any reason against this, or should I suggest a rename? The article is also one-sided, with mostly commentary from activists and NGOs, and little commentary from China or its allies; you don't need to believe it (I don't), but it has to be given in the article. Uses x (talkcontribs) 09:07, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Template:U, this title was very recently decided on in an extensive talk page discussion, which resulted in a one-year moratorium. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 09:12, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@AllegedlyHuman That was changing the name from "Uyghur cultural genocide" to "Uyghur genocide". None of the titles the article has had or have been suggested, giving five in total, have used the word "persecution", so my point hasn't been discussed yet. The moratorium isn't an endorsement of the current name, so "If it becomes clear in the intervening 12 months that a better name exists" I can suggest it on the talk page, but that would take over seven days so I can't support the current nomination anyway, unless I'm convinced "genocide" is the widely-accepted term. Uses x (talkcontribs) 09:20, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
See FAQ point two: Template:Tq AllegedlyHuman (talk) 09:24, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Uses x (talkcontribs) 09:29, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Re The title "Persecution of Uyghurs" was proposed in a February 2021 move request, which resulted in not moved, with nobody other than the nominator supporting it. The discussion was not as lengthy as the April 1 move discussion, but there was still a consensus present not to move the page. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 18:39, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Mikehawk10 "was not as lengthy" - that's an understatement if I've ever heard one. The singular oppose doesn't deal with what I said, as the IP user who suggested it didn't give any kind of rationale for the change, and the current name was based on other factors ("cultural genocide" vs. "genocide"), so I'm not convinced.
Take a look at the talk page for the recent rename, and tell me there isn't a huge amount of personal research and WP:ACTIVISM there. Remember, the editors who are even involved in article re-naming are usually those involved in the article itself (and look at the sheer number of now banned, recently registered, and IP users in that bunch), so talk page concensus doesn't necessarily equal ITN concensus. Uses x (talkcontribs) 19:28, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed that there is some activism going on that has led to breaches of the WP:NPA policy (such as this edit). I also think that Template:U, the administrator who closed the most recent move discussion (which once again found an affirmative consensus to keep the page at Uyghur genocide), correctly closed things in a way that reflects consensus achieved on the article talk. Obviously, there can be different local consensuses in different places when there is no global consensus, so talk page consensus doesn't necessarily equal ITN consensus. That being said, it seems that the proper place to challenge article neutrality is in the article talk itself, not a separate venue, as this would help to keep the discussions on the article in a consistent place that editors can more easily discover and engage with. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 22:38, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - for article subject and overall article quality. Any concerns raised though should probably be fixed before posting.BabbaQ (talk) 09:30, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Uses x. As long as this article is calling something a "genocide" despite reliable sources not yet referring to it as such, it's not suitable for inclusion on the main page. The closer of the recent RM acknowledged that the title was problematic, but appears to have closed it as "not moved" on the grounds that no better title has been proposed. That may be the case, but it doesn't make the current title suddenly OK. I also agree with TarkusAB's oppose - this tragedy did not begin recently, it's been going since 2014, and there doesn't seem to be any end in sight - if we put it up, then we're basically saying it's going to be up for the next five years. There haven't been significant new developments in the past week and it's unclear why this is being proposed now rather than at any other time.  — Amakuru (talk) 09:40, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Disagree that "there haven't been significant new developments in the past week" per Template:U. And as the nominator, I'll tell you frankly: I nominated it now because I thought of it now. Should it have been nominated in the past? Probably, but I can't go back and change that. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 11:32, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
OK that's fair enough, you thought of it now, and my point is not to say that nothing has happened recently. This is an "ongoing" event in the sense that terrible things are happening to people on the ground on a daily basis. I'm not belittling it at all. But as tragic and concerning as that is, that isn't what the ITN "Ongoing" section is all about. There are several ongoing conflicts and tragedies in the world right now - the never-ending wars in the middle-east, the War in Donbass, unrest in Venezuela, the persecution of Rohingyas, wars in Africa etc. etc. But the question is whether anything going on those conflicts amounts to global breaking news that we might consider posting as an individual story. When I do a Google news search for "Uighur" I don't see anything that would ever be considered as an ITN story in its own right. And honestly, from personal experience as someone who reads the UK news, nothing on this has crossed my radar this week. That may be a fault in the way international outlets are reporting it, but it's also not our job to WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 11:49, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Tq AllegedlyHuman (talk) 11:27, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't accused anyone of anything. I'm saying that we shouldn't push an obviously non-neutral article into ITN that parrots the US State Department's allegations. Those allegations are widely contested, not least by the US State Department's own legal advisors. See, for example, this article, which describes how the political appointees at the US State Department ignored the legal advisors and accused China of genocide. The article Uyghur genocide puts extreme claims into Wikivoice, despite the fact that reliable sources describe these claims as allegations. This is not the sort of content that we should be pushing onto the front page. -Thucydides411 (talk) 12:02, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You essentially called me and every support voter a fed for daring to think that a current genocide is in fact major world news. Now, I have a pretty thick skin, but you ought to strike that remark for those who don't. If you have concerns about neutrality, oppose on that principle and, if you're really so concerned about the article's current form, I would strongly encourage you to follow up on it by taking it to the article's talk page, making a better encyclopedia for all. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 12:14, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Per reliable sources, these are allegations of genocide, made by the US State Department, contradicting its own legal advisors. There's a difference between allegations and facts, and it's important to note this distinction on Wikipedia. Putting an unproven (and heavily contested) allegation in Wikivoice is bad enough. We shouldn't then push this non-neutral material to the front page. -Thucydides411 (talk) 13:28, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Besides for the Chinese government nobody appears to be contesting the allegations of human rights abuses, WP:RS have confirmed the allegations as far as they have been able to. Also just FYI the page name predates that US State Department designation as you well know because you participated in the naming discussion, your personal attacks are inaccurate as well as hurtful. Just because you personally don’t agree with a community consensus does not mean you can disrespect it or lie about it. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 14:45, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
64 UN member states have signed a declaration rejecting the allegations - far more than have supported them. Even the US State Department's own legal advisors advised that the accusation was unsupported by the evidence, but they were overruled by the political appointees. RS specifically describe "genocide" as an allegation in this case, and attribute the allegation to the specific parties making it, as has been shown over and over again at Talk:Uyghur_genocide. The fact that reliable sources report that allegations have been made does not mean that those allegations are true, as the Iraq WMD fiasco illustrates. -Thucydides411 (talk) 15:43, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
To be fair, usually edits or discussions which aim to sway an article to pro-Chinese or anti-Western views are quite often met with "CCP trolls" or "wumao". I'm not saying that we should be allowing accusations of ethnocentrism, but we should be careful about applying double standards especially on a Euro and American centric website if we are to aim for a clear, balanced and worldwide take on topics. 58.167.153.79 (talk) 12:30, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - (1) per Uses x. The article name is contested, (2) Not particularly in the news (looked on the front and "world news" pages of several major news organisations and searched for "Uyghur" with no hits. AntiVan (talk) 12:28, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose the CPC isn't going to stop because we stuck this article in ongoing. It will continue for generations until the Uyghur people are assimilated, exterminated, or driven out and the region repopulated with Han Chinese. Are we really going to leave this in the box that long? It's akin to putting Climate Change or Israeli–Palestinian_conflict into the box it is never ever ever going to stop. Nominate the occasional "blurb-worthy" event instead please. --LaserLegs (talk) 14:53, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Nominate the "blurb-worthy" event instead please. Otherwise we end up filling the infobox with ongoing events, like Rohingya genocide,Yemeni Genocide all of which are current. When US designated a genocide in January 2021, that was a good point for "blurb-worthy" nomination. Albertaont (talk) 15:08, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Same old allegations do not qualify as "ongoing" for ITN. STSC (talk) 16:06, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose As far as I could see the only legitimate support is from the nominator itself and Mikehawk10. All other supports other than that doesn't clearly state the reasoning. The oppose section raised various concerns regarding the neutrality of the article title and the content, and the fact that putting in on ongoing is an act of WP:RGW as the event itself has been going on for several years and the recent coverage is just about the "expose" part. One IP user pointed out to balance the take of the topics.
Meanwhile, the only support for this ongoing based it on the fact that there has been continuous widespread coverage over the past week. Judging through the refutations of the nominator on oppose comments, the nominator nominates this item due to the continuous development of the event's article in Wikipedia and the recent widespread coverage. The nominator refutes the neutrality allegation put forward by the oppose, stating that the matter has been discussed for a while and there is a moratorium for that. The nominator recommends whoever questioned the support to bring it up on the talkpage.
Judging by the weight of both opinions, I oppose the notion of nominating this item for ongoing. The continuous coverage of the event is only for the various actions of nation in response to the event and not for the existence of the event itself. Other than that, I believe that this article is sufficiently neutral due to the continuous consensus. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 16:41, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Abot

