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.
The Salvadoran government opens the
Terrorism Confinement Center, a prison with a capacity of 40,000, amidst a gang crackdown which has arrested over 62,000 people since March 2022.
(Reuters)
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.
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.
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.
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.
Not yet ready A few CN templates. Date/place of birth is uncited, and entire early/non-political life are missing. The prose in political career is bare, but ok enough for our purposes. Prose in the activism section is fine, except for the 2010 contempt charge which needs updating.
Curbon7 (
talk)
15:11, 1 February 2023 (UTC)reply
British sports-fashion retailer
JD Sports says that the stored data of 10 million customers "may have been accessed" in a
cyberattack, including names, addresses, email addresses, phone numbers, order details, and the final four digits of
debit card numbers.
(BBC News)
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.
Almost I think this article is quite close. I don't know much about football, so correct me if I'm wrong, but the general manager is a fairly minor role compared to the same position in baseball, right? If so, I don't think too much more expansion is needed, as I do note that the article already names some prominent players he scouted. Just a few sentences of what he did while the scout/manager of the Dolphins, Falcons, and Chargers (particularly the latter) should suffice. Some spots also need sources.
Curbon7 (
talk)
10:06, 3 February 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
I don't want this to seem over-scrupulous, as we of course don't need the articles to be great or even necessarily good for RD; however, they have to meet a basic threshold of quality. The article is mostly fine for holisticity (wish there was a bit more to his non-superfan life, but it's understandable that sources may not cover this) and sourcing (his date of birth and education are uncited; these are more pressing, as you'll know we can't have uncited material on the main page).
The main issue here is the prose. This is far from the (very basic) level of quality we expect and needs to either go through
WP:GAR to be delisted or needs a ground-up rewrite. To say the article's tone is very informal is an understatement; the entire thing reads like an article on baseball.wikia. That is to say, it doesn't read like an encyclopedia article, it reads like a fan write-up, chock with inside baseball ("making him the only fan for whom the team dedicated a bobble head day"??), weasel words, and general poor phrasing. It is hard to explain because there's not necessarily one specific thing wrong that I can point to, it's kind of just the entire article.
Curbon7 (
talk)
00:22, 31 January 2023 (UTC)reply
@
Curbon7 I have been going through the article and making some edits along the same lines. I think the problem here is that the information in an article is going to be shaped by the information available in the sources, and generally speaking it's going to be Cleveland publications writing about him with a very casual tone.
Sunshineisles2 (
talk)
00:55, 31 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support I've swapped out the DoB with his birth year based on age at death (DoB is commented out so it is still available if a source is found).
Curbon7 (
talk)
14:59, 1 February 2023 (UTC)reply
Support (provided date of birth is correctly cited or removed) – I think the quality of the prose is perfectly fine for a front-page feature like this. It goes into details that other encyclopedic articles are unlikely to contain, and therefore can feel informal or odd, but I think it is acceptable at worst and charming at best. Article is well-cited and beautifully detailed, including his personal life (I'm not sure what else Curbon would want from that section (it lists school, marriage, occupation, volunteer work, and health issues). I think this is a lovely feature! ~
Maplestrip/Mable (
chat)
13:38, 31 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment Someone has updated the article after his death to replace Indians with Guardians in many places. I understand the intent, but it is now factually wrong in many places due to the time frame in which he was active. GreatCaesarsGhost20:16, 31 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
Support. Article has been updated and is well referenced. I think it's already fit for ITN. It will continue to be updated as new information arrives. Very sad news. :(
MSN12102001 (
talk)
13:00, 30 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Article is definitely not ready yet, with all of its one-sentence paragraphs, but with how the death count is spiking up I'm fairly certain it will be posted soon. Very big tragedy.. ~
Maplestrip/Mable (
chat)
15:24, 30 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support - about 2k characters of cited prose is long enough for DYK, and it's also long enough to meet the quality requirements of ITN, IMO.
Levivich (
talk)
15:33, 30 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support alt blurb. First blurb is not grammatical. Notable for sure, article quality is good as is. There are a couple things on the article that need citations, but the article is being actively edited so I assume these will be fixed by the time of posting.
e.b. (
talk)
17:04, 30 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Question: Do reliable sources provide any indication that this is having national or regional consequences? Has this affected the political climate in Pakistan in any way?
Thebiguglyalien (
talk)
17:31, 30 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Posted Went with a variation on the altblurb. "Suicide blast" sounds sensational and a bit weird. Changed it to the terminology 'in the article' and said "suicide bombing". --
Jayron3218:23, 30 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The governor of
Comoé Province reports that 15
corpses, who were among 24 passengers of two
minibuses that departed the provincial capital of
Banfora when suspected
jihadists hijacked the buses in
Linguekoro and coerced the passengers to walk to
Mangodara, were discovered near Linguekoro. The governor also reports that 15 other passengers had been abducted.
(AFP via ABS-CBN News)
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 MLA who was killed (possibly assassinated) by a police officer. Prose and sourcing both need significant work.
Curbon7 (
talk)
18:25, 1 February 2023 (UTC)reply
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: German politician, member of federal parliament from 2002 until his death (however in intensive care from April 2022), worked for traffic and other matters. Most facts were there, but referencing needed work. --
Gerda Arendt (
talk)
12:42, 31 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support Well-cited, and more-or-less holistic enough for our purposes. A minor point of issue is that Kreisvorsitzender is not defined or linked, but this one point isn't that big a deal in the big picture.
Curbon7 (
talk)
06:14, 1 February 2023 (UTC)reply
Please help. It's not linked in German. "Vorsitzender" would literally be president, and "Kreis" means districts. Wiktionary has
Kreisverband for the district level of some organisations, here the CDU party. Is there anything comparable in English, and if, should that be used? --
Gerda Arendt (
talk)
07:28, 1 February 2023 (UTC)reply
I've parenthesized the word in Deutsch and preceded it with "district president"; this can hypothetically be reversed (parenthesize the English word) if you want. Excellent work as usual
Curbon7 (
talk)
14:45, 1 February 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
Not ready. Unfortunately there is no prose on the games whatsoever, not even a description of the final. There needs to be at least a few paragraphs describing what happened at the tournament - tables are not enough.
Modest Geniustalk17:15, 31 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
Not yet ready A number of CN tags. The other sources need to be spot-checked as well, as I have low confidence in them. Too many section headers, need to be condensed down. Article is almost holistic; expansion is needed on his 1996 imprisonment and his career between 1999 and 2009. If available, details on his army career from 1978 to 1986 and his life from 2009 until his death is desirable, but not necessary, as I understand sources may not cover those details.
Curbon7 (
talk)
05:29, 30 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
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.
Oppose It's not an ITNR so the article should be of high quality, but there's very little prose involved including what is needed for championship finales. --
Masem (
t)
16:47, 29 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose on both notability and quality. Not on ITNR, doesn't seem to be excessively popular, and most importantly the article is almost entirely tables with little to no prose.
The Kip (
talk)
17:48, 29 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose on quality Just because it's not on ITNR doesn't mean it can't be posted, and as the top event in field hockey, it has at least a claim to significance. That said, as stated above, the entire article is composed almost entirely of tables with little in the way of prose.
Curbon7 (
talk)
21:05, 29 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Not ready. There's no point in even discussing the significance when the article has no prose on the games. There need to be a few referenced paragraphs explaining what happened at the tournament - tables are not enough.
Modest Geniustalk17:18, 31 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
Wait "A blast recorded in defence ministry which caused minor damage" isn't the clearest English sentence, but it certainly sounds like the opposite of major news to me. The blowback could be huge, especially if bolstered by a video. But you never know how people will react to provocation, the supposed battle to come could also just be one of words.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
06:35, 29 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Already CNN, Fox and Al Arabiya can't agree on which words from IRNA's tweet to replace with which of whose choosing. Are they drones or "small drones"? Them or "the drones"? One was hit by or "struck"? Props to UPI for the relative straight dope, just omitting parts, nice and objective-like.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
06:52, 29 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Wait - Rumours are flying; solid news is still scarce. It currently seems like both Western world media and Iran want to hohum this. Without solid sources, WP is not going to override that. There doesn't seem to be any article on this in fa.Wikipedia - at least according to Wikidata.
Boud (
talk)
12:43, 29 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Wait a few days to see if more information is made available, but definite support if further reporting increases in confidence that it's an intentional attack by another country.
Thebiguglyalien (
talk)
16:36, 29 January 2023 (UTC)reply
No dead, no wounded. Both "sides" agree on that. Damage is more subjective, quantitative not qualitative, and making things seem better and worse than they are is inherent in political news...or entertainment news...human interests, overall.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
06:58, 30 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Article needs updating 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.
Support once expanded. Individual events need prose descriptions. See the
2021 event for a model. With this win, Djokovic is now tied for the most men's Grand Slam titles and holds the record for most individual titles at the Australian Open (10), perhaps these records could be worked into a blurb?
e.b. (
talk)
17:17, 30 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Not ready. Neither the main tournament article, nor those on the men's and women's singles, has a prose summary of the events. There need to be a few referenced paragraphs explaining what happened at the tournament - tables are not enough.
Modest Geniustalk17:21, 31 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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: Austrian soprano, legendary as the 4 loves of Hoffmann in Berlin in 1958 (pictured by
GRuban). There's more detail in the obit, but I'm too tired. --
Gerda Arendt (
talk)
21:59, 1 February 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
Support Appears to be acceptable length and adequately sourced. A lot of the references are in Indonesian but I'm going to AGF here and assume they are reliable in the absence of evidence to the contrary. -
Ad Orientem (
talk)
19:14, 30 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support Well-cited and holistic. The last sentence ("Prior to his death, Amru had suffered stroke for four years") needs to be re-jigged though.
Curbon7 (
talk)
14:39, 1 February 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
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: Australian Olympic canoeist, sports administrator, and member of the International Olympic Committee for almost 30 years.
HiLo48 (
talk)
04:53, 30 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Not yet ready Article is well-cited, but is quite short of being considered holistic and is hardly updated to reflect his death. If available, details should be added about his life before becoming an Olympian, his competition in the 1960 and 1968 Olympics, and his life after 2002. A primary example is the quote: "He was key to getting an Australian Olympic team to the Olympic Games Moscow 1980 against all requests for a boycott"; this is a key biographical detail that is not mentioned at all in the prose besides that condolence. The article also makes no mention of his death besides one paragraph of condolences (but again does not explicitly say he died on such and such date in such and such place); as such, I don't think it meets the updated requirement. The article doesn't obviously need to be GA-level, but it can't be a glorified stub either.
Curbon7 (
talk)
05:20, 30 January 2023 (UTC)reply
To shorten: brief details should be added about the '60 and '68 Olympics; his role in the 1980 Olympics needs to be included; his death needs to be included. These 3 points should be fairly easily achievable.
Curbon7 (
talk)
09:46, 3 February 2023 (UTC)reply
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: Petr Pavel has won the race according to projections and early results. Well PM is the one in charge which does not make this ITNR, but the president holds significant appointment and foreign policy power. President Zeman overused his powers, making the presidency pretty powerful. Very watched in Europe by the news and many observers.
BastianMAT (
talk) 14:33, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
744cody (
talk)
16:42, 25 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Ok I just looked at
Wikipedia:ITN/R and I'm not very sure now whether or not this qualifies as ITN/R, so I'll remove the label. I'll still support on notability even if not ITN/R, but the article is not yet ready.The ⬡ BestagonT/C14:43, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
@
The Bestagon check now, it's still 99.99% reporting (there's always a few problem wards that take forever) but the main figures (58-42 and turnout over 70) are staying where they are and are already being reported in RS. –
filelakeshoe (
t /
c)
🐱16:13, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support. A presidential election by a popular vote should certainly count as ITN/R, even for countries where the president holds limited power. If our ITN/R guidelines say something else, they should be changed/clarified. In any case, support this item on notability. Both bolded articles appear to be in sufficiently good shape for posting.
Nsk92 (
talk)
17:04, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Weak support This is a decently significant election, and it probably should qualify for being a successful candidate. However, it should be noted how few powers the Czech president really has, the impact on the country because of this election is likely to be minimal. Also, I believe the alternative blurb would be better to be used.
Quinby (
talk)
18:30, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Changes in the holder of the office which administer the executive of their respective state/government, in those countries which qualify under the criteria above, as listed at
List of current heads of state and government... President of Czech Republic is the head of state and thus does administer the executive office of the state, plus he is the commander in chief of the armed forces, another executive position. Heads of state are ITNR.
Levivich (
talk)
20:25, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
But he does not administer the executive; the head of government does. The monarch in the UK is the head of state; but he is not a member of the executive and does not administer it. --
RockstoneSend me a message!20:30, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Note for admins (cc @
Tone), the file in the suggestion has questions surrounding its potential copyright. I'd suggest File:Gen. Petr Pavel (2018) (cropped).jpg should be used instead, as is on the 2023 election page.
Quinby (
talk)
01:01, 29 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Weak Oppose -- This is not ITN/R, as the President of the Czech Republic is not the head of government. ITN/R says: "Changes in the holder of the office which administer the executive". The President of the Czech Republic does not administer the executive, the Prime Minister does. Switching from ITN/R yes to no. I do however see discussion of this in the news, and the fact that he was a former general means there is something more notable here than "new President". --
RockstoneSend me a message!20:17, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Elections of the Heads of State like the Czech president are not ITNR. This doesn't prevent it from being included in ITN, it wouldn't be the first time.
_-_Alsor (
talk)
21:12, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support - The President in Czechia is far more powerful than ceremonial leaders you see in many parliamentary democracies, even holding veto powers similar to the USA. This is a major change - I see no reason to not post this, especially given the international coverage.
Nfitz (
talk)
21:35, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support, obviously Both articles are in good shape and seems like a significant election which has European-wide consequences (mostly on the Babis aspect).
Curbon7 (
talk)
00:27, 29 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support In a normal living or dead person's article, an unsourced paragraph revolving around a claim like In January 1993, his unit was sent to evacuate a French military base, where French soldiers were under siege by Serbian troops would be unacceptable, but this is an elected politician we're talking about here, the sort of person who doesn't even need to meet GNG.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
05:35, 29 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Posting. I am bolding just the election article, some paragraphs in Pavel's article could do with source improvement. --Tone08:44, 29 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I like how the current one doesn't have a gigantic and irrelevant NATO logo in it. Not knocking NATO, but the Czech people have very little people power there. This guy here (who looks bright enough to me) is the guy they more or less chose to lead the way.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
08:54, 30 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Indeed. It's a fine picture for his article, just irrelevant to this election. He probably wasn't elected in the currently pictured shirt, either, but that draws way less attention to itself.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
07:21, 31 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
Comment Regardless of whether or not this meets the significance threshold (which I would assume it does), all three bolded articles have pretty fundamental issues when it comes to sourcing, holisticity, and possibly
WP:BLPCRIME.
Curbon7 (
talk)
06:34, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I'd also like to point out that there is an ongoing discussion about merging the first two targets. This should be resolved before posting, assuming that consensus develops that the item is notable for IT. The ⬡ BestagonT/C06:44, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Caution I'm not a BLPCRIME extremist, and there is nothing wrong with noting the charges against high-profile murder suspects. But you can't say they killed him yet, as the current blurb does. Not allowed, anyway, it's prejudicial.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
07:09, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose as currently written. There don't appear to have been 'riots' - our own article says one protestor, at one protest, was arrested for jumping on and damaging a police car. The editorial bias involved in regarding that as 'riots' is pretty stark.
GenevieveDEon (
talk)
08:15, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose again. Police abuse in the US is routine and this is not a local newspaper. Not serious riots with international interest/impact.
_-_Alsor (
talk)
09:56, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The coverage this is getting is way beyond "local newspaper", or we wouldn't be here. And "international impact" has never been an ITN criteria.
Pawnkingthree (
talk)
16:19, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I'm not out here demanding global significance. National news can be well worth including. But this is a developing story, and the current framing (not to mention the premature fork into three articles) is unhelpful. I think we need to wait and see for a bit.
GenevieveDEon (
talk)
11:56, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Opposed - Purely internal US matter, and no evidence of outsized or extraordinary impact or consequence. Not notable for the vast majority of English speakers. If ITN started featuring US police abuse, it'd be able to feature nothing else.
Melmann11:31, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I don't think 'purely internal matter' is a knock-down argument in cases like this. An internal matter can be worthy of ITN if it's big enough. But I don't think this is, yet, and attempts to talk it up with words like 'riot' are counter-productive.