April 10

[edit]

Template:Cot Portal:Current events/2021 April 10 Template:Cob


(Posted) RD: Ramsey Clark

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

Support Issues were addressed. Hanamanteo (talk) 23:10, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Notability is not a factor for an RD; all people with articles are important enough to post. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 04:34, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
My personal iVotes on these issues takes notability into primary consideration. Just because someone nominates someone who played one professional game of football but has a cracker-jack polished page doesn't mean I'll be coming by to support an RD. Randy Kryn (talk) 04:41, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ooooookay, but editors have raised legitimate concern about this page's current quality, the (agreed upon by consensus) sole issue for an RD. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 04:44, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
What is an iVote? Is that the Spanish version of !vote? --Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 04:54, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Si. Randy Kryn (talk) 04:56, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Collapse top

Just read the novella-length RfC and discussions, and it seems that the close of the RfC is far from supportive of the criteria without criteria expansion. Randy Kryn (talk) 05:56, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If what you're saying is that you think regular ITN users have misinterpreted the RFC linked to every RD proposal, then that's something to take up higher than this individual nom; I would suggest Wikipedia talk:In the news. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 06:01, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The RfC close accepts the criteria as defined but seems to ask for further refinement. If someone can come up with a coherent sentence portion to add to it then your advice is appropriate. Randy Kryn (talk) 06:07, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Randy Kryn ... that's the literal point of RD. Anyone (and I mean anyone) who has a Wikipedia page is eligible for RD, which you can read on the text of the nomination itself. You don't need to come by if you don't support that, the regular contributors here will manage. Uses x (talkcontribs) 06:23, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Please read the close of the RfC which asks for further criteria refinement in addition to article quality. This has been done in the case of inclusion of animals, yet it seems that the need for additional language to address other good faith concerns hasn't as yet been fully addressed and resolved. Randy Kryn (talk) 06:32, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Randy Kryn It has already been refined. Wikipedia:In_the_news#Article_quality, and the article doesn't meet that. And remember, if there are citation needed tags it means no one has put much effort into fact-checking the article, so the citations that are present likely haven't been verified. Uses x (talkcontribs) 07:20, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Collapse bottom

Support I've sorted out most of the citation needed tags, the only two bits missing are two dates (both tagged) that are not particularly important, and that's fine according to the critera. Pinging everyone who was also opposed, in case you don't see the update: Template:Reply to
Changing to Support as issues were addressed throughout the day JW 1961 Talk 21:56, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
PS: Listed by French & German Wikis' RDs. – Sca (talk) 14:46, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Sca Take a look at those pages, and you'll be able to say why those got posted yourself. Uses x (talkcontribs) 15:41, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Always amusing to see how poor the de. and fr.wiki standards are for BLPs. Something we should definitely not aspire to. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 17:47, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
We're here to please. – Sca (talk) 13:13, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Grand National

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

Why am I tagged in this? L1amw90 (talk) 17:32, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You've made significant contributions to the article so people think it reasonable to credit you with doing so. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 17:38, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Riders come off at a jump, it's the only reason and so common and expected to be unremarkable. Kingsif (talk) 18:06, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That is not the only reason a horse fails to finish, and you know it. We are covering an historic event, so the info should be there for those in the future to be able to read. Mjroots (talk) 18:45, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No, it is the only reason. I mean, if they have to shoot a horse, I hope the rider's come off it by then. Which is the disqualifying factor. Kingsif (talk) 20:58, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull. I have to agree with the above. The event is noteworthy enough, but the article is insufficient. The horse's article is also a redirect (to the race) and the jockey's article is a stub. -- Calidum 22:04, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