GenevieveDEon (
talk)
11:56, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Can we PLEASE STOP using arguments like "this is an internal matter"? What part of the admonishment in the rules above that say "Please do not oppose an item solely because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. This applies to a high percentage of the content we post and is generally unproductive" are people failing to read? --
RockstoneSend me a message!20:23, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I think many tend to immediately discount US stories as a sort of "counter culture" to how American-centric the internet can be at times, but the USA is so central to global institutions and orders, domestic politics essentially become international from the get-go. Something like this can have far-reaching effects
PrecariousWorlds (
talk)
22:27, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Wait per PrecariousWorlds, but I don't think that opposing for the lack of global significance is valid. In fact, a lot of
WP:ITN/R items lack any global significance, but are still considered perfectly notable. The ⬡ BestagonT/C12:47, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Wait Nothing yet of the scale of the George Floyd protests, in terms of both scale and violence levels. Could escalate but premature to do that now. --
Masem (
t)
13:20, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support - top international news for the third straight day. Nationwide protests last night. More protests planned tonight. ITN stale. There are so many nominations we could be posting right now, but nah, let's just update once a month because "global significance".
Levivich (
talk)
15:14, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose unless it escalates into a George Floyd level movement or if riots take place. There are more significant examples of ongoing civil unrest in Bangladesh, Ghana, Haiti, Lebanon, Spain, Sudan, and Tunisia, among others. The Tyre Nichols unrest is very minor overall, certainly not significant enough for ITN.
Thebiguglyalien (
talk)
15:54, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support - world-wide news, and this nonsense about international impact is just that, nonsense. We have a an entrenched contingent at ITN that refuses to allow what is widely covered world-wide to appear because it happened in the United States. What pray tell was the international impact of
2022 St Helier explosion. But things that are widely covered across the world, proving the lie in the claim that there is no international interest, cannot be included for reasons that the guidelines to this page expressly say are not valid. Please do not item 2: Oppose an item solely because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. These opposes should be tossed out wholesale, and this place needs an overhaul to actually include what is provably widely covered material on the front pages of news sources around the world. Front page of Reuters, BBC, Le Monde, El Pais, Al-Jazeera (Arabic). It is bs that a set of users have effectively claimed ITN as a member of the EU. It doesnt have to matter to you if this is in the news. It is however in the news, it is widely covered, around the world, and it should be posted here. nableezy -
15:58, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
We are an encyclopedia that covers a wide range of topics, and not just a US/UK news ticker, which is what happens if you want to follow only the breadth of coverage of a topic as you suggest. That's why we repeat that we are not a news ticker and not simply a mirror of what happens on the front pages of major papers. If you want to work in that space, that's what Wikinews is for, not an encyclopedia.
Masem (
t)
16:26, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
That has not been true no matter how many times you have repeated it without basis. Wikipedia is not a news ticker. In the news is literally about directing our readers to topics they have seen, wait for it, in the news. If you dont want to cover things in the news then go help out at DYK, or at FAC, or on this day. This however remains the portion of the main page meant to help our readers find our coverage on the things that are widely covered, once again all together now, in the news. nableezy -
17:10, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
That's not what ITN says, it is to show quality articles on topics that happen to be in the news. Being in the news is a necessary but not sufficient element prior to posting. We are still selective because this is the front page of an encyclopedia and we need to strive to avoid the media's systematic bias against most topics that are not directly US or UK related. We want a broad selection of topics, not the narrow selection that "following the news headlines" would generate. It should also be obvious that not every major world trending news headline is the basis for a WP article. All that is that ITN is tuned to capturing encyclopedia topics, not following the news.
Masem (
t)
02:47, 29 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Topics are encyclopedia topics by virtue of having an encyclopedia article about them. If you feel they are not encyclopedic then you should be arguing for their deletion. Is anybody seriously arguing this is not an encyclopedic topic? But we must not be reading the same page.
WP:ITN says its purpose is to: To help readers find and quickly access content they are likely to be searching for because an item is in the news. And despite your admonishment that I should instead look to Wikinews, what it actually says about that is Unlike Wikipedia's sister project Wikinews, Wikipedia is not an online newspaper and does not accept original works of journalism or first-hand reports. However, many Wikipedians are motivated to create and update encyclopedic articles of timely interest. ITN originated in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks, when entries were created and put on the Main Page within minutes of the attacks. The entries led to an infusion of interest by editors in creating a Main Page section that linked to articles providing readers the context behind the news This is not about producing original works of journalism, it is about directing our readers to our encyclopedia articles about topics they are likely to be searching forbecause they are in the news. nableezy -
04:06, 29 January 2023 (UTC)reply
But we are still talking encyclopedic articles, not topics that the news media feel is important. We're talking content featured on the main page, so it should represent some of out best quality encyclopedic content. And unless we work against media systematic bias, we will end up never featuring topics that are good quality articles outside the English-speaking world while focusing too much on relatively common and repeating events that the news media love to focus on.
Masem (
t)
15:38, 29 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Youre confusing factions here. Masem isnt one of the editors who reflexively supports anything UK related and opposes anything US related. He does however have these very longstanding and, in my opinion, very wrong ideas on some things related to what the standard for inclusion here should be, which as best as I can tell is either being ITNR or having some wide-ranging impact on several countries, and some other quirks related to his reading of BLP and DUE, but you are barking up the wrong tree with that question to him. But there are editors here who would have voted against including the assassination of MLK here as racist violence against Black people is common in America, and this one man did not have any world-wide impact, so include in RD, but when the riots start potentially blurb. nableezy -
21:19, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Not as often as we posted about news in the UK, actually. We even posted about the riots in Northern Ireland last year, and the fact that Sinn Féin won in the Northern Ireland parliament; even though Northern Ireland is not a sovereign state, and the riots were insignificant. --
RockstoneSend me a message!00:20, 29 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The USA is so central to global institutions and orders, domestic politics essentially become international from the get-go. Something like this can have far-reaching effects
PrecariousWorlds (
talk)
22:29, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I agree that domestic politics often have international implications due to the fact that the US is the world's sole superpower, but at the same time, there are domestic events that happen in the US that while important, don't warrant a blurb. Great example: the
2022 Florida Gubernatorial Election saw Ron DeSantis win in a landslide; while his victory annoyed and upset me greatly (since I live in Florida) and has important implications at both the state and national levels (Ron DeSantis is probably going to try to run in 2024), the event is not worthy of ITN. --
RockstoneSend me a message!00:20, 29 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Although I agree that the "global impact" arguments are invalid, we should still wait as the level of the protests so far is nowhere near to the
George Floyd protests, for example. (Note that GF should not be the standard for protests, but there has not been any of the unrest or chaos that would make these protests more "postable". Until then, they're just another protest movement.)The ⬡ BestagonT/C16:34, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Do you realize the GF protests were the largest and longest lasting BLM protests in history? Why does that have to reach that level to be ITN? Why is multi-day international coverage and nationwide protests not enough, it also has to be record-breaking?
Levivich (
talk)
16:38, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Yet you also said it's nowhere near, and that it's just another protest movement unless there is unrest and chaos. Think about what you're saying: nationwide BLM protests receiving international coverage is not news unless there is violence? White man gets elected: instant ITN. White guy plays bar games (snooker, darts): automatic ITN for a week. But people of color protest? Nah, it's gotta be violent or it's not news. Woman PM resigns? Not news. White man replaces her? Put his picture up for a week! This is systemic bias, again. Thinking BLM protests aren't newsworthy unless they're riots is systemic bias. At ITN. Again. And it's not just you, look at the oppose vote just above: oppose unless there's riots or it's the level of George Floyd. This is sheer bias, it's not logic, it's not the application of our global consensus, it doesn't advance the underlying purpose of ITN, it's just plain bias.
Levivich (
talk)
16:45, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Ok. I was wrong in making the comparison with GF was wrong, and in fact almost my entire above comment was a catastrophe, so I'll just strike it. However, I never intended to say that BLM protests aren't newsworthy in their own right - this applies to all protests, even if they are thousands strong. Otherwise, the ITN section would feature nothing else. Let the story develop, and if the protests persist, then we can post. And by the way, I'm not white, not American, not European. The ⬡ BestagonT/C16:56, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Levivich's point is valid; Jacinda Ardern's resignation was only posted once Chris Hipkins was identified as the successor, despite a significant number of calls to post sooner rather than later, and Chris Hipkins both received first mention and the picture in the blurb. Not a good look if we're trying to avoid a sexism bias. 🌈WaltCip-(
talk)16:32, 29 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Ghali may not be the most Anglo-Saxon Protestant man out there, but if he's not white (by your foolish American standards), I don't know who is.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
05:48, 30 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Okay, what stories do you think should've been posted instead of these? Was the Pope, the leader of a religion with more than 1.3 billion followers, dying not notable? Is the Darts Championship not in ITN/R? Rioters storming a national congress? 68 people killed in an aircraft crash?
That's an entirely different discussion, about whether or not ITN should even exist in its current state. Also, almost every one of those articles was listed under RD.
Now I actually agree with many of the nominations you cited(most of all the Speaker of the House election), and I will concede there's a little bit of Anti-Americanism in ITN, but I do believe this is done in good faith to try and balance the stories we post from just being a US Domestic politics news ticker.
I think we're having a discussion here on whether or not nominations need global significance to be posted, and I would agree with you that we should post more local stories. My own personal opinion is that we should post what is, quite literally, In The News. But, a lot of the nominations you mentioned weren't quite notable or of quality to be posted to the front page of the sixth largest website in the world.
Damar Hamlin wasn't posted because A. We aren't a celebrity news ticker, and B. The nomination in question made it sound like he already died, when it wasn't the case. The US and Philippine closures were small, one-day long events that did not have wide reaching significance, and by the time the story was voted on and the article expanded, everyone had already moved on. The Australian helicopter crash, while a tragedy, did not meet our (somewhat morbid and odd) death criterias for posting. Based off of precedent, we only post tragic loss of life if they are of significant scale, if we were to post every awful loss of life, it would flood ITN. Comet C/2022 E3 is probably going to be posted in the next few days as the comet makes its closest approach. The Afghanistan cold wave was not of sufficient quality (And I'll add I nominated this story), one small group in Russia being dissolved didn't meet notability criteria, and was already sort of covered by the ongoing crisis in Russia and Ukraine. In regards to Jacinda Ardern, we still would've posted her successor if she was a woman, and I would also bring up we posted Jacinda Ardern being
elected. And finally, the Jenin and Jerusalem violence is literally ready to be posted.
I can see your point about Anti-Americanism(which I attribute to a push back against the American-centric Internet) but generally I have not seen evidence of a widespread bias against women or minorities in the stories we post, and for the most part, I believe people are acting in
Good Faith, and acknowledge that this is a divisive nomination and there are many arguments for and against that people have put better than I could, which don't come down to Bad Faith or plain bias.
PrecariousWorlds (
talk)
16:35, 30 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I can not understand why in particular the images section of ITN draws so much ire. It should be the last thing we are concerned with, yet some people seem to want to make it their singular object of ire. The seemed suggestion that we are being biased against events involving minorities and women using an arbitrary timeframe where it just so happened that none were shown in a picture was absurd, whether the bias be "systemic" or not. In fact, it's probable that NONE of the blurbs that you noted would have been accompanied by such images as well, and either way the lack of such shouldn't be an indication of bias.
DarkSide830 (
talk)
20:09, 30 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Levivich: Are you suggesting that we wouldn't have posted it if Arden had been succeeded by a woman? Or that we we'll stop posting an ITN/R if a Black person wins a sporting event? Or maybe that we'll support posting a few hundred people protesting something if they're white? Not only are you casting
WP:ASPERSIONs, but you're casting them in a way that's not even plausible. If you continue to accuse me of opposing on the basis of race, then I fully intend to open an ANI thread.
Thebiguglyalien (
talk)
03:24, 30 January 2023 (UTC)reply
@
Thebiguglyalien: Neither I nor anyone else is accusing you or anyone else of opposing on the basis of race.
Systemic bias is a result, not an intent. My fuller comments about Arden are in the thread about her; ITN didn't think her resignation was worthy of posting, but her successor was worthy of posting. Similarly, five police officers being charged with murdering an unarmed black man is not deemed worthy unless it leads to a movement or riots, in your words. It's not that you are opposing on the basis of race; you are clearly opposing on the basis of your personal opinion about what is important and what is not important. You are not basing your !vote on what reliable sources are writing (which is what you should be basing your vote on, see Snow Rise's excellent explanation below). Because you and others are !voting based on personal opinion and not based on reliable sources, the result is things like, what I posted above, that this month we had a picture of a white guy for 18 days and a picture of a non-white guy for 2 days, and no pictures of women at all. This isn't because we had so many nominations of white guy news; it's because too many of us are voting based on personal opinions, and our personal opinions are unavoidably infected by systemic bias as a result of the culture we live in (far more so than mainstream media, which also has systemic bias, but at least has some built-in protections against it, which we lack).
Levivich (
talk)
05:26, 30 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I think my point stands. The same thing would have happened if Arden was succeeded by a woman or if the protests were about economic issues. The only difference is that no one would be making claims of "bias". Nonviolent protests of a few hundred people almost never have sustained notability, and we shouldn't post them just on the off chance that they might. The thing that was predicted in RS didn't happen. If we post this, then there are at least a dozen other protests going on around the world that we should post as well. Now if we just nominated whatever was on the front page of the BBC without regard for
sustained notability, that would create a clear systemic bias.
Thebiguglyalien (
talk)
05:53, 30 January 2023 (UTC)reply
If Adern had been succeeded by a woman, the same thing would have happened, and it would still be systemic bias, and I'd still be complaining about it. You're missing the point, re-read what is wrote: the systemic bias in that situation was ITN deciding that the resignation wasn't important enough to post until there was a successor. It's the failure to recognize what the RS recognized: that the resignation of a female PM is significant -- more so than just a change in PM. The result is systemic bias because it was highly likely that the successor would be male. That's why it's systemic bias, not personal bias. The system overlooks the unique aspect of it being a female PM resigning, but it doesn't overlook the ordinary aspect of a change in PM (which overwhelmingly involves men, since that's the world we live in).
Back to this nom: it's not about the protests. It's about the
killing of Tyre Nichols. That's the important story. That's what the world's media has been writing about for the past four (almost five now) days in a row. The failure to recognize that police being charged with murdering an unarmed black man as important, unless there are "George Floyd level" protests, or riots, is systemic bias. It's the failure to recognize this event as important, even though it is important, even though reliable sources all agree it's important, because we are working in a system (here, ITN) that has biased results (like way over emphasizing white guy news to the exclusion of news about non-white-male people). There is no basis in policy, no basis in reliable sources, for suggesting this killing isn't worth posting to ITN. There is no "must be a movement or riots" rule or even a principle from which such a rule could be drawn. Focusing on the protests and not on Tyre Nichols is an example of systemic bias. Some are saying this is common--the violence is common, but the video, and the charges, are not common. Failing to recognize this as extraordinary is the systemic bias of which I speak.
We post the darts champion's picture for days (white guy), but police being charged with murdering an unarmed black man, brutally, on video, isn't important enough unless there are historic protests (not "just" nationwide protests)? I'm sorry but if we make such decisions, we are valuing ordinary white people news over and above extraordinary black people news. It's just like Adern/Hipkins: we post ordinary men's news but don't post extraordinary women's news. This has become a very serious problem at ITN, IMO.
Levivich (
talk)
06:10, 30 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The death happened 23 days ago (a week and a half before the oldest ITN item). Over the past four or five, the story's been arrests, video and state-sanctioned protests. That's not to say the death isn't the root of these problems, but the nom and the news are too closely timed to ignore here.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
06:19, 30 January 2023 (UTC)reply
For those following along at home, this is a reply to the first two paragraphs above. The third came later. It's clearer now that Levi already gets how the charges and video are bigger than the everyday police violence. And yes, nationwide protests are historic. That's why we write about them.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
06:47, 30 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I see your point, and even I have to admit it feels a bit weird placing higher priority on a darts championship for posting rather than the death of a man, but at the same time, if we were to post every tragic murder, or protest, that's literally all we would post.
PrecariousWorlds (
talk)
11:50, 30 January 2023 (UTC)reply
OK. Instead of posting every tragic murder or protest, how about we post just the ones that make international news for multiple days, like this one? How about we just post the ones where the President of the United States gives a speech about it, like this one? How about we just post the murders that lead to nationwide protests, like this one? How about just the ones where the article receives a million page views in the first couple days... like this one? Supporting this nom does not require changing any rules or even stretching the imagination. Opposing this nom does however require closing our eyes, both to our rules, to what's happening in the ITN box, to what our readers and the rest of the world are looking for, to the very purpose of ITN, to the very purpose of Wikipedia.
Levivich (
talk)
14:07, 30 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Lots of things happen in the US that lead to international coverage and the press talking about, we don't post every one since that would set an undue bias on US events. We also carry little about page views, since we are not newspaper dependent on that to keep out of the red ink. And if we only post the most popular topics, then by TOP25, we should be posting about Avatar 2, The Last of Us, and several other pop culture topics.
There is literally only one paragraph in the article about protests, and scanning news, there really isn't much at a national or international level about the protests that did happen. That is, while the press were gearing up for something as dire as the George Floyd protests, that simply didn't materialize in that expected manner.. what protests their were after the video release were tame. Thus the story here is not about the protests, but simply the arrest if the officers for murder, which is not the type if story we cover at ITN.