April 9

[edit]

Template:Cot Portal:Current events/2021 April 9 Template:Cob


RD: Sandra J. Feuerstein

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

(Posted) RD: Nikki Grahame

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

That is not a reason to Oppose on ITN. Secondly, you obviously has not read the article.BabbaQ (talk) 09:28, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Also, the article had over 300.000 views yesterday.BabbaQ (talk) 11:23, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Because admit it, she was popular back in the days and that was the last series of BB I've watched. 86.9.227.81 (talk) 12:46, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Great; not a valid reason to oppose. Read the notice at the bottom of the tan box. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 12:49, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Ross Young (politician)

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

Template:Small AllegedlyHuman (talk) 07:31, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Aten (city)

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

  • Provisionally oppose on quality, support on significance. Whoa, this is big news, but I'll withhold my support until after the article is improved to post-able quality. Osunpokeh (talk) 21:46, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: DMX

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

Article is currently full-protected, so I literally can't. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 16:22, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, bloody ridiculous to have it fully protected. Shambles. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 16:25, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I pinged the protecting admin, who dropped it back to semiprotection. Edit away. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:33, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The likes of TIME and USA Today called him a “legendary rapper” who “changed hip-hop forever”. On top of his number-one albums breaking Billboard records. So a transformative career is irrevocably the case. Trillfendi (talk) 17:37, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose blurb Article looks good enough for RD. A cleanup is due for the 'Legal issues', but it's acceptable. Uses x (talkcontribs) 17:03, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Template:U and Template:U: Template:U has now removed claims that were missing citations from the article. Would you mind taking another look? Thanks. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 16:58, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Template:U Done, the article is acceptable for RD. Thanks for the ping. Uses x (talkcontribs) 17:03, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Two major things that are still a problem: All of the Apperances need to be sourced (standard for any actor), and I'd beg the question if we need to detail every arrest/time in jail in "Legal Issues"; that he was frequently arrested and in jail is summarized in the lede, and if there were any major notable ones, those can be mentioned but it is highly inappropriate to post a rap sheet for a BLP/BRDP. --Masem (t) 17:01, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Where does the guidelines say the deceased must be "notable enough outside the US for a blurb"? --LaserLegs (talk) 00:10, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Not speaking for Connor, but as I read it, that was a kind way of saying "he might have been blurbworthy at his peak based on US popularity, but not when you think of all rappers globally". Of course, Connor might be saying "people outside the US don't listen to good rap" or something... Kingsif (talk) 00:24, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The chart peaks in DMX discography show hotness in Canada and not bad at all elsewhere after 2001. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:44, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Needs referencing. When ready, Support RD only: I thought I knew music, but I have never heard of him. Anecdotal evidence? Sure, but in a rapper hierarchy of who might possibly get a blurb one day (currently opining none), he's not even on the list. Kingsif (talk) 00:00, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb, Support RD Had he died a decade earlier, may have justified a blurb. Has been out of limelight. Albertaont (talk) 00:20, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb, support RD - At no point in his life was he anywhere near important enough for a blurb. Claims that he was a household name are ridiculous. Try mentioning DMX to elderly relatives - they won't even know there was a person known as DMX, let alone that he was a rapper. Jim Michael (talk) 01:04, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I'm sure the elderly would have actively avoided any such kind of "that hip hop music", just as I'm sure many free-spirit young punk whippersnappers would have avoided any sign of fealty to those monarchists in England. Singling out one group or another to determine what's important to society overall is myopic. (I doubt most of those grannies would have even heard of Kanye.) AllegedlyHuman (talk) 03:07, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Millions of young people don't care about Prince Philip's death, but they know who he was. (By the way, I'm opposed to him having a blurb as well, but realised long before he died that there'd be a strong consensus for a blurb.) Ask your octogenarian/nonagenarian (grand)mother/(grand)father/(great-)aunt/(great-)uncle what (s)he thinks about DMX & (s)he won't even know you're talking about a person, let alone a rapper. Jim Michael (talk) 07:11, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, you said that before. And as I said before, it's a ludicrous argument. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 07:23, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It's relevant in refuting the claims that he was a household name. Most people haven't heard of him. Jim Michael (talk) 09:37, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
When it comes to American rap, something that most people have no interest in. Being a household name means being very well-known across all demographics. Someone merely being well-known in their field isn't sufficient for them to have a blurb - they need to be at the top of it. Jim Michael (talk) 07:11, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The bar here is Template:Tq, not "top". AllegedlyHuman (talk) 07:23, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In what way(s) was DMX transformative? Jim Michael (talk) 09:37, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Also, doing a cursory glance through what Wikipedia has to say on rap music, it's about 90% one and the same as "American rap music", especially in the period DMX was most notable. (Sorry, UK drill.) AllegedlyHuman (talk) 07:28, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Mahyuddin N. S.

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

(Posted) La Soufrière eruption

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

Oppose for now; information in the target article is exactly identical to the blurb. Unless we have something more to tell people in directing them to the article in question, there's no reason for an ITN posting. Please expand the article with sufficient information about the eruption, and then we can look at assessing those additions for their quality. Right now there's basically nothing there. --Jayron32 15:17, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Bueno. --Jayron32 18:01, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The article has been updated / expanded. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Thanks ) 16:15, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted as blurb) RD: Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh

[edit]

Template:Atop Template:ITN candidate

  • But if you really want "transformative in his field", he was a commander of the Royal Navy and literally helped invent a modern-day equestrian sport and the premier award for encouraging community spirit in young people internationally. In short, I'd expect the same treatment for any equivalent figure, though there are none (internationally impactful constitutional monarchy, military career, charitable career, dynastic longevity, etc). Kingsif (talk) 11:51, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