Masem (
t)
14:24, 30 January 2023 (UTC)reply
@
Nableezy: You and I have been normally on diametrically opposing sides when it comes to ITN/C, but I couldn't agree with you more. You hit the nail right on the head. 🌈WaltCip-(
talk)17:02, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
This blurb reads as a little sensationalist. Protests have not "erupted" - there have been a few and each have been of relatively small scale. I'm fine waiting, but as of now I would be opposed to this nom.
DarkSide830 (
talk)
17:28, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Switching my vote to oppose now, more or less per Masem, and also seeing as I feel the long-term impact of this incident really hasn't been substantiated.
DarkSide830 (
talk)
03:16, 31 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support -- for all those opposing, would you oppose if this was happening in the UK? It seems to me that this more than meets the requirements to post; it is indeed "in the news" by any metric. Stop with the anti-Americanism. --
RockstoneSend me a message!20:23, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Big difference: in the UK (in Europe in general), this doesn't usually happen. If it happened in Brazil, would you support it? I certainly wouldn't.
_-_Alsor (
talk)
21:13, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
What part of this story is it that you think usually happens in America, besides the initial beating of an unarmed Black man by police. Because it is unusual that there is video, that the police are fired, charged with murder, or that the video is released. It is unusual for multiple cities to have protests related to that video on one night. Which part of this is usual to you? nableezy -
21:23, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I don't take the country into consideration when deciding significance. For something of a political nature, you might consider scope, impact, or duration, among other things:
The number of people directly affected is low. I would expect hundreds of thousands if not millions of people to be directly affected for it to be posted on the basis of scope.
There is no evidence of significant short-term impact. It's not likely that Memphis is going to be plunged into anarchy or have to undergo significant reconstruction, so it shouldn't be posted on the basis of impact.
There is no evidence that this will still be significant or relevant in
WP:TWENTYYEARS, so there's no argument for duration.
If any of these three things changes, then I would strongly reconsider my oppose !vote. Compare the Peru protests, for example, which brought parts of the country to a standstill and plausibly may have affected national-level governance. Anti-Americanism is certainly a problem, and it should be prohibited on Wikipedia just like any other bigotry, but I don't think this is it.
Thebiguglyalien (
talk)
23:43, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The disbanding is interesting, but it's a local task force. If it was the entire state law enforcement apparatus, I'd probably consider it significant. And I said "hundreds of thousands", not "hundreds". The fact that each of these protests are only a few hundred people essentially confirms to me that this doesn't reach the level of significance I'd expect for an ITN post.
Thebiguglyalien (
talk)
16:02, 29 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support Major news, global RS coverage. I will remind users that !opposing "solely because the event is only relating to a single country" is invalid.
Davey2116 (
talk)
21:02, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose Impacts seem exaggerated. Riots? Looking around, I see reports of his death - which may be notable. But nothing about riots, and the protests seem relatively peaceful. I am seeing lots of coverage - but not about riots. Did we do a RD for this?
Nfitz (
talk)
21:19, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
And the exact opposite guideline is in effect after much discussion at RD's parent article. If a person's name is in the title of a death article, they don't get removed at the end of the month. Any interpretations of BLP1E weigh less than Deaths in 20xx rules, to me.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
05:12, 29 January 2023 (UTC)reply
• Oppose unfortunately, police brutality like this is fairly common in the United States, and there don't seem to be full-on riots yet. Protests like this is also fairly common in the U.S.
Editor 5426387 (
talk)
02:31, 29 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment I'm neutral on blurbing the death, but including the protests seems a bit disingenuous to me. So far they are very small scale (the article talks about "75 people", "a dozen protestors", and 3 arrests) and quite localized. On the other hand, we can't include the indictment of the officers because of BLP.
YD407OTZ (
talk)
04:29, 29 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I also dont think anything in BLP prevents us from saying four officers were charged with murder when they verifiably have been charged with murder. We arent saying they are guilty of murder, but it is an unambiguous fact they have been charged. nableezy -
05:06, 29 January 2023 (UTC)reply
ALT III Precise, concise and fair in its limited presumptions. If I have to nitpick, I'd only bolden the protests article instead of the death. The death is kind of stale.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
05:02, 29 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support: The impact is high enough for ITN. For those who say this is common in US; maybe, but this one is exceptional due to footage release showing the police savage behavior and the fact that significant reactions were resulted (FBI director said he was "appalled" after watching the video!!!). Also, given the
Brown and
George Floyd experiences, and dozens of others, this one is even more news worthy. Ha? they did it again? Wow !--
Mhhosseintalk15:23, 29 January 2023 (UTC)reply
You say "they did it again", but the consensus among criminologists is that this sort of phenomenon happens rather frequently in nearly every state, but it goes unreported due to lack of video evidence. That said, this is of course newsworthy due to the national fervor associated with its aftermath. 🌈WaltCip-(
talk)16:34, 29 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment It would be advisable to wait for sometime before posting this, to see if the protests prolong. Blurb and alt-blurb appear too verbose and exaggerative, the ones after these should be preffered.
Gotitbro (
talk)
17:06, 29 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment honestly, the fact that we haven't posted this, when it's the headline news story across the world, makes us look silly. I'm not sure why there is such a strong anti-American bias in ITN, but it is annoying. --
RockstoneSend me a message!21:53, 29 January 2023 (UTC)reply
No one here will look like a fool for a decision to support or oppose a ITN nom, and anyone reader who believes not posting a nom to ITN reduces our credibility is probably coming here for news and we are not a reporter of news.
DarkSide830 (
talk)
22:34, 30 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose — The protests are not that notable. However, I'll change my vote to ongoing if there are continued protests, but that has so far not been demonstrated.
Strong support. I will grant you that I do not check in on ITN all that often, but every time I have of late, I have been struck by just how completely un-anchored from
WP:WEIGHT and
WP:OR process here has become: instead of !votes rooted in coverage and RS, I invariably find the majority of positions (supporting and opposing entries, to be fair) more likely to be predicated in the completely subjective value-judgment assessments of editors as to why the subject is or is not "important" enough to mention--or sometimes based in thinly veiled rationalizations for the same. Police abuses (even those accompanied by protests, massive media attention, exceptional and noteworthy action by authorities at local, state, and federal levels, and significant political impacts) aren't warranted for inclusion unless the protests devolve into riots? Since when? Why? Where is this anywhere codified in policy or other formalized community consensus? What an arbitrary, ad-hoc, and completely irrelevant-under-our-policies argument.
Likewise, purely domestic/"internal" U.S. issues don't warrant inclusion? That's another one I see conveniently reached for as a thin cover for
WP:IDONTLIKEIT (or more precisely IT'SNOTHINGBIGTOME), but again, where has the community ever enshrined this principle that "only subjects of global significance" are fit for ITN? If there's been a properly vetted change to a guideline regarding ITN in this respect, I'll be happy to eat some crow once someone shows it to me, but lacking that, this argument too is completely divorced from policy and established best practice on this project. (Edit: I just reviewed the current wording
WP:ITN and discovered that not only are such arguments not endorsed by the guideline, but they are specifically identified as low-quality arguments to be avoided). As for the also prevalent position that
WP:NOTNEWS somehow operates to keep mention of recent events out of the In the News section of the main page, that position is so manifestly, obviously, and profoundly obdurate that I don't even know how to approach someone making such an argument.
All of which is to say that the context of ITN is not so unique that the arguments here can abrogate or ignore our normal content policies. The only relevant evidence anyone should be advancing is that which is based in the volume and depth of coverage in sourcing, not idiosyncratic opinions directly from our editorial corps' mental processes as to why this subject is or is not "really important in the grander scheme of things". You think that "the media" is blowing the story out of proportion? Oh well, too bad--that is exactly as much an
WP:OR argument here as it would be on the talk page for relevant articles. You know what we call "the media" in contexts such as this?
WP:RELIABLE SOURCES--you know, the stuff we are supposed to be basing our content on, rather than our individual, personal opinions?
In those terms, this is unambiguous: this is front page news on papers across the U.S. and well beyond and is getting similar coverage on the airwaves, on online news pages, and new media: American news constitutes a relatively limited part of my personal media diet, and I see this story everywhere in the global press. Yes, more prominent in the anglophone sphere, of course, but hardly relegated to U.S. domestic press. And again,
WP:ITN specifically notes that the existence or absence of major coverage in international press is a bad argument for or against inclusion of a particular topic, and that the volume, breadth, and depth of overall coverage is what is important. But even were international coverage a prerequisite, it would still be handily met here, by miles. This should be a
WP:SNOW call for any editor basing their !vote on an objective WEIGHT test rather than a subjective personal assessment of the "actual importance" of the topic. SnowRise let's rap03:14, 30 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I could not have said it better myself. It seems like there's a contingent of Wikipedia that is simply unwilling to consider any actual news from the US to be "worthy" of ITN, even though this same contingent was fine with posting non-news from elsewhere, especially the UK. It's like yelling against the wind. I'm sympathetic to the fact that not every news story (or even most news stories) which are important in the US should be blurbed, but the only way someone can possibly believe that this story does not rise to the level of importance to merit a blurb is if they're ignoring the obvious; I don't mean any disrespect by that comment, but that's just how I see it. It makes Wikipedia look detached from reality. --
RockstoneSend me a message!03:37, 30 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support I generally oppose "routine" US stories such as most mass shootings because the vast majority are in the news (in the rest of the world) for a very short amount of time - purely because they're so regular. But this was top of the page in reliable sources for quite a few days - it does seem to have dropped off today, though it's still the 2nd story after the Pakistani bombing on BBC World News. I think it passes.
Black Kite (talk)14:15, 30 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I actually tend to think there is no consensus, and that if further participation doesn't occur, an admin will likely close it as such. Also, there are a god-awful high number of blurbs to pick from.--🌈WaltCip-(
talk)13:42, 31 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Of all the numbers in the multiple choice world,
seven is probably the least ungodliest, and as a man with a rainbow connection, I'd expect higher praise of it from you. You're right that more than three options isn't conducive to helping a group that already disagrees agree in time, though. If that's what you meant.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
13:56, 31 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Sure, the record high inflation & Ukraine war both heavily involve the US and have been receiving international coverage for months, if not years.
Banedon (
talk)
06:04, 1 February 2023 (UTC)reply
Seriously, those are examples of stories from the US? You realize the first one is happening everywhere and the second one is not happening in the US?
Levivich (
talk)
06:08, 1 February 2023 (UTC)reply
Support Now that some time has passed, it is clear this was a significant event with a significant response. Admin discretion on whichever of the seven(!) blurbs they favor.
Curbon7 (
talk)
15:19, 1 February 2023 (UTC)reply
But nothing significant has happened. There was some peaceful protests, but nowhere close to the level of protests that the George Floyd protests created (like all of 70 protestors in New Orleans yesterday). There is yet no convictions yet. There are more serious and sizable protests happening in other places in the world (like UK and France related to labor policies) that actually have a larger impact on the world than these, at this point. Maybe if the conviction comes down and these officers are acquitted, we're going to see the South and major urban centers light up and be larger than any prior events, at which point those protests would be ITN. But that's then, not now.
I cannot stress more than enough that we (en.wiki) are not a newspaper, and when it comes to ITN we cannot follow what the news media thinks is important (otherwise, as I've pointed out, we've be flush with pop culture topics and US/UK daily politics, aka we are not a news ticker), nor are we here to serve readers that are coming here looking for newspaper content, at least at the cost of a quality encyclopedic article, Writing encyclopedia articles is at odds with trying to write like for newspaper (writing in broad, long-term approach rather than the day-by-day nitty gritty), which is why NOT#NEWS exists. We have people trying to detail the events in this case too narrowly (unlike the Floyd protests, there is almost no long-term impact of the day-to-day protests that need covering). Particularly when we consider how limited we can cover non-US and UK topics. I'm not saying we stymie ourselves in crafting articles on clearly notable events in the US and UK, but we should be writing as if they occurred 10 years ago and the small details are simply unnecessary, so that we have similar equity in article quality for notable events in other non-US/UK countries.
Masem (
t)
04:25, 2 February 2023 (UTC)reply
Significant things that happened: (1) an unarmed black man was beaten to death by police officers, (2) it was captured on multiple videos, which were publicly released, (3) the police officers lied about it in their reports, as we learned in the last day or so, (4) the police officers are being charged with murder, and (5) this killing is leading to police reforms at various levels of government in the US. The nationwide protests were smaller than the George Floyd protests, but protests are not the point; the killing is the point. Apply any logical measure or test that results in the current ITN postings being a "pass", and this nomination is also a "pass" under that measure or test.
Levivich (
talk)
04:48, 2 February 2023 (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.
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.
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.
Support Well-cited and holistic. A little underlinked, especially in the latter half, but not that big a deal for our purposes.
Curbon7 (
talk)
14:23, 1 February 2023 (UTC)reply
Support. As per the nom, deadly attacks on embassies are quite rare - a rough estimate from
List of attacks on diplomatic missions would suggest an average of once a year. The significance is increased by this being the first one on an Azerbaijani one, making this a very big deal there. It's also been reported across major global news outlets. I think this is a good example of an event that's blurb-worthy without being ITN/R or all over the place in Anglophone media. The article is in good shape, too. --
GGT (
talk)
17:31, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support I think an attack on an embassy, whether terrorist or state-sanctioned or otherwise, which results in death of a state official is clearly something we should be posting.
Curbon7 (
talk)
00:44, 29 January 2023 (UTC)reply
This killed a guard, not an official. I'm not saying officials are worth more, even if they have an article, or that I Oppose this post. Just a reminder.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
03:56, 29 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Pull Observing this new blurb, I read the article and found it to be of poor quality – the English is stilted. And the incident seemed quite petty – a domestic matter about a wife which became lethal because the guy with a grievance had a gun. Browsing the BBC and the NYT, I see no mention of it whereas the drone strike on Iran is getting reported there. So, it doesn't seem to be in the news in a significant way. As shootings go, this seemed less significant than the recent ones in California.
Andrew🐉(
talk)
08:33, 29 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Pull One dead from an attack that for all purposes appears to be a lone wolf and not associated with any terrorist group? (Yes, they initially treated it as a terrorist one for easing the investigation, but they seem to have backed off that) Yes, it is an attack on an embassy but this is nowhere close to the scale of other events already on the board and likely to be added sooner, and a story on violence within a region already filled with violence. --
Masem (
t)
15:40, 29 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Post-posting support Attacks on embassies are rare and are automatically diplomatic scandals with implications on the bilateral relations between the countries. So, comparing this to other attacks of similar scale is like comparing apples and oranges.--
Kiril Simeonovski (
talk)
17:18, 29 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support. This was a major news in international mass media, including
CNN,
BBC,
NYT,
The Washington Post,
Reuters, etc. Also it led to a significant crisis in relations between Azerbaijan and Iran, with Azerbaijan closing operation of its embassy and evacuating its personnel.
Grandmaster19:54, 30 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Dont Pull - I can not see why some of us are making such a big deal over the low death toll. The death toll is not the only factor that may make an attack notable. The armed attack on the embassy resulted in the death of the head of the embassy's security staff and the injury of two others. In addition, this armed attack was one of the factors why Azerbaijan closed its embassy in Iran. This is definitely not a routine event, thus it should not be pulled.
A b r v a g l (
PingMe)06:02, 31 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Keep it this was significant worldwide news and it serves to show the wide range of Wikipedia's articles. We tend to focus too much on US the Europe. We should try to get more blurbs from other parts of the world.
JehochmanTalk06:10, 31 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Post-posting support. These sorts of attacks capture the news cycle because of their international importance, and this article is high-quality enough to remain there. No need to pull. — Red-tailed hawk(nest)19:07, 31 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Dont Pull — Some commenters seem to be either unaware of the incident or have not read the article.
1) Attacking embassies is a common practice in Iran. There were attacks on the US embassy in Iran in 1979, on the British embassy in 2011, and on the Saudi Arabian embassies in 2016.
2) After this attack, Azerbaijan evacuated its embassy Tehran.
Don't pull So we have the Iranians claiming it was a domestic incident and the Azeris claiming it was a (possibly state-sanctioned) act of terror. Now, both sides are wildly unreliable authoritarian regimes, so I don't see why we should take either at their word. Regardless of the intention, this attack is spiraling relations between two countries who are closer to war than a lot of people realize.
Curbon7 (
talk)
09:05, 1 February 2023 (UTC)reply
Weak support article looks good. 22 deaths is quite significant. It seems that last year a tropical storm hit Madagascar leading to 142 fatalities, and that would have been nominated if the article quality was good enough.
Azpineapple (
talk)
15:06, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Nominator's comments: I was hesitant to post this, but it appears that this is a significant political escalation. I've done my best to write a few options for neutral joint blurbs. Note that the Israel–Palestine conflict is
listed as a contentious topic, and editing restrictions may apply to this discussion. I will support sanctions against any user that attempts to
WP:DISRUPT the conversation, use it as a
WP:FORUM, or
WP:BLUDGEON the process by replying to everyone that has a different opinion than them.
Thebiguglyalien (
talk)
21:37, 27 January 2023 (UTC)reply
There are several parts that could be included, but the most significant outcome so far, obviously besides the loss of life, is the Palestinian Authority suspending security cooperation with Israel (
[10],
[11]). Could be something like The Palestinian Authority suspends security coordination with Israel as tensions escalate following an Israeli raid in the West Bank and a Palestinian attack in East Jerusalem. Also, the two articles maybe should just be merged together. nableezy -
21:47, 27 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The two events are clearly connected, with several Palestinian factions and sources celebrating the synagogue shooting as "revenge" for the raid. Plus, the "raid on terrorists" also killed civilians. The ⬡ BestagonT/C05:54, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Procedural comment All editors participating in this should be aware of the sanctions and remedies established in
WP:ARBPIA. Per those remedies, this discussion is restricted to users who have
ECP. As a personal note, as this is a clearly contentious area, let's all try to stay on topic and keep the temperature low.
Curbon7 (
talk)
23:07, 27 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support blurb on the attack, and support altblurb one if there is a consensus to combine. However, oppose combining as while coverage of the attack does mention the raid the blurb puts undue emphasis on the raid - the BBC article on the attack, for example, includes 24 paragraphs, of which only one discusses the raid.
BilledMammal (
talk)
00:35, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The article still mentions the raid, which proves Thebiguglyalien's point that it's seen as a retaliation. Only talking about the synagogue attack makes it seem like the attack came out of nowhere, when the timing shows it's most likely otherwise.
Mount Patagonia (
talk)
00:55, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
They are connected, but to comply with
WP:N we need to ensure that we reflect the respective emphasis in reliable sources. None of the proposed blurbs do this, as they put too much emphasis on the raid.
BilledMammal (
talk)
01:52, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Just to be clear, this is not a blurb about the attack that just happens to mention the raid. This is a blurb about two significant events. The raid has received extensive coverage in its own right.
Thebiguglyalien (
talk)
03:53, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support altblurb I or III. This is clearly a tit-for-tat attack, so it's important to mention both. To only blurb one or the other invites accusations of bias.
Mount Patagonia (
talk)
00:55, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Wait. I think it stands to reason that these two events are connected, but it might be worth us waiting for a bit more verification. To link these events. Sure Hamas claimed responsibility, but I don't feel we should be inclined to take their word for it.
DarkSide830 (
talk)
01:39, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
It could be best to wait a bit, I'm not seeing a clear cut claim from Hamas/PIJ in the latest sources. Of course, viewing it as just a coincidence seems a bit of a stretch. Lone wolf is a possibility, however.
Selfstudier (
talk)
02:08, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Weak Support On the one hand both incidents involved multiple fatalities and are clearly terrorism related. But being brutally honest, this sort of thing is not exactly uncommon in that part of the world. -
Ad Orientem (
talk)
04:23, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support alt3 - The Guardian
described the Palestinian attack as "the worst in years" and made the connection with the Israeli raid, describing it as "the deadliest in two decades". Both events are thus significant and connected. Note as well that the death toll
has risen to eight. The articles are good enough too, except for one CN tag in the
2023 Jenin killings article. The ⬡ BestagonT/C05:43, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Since there has been more violence today, I would support (and prefer) an updated blurb that works that in. Maybe even a generic "violence erupts" blurb if it's too complicated to discuss the individual events. Or, better, Support adding I-P conflict to ongoing where it should have been the entire time ITN existed.
Levivich (
talk)
16:09, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose The NYT report says that this is "latest escalation of a particularly violent cycle in the region, where the situation — never calm — began to worsen last spring". So, it's an ongoing situation. This appears in the
list of ongoing armed conflicts as going back to 1948 with about 27,000 deaths total to date. That just rates as minor, as these things go.
Andrew🐉(
talk)
08:50, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Weak Support - Escalation of the conflict, In The News. While I can see the argument that this is unfortunately nothing new in Israel/Palestine, I still think that this should be posted on the basis of notability.
PrecariousWorlds (
talk)
11:54, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose Violence around the Gaza Strip region (including into Jerusalem) is sadly too common there due to the long-term conflicts there. --
Masem (
t)
13:22, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Update: A 13-year-old Palestinian gunman injured two Israeli civilians in East Jerusalem today. Adding an AP News article to the sources list, but I'll leave any additions or rewriting of the blurbs to discussion. In regard to significance, the new source also notes that the Jan 26 raid was the deadliest single incursion in the West Bank since 2002, so it's not business as usual for the region.
Thebiguglyalien (
talk)
17:29, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
This article gives a longer perspective, the temperature has been increasing slowly for a couple years now and the new Israeli government is considered to be raising it some more. Definitely not business as usual.
Selfstudier (
talk)
17:34, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Dunutubble, we don't get to pick and choose what does and doesn't roll off. The blurb that rolls off is always the oldest blurb on the list (i.e. the bottommost one), which is currently the Kyiv helicopter crash.
Curbon7 (
talk)
21:16, 29 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
Oppose First off, the article hasn't been edited since November 2022, so there is no update to the article to evaluate. Secondly, so what? This report isn't telling us anything that we didn't already know. –
Muboshgu (
talk)
20:29, 27 January 2023 (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.
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.
I had spot-checked it, and unless I'm mistaken, there are a bunch missing. 1972 The Adventurer, 1991 Countdown, 2002 Doctor Zhivago, 2008 New Tricks, and 2009 Blue Murder, as just some examples I randomly selected.
Curbon7 (
talk)
15:28, 1 February 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
Oppose unless the situation changes. Arrests on their own are not notable, and the response will not be notable unless it escalates into citywide riots.
Thebiguglyalien (
talk)
04:39, 27 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Top story at BBC.com right now: Tyre Nichols: Biden urges calm over Memphis police murder case. When the BBC is reporting that the US president is urging calm ahead of a video of police brutality that will be released Friday night, it's an indication. It's likely there will be protests, and it's likely to stay in the news, and we're likely to post it, the only question is what the blurb will say exactly. It's not just the BBC, also
The Guardian,
Le Monde,
El Pais, and of course it's the top story in all US news outlets right now, and the video isn't even out yet. Support, we can update the blurb as events progress.
Levivich (
talk)
05:10, 27 January 2023 (UTC)reply
He's not exactly urging calm, he's "calling for peaceful protest", outrage without violence. That could make a good altblurb. Not every day the president calls on citizens to protest a criminal matter rather than just let the judicial system do its job.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
08:06, 27 January 2023 (UTC)reply
An arrest of a police officer for the killing of a civilian in the United States is absolutely notable, and rare. From the
NYT in 2020: Law enforcement officers kill about 1,000 people a year across the United States. Since the beginning of 2005, 121 officers have been arrested on charges of murder or manslaughter in on-duty killings, according to data compiled by Philip M. Stinson, a criminal justice professor at Bowling Green State University in Ohio. Of the 95 officers whose cases have concluded, 44 were convicted, but often of a lesser charge, he said. Shades of Laquan Mcdonald in the arrest only coming when the video is ordered released, but absolutely notable, absolutely in the news. Support. nableezy -
05:20, 27 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose Main page should adhere to
WP:BLPCRIME policy:
For individuals who are not public figures...editors must seriously consider not including material—in any article—that suggests the person has committed, or is accused of having committed, a crime, unless a conviction has been secured.
No police officer is named in the article. The police officers that have been charged have indeed been charged with a crime. That is verifiable fact. And nothing in BLPCRIME says we cannot say so. If you feel it does, then it is a BLP violation to include the charges in the article. Do you actually think that is true? nableezy -
07:27, 27 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I just read the article and the five officers were named. You can't rely on the state of the article unless it is completely locked.
Andrew🐉(
talk)
07:51, 27 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose per WP:BLPCRIME. Btw, this is another case of police abuse in the United States. It did not have the same international impact/coverage as George Floyd. So no, it’s not ITNR worthy. Not now, not later.
_-_Alsor (
talk)
09:12, 27 January 2023 (UTC)reply
BLPCRIME? For internationally-reported arrests of police officers? That didn't stop us from posting about George Floyd, and we create these articles all the time. Tonight there will be protests, give it a minute.
Levivich (
talk)
13:42, 27 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The key part is that as these are not public figures as BLP defines, their mere arrest is not something we should be shouting from the rooftops by plugging it in an ITN box.
Masem (
t)
14:34, 27 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose mere arrests; even a conviction seems unlikely to be significant enough to justify a blurb. So far there are minimal signs of broad impacts. If major protests erupt, then we can consider those on their own merits, in a separate nomination.
WP:CRYSTAL applies.
Modest Geniustalk13:55, 27 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Likely as there was nearly no protests comparable to the Floyd ones from this event - the PD took a rapid step to outright fire the officers than cover up anything, and given the racial makeup of the fired officers, its hard to bring in racial motivation as it was in the case of Floyd. So there's nothing to report beyond the remaining legal trials from these arrests, yet. If they all get off completely free, there could be riots from that, but that's not going to happen until the trials happen.
Masem (
t)
14:33, 27 January 2023 (UTC)reply
It's still top news today, 2nd news cycle, and it will stay in the news all weekend. The video is being released tonight. There will be protests tonight and this weekend. My question was: why a new nom and not this nom? I don't see the point in closing this today and making a new nom tomorrow.
Levivich (
talk)
14:40, 27 January 2023 (UTC)reply
And ITN doesn't care how much a topic dominates the news, otherwise we'd only be covering US and UK politics and pop culture. And if riots actually break out, we'd likely need a rescoped article, but they might not even happen. It would be better to start a fresh ITNC if the riots are the key story. --
Masem (
t)
14:57, 27 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Please, let's not refer to protests as riots. The video will be released in about 9 hours. In 12 hours, the story on all the news will be "
protests erupt after video is released of the death of Tyre Nichols", which will be a blurb we can post without BLPCRIME concerns. It makes no sense to close this nom before then and require someone to make a new nom. By tomorrow consensus will develop to post.
Levivich (
talk)
15:00, 27 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose The notable aspect of events like this is what happens afterwards, from possible unrest to criminal proceedings/convictions. The arrest itself is too soon to post, as we do not yet know the impact of this case.
Kafoxe (
talk)
16:22, 27 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The BLPCRIME votes make zero sense to me, if you feel it is a BLPCRIME issue then nominate the article for speedy deletion. This is widely reported, BLP does not exist as something to suppress uncomfortable material if and when it is widely reported in reliable sources. nableezy -
18:45, 27 January 2023 (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.
Ten police officers are killed, one is critically injured and another is missing during a series of attacks in
Port-au-Prince,
Haiti, by the Gan Grif gang.
(Al Jazeera)
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.
Oppose It's an interesting story but
ChatGPT is already a top-read article since the tool was announced – #4 yesterday, for example. We can expect a stream of such achievements and so it's more of an Ongoing item now. I asked it what it thought and it replied, "As a language model, I do not have the capability to take exams or have qualifications. Therefore, it would not be appropriate to announce this news on Wikipedia or any other external platform." So, it's modest too. I'd like to see how it does with some other tests such as the senility test which Trump boasted of passing. Or those common, "are you a bot?" tests.
Andrew🐉(
talk)
07:30, 27 January 2023 (UTC)reply
OpposeNiratias! This language model didn't "pass", it simply provided more of the correct answers while utterly failing the part where it advances in some meaningful way, like a human would. No qualification, no new job opportunity, not even a feeling of accomplishment. No class would accept it as a colleague, only a tool to pitch out first drafts really quickly, like the way "real" artists feel about very talented but creepy image generators. It's not being modest, it's being honest, and that's another problem. Without reason to lie and get ahead, I believe it when it says posting would be inappropriate. It knows things we don't about why.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
07:47, 27 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose - Per @
InedibleHulk. I do think we shouldn't immediately discount GPT-related nominations, as this is causing such a stir. But, as Inedible pointed out, it's a bit misleading to say it 'passed' the exams.
PrecariousWorlds (
talk)
10:29, 27 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose - natural language processing, but otherwise not impressive. Not exactly rocket science being tested, and not exactly headlines.
Juxlos (
talk)
10:36, 27 January 2023 (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.
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: Not missing too many citations, but the sources needed to be checked, and it seems as if the article could be expanded.
Mooonswimmer17:28, 26 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose Almost all of the citations appear to be
primary sources, including tweets and team press releases. Additionally, the article is far from holistic; the entire early life and collegiate football career is missing, and his professional career is barely even bare bones. Sources available on newspapers.com may help at least some of these problems.
Curbon7 (
talk)
03:28, 28 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
Comment: Seems to be a bunch of 1 and 2-sentence paragraphs, should be condensed into larger paragraphs as appropriate. Otherwise seems fully referenced. SpencerT•C05:21, 31 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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:2023 BU (
talk·history·tag) Blurb: Near-earth object passes 2,178 miles (3,506 kilometers) above the Earth's surface (
Post) News source(s):BBC;
Space.com,
Gizmodo Article updated
Oppose I can't see the point of posting this. According to the article, nothing would happen even it is was hurtling towards Earth: Assuming the asteroid is at the larger size estimate of 8 meters in diameter, an impact by it would not reach the ground intact and would breakup around 30 km above the ground. Hence I can't see why this is ITN-worthy. Anyone interested could nominate this at DYK. Schwede6623:46, 25 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support It's impressive that this has been detected and analysed so quickly. According to JPL, "this is one of the closest approaches by a known near-Earth object ever recorded".
Andrew🐉(
talk)
00:01, 26 January 2023 (UTC)reply
"One of the" isn't impressive, on its own. One of the three closest approaches might sway me, but one of the Top 40 will leave me as bored as TomMasterReal. The quick detection and analysis of spacerock data is just one of the many amazing things about scientific measurement capabilities in the 2023 AD.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
02:01, 26 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose -- would be worth posting if it were actually to hit the Earth, or at least, if it were something that would be dangerous if it did hit the Earth, but since it will not hit the Earth, and is not dangerous, there's no reason to post it. --
RockstoneSend me a message!05:04, 26 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose - Unlike the other astronomical story nominated, this doesn't really have any noteworthy value. The object wasn't visible from Earth, and had no real significance. Good faith nom, but I don't think this should be posted.
PrecariousWorlds (
talk)
11:16, 26 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose. It's only 'closest' if you ignore the ones that hit. Astronomers have spotted objects this size that actually impacted the atmosphere, predicted exactly where it would happen, and recovered the meteorites on the ground (e.g.
2008 TC3). Such a small meteoroid is no danger to anyone. This has DYK-level interest, but isn't suitable for ITN.
Modest Geniustalk12:06, 26 January 2023 (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.
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.
Nominator's comments: One of the largest and most significant transit infrastructure projects in the United States, complete after many years of planning and construction. Full service did not start yet, but the station is fully open and being served by temporary train service, which is not relevant to the project itself.
VarietyEditor (
talk)
20:52, 25 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment The news coverage is there, and the article is in excellent shape, but- and I say this as an NYC resident- I'm not sure how important this is to anyone besides Long Islanders? --
Kicking222 (
talk)
21:44, 25 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose I love trains and public transit, and I personally find this super cool, even as a non-NYC resident. However, major construction projects happen all the time. If this project had some kind of notable fact - e.g. predicted to be the most trafficked route in the world, most expensive rail project of all time, first use of a new rail innovation - I might consider it blurb-worthy. I think this is better suited for DYK.
e.b. (
talk)
22:08, 25 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Needs work It appears that there will just be a "limited service to Jamaica" initially and so there seem to be some loose ends still. And the reference to Jamaica may puzzle some readers who associate this name with the Caribbean island. But the delays and budget overruns on this project make
Crossrail look good and so some airing of the agony is appropriate.
Andrew🐉(
talk)
00:15, 26 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment - While it's true this is an opportunity to put a Good Article up on the Main Page, we did not post the
Northern line extension to Battersea in September 2021, which would probably be considered about the equivalent to this type of event. Seems a bit unfair to snub one but not the other if our intention is to diversify our news on ITN. --🌈WaltCip-(
talk)00:31, 26 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose an interesting article, of refreshingly good quality, but this is a two-mile rail link; this isn't near the level of significance of events we typically post. Vanamonde (
Talk)02:15, 26 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Weak oppose - This is interesting news, but, per above, I don't think it qualifies for ITN. I'm going with Weak Oppose, however, as I don't think large infrastructure projects should immediately be discounted for ITN. I don't think 'East Side Access' really qualifies as a mega project (though it will certainly transform transit in NYC!), but something like a brand new high-speed rail line in the US could be notable. I think once/if
California High Speed Rail, or
Texas Central Railway, or something of the sort is completed, we should consider it for notability.
PrecariousWorlds (
talk)
11:22, 26 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I also think we should seek to diversify the stories we post, as it seems like 90% of nominations are either sport-related, changes in head-of-state/government, or X tragedy kills Y people.
PrecariousWorlds (
talk)
11:25, 26 January 2023 (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.
(Needs Attention) Dissolution of the Moscow Helsinki Group
Nominator's comments: We
posted the dissolution of
Memorial as "Russia's oldest... human rights group", but the Moscow Helsinki Group appears older, being founded in 1976. Article needs some more work, but update is there.