*Support RD only We don't post blurbs for the deaths of consorts (a recent example is the death of Henrik, Prince Consort of Denmark) and I don't see how this person transformed any relevant field. Blurbs are not reserved for public figures per se.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 11:31, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:IMAGEQUALITY is relevant: Template:Tq AllegedlyHuman (talk) 12:24, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd set that rule to anyone with a death article but that's yet a two-edged sword. People will fight to work up such articles in order to make the nominations qualify but, on the other hand, we'll probably end up with an increased number of RfDs on notability grounds as a result.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 12:20, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with Mjroots, I don't think this meets the spirit of WP:WHEEL, Stephen reverted Fuzheado because he saw consensus. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:40, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
WP:WHEEL: Template:Tq: Fuzheado reverted. OK. Stephen reverted. Wheel. —Bagumba (talk) 12:51, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Both Fuzheado's second action, and Stephen's action, were technically WHEEL. It might be a good idea to stop there for the time being unless there's a clear consensus to change it, I think. Black Kite (talk) 13:05, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Template:U. Let it end there, rather than everyone heading on over to WP:DRAMAFEST. Mjroots (talk) 13:09, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Abot

April 7

[edit]

Template:Cot Portal:Current events/2021 April 7 Template:Cob


(Posted) RD: Charles H. Coolidge

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

(Posted) RD: Emmanuel Evans-Anfom

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

(Closed) First results from the Muon g-2 experiment at Fermilab

[edit]

Template:Atop Template:ITN candidate

*Wait to see what the results are. If there's nothing beyond the Standard Model, there's no reason to post. If there really is new physics here, the article(s) need(s) to be updated first, which I expect will take longer than most current events and require subject-matter expertise. Modest Genius talk 09:41, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Also, it's not clear if there is a peer-reviewed journal paper associated with this announcement. Modest Genius talk 10:10, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait too soon, as no results have been published. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:45, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose We're not going to post anything scientific without a peer-reviewed paper to back it. --Masem (t) 13:35, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Continued oppose based on the published paper. Yes, the paper's out, but reading through it (most going over my head), there's no such indication of anything suggested in the blurb (namely the fifth force of nature), but only a better confirmation of the results to prior tests at BNL. Reading ArsTech take on it, the results nearly eliminate that the BNL results 20 years were statistical anomalies, but it doesn't bring the field closer to proving that there's a fifth state to the Standard Model ; more work is needed for that. --Masem (t) 04:43, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – Not only has the seminar not happened yet, but also the topic seems forbiddingly obscure and arcane. – Sca (talk) 13:40, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Maybe it's just me, but I think I'd prefer something obscure and arcane get posted to ITN instead of just continuing to post mass casualty events and ITN/R and nothing else. Mlb96 (talk) 05:23, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
How did you feel about the boat race? – Sca (talk) 15:05, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - This is not an issue that demands immediate attention to a preprint. Peer review comes first. --WaltCip-(talk) 13:46, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Having now seen the results, they find almost the same thing as the 2006 measurement. The precision has improved slightly, but it's still less than the five-sigma threshold required to claim a discovery in particle physics. I still can't see any sign of a peer-reviewed paper either. Lots of theorists will find this interesting, but for the general public it's incremental stuff. Modest Genius talk 15:23, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Update: there's now a paper in PRL, which is good to see. However another paper in Nature was published on the same day, which claims the measured value is consistent with the Standard Model after all. That diminishes the excitement level even further. 'Physicists measure the same value as they did in 2006, and argue whether it is or isn't consistent with standard theory' isn't significant enough for ITN. Modest Genius talk 10:42, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • Can't see the contents of the Nature paper but comparing its contributors to that on the PRL one, it seems to be by a different team altogether and not related to the Fermi data (Nature is by French and German researchers, none that are on the PRL paper?) --Masem (t) 12:55, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        • Correct, it's by an independent team presenting new theoretical calculations of the Standard Model value. The simultaneous publication is surely not a coincidence. I have no idea which theoretical value is superior, but it does demonstrate that the experiment is not necessarily discrepant with the Standard Model. Or another way of looking at it: the anomaly may have been a problem with the calculation methods, not due to any new physics. Modest Genius talk 13:57, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reopened I'm reopening this not because I think it should be posted (I am ambivalent for now), but because many of the opposes claim no peer reviewed paper, and such a paper has been published: [35]. Banedon (talk) 02:15, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That paper came out after this item was nominated, at which time people voted for other reasons. (Notice the "Wait" votes becoming "Opposes".) AllegedlyHuman (talk) 02:39, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on principle but the article hasn't been updated yet. As the paper was only published today, I think it's fair to give editors time to update the article. NorthernFalcon (talk) 04:25, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose until result is 5-sigma confirmed. -- KTC (talk) 11:41, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Exciting for particle physicists as it suggests a crises in the theory so as to lead to advances in human understanding, but still not yet at the confirmed crises. Alanscottwalker (talk) 14:54, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Just to clarify, there have been three published peer-reviewed papers related to the result. Very roughly, the theoretical overview in PRL, the experimental details in PRA, and the remarkably sophisticated magnetic calibration in PRD. Calculating the higher-order effects is mostly a difficult black art. The Fermilab papers took past theoretical calculations (most recently 2020) as their go-to comparison. The new Nature calculations (using an intense amount of supercomputing) were not available. As for the Fermilab results, these are based on less than 10% of their data, so updates will doubtless be soon enough. But it's going to be unclear for quite some time whether a 5-sigma claim has any meaning! An overview of all this can be found at quantamagazine.com. 73.81.122.254 (talk) 16:18, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose an obscure topic with an insufficient update.-- P-K3 (talk) 18:16, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Seems forbiddingly obscure and arcane. InedibleHulk (talk) 10:34, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Abot

(Closed) Mrs. Sri Lanka controversy

[edit]

Template:Archivetop Template:ITN candidate

Template:Archivebottom

RD: Tommy Raudonikis

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

(Closed) COVID-19 pandemic at the University of Notre Dame

[edit]

Template:Atop Template:ITN candidate Template:Abot

April 6

[edit]