Brandmeistertalk16:26, 25 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support Article is in good enough quality, is updated with the relevant information and well referenced, and the story is being covered by major news organizations in a way that indicates this is significant. Checks every box. --
Jayron3216:39, 25 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose While broadly associated with the blanket term "human rights", the original group's main purpose was annual reporting on Helsinki Accord violations by the Soviet Union. In 2023, this job has largely been taken over by a much larger and hourly collective of reporters and international information agencies, commonly called "the news". The "2010s and 2020s" section mostly has it defending itself from accusations that it's a Western tool, not defending the sort of people that "human rights" came to closely stand for in the same period. Basically, it was already dying and this court ruling was as formal as it seems. Perhaps we can still watch for news on whether any board members are convicted of crimes in the wake.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
02:30, 26 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Weak oppose as this is clearly tied to the ongoing war entry. Justification by being the oldest rights group in Russia doesn't really establish its larger relevance that is not already covered by the ongoing. If it were the case that, say, the Red Cross closed down, that would be of a scale worth posting. --
Masem (
t)
13:42, 26 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support - it's in the news, the article quality is good enough (I don't consider a few tags to be a problem), and ITN is stale right now.
Levivich (
talk)
05:16, 27 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose because (a) the group doesn't seem to be that significant on its own as InedibleHulk pointed out, and (b) the article has not been updated enough to merit a blurb IMO. The ⬡ BestagonT/C10:22, 27 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Three people are killed, twelve are missing and twelve are rescued after a building collapses in
Lucknow,
Uttar Pradesh,
India, due to the earthquake in
Nepal.
(Reuters)
The death toll from two weeks of cold is 124 people and about 70,000 livestock, according to the government, the majority of whom lived in
rural areas.
(BBC News)
Nominator's comments: This is gaining significant coverage In The News. More people have died than in the North American storm last year, which was blurbed. I think we could even make an argument this qualifies for ongoing. I do think an article is urgently needed if this is to be posted, but the subject is definitely notable and we should get this up as soon as possible.
PrecariousWorlds (
talk)
18:34, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support Reading up on some news reports, this is a lot more severe than the winter storm that happened a little while ago in the US, which was blurbed. Though, the article... yeah, that needs a ton of work, but it's early days in the nomination, there's still plenty of time for someone to go in and solve that issue.
TheBlueSkyClub (
talk)
18:59, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Now Support as it's been expanded. 1500 characters is good enough for DYK, I'm fine with posting a 1400 character article to ITN. It's all cited, and I'd rather have a short timely article at ITN than have weeks-old news as we do now.
Levivich (
talk)
05:20, 27 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose This does not belong on the mainpage in this state. Support in principle if expanded.
Oppose Browsing the news, it appears that heavy snow is currently disrupting a long list of countries including Austria, Italy, Japan, South Korea and more. This appears to be wintry weather typical of January and it's quite cold here in the UK too. If deaths are what really matters then 124 is not a large number for an entire country. In China, they are
running out of coffins as the death toll from their COVID wave bites. The numbers there are over 100 times greater.
Andrew🐉(
talk)
11:09, 25 January 2023 (UTC)reply
We shouldn't of, but unfortunately, ITNC is often swayed by popularity votes or claims "it's all over the news" (
[14]). Average death tolls in nearly annual events like winter storms or flooding (which kills thousands each year in China and India as another example) should be taken as routine stories, just like the NA winter storm. I don't know if this specific storm in the Middle East is typical or unusual, but if its typical, we probably shouldn't be blurbing it.
Masem (
t)
13:32, 25 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Almost every weather event occurs annually or multiple times a year and does not have an unusual death toll. If this is the case, we shouldn't be blurbing ANY of them as their death tolls are typical and expected.
NoahTalk15:00, 25 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Yes, I don't agree with Masem here. I think there was a solid consensus to post the North American winter storm, and I also believe that particular storm needs to be the barometer by which we measure other storms in terms of death toll and significance, regardless of which region they occur in. 🌈WaltCip-(
talk)15:17, 25 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The problem is that using the NA storm feeds on more systematic bias. Because it affected the US, it got *lots* of coverage, while its still apparent here that this storm in the Middle East - far away from the US and UK, is getting next to no coverage. From an encyclopedic topic aspect, the storms should be treated equally, but we let too much of the media's bias affect how we cover weather topics in ITN.
Masem (
t)
13:44, 26 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I think that's kind of unavoidable, don't you?
WP:ITN's stated purpose is to showcase quality content on current events/items that are in the news. More often than not, quality correlates with reliable source coverage. I'd rather it be otherwise, but I don't think denying both stories is the answer to that. 🌈WaltCip-(
talk)13:58, 26 January 2023 (UTC)reply
We should strive to still cover (both in general and at ITN) news events that may only get a few stories in major papers, with stories that get wide coverage. We need some coverage to be notable, and that is a systematic bias already, but once past that, the number of RSes covering a topic shouldn't matter or come into play, beyond the ability to write a quality article. Hence why we need a review and consensus of topics that try to fight against systematic bias.
Masem (
t)
17:55, 26 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I don't know but most of the country is at least as high as the South Appalachians (their mountain passes even go high enough to cause low antigravity in bin Laden-killing helicopters and hypoxia in healthy young drivers, Earth's first mention of altitude sickness is from the ancient Silk Road from China to Afghanistan or nearby and points west) and about that latitude and they get lots of snow without the benefit of Afghanistan's possible Caspian Sea effect snow (don't know if it's still after crossing Turkmenistan) and total mountain protection from air lower latitude than them.
Sagittarian Milky Way (
talk)
15:45, 25 January 2023 (UTC)reply
By that logic shouldn't we refrain from blurbing most extreme weather events because they are somewhat routine (i.e. the Atlantic and Pacific seeing a few major hurricanes/typhoons a year)?
DarkSide830 (
talk)
19:02, 25 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose - The article will never get posted if it remains in this state, and unfortunately, I'm not sure what can be done to resolve that. Storms that occur in the United States have the benefit of being in an area with excellent English-RS coverage, with reporters that can go door-to-door to assess storm impacts. There's no benefit of that in Afghanistan. Indeed, this is why systemic bias is such a problem on ITN. --🌈WaltCip-(
talk)13:59, 25 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose The blurb and article seem mistaken. The sources say these dead accumulated over the last fortnight, across the country, due to cold and generator poisonings. No mention of a storm, especially an ongoing one that started on January 17.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
00:28, 26 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Note I've corrected the article, making this no longer a storm, but a cold snap. I didn't change the nom stuff because the replies would have stopped making sense and someone else might prefer the term "cold wave" soon. But it's worth reconsidering (I still oppose).
InedibleHulk (
talk)
03:40, 26 January 2023 (UTC)reply
A likely story! I won't mind if you move the article there (lowercase, of course). But always remember, trees and water tend to sound snappy in the cold while air and animals appear wavier in the heat.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
00:19, 27 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
Comment. Needs work, currently has neutrality issues and isn't hugely readable. I've made a start and welcome anyone else who wants to assist. Cheers,
Chocmilk03 (
talk)
03:16, 26 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Okay, been working on this one and think/hope it is now ready for ITN. It's been a tricky one given how controversial a figure she is, but I've endeavoured to be as neutral as possible. @
Curbon7: in case you have capacity to take another look (no worries if not).
Chocmilk03 (
talk)
05:38, 27 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support Great work by
Chocmilk03. I've gone through the article and tweaked a few things plus added a classic line delivered on behalf of
Jacinda Ardern that demonstrates just how much influence Harawira had on the prime minister of the day. It's now ready for posting AFAIC. Schwede6607:49, 27 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
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.
Nominator's comments: This gave me a shock when I read about it just now as I have a deadly brick of 85% right here. There's work to do, of course, but that's what we're here for, right?
Andrew🐉(
talk)
16:20, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Meh. This is the type of high-engagement, low-impact stuff you find in the "health and science" sections of newspapers. Can't really see any evidence this is major news; it certainly isn't a top-flight story on any of the major services. --
Jayron3216:24, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
This makes it sound like this is a
WP:POINT nomination. I was actually just looking for science articles to post today to try and create some balance among news topics, but I decided that little things like this aren't sufficient. It would need to be something like a new element being discovered, the extinction of a well-known animal, a cure for a major disease, etc. Some sort of major breakthrough or discovery. I wonder if
a new major iceberg is significant enough, but it currently doesn't have its own article.
Thebiguglyalien (
talk)
16:50, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
This is much bigger news than any sports event AFAIC and there are so few nominations of any sort that it seemed better than than nothing. See the talk page for discussions of the general state of ITN and what might be done about.
Andrew🐉(
talk)
17:01, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The news that a food "may" have lead is certainly not a bigger news story than sport event. This story is barely even in news outlets let alone notable for a blurb.
Jbvann0517:18, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
According to Consumer Reports, there's no may about it as
they tested 28 brands and found cadmium and lead in all of them. Of course, you then get into the weeds about the exact levels. But this reminds me of lead in petrol which was quite scandalous before the vested interests were faced down. There was an ITN nomination about the last country to use leaded gas/petrol -- Algeria iirc.
Andrew🐉(
talk)
17:28, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment The only mention of this in the article seems to have been there for some time, and is linked to a 2014 paper - there are no edits for months, other than a bot. Did you link the correct article?
Nfitz (
talk)
16:29, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose respectfully. This is ITN. Significant current news coverage is generally required for nominations. Also note the article has not been substantially updated in quite some time. This might be better suited for DYK if there is enough for a major update. -
Ad Orientem (
talk)
16:57, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose - one of the sources is from Dec 30, the other is nowhere on the front page of Reuters, it is not even in the top ten stories in its section of Retail News. That is not something many people are likely to have read in the news and to be looking for more information here. nableezy -
17:14, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose Potatoes may contain Uranium. Actually, they most certainly do. But do they contain hazardous amounts? No. Same thing here. —Wasell(T) 🌻🇺🇦
17:48, 24 January 2023 (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.
Comet C/2022 E3
Article:C/2022 E3 (ZTF) (
talk·history·tag) Blurb: A green comet(pictured) makes its closest approach to the Earth (
Post) Alternative blurb: Comet C/2022 E3 (ZTF) makes its closest approach to Earth Alternative blurb II: Comet
C/2022 E3 (ZTF) will make its closest approach to Earth on February 1. News source(s):The Guardian;
NYT;
BBC Credits:
Wait – The closest approach will be on February 1. It seems like a good plan to post it on that day and not too much earlier. I hope in the meantime, the article will see some more expanding. It feels alright for blurbing, but a bit short. (I have to say that it being nearly 0.3 AU away from us is quite far. Will this be visible without a telescope?) ~
Maplestrip/Mable (
chat)
10:44, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
You know closest approach isn't always best time to see something right? Best night for most of our North Hemisphere readers (comet is above the Arctic) might be Jan 26-27. Assuming you can't see later than midnight (when it's still rising or fucked up by moonlight which starts happening all evening even before half moon this time of year) and taking into account moonlight, when the model says it'd be brightest from Earth if Earth didn't have an atmosphere and how much atmosphere you have to look through. You'd be surprised how far you good see Comet Hale-Bopp but this is no Hale-Bopp. Some people can see it with just their eyes but most first worlders live under nighttime light pollution, the same scattering that makes the sky blue except light bulbs instead of sunlight.
Sagittarian Milky Way (
talk)
03:06, 25 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I'll accept that we should probably post it now if we do post it. Now I'm just not entirely sure about the quality of the article and of whether it's visible enough for a listing. ~
Maplestrip/Mable (
chat)
08:05, 25 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Unbelievable, it'll be fucked up by moonlight by then. When this happens is actually like Jan 26, assuming you can't wait for it to stop rising before trying to find it which happens after midnight till like the 31st. As 0.28 AU is not close by near-Earth comet standards.
Sagittarian Milky Way (
talk)
03:19, 25 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Your "related comment" is compliment to the NYT writer and a link back to Wikipedia? Not particularly relevant for our discussion here. Moreover, a comment on an online newspaper article is not usually considered "being published in" that newspaper. Glad you're excited though :) ~
Maplestrip/Mable (
chat)
14:02, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
@
Maplestrip: Thank You for your reply - yes - *entirely* agree - not relevant to the current ITN issue - although related to the "
ITN subject" - also yes - the comment may not be published in the "
NYT" newspaper - although such comments are published (or perhaps, alternatively, posted?) on the "
NYT" internet website - at least, afaik atm - iac - Thanks again for your reply - and - Stay Safe and Healthy !! -
Drbogdan (
talk)
15:27, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Changing to support as per Andrew's comment. Proposing altblurb2 01:15, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
Wait until Feb 1 as suggested above. That would make this ITNC more useful then to remind readers that have the ability to see it to take the opportunity. The "Outbound" section has one unsourced statement but otherwise the article seems to be at quality for that point. 13:38, 2023 January 24
User:Masem
I don't see a problem with posting it a day or two earlier where there is no chance of falling off the ITN blurbs, but posting now risks that removal. Jan 29 or Jan 30 would make more sense. --
Masem (
t)
01:54, 25 January 2023 (UTC)reply
"Don't look up" The people advising everyone to wait don't seem to have read the sources which indicate that the time to view this has already started. The NYT, for example, recommended viewing last weekend as there was a new moon, which makes for darker skies. Viewing windows, in any case, are tricky because cloud cover often gets in the way. So, it's best to give people plenty of notice, which is what the MSM is doing.
Andrew🐉(
talk)
17:41, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose The comet "might get brighter than magnitude 6". It's not visible to the naked eye, except maybe under the most perfect conditions. —Wasell(T) 🌻🇺🇦
17:54, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Magnitude six objects aren't that hard to see. Sure, you won't see any in light polluted skies, but even moderately dark conditions can allow you to observe them.
PrecariousWorlds (
talk)
19:01, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I only just read Andrew's comment about everyone who is saying to wait on it, so changing to Support. If it is currently viewable, then it should be on ITN. Sorry about that.
TheBlueSkyClub (
talk)
18:41, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support alt blurb. It is currently visible from earth! And currently in the news!
APOD posted a picture of Comet ZTF three days ago. Today APOD linked to an entire gallery of ZTF pictures. Why wait for the actual day of peak visibility? It won't come around again for 50k years, which I'm assuming is longer than most Wikipedia users' lifespans. My only complaint is some awkward phrasing in the top section of the
page, but that's a quick fix.
e.b. (
talk)
03:16, 25 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support posting alt2 now and not waiting until Feb 1 because it's viewable now. Seems kinda mean to our readers to wait until later to post this. "Once in a lifetime comet was viewable yesterday..." :-D
Levivich (
talk)
04:07, 25 January 2023 (UTC)reply
"It's not easy being green" Most of the news headlines that I see about this use the word "green" and so this is an especially notable feature of the comet. And the article does a reasonable job of explaining the science of this. The ALT2 blurb seems deficient in this regard and its emphasis on the exact code string for the comet doesn't seem so interesting.
Andrew🐉(
talk)
11:23, 25 January 2023 (UTC)reply
We're reporting topics in the news, we are not looking for grabbing readers' attention with headlines (eg being clickbait). DYK is perhaps where we have the most "clickbait-y" information and that's why those blurbs are carefully worded to avoid that most of the time.
Masem (
t)
13:34, 25 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Calling it the green comet is just following the sources which all refer to it as such. See
WP:COMMONNAME. For clickbait, see
TFA which today features a lurid picture of a naked woman being sacrificed to blood-drinkers! (right). ITN is no contest as it is running the same picture of
Chris Hipkins as it has for 6 days straight now.
Andrew🐉(
talk)
10:19, 26 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Not ITNR. This has not been widely referred to as the 'Great Comet of 2023', nor is it 'clearly visible by naked eye even to those who weren't specifically looking for it', which are the requirements listed on ITNR. At present it's about mag 5.5 - just about visible to the naked eye from a very dark site (no light pollution), but only if you know where to look. The article is correct when it says "most viewers will need binoculars". I've removed the ITNR flag from the nomination template. That doesn't mean we can't post this anyway, but there needs to be something remarkable about the comet to justify doing so. Lots of comets have green emission, so that isn't a distinguishing feature, and nor does it come particularly close to Earth or the Sun. I know this is a slow news period, but I don't see anything exciting here. Readers who are amateur astronomers will already know about this, and those that aren't won't be able to see it. The article is adequate, nothing more. So I won't oppose, but I can't support either.
Modest Geniustalk14:02, 25 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support posting the original blurb now This seems notable enough to post, it seems like now would be the best time to post this & the original blurb seems like the best blurb.
Blaylockjam10 (
talk)
09:27, 26 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Not ITNR I don't see why this is marked as such, per Modest Genius, so I am switching the flag. I am ambivalent on posting it as well. It is a minor astronomical event, but it is an astronomical event that anyone around the globe can go look for.
Banedon (
talk)
01:13, 27 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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 architect. News just coming-in. Article requires some work before it can be ready for homepage / RD.