Template:Cot Portal:Current events/2021 April 6 Template:Cob


(Posted) RD: Grischa Huber

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

(Posted) RD: Hans Küng

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

  • Comment: Thank you for the groundwork, Grimes2 and Bmclaughlin9. I added the last missing sources. Just for the one thing "citation required", I found only what could be mirrors, - commented out for now. If someone can verify they are not mirrors, please restore. Need sleep. Will dream of more lead, - would be nice to wake up to it done. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:21, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
As the Dutch say, Slap lekker....Sca (talk) 14:00, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Alcee Hastings

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

  • Support decent article, obviously qualifies. Elli (talk | contribs) 15:28, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I have to mention that every person who has a Wikipedia article 'qualifies'. Discussion for RD comes entirely down to article quality. Uses x (talkcontribs) 22:11, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Citations are needed in some places, the "Elections" section oddly only includes specific mentions of his first US House election (1992) and then 2016 and 2018, despite running every two years and 2018 being unopposed, no mention of his 2020 primary challenge, some possible POV issue around the Lexus lease (if he didn't break any rules, why is it mentioned?) and his ten year service as a judge is not covered beyond his impeachment. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:48, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • What Muboshgu said. Some citations missing and the content selection in "U.S. House of Representatives" is strange. Wait, if it's still problematic in 8 hours and the current heavy editing slows down I'll try to fix it. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 17:33, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for now. Citations needed and the article has balance issues. There's a lot of detail about his impeachment, finance problems, etc,(the negative stuff), which all seems fair and well-phrased, but nothing about what he actually did in his career at that time (the positive and neutral side of things). Uses x (talkcontribs) 22:20, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. It's basically a hit piece at the moment, as 90% of it is about the negative 10% of his career, and only 10% is about the other 90%. Black Kite (talk) 00:26, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
As one of the few people removed from office by an impeachment trial, I would expect an article about him to focus on that. What more positive aspects are missing? 331dot (talk) 00:35, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Australia-New Zealand travel bubble

[edit]

Template:Atop Template:ITN candidate

Template:Abot

April 5

[edit]

Template:Cot Portal:Current events/2021 April 5 Template:Cob


(Posted) RD: Veronica Dunne (soprano)

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

(Posted) RD: Paul Ritter (actor)

[edit]

Template:Archive top Template:ITN candidate

The thread I opened about an image awaits your valued input. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:41, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I've already added my opinion here, thanks for all the off-topic bloating here. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 15:18, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Archive bottom

(Posted) 2021 NCAA Division I Men's Basketball Championship

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

Template:U The women's tournament is not ITNR. You are welcome to nominate the women's tournament using the regular ITNC process. Adding it to ITNR has been discussed in the past and not gained consensus. They are separate events in separate locations, unlike the boat race. In addition, rightly or wrongly it does not get the attention of the men's tournament. Note that the WNBA final also is not ITNR. 331dot (talk) 13:11, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Women's championship got a ton of coverage incl. Stanford's first title in 29 years. It was certainly in the news. It was widely covered by ESPN, USAToday, etc. AvatarQX (talk) 23:35, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support posting the women's result. Same time frame, same effective league, so this is nothing like comparing the NBA to the WNBA. While it is clear the mens play get far more coverage, we should not hide the women's result if it happened nearly at the same time. --Masem (t) 23:50, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Re I've created a nomination for the women's tournament. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 07:06, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting proposal to add women's tournament to blurb - As well-sourced as the men's article. Different venue has no bearing on notability. Women's tournament has plenty of coverage and was discussed more than ever this year, including player's claims of gender discrimination in training facilities, food, etc. GaryColemanFan (talk) 13:19, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Template:U My suggestion would be for you to make a separate regular(not ITNR) nomination for that event. "Different venue" is simply the reason we don't post both as ITNR, they are separate events. 331dot (talk) 13:32, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'd like to know what kind of food is strong enough for a man, but made for a woman. InedibleHulk (talk) 18:36, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) New president and PM of Vietnam

[edit]

Template:Atop Template:ITN candidate

Template:U Support on the merits is not required for ITNR nominations, this discussion is only to judge article quality and a blurb. 331dot (talk) 09:41, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Any comment on the quality of either article? AllegedlyHuman (talk) 08:54, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Template:U Notability is not at issue for ITNR nominations. 331dot (talk) 08:56, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Abot

RD/Blurb: Robert Mundell

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

(Closed) Battle of Palma

[edit]

Template:Atop Template:ITN candidate

My bad. I should have clarified; if the city is decisively seen as taken back by Mozambique, then we should keep it. If it does change hands over and over and over, however, then I will proceed to end this proposal. :) Fakescientist8000 (talk) 02:27, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, but would you say it is or isn't clear that the battle has ended? Jim Michael (talk) 09:55, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Only if you consider Sky News a reliable source. – Sca (talk) 16:25, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Abot

(Posted) RD: Mehli Irani

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate


RD: Marshall Sahlins

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

Suggest close, with the option to reopen if a reliable source is added. RD is understandably a very sensitive space. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 18:53, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I’ve found the following source from the University of Chicago, where Sahlins taught. [36], I’ve replaced the Tweet in the nomination with this link. Wishva | Talk 06:02, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

April 4

[edit]