Ktin (
talk)
07:34, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Swedishmusic streaming serviceSpotify announces that it will cut 600 jobs, around 6% of its workforce, citing low revenue growth and a need to improve efficiency.
Dawn Ostroff will also depart as its chief content and advertising business officer.
(BBC News)
Judge
Tarek Bitar resumes his investigation into the
explosion, 13 months after
Hezbollah officials filed complaints against Bitar that prompted him to suspend the investigation.
(AFP via Zawya)
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.
Oppose for now Major issues with this one. Tons of unsourced claims in the prose (the Honors and awards section is also mostly unsourced), excessive quotations (
WP:OVERQUOTE), and usage of curly quotation marks in a number of spots (
MOS:CURLY; this one can also be implicitly dealt with by cutting the number of quotes).
Curbon7 (
talk)
17:38, 25 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
@
Curbon7 This weekend I've made an expansion of the article's content, fully sourced with RS. There are some aspects to be polished (references, spelling, typo...) but I think it's ready. Can you take a look at it?
_-_Alsor (
talk)
17:42, 29 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
Oppose this, as unlike the Monterey Park shootings, this does not appear to have any racial or hate angle too it (the shooter appears to have been a worker at the site, making it a domestic crime). Also, just because a news story appears on multiple front pages of newspapers does not make it suitable for posting at ITN.
Masem (
t)
05:09, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
What racial/hate side is there to the Monterey shooting? I thought that went away when it turned out the shooter wasn't white.
Nfitz (
talk)
05:50, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Being a member of a group doesn't automatically rule it out as a hate crime. And it's not limited to whites either. But I agree, it's been ruled out for the Monterey Park one (last I checked).—
Bagumba (
talk)
06:05, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I had not seen (at the time I posted the above) that the MPark one was dismissed as a hate crime (just being non-white doesn't mean it couldn't be a hate crime). As such I would also consider the MPark shooting a domestic violence case that shouldn't be posted either.
Masem (
t)
13:40, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I wasn't saying it could only have been white. I was commenting that the claims it was a hate crime vanished at that time. I was subtly and ironically critiquing those who keep jumping to "hate crime". In both cases though, the shooters were closely associated with the places they attacked. In neither case was it terrorism, hate, random, ...
Nfitz (
talk)
16:25, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support combined blurb "Eighteen people are killed in two mass shootings three days apart in Monterey Park and Half Moon Bay, California" or something like that.
Levivich (
talk)
05:53, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The Guardian links it with a recent mass-shooting in Goshen too, "The shooting followed the killing of 11 people over the weekend at a ballroom dance hall in the southern California city of Monterey Park, near Los Angeles. It also comes on the heels of a shooting in California’s Central Valley last week, where six people, including an infant, were killed in the small town of Goshen." There's then some commentary about the frequency of such events, "Other public figures spoke out in shock at the killings, which also mark the nation’s sixth mass shooting just 23 days into the new year. ..."
Andrew🐉(
talk)
09:08, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Changing my vote to Oppose Combined Blurb. We should not be posting combined blurbs for events without a specific relationship. This follows for something like "killing of x causes y protests" or "x resigns and is replaced by y". This is not such a situation.
DarkSide830 (
talk)
17:35, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose This demonstrates that, if we start posting such shootings, we'll have a steady stream of them. ITN deals with such general and routine news by having a link to
Portal:Current events. But this is obscured by hiding it under the title for the Ongoing line. It should be made clearer to the reader so that they see where to go for more current news stories. The ITN section used to have three such links at the end of the section "Wikinews – Recent deaths – More current events..." That was much clearer in showing that the blurbs were just the tip of the iceberg.
Andrew🐉(
talk)
09:09, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support combined blurb alright, it’s more unusual now I suppose. Propose wording the hook in a way to make it easier to edit it once a 3rd one pops up in a couple days, though.
Juxlos (
talk)
09:42, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I would be interested in such a combined blurb if our two articles describe the relationship between the two shootings. The Moterey Park article currently doesn't mention this new shooting at all, or vice versa. Oppose blurbing Half Moon Bay shooting at all due to quality. ~
Maplestrip/Mable (
chat)
10:49, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose solo blurb. Does not have any particulars that would justify posting compared to larger mass shootings that we do post (e.g. ideology, location, target, etc.). Possible support for a combined blurb since they are in the same state and reliable sources do seem to make the connection, but that would require waiting for the articles to develop in that respect. --
Patar knight - chat/contributions11:02, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose - workplace violence, this actually is relatively common. That it extended to a second crime scene is less common, but not so much that it makes ITN. nableezy -
15:45, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support combined blurb Evidence is clear that major news sources are treating this as a major story. The articles are in OK shape (the Monterey Park on is better, but both contain enough extra information beyond the blurb to be worth linking to). Many of the "oppose" votes don't cite any evidence or discuss article quality, they all amount to "I wish that major news sources didn't treat US mass shootings like they were a major story"; and yet, the news sources do treat them as such, people ARE hearing this story across the news sources, so directing people to the Wikipedia articles on the topic seems like a good idea. Remember, we don't make the story go away by not linking to it, but we do provide readers with a less useful front page. --
Jayron3216:28, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Note that between the time of nomination and this message, two more mass shootings happened in the US, killing another 4 people.
Juxlos (
talk)
16:39, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
1) Those news items are not nominated, so they are not relevant to this discussion. 2) There is no number 2. Bringing up irrelevant information distracts from the current discussion. --
Jayron3218:09, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support combined blurb Both shootings are getting news extensive coverage. Same state within an unusual brief time period. I also wouldn't oppose including the even more recent shooting in Yakima, Washington in the total death count. All very tragic.
Estar8806 (
talk)
17:24, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support combined blurb (Alternative blurb I) Both shootings were committed by elderly Asian men, which is extremely rare. It is definitely a connected shooting, because the latter was inspired by the prior. I think this blurb should replace the Antiguan general election blurb, because that country is relatively unknown and it has been up for a couple days now.
Alexysun (
talk)
17:49, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support combined blurb This makes the most logical sense, as it includes both tragedies which took place in the same state just days apart and affecting the Asian community.
Curbon7 (
talk)
18:42, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose combined blurb for the avoidance of doubt. There's no causal link between these events other than the frequency with which these events occur. Linking the two events is in no way encyclopedic, quite the opposite in fact.
The Rambling Man (
Keep wearing the mask...)
18:43, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose combined blurb Neither event is connected, with the exception of both having gunmen that were old Asian men, and were both committed in the state of California. Unless it comes out that the Half Moon Bay shooter was connected to the Monterey Park shooter, either in some kind of ideology, personally, or Half Moon Bay shooter was inspired by the Monterey shooter, then we can consider it.
TheBlueSkyClub (
talk)
18:52, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose combined blurb. Nothing to do with each other. You might as well connect the sacking of Frank Lampard and the delivery of Leopard 2 tanks to Ukraine because both sort of begin with L.
Ericoides (
talk)
20:52, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose. Unfortunately, mass shootings are a common occurrence in the US.
List of mass shootings in the United States in 2023 shows 11 events that involved 3 or more fatalities just this month. The equivalent list for 2022 shows approximately 2 mass shootings and 2 fatalities per day. That the country has proven incapable of addressing this epidemic of gun violence is deplorable and an important issue. However there's no sign that this particular shooting will do anything to change that. If/when the US brings in gun control laws, that might be suitable for ITN.
Modest Geniustalk14:42, 25 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment Ok this has been reopened twice now. I would respectfully point out that there are quite a few !votes running at roughly 2:1 against posting. In order to gain consensus, you are going to need an avalanche of new comments with all, or nearly all, supporting. Based on many years of experience, there is no reasonable likelihood of that happening. I would encourage an uninvolved admin to Reclose the discussion. -
Ad Orientem (
talk)
16:40, 25 January 2023 (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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Comment - I want to preemptively ask that users
conduct themselves with civility when discussing this particular news item. Yes, this is a mass shooting. Yes, it occurred in the United States. Yes, the death toll might be on that precipice of just barely being significant or not significant. Whatever the case may be, I do ask that we avoid hurling invective around regarding how shootings are treated on
WP:ITN, or how Americans vs non-Americans view this event, etc.. I hope this is not too large of an ask, particularly for an area which seems to bring out the most toxic of discussions here at ITN/C.--🌈WaltCip-(
talk)16:14, 22 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Wait This may be a racially-driven shooting, which would elevate it for posting, but right now, it is a typical unfortunate mass shooting in the US, which we typically don't post. Last I read the suspect is still at large so motive will be a ways off from being known. --
Masem (
t)
16:19, 22 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Counterpoint: this was one of the deadliest mass shootings the U.S. has ever had, happening in the middle of holiday celebrations, and is properly newsworthy for ITN regardless of motive. Further, it's comments like typical unfortunate mass shooting that minimize the impact of U.S. mass shootings, making them sound way more common than they are. These comments infuriate me and I will make no further responses in this section other than regarding article quality in the hopes of keeping this thread civil, per WaltCip's above comment. –
Muboshgu (
talk)
16:49, 22 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I mean, they are pretty common by the standards of any other country. There's been 12 mass shootings with 10+ deaths in the US since 2017, an average of two a year. The fact is just that many of the newspapers we use as a standard for coverage are in the US and report on domestic events.
AryKun (
talk)
15:23, 25 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Changing to Oppose as any racial hate crime appears to have been dismissed as a reason for this shooting, making it a purely domestic violence case that we don't generally cover on ITN. --
Masem (
t)
13:41, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose Unfortunately this sort of thing really is far too commonplace. Last year there were 14 mass shootings in the US with combined casualties in the double-digit range.
1 Will reconsider if this turns out to be some sort of terrorist related event. -
Ad Orientem (
talk)
17:24, 22 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Please do not act childish. My point is that injuries and deaths are not comparable to each other. A mass shooting where 10 people were killed is worse than a mass shooting where ten people were injured.
Silent-Rains (
talk)
17:53, 22 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support altblurb Oft-mentioned ITN topics are global impact and
stagnant blurb content. This tragedy affects the Asian diaspora on a major cultural holiday,
Lunar New Year, in a city whose majority population is Asian American. A timely page on an ongoing news item at the tops of most international versions of English news sites (I VPNed and browsed in private mode). Oh, and this should meet standards for
WP:MINIMUMDEATHS, for those who subscribe to the theory.—
Bagumba (
talk)
18:05, 22 January 2023 (UTC)reply
What a bizarre argument. To act like any "mass shooting" (which is a loosely defined word as is) is similar in notability is insane. I live near Philadelphia and basically every day on the morning news is another report of a shooting in the city, many of which involve multiple fatalities. I would not think these events blurb-able, but it's hard to argue such events are even close to as notable as this one.
DarkSide830 (
talk)
21:46, 22 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Very weak support As terrible as this is, unfortunately the US has many, many ass shootings a week, but with the amount of people, this may be ITN worthy.
Vriend1917 (
talk)
18:23, 22 January 2023 (UTC)reply
See TRM, 23:09. ("Once again we have yet another shooting in the US which amounts to nothing, will come to nothing, achieves nothing, "thoughts and prayers" and all that kind of crap, yet because we're 60% yank, we feel obliged to post this kind of crap non-story, week in, week out. Boring, useless, not even encyclopaedic.") That's my/his point.
Ericoides (
talk)
06:29, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
not even encyclopaedic would be more credible if these pages were regularly deleted, or even respected if one actually nominatated it for
WP:AFD, instead of adding mere innuendo. —
Bagumba (
talk)
10:12, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose The article and news reports seem quite uncertain about the details. If we can wait for the future of the NZ PM to become clear then we can wait on the outcome of this mayhem. But that's then likely to turn into an arrest/trial and so we will have to wait upon a conviction.
Andrew🐉(
talk)
18:57, 22 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The article and news reports seem quite uncertain about the details: No, the deaths and injuries are quite certain, as is everything else stated in the blurb. Sounds like a
WP:POINTy rationale to propose a wait based on an unrelated future resignation announcement. —
Bagumba (
talk)
19:49, 22 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The article is full of vague terms like "suspect", "did not specify", "estimated", "possible scene", "reportedly", "appeared to be". I just took another look at the NYT which has a live feed of the current SWAT team assault/siege so this is clearly an ongoing situation. We're an encyclopedia not a live news feed and so there's no rush. Let the news media do their job and we can get to it when the details and verdict is clear. Per
WP:NEWSEVENT, "Routine kinds of news events (including most crimes, accidents, deaths... – whether or not tragic or widely reported at the time – are usually not notable unless something further gives them additional enduring significance."
Andrew🐉(
talk)
22:27, 22 January 2023 (UTC)reply
These happen every day and so we need something more. For an example of enduring notability, see the
Tottenham Outrage which is in the
OTD section today. That passes my personal test for enduring notability -- is there a book or movie about it?
Andrew🐉(
talk)
08:49, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose I don't see how yet another mass shooting in the USA is notable, without any indication that there will long-term notability, like that occurred at Sandy Hook or Kent State. It's almost as if, that if a shooting is notable enough to get it's own article, that a nomination ends up here. In any other country, an event like this would lead to massive changes in gun law. If this finally happens in the USA because of this, then perhaps it would be ITN - but I don't see any indication that it would for this LA shooting. About the same number were killed in a shooting in Utah a couple of weeks ago, and there's been no ongoing coverage.
Nfitz (
talk)
19:05, 22 January 2023 (UTC)reply
If you don't think it's notable, nominate it for deletion. If you think it needs "long-term notability" on par with Sandy Hook or Kent State, which can't possibly be determined this early, that shows how off base people's thresholds for posting are. –
Muboshgu (
talk)
19:07, 22 January 2023 (UTC)reply
If you think that if something isn't quite notable enough for ITN, then it's not notable enough for Wikipedia at all, then you shouldn't be here.
Nfitz (
talk)
19:13, 22 January 2023 (UTC)reply
You're the one who said you don't see how it's notable. I tend to think that articles on subjects that are "in the news" are appropriate for "In The News", but that's just me. The Kent State shootings had four deaths, and I bet many here would have opposed posting it for not meeting their
WP:MINIMUMDEATHS criteria. –
Muboshgu (
talk)
19:23, 22 January 2023 (UTC)reply
It's clear from the context that I'm discussing ITN, and not something else. And beyond context, I actually used the ITN acronym in my comment. Not that I support MINIMUMDEATHS, but presumably it would be quantified differently back then. There were only 3 incidents in the preceding decade in that country where more victims were murdered at Kent State. Heck, there were only 3 incidents in the preceding TWO decades! Heck, you have to go back to the 1920s, to find a significantly higher number of incidents - and most of those were white Americans massacring blacks, or labour unrest. So I disagree that there'd be many opposing it for not meeting Minimum Deaths; also it was particularly noteworthy, as it's the first time in that nation that the military was used to murder peaceful white protesters. Similarly the
1985 aerial bombing by police in Philadelphia didn't have a particularly high death toll (9), but the way that police mass murdered the victims would have made that noteworthy.
Nfitz (
talk)
20:24, 22 January 2023 (UTC)reply
In terms of anything in the news being appropriate for ITN, looking at the local state broadcaster, things that rank higher than this currently are Tik-tok cybersecurity concerns, ChatGPT, AI Chatbot, vehicular impaired driver restrictions, and the invasive species Phragmites australis subsp. australis. Which ones should I nominate
User:Muboshgu?
Nfitz (
talk)
20:34, 22 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Nominate what you want, as OTHERSTUFF arguments are unhelpful and each nomination should be considered on its own merits. And what the U.S. was like 100 years ago isn't relevant to how it is now, either. –
Muboshgu (
talk)
20:40, 22 January 2023 (UTC)reply
It's not an OTHERSTUFF argument. It's an indication of just how insignificant this event is, even in neighbouring countries, that media coverage is already vanishing. Yeah, it will be in the national papers here tomorrow, but there'd unlikely be ever a mention of it afterwards, unless there are some unexpected developments.
Nfitz (
talk)
20:59, 22 January 2023 (UTC)reply
That speaks more to the lacking notability of the darts than the notability of this event, and either way that's a discussion for the ITN criteria talk page, not here.
DarkSide830 (
talk)
21:49, 22 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Awwww we replaced the boat race with darts in regards to this argument? Forget 10+ Americans dying due to gun violence, 50+ brown people dying on disasters is still enough enough while we allow darts to get a free pass.
Howard the Duck (
talk)
21:57, 22 January 2023 (UTC)reply
You seem to have me incorrectly measured. I support an ITN sports cleanup and darts would be one of the items most clearly on the chopping block. Again though, this is not the place to discuss this though.
DarkSide830 (
talk)
22:13, 22 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Hatting heat > light
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Comment the sheer ignorance of people attempting to compare this commmonplace event in the good ol' US of A (33rd mass shooting of 2023) with a sports event which is on the ITNR listings is a clear demonstration that we should probably seek a minimum threshold of
WP:CIR for people who "vote" here. Ridiculous. Once again we have yet another shooting in the US which amounts to nothing, will come to nothing, achieves nothing, "thoughts and prayers" and all that kind of crap, yet because we're 60% yank, we feel obliged to post this kind of crap non-story, week in, week out. Boring, useless, not even encyclopaedic. "Man in country full of guns uses gun to kill to kill other people with loads of guns". Derisory.