Template:Cot Portal:Current events/2021 April 4 Template:Cob


(Posted) 2021 NCAA Division I Women's Basketball Championship Game

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

Not really sure the NCAA tournament, i.e. the most prominent in American college sports, is really "plumbing the depths." The women's game was watched by a peak of about 6 million people.[3] The 2020 NBA finals (Lakers v. Heat) peaked at 8.29 million.[4] Nobody called that "plumbing the depths." AvatarQX (talk) 08:37, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think the issue has been in part that the men's and women's events are two separate tournaments, held in different locations. No issue with posting, just saying. 331dot (talk) 08:26, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It's a technicality that should just be WP:IARed. AFAICS, the years recently when the women's wasn't posted was because it wasn't nominated, not because it was explicitly opposed. FWIW, the recent women's final got 4M TV viewers.[37]Bagumba (talk) 08:33, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support media coverage was extensive and it seems sensible to just include both the mens' and womens' NCAA results in one blurb. AvatarQX (talk) 08:37, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support article is in good shape, and the audience figures indicate this wasn't just some "routine game". Could we combine both basketball hooks though, because 2 basketball hooks in 4 ITN items seems like an overkill? Joseph2302 (talk) 09:50, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose. Even the men's tournament is kind of borderline, from the experiences from previous years, when there were contentious discussions. But it is ITNR, so I won't argue about it. Women's tournament is not ITNR. Since we don't post the WNBA results, arguably the highest level of sport in the US, we should not post the college-level event. (clearly, the NBA title is ITNR as well) --Tone 12:22, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support combining with men's blurb. Received extensive media coverage (more than the WNBA, so that's not a great comparison). Article is in good shape. GaryColemanFan (talk) 13:14, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Europeans may find this mind-bending, but the women's NCAA tournament is more popular than the WNBA. A female basketball player would get the most attention of her career playing in March rather than October in the WNBA Finals. Might as well codify this in ITNR if this will be posted. Howard the Duck (talk) 13:18, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes. Game 3 clincher in 2020 WNBA Finals had 570,000 TV viewers.[38]Bagumba (talk) 13:39, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I do love people insisting that we only post the "highest level of sport/professional competition" when that's not even in the rules. It's just made up bullshit to oppose items such as this one. Either this is in the news or not.... you know like... college football lol. Howard the Duck (talk) 15:19, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Article is in good shape, topic has been covered appropriately by news sources. Checks all of the boxes. --Jayron32 13:51, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose any and all amateur university sport on ITN. I know the men's version is on ITNR, as is the Oxbridge rowing, so there isn't anything I can do about those. However I will continue to oppose adding any further items of this kind. Stick to the highest levels of professional competition. Tone also makes good points above. Modest Genius talk 14:08, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted - combined with men's tourney per Alt 1. --Floquenbeam (talk) 15:18, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Ref-talk

(Posted) RD: Cheryl Gillan

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

(Closed) 2021 Bulgarian parliamentary election

[edit]

Template:Atop Template:ITN candidate

  • Oppose Don't agree with the assessment that the "article is good". There is no prose about the results, and the majority of the article at present is large tables and graphs. SpencerT•C 16:15, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on quality the article has 1779 characters of prose, this isn't enough to fully summarise the election. The lead is also way too short, as it doesn't even mention which party got most votes and the impact i.e. if Government/coalition was formed. For reference, 2021 Liechtenstein general election had around 4k characters of prose, and that's for a country with 0.1% of the population of Bulgaria. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:41, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also, doesn't look like 100% of the votes have been counted, so too soon for this to be on ITN. The article also doesn't mention anywhere in prose that the incumbent Prime Minister. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:43, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Abot

(Posted) New president of Kosovo

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

All better now. InedibleHulk (talk) 15:15, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I read the inclusion criteria. It's BS but Kosovo passes. --LaserLegs (talk) 20:54, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
admittedly, i have no issues with the list of sovereign nations being generously inclusive, as i worry that being fairly more exclusive could potentially raise pov issues. dying (talk) 13:22, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
List of Sovereign states includes Kosovo because of the rather generous criteria so ITNR is appropriate. I was just wrong before. --LaserLegs (talk) 21:03, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Ping we had exactly the same dispute a few months ago re Northern Cyprus. And in the end that was not posted, so we effectively have a precedent that the countries in the "disputed" section of List of sovereign states aren't part of the ITN/R list.  — Amakuru (talk) 17:30, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Only the lead mentions she became president on 4 April. No details in body on how she transitioned from earlier title of acting president, or what happened between the parliament election in February and now.—Bagumba (talk) 06:42, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    As of 07:38, 6 April 2021, the article has explained the election of her as President. --Jayron32 12:23, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Striking my oppose based on updates.—Bagumba (talk) 04:19, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • hah, yeah, i noticed that too, but only hours after the first time i looked at the page.
    regarding your first point (osmani's transition), it's now partially resolved. also, osmani apparently voluntarily resigned from the position of acting president in accordance with article 90 of the constitution, but i haven't figured out why.
    regarding your second point (what happened in two months), i'd like to know too, but am not sure it would be appropriate for this article unless it involved her, and also wouldn't consider its inclusion necessary for posting to itn unless it directly related to what is mentioned in the blurb, i.e., her becoming president.
    in any case, her transition Template:Em president is now covered, so i feel that the article has been properly updated with respect to the blurb, even though her transition Template:Em acting president, which happened about two weeks before, isn't covered yet. there's more that could be added about the election itself, but i think that what's there currently meets the minimum requirements for updates. dying (talk) 13:22, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • question: should "5th" in the blurb be spelled out as "fifth", or is it better as is? mos:ordinal refers to mos:numeral regarding "guidance on choosing between e.g. 15th and fifteenth" and mos:numeral states that, in general, "[i]ntegers from zero to nine are spelled out in words", while i couldn't find any applicable exception for this case, though it's entirely possible i missed something. however, in the article on james monroe, he is referred to as both "the fifth president of the United States" and "the 5th president of the United States", and i can't figure out if there were any reasons for using one format or the other. (the "5th" used in the infobox i can attribute to the infobox exception in mos:numnotes, and the "5th"s used in the references are there because they are in the titles of the references.) in any case, i think the word "president" should be uncapitalized in the blurb due to mos:jobtitles. dying (talk) 14:34, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I don't think the election of a ceremonial office-holder by the national assembly (not by the people in an open election) in a partially recognised and non-UN member state merits inclusion. We didn't post the election of the presidents of Albania, Greece, South Africa and Switzerland who were elected in a similar way so I don't see a strong argument why this should be an exception given that it would set an undesirable precedent that some people are waiting for to use in the future. In general, there's no point to post the election of a head of state when there's no stand-alone article documenting the election.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 17:20, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Template:Reply We usually don't post presidential changes in UN member states elected in this way. Do you have a specific reason why this partially recognised and non-UN member state should be an exception (and please make a stronger argument than comparing this ceremonial office to the prime minister of the UK)? This sets an unwanted precedent for other disputed territories (Disclaimer: I have friends from Kosovo and don't have anything against the country's independence but the fact is that it's still not a UN member state and that very fact may encourage snow-balling with nominations about states in similar situation or even regional politics in some large countries.).--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 13:59, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Presidency in Kosovo is not a ceremonial position (see Article 84 of the Kosovan constitution), and they are also the head of state. They are always elected indirectly by the Assembly, however it is always just after a direct election for the Assembly (this year's was 14 February), so the Assembly elections are effectively electing them. Also, check the ITN inclusion criteria. Black Kite (talk) 14:35, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There are two discussions at WT:ITN to consider the same. --LaserLegs (talk) 20:12, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, true. Changed. Alsoriano97 (talk) 13:13, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Not if you didn't add it to the blurb. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 13:24, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I've added an altblurb, although I haven't bolded the election article as no-one has been !voting on it.-- P-K3 (talk) 13:36, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No, don't bold it. It's OK, but shouldn't be the target. Black Kite (talk) 14:36, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Marked ready. Her article is good enough and there is no substantive opposition. Black Kite (talk) 13:19, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Article is comprehensive enough and is well-referenced, and it qualifies. Uses x (talkcontribs) 13:43, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Article is fine, ITNR. Modest Genius talk 14:26, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Template:AddedBagumba (talk) 13:28, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose and Pull. Per precedent of Northern Cyprus, we established that only states in the main part of List of sovereign states are WP:ITN/R. The line which counts here at ITN/R is: Template:Xt. I see no discussion above of the merits of posting this, and given that this is effectively a mostly ceremonial role, I don't think it should be posted.  — Amakuru (talk) 17:41, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    That seems an odd reason to pull. The ITN/R banner was removed three days ago, and no-one withdrew their support. There was still consensus to post.-- P-K3 (talk) 17:50, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree - I admittedly haven't looked into the Northern Cyprus discussion, but I think it's clear from the "Further Information" section on List of sovereign states: Kosovo is recognized by 113 UN Member states, while N. Cyprus is only recognized by Turkey. Kosovo also has de facto control over its claimed territory, which is a strong indicator of sovereignty IMO. I don't have an opinion on inclusion/pulling based on the ceremonial nature of the role, but I think Kosovo is "sovereign enough" to be included. AviationFreak💬 17:54, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    It's not an odd reason to pull at all. Most of the !votes are based on the assertion that it's ITN/R, which the Cyprus precedent suggests it isn't. Very few of the !votes actually addressed the question of significance at all. And I'm sorry, AviationFreak but the whole point of using the "List of sovereign states" article is to give us an objective standard of what counts for ITN/R and what doesn't. Note that if this was the PM of Kosovo, I'd support it in a heartbeat, as someone of true significance within a territory that is under that person's control (as indeed Northern Cyrprus is). But the largely ceremonial post of presdident just isn't that.  — Amakuru (talk) 21:26, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Again, I don't have an opinion on whether to include or pull based on the importance/ceremoniality of the role - My main opinion is that Kosovo is "sovereign enough" to be covered at ITN. I think we agree here, seeing as you would support posting a change in PM of Kosovo. Even if there is currently consensus against posting ITN blurbs relating to, say, Northern Cyprus, that doesn't rule out posting blurbs about other disputed states (in my interpretation, this is what is meant by the phrase "Disputed states and dependent territories should be ... judged on their own merits"). Hope that clears things up! AviationFreak💬 22:34, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Template:Ping sure, yes I understand your point. I did say after the Northern Cyprus debate that we should clarify the rules once and for all on this, because it seems to cause procedural arguments every time it comes up. Personally I think Northern Cyprus, and indeed Kosovo, Taiwan and other places, should be on the list of things we always post, because however much they're disputed they do control real territory with a real population, and act to all intents and purposes like a nation state.  — Amakuru (talk) 08:36, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Cyclone Seroja

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

  • Support a blurb for significant impact once the issues are fixed, oppose ongoing. NoahTalk 00:51, 5 April 2021 (UTC) Fuck it... I'm done putting up with all the bull shit arguments to oppose any significant weather event that happens. We don't need to participate in ITN period if you guys don't want us here. Go ahead and keep posting all the sports stories and awards while ignoring items that are definitely "in the news". We have better things to do then keep arguing with brick wall. Let the more sensible editors comdemn you all when the next Hurricane Katrina occurs and it doesn't get posted. NoahTalk 01:25, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Do you mean like the wall of opposition for the first nomination and lesser but present opposition to the second nomination for what was literally a record breaking Atlantic hurricane season? there was an inconclusive discussion about it. Relax, this will get posted, almost all death toll stories get posted. --LaserLegs (talk) 02:03, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No, it wont get posted. The regime will oppose it in mass and close it before anyone else gets to respond. Nobody wants to cooperate and establish any kind of criteria for weather events. I think it's time the weather projects just leave ITN and focus on more important things. NoahTalk 02:07, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah the "snow close" mentality has got to stop, but you'll see, this will get posted. If not, you could try DYK. These articles are always new, DYK has a high rate of churn, and there is always some bit of trivia to use for a hook. --LaserLegs (talk) 02:23, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
See, it was posted like I knew it would be. Relax. --LaserLegs (talk) 21:58, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Holy shit, calm down. The internet is not serious business. Mlb96 (talk) 03:54, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with this. He needs to calm down, lest we're going to see what happened on February this year. MarioJump83! 14:11, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If this isn't working, then WPTC boycott is the best choice unfortunately. I'll still be involved in the ITN however as the part of WPCE (WikiProject Current events), especially about the events involving my country. MarioJump83! 04:03, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose blurb or ongoing. Storm during storm season does storm things, not uncommon for the Timor sea. Relatively low death toll for a developing country with poor infrastructure. This is no different from an Atlantic hurricane killing 40 in Central America with landslides and flooding. It's sad, it happens. Article isn't terrible by disaster standards. --LaserLegs (talk) 01:00, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
While I acknowledge that my country really has a bad infrastructure, it's important to note that Indonesia is a country of islands, not a single landmass, and Java is very dense for an island, contributing to 56.1 percent of Indonesian population. And the floods affected Timor Leste which is far smaller country than us and was formerly colonized by us, contributing to sorry state of our situation. MarioJump83! 04:10, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In regards to this being an ongoing event, oppose. I don't think Seroja will do much outside Indonesia or Timor Leste. MarioJump83! 04:24, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Template:Re This is what happens when you have over half a year of a specific group of editors opposing (and closing in most cases) every nomination no matter how severe the storm was. Killed over 100? Too bad, it wasn't enough. Crippled a whole state's powergrid and water supply? That's just a normal snowstorm. I'm sorry if I got upset, but this is getting ridiculous when this group comes out and does the same thing every nomination because they WP:IDONTLIKEIT. We tried to discuss with them for criteria, but that discussion was not fruitful in the least. I see no need for myself or my project to participate any further in this toxic environment. We might as well just stop nominating anything here if people don't want us to be here. NoahTalk 13:00, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Here we go again, more toys. The weather fans need to stop this faux indignation (glad to see no repeat of the co-ordinated oppose like we did for the America's Cup nomination though) and suggest that if you and your project don't "like" the way ITNC operates, you do something positive about it rather than these fruitless outbursts. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 13:19, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Template:Re Hi Hurricane Noah, I understand your pain. I've had similar experiences with you in this ITN/C, seeing bias towards certain countries, double standards, and else. My method is just to rant on your own talkpage and Template:Abbr. If you are addicted to Wikipedia and multilingual, try contributing to other Wikipedia. After a while or so, return back here! Please, whatever you do, don't try to blame anybody on "toxic, bias, etc" unless you have sufficient evidence to back it up. And try to rant somewhere else other than in publicly visible place. Thank you... :) --Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 14:48, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Re It's kind of nice that you have a lot of watchers in your talkpage, so your ode has literally a lot of views. --Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 03:16, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I more appreciate having 123 watchers than a lot, given my namesake's incredible 1-2-3 over The Iron Sheik on 1/23 of '84. InedibleHulk (talk) 13:48, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • At ITN we try not to post weather storms or other natural disasters like earthquakes that simply involve disruption of everyday life, unless that disruption is on a massive scale or that it because a major loss of human life. Storms and disasters happen all the time, and many simply knock out power, cause flooding (without loss of life), and other types of property damage but because this is "routine" , we avoid those. It's when there's clearly something more fundamentally critical in the damage and disruption post-storm or disaster that we consider to be significant. Plenty of storms make it to ITN (like this one is definitely going up), we're just not going to post storms with minimal impact even if these may be seen by weather experts as major events. --Masem (t) 15:57, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Venezuelan clashes