The Rambling Man (
Keep wearing the mask...)
23:09, 22 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Ah, I see you took
WaltCip's admonition to heart. (sarcasm) Don't be rude or insult people by saying they're not competent to vote here. This was exactly what WaltCip was warning all of us about. Anyway, no, mass shootings that kill 10+ people are not "commonplace" in the US, even if they do take place far more often than they should. The last mass shooting that took place in the US that was posted here was Uvalde, and the last mass shooting that killed more than 10 people in the US was also Uvalde. That there were 32 other mass shootings in the US this year is irrelevant, we didn't post them and no one proposed to post them, because they were not notable enough for ITN. This isn't a "non-story", and I'm tired of these false comparisons. --
RockstoneSend me a message!23:15, 22 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Suggest you take a break. The very fact you're telling me "the last mass shooting that killed X" is the very reason it's a non-story. Get a grip Rockstone, you need to grow up and stop trying to convert this Wikipedia to US-shooting-events-pedia. It's grim reading every time some nutbar in the States uses his second amendment rights to shoot up a load of people. Thank goodness this time it wasn't kids. But all we do when we publicise this crap is encourage more stupidity from gun-wielding maniacs who have the blessing you lot. Weird, but not encyclopedic, not enduring, just sadly tragic. One day you'll realise that. The rest of the world looks on in total abject pity for your situation.
The Rambling Man (
Keep wearing the mask...)
23:25, 22 January 2023 (UTC)reply
No, you have GOP "elected representatives" in Amurica saying "If you hear Democrats fantasizing about banning a specific type of firearm, run to your nearest gun show and buy one to find out what they don’t want you to own." That's enough.
The Rambling Man (
Keep wearing the mask...)
23:58, 22 January 2023 (UTC)reply
No your opinions on American politics are of no relevance to literally anything about this page, and of interest to likely nobody else on this page. Your dismissal of ten people being killed would, in any sane administration, get the same treatment something like
this eventually got. But youre too popular here for that to ever happen, at least among a cohort of old-timers, and you know that, so you abuse this page with impunity. Toodles, nableezy -
00:13, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
@TRM Comments like this are what make it obvious to most people that you have only a thin veneer of actual sympathy for victims of gun violence, and mostly just seem to enjoy using our tragedy as a fun little bludgeon against your wiki-enemies. So fuck clean off with your fake fucking sympathy and 'outrage', from the people who actually have to live with the horror of having loved ones die to this, and do their best to stop it from happening again. I've read too many of these snide little comments to let this one slide. The deaths of our family members might be a fun little game to you to hit back at all the people who annoy you here, but they're real to us.
Parabolist (
talk)
07:34, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Frankly, we entered into
WP:PACT territory somewhere in the last dozen times he made these sort of snide, gross "Oh, are the little Amurricans shooting each other again? Yawn. It's your own fault, you know." whenever a tragedy like this occurs. I'm done.
Parabolist (
talk)
20:49, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
You're strange
Parabolist. This isn't a
forum for you to berate me about my personal feelings of gun violence. In civilised countries, we have had outrageous gun crimes, and then we fix the situation. In the US, there are multiple outrageous gun crimes every day, week, month, year. Nothing changes there. I have sympathy for the dead and their families, but the abject stupidity and "thoughts and prayers" bullshit means we're all somewhat done with "gun crime" blurbs in an encyclopedia. This isn't US Wikipedia, this isn't guncrime Wikipedia. Y'all object to a bomb killing a few dozen Afghans but hell, if a dozen Americans get shot, it's *so important*. Get a grip, wake up.
The Rambling Man (
Keep wearing the mask...)
22:59, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
This is not a forum for you to share your personal feelings about gun violence. Im glad you recognize your earlier thoughts and prayers was bullshit though. nableezy -
23:15, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
@
The Rambling Man Did you ever stop to think why I may have taken your repeated, years long disgusting posturing so personally, before responding by once again claiming your bizarre higher ground. I'm responsible for bombing Afghans now? I'm not sure you want to really start adding up historical war crimes. My point is that people on this website have skin in the game, and while it's fine to oppose this on notability grounds, to take the tactic and make the comments you have is gross, puerile, and unbefitting of anyone outside of a child. So go ahead, lay the blood of a dead loved one at my doorstep, I'm led to understand someone was rude to you about your rowing article. You deserve to let off steam. Finally, I think the world has enough of the British calling other countries "less civilized" for a lifetime.
Parabolist (
talk)
07:28, 25 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I acknowledge that I did send out a plea for civility, although I also realize that perhaps TRM has some reason to be gruff given the goings-on at the ITN talk page. I'd say just let it be for now and not try to escalate a further argument. 🌈WaltCip-(
talk)23:21, 22 January 2023 (UTC)reply
To be a devil's advocate, I think we have not posted suicide bombings that have killed 10 people from countries where they are common. Although that's not because of notability, but because the articles are too stubby. --
RockstoneSend me a message!00:49, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
What do you mean "name a ten death massacre from another country that wasn't posted",
User:Muboshgu. We've discussed in detail previously that there's a lot of 100-person massacres that aren't being posted. That you are suggesting that all 10-death massacres in other countries are posted just demonstrates how out-of-touch many Americans are with the world outside their borders! Here's some examples from last year -
May 2022 Madjoari massacre (50 dead in Mali),
2022 Bankass massacres (132 dead in Mali),
Gimbi massacre (over 500 in Ethiopia),
Hpakant massacre (over 80 dead in Mynanmar),
Celaya massacre (11 people in Mexico),
Las Tinajas massacre (20 people in Mexico),
2022 Soweto shooting (16 people in South Africa),
2022 Seytenga massacre (over 100 in Burkina Faso),
May 2022 Anambra State killings (14 people in Nigeria),
Aïgbado massacre over 65 people in Central African Republic,
Akwaya massacre 25 people in the Cameroons,
Nogolait shooting 11 people in Indonesia. And that's just 2022! I could go on and on and on. Though, I'm hard pressed to find any examples from mostly English-speaking countries - perhaps that's what you are thinking
User:Muboshgu? Sure, some are stubby, but some are very good, and even got nominated. I'm not sure why you are trying to push a false narrative.
Nfitz (
talk)
04:25, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support per above. While my country does have a serious issue with gun violence, I don't buy the argument that just because mass shootings are commonplace that means the most deadly ones aren't notable enough for ITN. This shooting had a casualty count equal to the second-deadliest shooting of 2022.
Davey2116 (
talk)
01:04, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Celaya massacre would have had trouble getting posted as it is a stub. Vila Cruzeiro shootout could have been posted based on length and quality (based on a quick glance). The problem is that I see that neither of them were nominated. This is a problem related to
systemic bias and I do not know if they would have been posted if they were nominated (and in Celaya massacre's case, nominated and expanded). But I probably would have supported them both. We need more nominations for articles like these. –
Muboshgu (
talk)
02:01, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support I don't see why being commonplace or routine is a reason not to post mass shootings. Sporting events are also routine, yet we post many of them on a recurring basis, some of them annually such as the Super Bowl, NBA Finals, and Premier League. Sure, the result might not be known ahead of time, but the location and time of a mass shooting is also not known ahead of time. Mass shootings that kill 10+ people happen on average once or twice a year; if we think that the topic of mass shootings in general is as important and newsworthy as 1-2 domestic sports leagues, then we should be posting routine mass shootings. --
King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠01:54, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
There were shootings last year where over 100 were shot - and not all were even ITN. Let alone small shootings like this,
User:King of Hearts. I'm not sure why you claim that shootings that kill 10+ only happen once or twice a year! Once again, this nomination is highly centred around a single country.
Nfitz (
talk)
04:41, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Because 1) Shootings that kill 10+ in the US DO only happen once or twice a year. 2)"Please do not oppose an item solely because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. This applies to a high percentage of the content we post and is generally unproductive." --
RockstoneSend me a message!04:51, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Two in 2022, two in 2021 (6 over 7!), three in 2019 (18 over 5!) - some of which got posted, 4 in 2018. Not surprisingly, 2020 was down because of the Covid restrictions, etc. I really don't think two to four postings a year from a single country is necessary. The issue isn't me, the issue is that frequent, and expected, events shouldn't be here, unless there's some other factor (such as a hate crime). And it's really not about 10, per se, we've posted a lot lower than that, for that country.
Nfitz (
talk)
21:40, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I looked through last year's ITN/C archives, and could not find any nomination of a shooting with 100+ deaths. I did find
Izhevsk school shooting (18 deaths) and
Las Tinajas massacre (20 deaths), which failed to be posted due to quality and then staleness. But failing to get posted for reasons other than significance does not say anything about our threshold for significance; I don't see any opposition on those two candidates on the basis of significance. We did, however, post
2022 Buffalo shooting (10 deaths); I think 10 is a good cutoff since otherwise we're just randomly crystal-balling about "lasting impact" when often that is not apparent in the week immediately following the event. As for as my aggregate statistics, I could not find a global list of mass shootings, so I was going off of
List of mass shootings in the United States. But I think it is fair to compare a single-country mass shooting list to the domestic leagues of that country (especially for a sport played almost exclusively in that one country). --
King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠05:19, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Even worse that some of the 100+ weren't nominated! Surely that goes even further to my position that nominations are unnecessarily American-centric.But hang on
User:King of Hearts, the 400+ person [[WP:In the news/Candidates/June 2022#Gimbi massacre] was nominated - there was ZERO support, and little interest (admittedly it was only 200+ at the time); it's not like it was a stub! The 130+
2022 Bankass massacres weren't nominated, but were mentioned in opposition to
WP:In_the_news/Candidates/June_2022#(Posted) 2022 Oslo shootings, where a killing of TWO white people people was posted! We have huge
WP:BIAS issues here.
Nfitz (
talk)
21:40, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Again, no one opposed over significance. Why did you not support the Gimbi massacre / nominate the Bankass massacres when you had the chance? In any case, while we definitely have a Western bias from a global perspective, we also have an anti-American bias from a Western perspective. There's no chance a shooting of 2 people in the US could possibly be posted. --
King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠21:55, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Is that an appropriate question,
User:King of Hearts? If you must know, if you look at my editing history, there's a 10-day or so gap during the time Gimbi was posted. I had Covid, which caused a blood clot in my leg, and wasn't doing much of anything! Also, I don't do nominations ... it's just not my thing. Though I'll certainly add to a deficient article.
Nfitz (
talk)
23:07, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose Lasting significance has of this event has not been established here or in the article and unless this turns out to be a racially motivated crime, so it will remain. This is not a place to compare such unexpected events with ITNR items, appropriate forums for which exist.
Gotitbro (
talk)
04:44, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
We have somewhat of a precedent with that in the posting of the Buffalo shooting last year and such events being treated as terrorist events does raise their notability further.
Gotitbro (
talk)
08:43, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I respect if hate-motivated would make it more significant for you. However, there's no general rule to not post non-hate crime related shootings though. —
Bagumba (
talk)
09:49, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Shootings in domestic violence (such as the Louisiana bar gun fight from this weekend that injured ten) are things that are routine news items that WP should not be covering under
WP:NOTNEWS (its why Wikinews exusts). I am not saying this one is similarly a routine shooting (motive yet determined) but it could possibly be such. Lately we kas a whole not just ITN) have become sloppy with understanding the line between encyclopedia content and simply news coverage.
Masem (
t)
20:04, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Question: If this happened in a country where mass shootings are rare, would it be an ITN? If so, then what makes it an ITN? Was it "a coincidence that it happened during Chinese New Year when people were celebrating the holiday, but it was marked by a mass shooting incident" or "a shocking incident in the country that rarely happened before?" If reason 1, I support, if reason 2, this event does not qualify.--(Sorry, I use google translate)--
Rang Djambak (
talk)
09:36, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment It would be a pity if someone had to kill 20-30 people in a US mass shooting before ITN was interested in covering it. Insisting on a hate motive also creates an unrealistic barrier.--♦IanMacM♦(talk to me)10:07, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support altblurb2. I have seen no sourcing/citation issues and the article looks well-written too. Although mass shootings have become (sadly) commonplace in the U.S., I do think this is still ITN worthy, not [only] because of the death toll and the potential motive/s but mainly because it is in the news and has been covered by a lot of major news sources (to name a few: BBC, CNN, The Guardian, ABC News, TIME, and Al Jazeera). The event looks to be pretty significant as well; the President has already ordered flags at federal government properties to be flown at half-staff. I know that some would say that this is too American-centric; however, I think most, if not all of the ITN blurbs right now are focused on their respective countries, instead of being an international issue/news. Thus, I think that this is okay to be posted: after all, none of the current ITN entries are from the U.S. (aside from some that are in the RD section). For the blurb, I prefer altblurb2 as that looks to be the one that is easiest to read.
Vida0007 (
talk)
10:33, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Continuing to support this. Article looks really good and nicely put together. Good representation of our quick encyclopedic coverage of mass shootings. ~
Maplestrip/Mable (
chat)
10:54, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support What's really sad and deplorable is when something that is by itself obviously newsworthy somehow no longer becomes news just because it comes on the heels of many other similar instances. That's just bonkers and if you think about it, applies just as much to Sportsman X wins yet another competition in Sports Y, or Politician X wins yet another election in Country Y, or just about 99% of the "news"... Let's do away with the tedious objections, please. Why can't we assess this article/incident according to its own merits?
KINGofLETTUCE 👑🥬14:32, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support Most mass shootings in the US don't attract much media coverage and never get Wikipedia articles or get nominated at ITN. This however is clearly in the news due to the number of deaths and the fact that it occurred at a Lunar New Year festival. Article quality is fine. --
Pawnkingthree (
talk) 15:24, 23 January 2023 (UTC
Weak Support - While noting that
WP:MINIMUMDEATHS does not exist, prior precedence in terms of posting U.S. mass shootings finds that although a death toll of 10 is usually insufficient for posting, an item in that range is more likely to be posted in that range if there are specific surrounding circumstances that make it noteworthy. The
2022 Buffalo shooting was cited as a prime example of that. So if we went off of past consensus, this story barely falls within that discretionary range which would make it postable. --🌈WaltCip-(
talk)15:34, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Error I just took another look at the article and noticed an immediate
WP:REDFLAG, "It is the deadliest mass shooting in the history of Los Angeles County". It then took little time to find a counter-example: the
Los Angeles Chinese massacre of 1871 in which 11+ Chinese were shot to death and then lynched. I'm not planning to join the scrum of editors jostling over the article but give it here as an example of the quality issues you can expect with breaking news based on journalism.
Andrew🐉(
talk)
17:27, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose - I say this every time, I am utterly saddened by the loss of life here and the trauma for friends and family that follow that. But that doesn't mask the fact that shootings in the US are routine, and will seemingly remain so until someone gets a proper hold of the gun issues. There are too many of these per year to post them all, and this one is only really separated from others by a slightly higher death count. —
Amakuru (
talk)
17:31, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I really have to push back on this routine argument. Some deadly shootings in the United States are routine. Indiscriminate mass killings are very much not routine in the United States. Mass shootings involving gangs and families, yes, that happens on such a regular basis that it would overwhelm ITN to post them. But mass indiscriminate killings by guns are not routine in the United States. And the mantra that they are is false. nableezy -
17:36, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
This shooting was not indiscriminate as it seems that the culprit had a long history of attending this place and was known for his hostile attitude to others there.
Andrew🐉(
talk)
17:42, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I just mean the person shooting did not know his victims. Most shootings in the US are carried out by family and acquaintances. These public mass shootings of strangers are not routine. And that is why they are so widely covered when they happen. nableezy -
17:47, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
They are widely covered because, well of course they are. And such shootings are routine when compared to the rest of the world, bar possibly a few countries involved in serious political violence. There were
eight such events with a death toll of 5 or more where the shooter did not know their victims in 2022, for example.
Black Kite (talk)19:02, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Take out the gang violence ones as well, those never get this wall to wall coverage. But the others, Buffalo, Uvalde, Highland Park, and Colorado Springs all merited posting IMO. Sure, routine compared to the rest of the world, but I didnt know that was the yardstick to measure by. We have users saying this is the 30th this year, and that is just not true. 4 in a year is not routine IMO, and the argument that by including four blurbs about mass killings would turn ITN in to a crime blotter for a gun obsessed nation is likewise not true. nableezy -
19:13, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I can't say that 30 is correct or not, but the problem is the "mass" part of a "mass shooting" is nebulous in definition. I'm guessing that the low bar being used here is 2, but either way there is an issue with a sentiment that seems to be present that because some number of people are killed in shootings with frequency that any number of deaths in one does not matter. I can understand one desiring a number beyond 11 to consider the shooting ITN-worthy, but it seems like some have chosen to unilaterally oppose any such nom.