[edit]

Template:Atop Template:ITN candidate

  • Weak oppose for now. It's certainly ongoing, but the updates are not long enough for me (last was 10 words) combined with the fact there's not much else to read. I recommend expanding the background, as most of the article is just from news updates of, and reactions to what's happening. Uses x (talkcontribs) 21:43, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Ping Expanded last events a little bit more and added a Background section. --NoonIcarus (talk) 22:37, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@NoonIcarus Is there any information about why the conflict is starting up again after the ceasefire? The article is still missing that. There are a few things that need explanation too, such as what "Infobae" or a "mixed patrol comission" is. Uses x (talkcontribs) 02:21, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Ping Thanks for the ping. The article mentions that "Experts have argued that control of drug trafficking routes is the motive for the clashes", and Colombian President Iván Duque has also declared that the conflict "was between the Venezuelan Cartel of the Suns and the FARC dissidents", but I have avoided placing it in the lead or repeating it to try to keep neutrality. Infobae is an Argentine news website and according to the references, a "mixed patrol comission" performs patrol, recconnaisance and search operations. I have added these details to the article, along with other updates. Notifying editors that voted in the last nomination: Template:Ping --NoonIcarus (talk) 10:30, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I will solely state the following; this is not ongoing-worthy. Fakescientist8000 (talk) 14:10, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose there is a lot of filler in this one (background/reactions). Of the events, two soldiers blew themselves up by accident, four agitators were arrested (by whom, and why?). Looks like the last actual clash was on 3/31 but the updates are thin and border on nonsensical (who is Vladimir Padrino López? What radio transmissions and why are they relevant? Whose armed forces? And WTF is a Tiuna FM Radial Circuit?). --LaserLegs (talk) 01:04, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • weak Oppose - still ongoing. More can happen. for now.BabbaQ (talk) 10:02, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose ongoing Article is ok and well-sourced but I don't think it rises to that of an ongoing article. It was better as a event nom. Dan the Animator 14:02, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose ongoing I agree with Dantheanimator above: would consider a blurb, and in general items like this nominated for Ongoing should start as a blurb and roll onto Ongoing if warranted. Neutral for a blurb right now since I don't think the article clearly explains recent events. SpencerT•C 16:11, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Abot

(Posted) The Boat Race 2021

[edit]

Template:Archive top Template:ITN candidate

Template:Archive bottom

(Closed) Chhattisgarh Maoist attack

[edit]

Template:Atop Template:ITN candidate

The bar for ITN is higher than simply the general notability guideline. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 02:57, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Abot

(Closed) Jordan alleged coup attempt

[edit]

Template:Atop Template:ITN candidate

Seems mainly a celeb/royal foofaraw. – Sca (talk) 14:16, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The Jordanian coup: arglebargle or foofaraw?--LaserLegs (talk) 22:01, 5 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Abot

April 3

[edit]

Template:Cot Portal:Current events/2021 April 3 Template:Cob


(Posted) RD: Arthur Kopit

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

RD: Luo Ying-shay

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

(Posted) RD: Cyprian Kizito Lwanga

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

(Posted) RD: Carla Zampatti

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

April 2

[edit]

Template:Cot Portal:Current events/2021 April 2 Template:Cob


(Posted) RD: April

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

(Posted) Hualien train derailment

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

April 1

[edit]

Template:Cot Portal:Current events/2021 April 1 Template:Cob


RD: Isamu Akasaki

[edit]

Template:ITN candidate

  • Comment: Agree that more work in sourcing is required. It appeared to be hard to find extensive sources in a language that I can understand. Maybe someone fluent in Japanese could help; the Japanese article lists a number of sources, but I can not read them. To rewrite the article to adapt to less sources seems counterproductive. Oceanh (talk) 10:45, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Trial Of Derek Michael Chauvin

[edit]

Template:Atop Template:ITN candidate

Template:Abot