DarkSide830 (
talk)
06:57, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Its correct for all shootings that have more than 3 injuries and/or deaths. But the overwhelming majority of those are cases where the shooter knows their victims, either family, friends, co-workers, and gang violence. Those are absolutely common. Chicago, a city I love deeply, had
24 mass shootings in the first 7 months of 2022. Twelve people were killed in those 24 shootings. Mostly as a result of gang violence on the south and west sides of the city. Those are unfortunately extremely common. A little less than once a week in a single city is definitely routine. Highland Park had one. And one person killed eight strangers at a July 4th parade there. Uvalde had one, a school massacre of 22 people. That is not common. It is not common anywhere in the United States for multiple random people to be shot and killed by a stranger. Even in Chicago. nableezy -
15:55, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support Very significant due to the loss of life and the time and place in which it happened - a state holiday in California. Might as well replace the plane crash article with this, that happened a week ago now and there's been no new developments.
Flyingfishee (
talk)
18:58, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Weak Oppose per Nfitz. I was previously of the mindset of avoiding a direct vote on this one as I prefer to with events like this, but Nfitz did raise an important point about inconsistency in posting certain loss-of-life events (in particular ones that could roughly be described as "killings"). 10 deaths in a shooting is far from "routine" in a shooting even in the US, but it seems this event is dwarfed by countless other such events that happen elsewhere in the world. If we want to counter bias in ITN, recognizing this is a good way to start.
DarkSide830 (
talk)
19:04, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Weak oppose - was on the fence about this, and if there had been some evidence of a hate crime then I would have supported, but from what the mayor has said I dont see it here. I dont think the opposes that resemble "boo hoo another American gun killing" should be taken into account here, but I dont think this goes past somewhat notable crime to ITN blurb worthy. nableezy -
20:10, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose as this is a result of a systemic deficiency. In the United States, the right to keep and bear arms is
constitutionally protected, with only Mexico and Guatemala being in the same boat, so the criteria applied for shootings anywhere else don’t apply to this case. Yes, it’s sad to read that human lives were lost in such incidents, but there’s no excuse when the authorities pave the way for that to happen. Some may argue that it’s difficult to exert constitutional changes, but that shouldn’t be a problem for a country that pretends to be a democracy. Those that could change the constitution are people voted by the electorate in a fair and free election. The indolence of those people to make a change that would save human lives indicates that: 1) most of the people are fine with the status quo, 2) most representatives weigh human lives below the profitability of gun-producing companies, or 3) there is a clear lack of democratic capacity in the country’s institutions to solve a basic problem. However vocal a bunch of Wikipedians may be that all this is tragic and something must be done, they don’t seem to form a representative sample.--
Kiril Simeonovski (
talk)
20:37, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
This is the exact type of comment that should be dismissed with prejudice. Nobody cares about your view on if the United States pretends to be a democracy, or your view on if the profitability of gun companies is given greater weight than human lives. The vocal bunch of Wikipedians are the Europeans (no strangers to violence lol) tut-tutting with their air of superiority. I might as well oppose the Ukraine War being in ongoing because European nations slaughtering each other's civilians is routine. nableezy -
20:42, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
If you think this is a real problem, you should try hard to find a solution. Seeing this posted on the English Wikipedia’s main page will hardly make any difference. In most European countries, if you’re caught possessing a gun without a licence, you’ll most likely get imprisoned, not to speak about protecting that right by constitution. That’s the reason why such incidents are rare. You can try to make this notable as much as you want, but this isn’t a natural disaster that comes totally unexpectedly with huge casualties. It’s merely a consequence of a repeated human error.--
Kiril Simeonovski (
talk)
20:56, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
You have no earthly idea what I do in my life, and you have the purpose of Wikipedia severely misconstrued in your head. This is not a project to promote whatever cause, be it pro-choice or pro-life, gun control vs a freedom to bear arms, or any other topic you can dream up. Your comments here are a blatant violation of
WP:NOTFORUM and should be ignored by any closer, and if they continue you should be brought to ANI and be blocked from this page. Of all the things I do not care about about, your views on American politics is at the top of the list. nableezy -
21:05, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Weak oppose This is a sad event that should be condemned, and as an Indonesian of Chinese descent, or Chinese-Indonesian, this is a black mark in what should have been a time for celebration. Personally, I found out about this event just after the end of celebrations with my family in Indonesia, and I was shocked to hear the news. Despite this, I concur with
DarkSide830 regarding mass shootings outside US, which would be a good start.
MarioJump83 (
talk)
20:57, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support. Eleven people dead in a shooting not related to gang violence or war-like conditions merits posting, no matter the country and no matter the politics of that country.
Khuft (
talk)
21:30, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support US mass shootings with a two-digit death toll happen roughly 1-3 times a year per
List of mass shootings in the United States. While it is sick, for ITN purpose I do not consider this too frequent, even 3 times a year - they are typically several months apart and receive enough editor attention for postable shape. Another thing is that by underreporting US mass shootings we're effectively playing into hands of US gun lobby. It is by consistent reporting of such high-casualty shootings that we as an encyclopedia can show the true nature of this problem and perhaps contribute to its solution in the future.
Brandmeistertalk21:41, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Wouldn't worrying about playing into the US gun lobby be bias? It's not our job to the morality police.
Nfitz (
talk)
That’s an interesting reasoning. I’ve always held the view that the media heed these incidents for two reasons: 1) human lives are equal everywhere no matter the circumstances, and 2) to raise awareness about the shooting problem in the US and ashame the authorities for doing very little to prevent it. Yet, the main problem is that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and shouldn’t be used as such to promote a cause.--
Kiril Simeonovski (
talk)
21:52, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I'd say we would promote a cause if we consistently sweep such shootings under the rug and not report them. By reporting it we are complete,
WP:BALANCED and honest rather than by not reporting it. But enough has been written here already...
Brandmeistertalk22:27, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
No one is "sweeping" anything under the rug. Neither ITN nor Wikipedia as a whole are nor pretend to be a newspaper or any other such reporter of news.
DarkSide830 (
talk)
06:50, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support - I'm lazy to go find the diff but I wrote a long thing around here somewhere once about the difference between "mass" shootings and rampage shootings such as this one, and how rare rampage shootings with double-digit deaths are in the US. The most-recent one was in
May 2022. Though even once is too often for something like this, these high-death rampage shootings are decidedly, demonstrably not routine. It's significant, it's in the news, article meets quality requirements, post it. Also, would an admin please issue block/warnings for what some people are writing above. Please.
Levivich (
talk)
21:45, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose I'm pretty sure we haven't posted US random mass shootings previously unless (a) the death toll is huge, or (b) there has been some sort of terrorist (including race/gender/sexuality-related) issue. At the moment, this doesn't appear to be either of those. It's simply another random mass shooting.
Black Kite (talk)00:37, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
A couple of supports, a couple of opposes due only to article quality at the time. The nominator withdrew the nomination after only a few hours, which wouldn't be advised if we follow the
WP:WITHDRAWN guideline principles for deletion. —
Bagumba (
talk)
05:01, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Honestly, someone checking ITN not familiar with the fact that it's a dumpster fire might reasonably suspect that the reason we are not posting this is anti-Asian racism. I'm not saying that this is why (we all know that it's because ITN/C is fundamentally toxic and broken), but a random person aware of the mass shooting expecting to see some mention of it on Wikipedia may well think this. It's outrageous that this has not been posted. In particular, it's outrageous that we are allowing the types of comments that are being made in opposition to posting this which violate both
NOTFORUM and WaltCip's admonition to be civil above; and finally it's outrageous that there's a double standard here, where we even (inexplicably) posted a mass shooting (if you could call it that) last year that only killed two people in Norway. --
RockstoneSend me a message!02:08, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I don't believe opposition is generally based on "anti-Asian racism", but perhaps one being more (naturally) familiar with their own background and culture. —
Bagumba (
talk)
02:44, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Not to sound callous, but as much as the Lunar New Year might be a culturally significant event, I feel like timing really shouldn't make a shooting more significant. I mean, it's not like gun deaths never happen on holidays.
DarkSide830 (
talk)
06:45, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Which I daresay was a mistake. There were only six votes at the time of posting, and factoring in post-posting opposes the margain was only 5-3 without a lot of real meaty discussion (One support not noting notability at all, one by a now-banned editor who amended a previous oppose with "Weak Support on second thought, WTF, why not?", and another support per the prior) even for the low number of votes.
DarkSide830 (
talk)
08:01, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
It's a lower bar if it's not in the US, and one might speculate even moreso if it involves a (Western) holiday like Xmas (and the event was on 11 Dec, not even eve)—
Bagumba (
talk)
08:53, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Well quite frankly that's an absurd precedent. This is exactly why I opposed this. We shouldn't be weighting less deaths in a country more than more deaths in another, especially when circumstances are comparable.
DarkSide830 (
talk)
17:32, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support Death toll >10 is very significant and these are typically posted, as well as this happening on Lunar New Year. Just because large shootings like this are much more common in the US than elsewhere doesn't mean it has less merit of being posted. It is still an evil and outrageous disaster. -
Azpineapple (
talk)
03:35, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment re: "too many" There about over a handful of !votes basically opposing only becuase there are too many U.S. shootings. Yes, there are a lot. But we are not discussing to post all of them, only this one. The others were generally not posted. And this one has unique circumstances: 11 deaths around Lunar New Year. It's irrelevant that there are other non-ITN worthy shootings. It's not in the blurb. A lot of people die. But we still have occasional death blurbs. We are discussing the merits of this shooting—only. Barring more support, unless a closer sees fit to discount those !votes, this will go as "no consensus".—
Bagumba (
talk)
05:57, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
A lot of these votes (like the one below me) don't actually add anything useful to the discussion, either. Whoever is going to close this, I really hope you will discount the !opposes who don't add anything useful to the conversation (or even worse, make the environment here in ITN even more inhospitable). --
RockstoneSend me a message!06:37, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Comments adding nothing but a statement of support to a prior comment add little to the discussion (and are a form of § I like it, just directed at someone's vote instead of the article itself). Participants are always encouraged to provide evidence or arguments that are grounded in policy, practice, or simple good sense to support their positions.
Support: I would support this article being mentioned for ITN on the grounds that the article get expanded which means waiting until new information gets out over a day or two. Given that there was another mass shooting within two days. I'd suggest mentioning both incidents.
Why not let things take their course? You seem determined to insist there is a consensus for support when as I and others have pointed out, no such thing exists. Half of your comments on here at least are of the form, "What I want to happen simply has got to happen"!
Ericoides (
talk)
10:12, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support. 12 deaths is well-within the so-called "
WP:MINIMUMDEATHS" discretionary zone. The circumstances here (Lunar New Year, multiple locations, public reaction, international reaction) would push it over the edge in my opinion. There's also the possiblity of having a combined blurb with the Half Moon Bay shooting in the same state since reliable sources are making that connection. The oppose !votes about this just being another mass shooting are missing the difference in scale between this and most mass shootings. Per
List of mass shootings in the United States,1-2 occur daily, but since 2000 there have only been 26 shootings with 10+ fatalities, (21 if excluding perpetrators), or about 1-2 a year. The oppose !votes that mention how similar or worse events in other countries dont't get blurbed, do have a point, but the issue there typically isn't a different standard, but systemic issues around a lack of nominations, familiarity with non-English sources, and prompt updates, not with ITN !voters. --
Patar knight - chat/contributions10:53, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment -
The above discussion on the Half Moon Bay shooting has developed into a situation where most (more like all) !voters oppose the posting of that event on its own, but some are willing to support a blurb which combines that shooting and this one. Accordingly, I move my above oppose !vote into the support combined blurb column. I suggest re-closing this discussion, as it's pretty clear that consensus seems currently difficult to develop, and users who supported this nomination, or would support a combined blurb, would be able to express their opinion on the above discussion. The ⬡ BestagonT/C12:39, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose Unfortunately the shooting nominated above seems to defeat the argument made by some that these kinds of shootings really aren't that common at all in the U.S.
YD407OTZ (
talk)
16:40, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Arguably the most misguided attempt to post mass shooting blurbs I've ever seen. American mass shootings is not equivalent to rain in a desert, and the likelihood of people owning guns and shooting other people in America is known to be off the charts high since hundreds of mass shootings occur in that country every year. Levivich, you've destroyed any kind of standing you had here with such a stupid comparison.
The Rambling Man (
Keep wearing the mask...)
22:54, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The shooting nominated above is nothing like this. You only get these ignorant arguments about commonality if you ignore what actually happened. The shooting above is a case of workplace violence. That is common. That is not the same as this one. nableezy -
19:14, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I'm not seeing much difference between shooting up the place you work, compared to shooting up the place you frequently dance,
User:Nableezy. Both are non-random. Both are personal. Both would be mental illness (surely). Both involved guns. Both were in the same state. What are you seeing as the big difference?
Nfitz (
talk)
22:52, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The targets are not random at work, the person doing the shooting knew his victims. If the person who killed 11 people at the dance hall knew his victims then Id say that would fall under the more common bucket of murders we have in the US. I wish that hadnt been nominated tbh, because even though I weakly opposed this nom I think nominating what actually is fairly commonplace gave the "this is routine" crowd a leg to stand on. But mass murders of multiple strangers is still not common or routine in the United States. Half Moon Bay is not that. There were 17,865 workers killed in a workplace homicide in the US between 1992 and 2019. More than one a day over the span of decades is indeed routine. nableezy -
23:11, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support a newsworthy topic to be posted to the In the News section. The frequency of something happening doesn't really affect its newsworthiness. Celebrities die all the time, but nobody really ever uses the "yet another celebrity death" rationale for opposing.
Mr Ernie (
talk)
20:08, 26 January 2023 (UTC)reply
As Im sure you were diligently checking to report as soon as it fell off, the fact that it took 4 days to stop being covered in another country should indicate its newsworthiness and notability to any good faith editor. nableezy -
07:25, 27 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support. Event is notable as clearly described throughout above discussion – "rampage shootings" aren't the same as other "mass shootings", they are rare and uncommon, which clearly makes this event notable enough for ITN.
Happily888 (
talk)
06:06, 27 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Weak oppose While this was certainly ITN worthy five days ago, this event seems to have not received recent news coverage, or at least substantial enough for ITN. It’s kind of unfortunate we couldn’t get consensus sooner, but seeing how late this is, I just don’t see it as notable enough anymore, sadly.
71.125.62.146 (
talk)
21:44, 27 January 2023 (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.
Peru indefinitely closes its iconic
Machu Picchu historic site due to the ongoing unrest which has killed dozens of people. Around 500 foreign nationals are currently stranded in Peru.
(BBC News)(AFP via France 24)
Burkina Faso demands that
French forces withdraw from its territory after suspending a 2018 military accord that allowed the presence of French troops in the country. The
ruling military junta has given France one month to complete the withdrawal.
(Reuters)
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.
Oppose on quality, very weak support on notability. Target articles are stubs, I can semi-justify supporting on notability due to precedence but the President appears to only have very nominal/symbolic powers.
The Kip (
talk)
19:42, 25 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose per Kip. I would fully support if we had a quality article to highlight on the main page. The current article on the new President is shockingly light on details for someone who is the head of state of an independent nation, and the election article is similarly light on prose. If we want to post either article on the main page, some major work on expanding the articles is called for. --
Jayron3219:45, 25 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I'd like to support but it really is like 800 characters of prose repeated twice as Bagumba points out. If it had twice as much well-cited prose, I'd support.
Levivich (
talk)
05:23, 27 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
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: Award-winning American sports columnist, frequently cited by peers at other media outlets, ~40-year career as journalist
Cielquiparle (
talk)
10:34, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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: Chiweshe is an internationally known Zimbabwean mbira player. Also this is my first ITN nomination, so apologies if I have done it not quite right.
Lajmmoore (
talk)
22:12, 21 January 2023 (UTC)reply
welcome to itn/c,
Lajmmoore! i believe editors here generally require discography entries to be reliably sourced. (also, i assume the quotation mark used in one of the discography entries is misplaced.) i'd also recommend mentioning only the longest alias in the introductory parenthetical, and moving the other two to a footnote, but that's just a personal preference. article looks pretty good otherwise, especially compared to how it was before you updated it.
dying (
talk)
04:46, 22 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Thanks very much @
Dying I've referenced the discopgraphy now. However, I don't usually work on musicians so another pair of eyes to the reliability of the sources would be wonderful.
Lajmmoore (
talk)
10:33, 22 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support College and worldbeat radio staple in the 1990s (when I was tuned in to that world), probably beyond as well, no notability concerns, and article is a good introduction to her life and work.
Penny Richards (
talk)
15:54, 22 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
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.
Comment: The documentary about his life "Gesturing Notations (Catatan Tanpa Selesai)" is mentioned in the lede but not elsewhere in the article. SpencerT•C03:48, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
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.
Nominator's comments: I don't think the updates are frequent or substantive enough to merit continued inclusion in the Ongoing section. Even the more significant edits are mostly about "sideline" issues and not the protests themselves. Plus, coverage of the protests, while still present, has decreased. The ⬡ BestagonT/C14:36, 20 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose - Unlike the Mahsa Amini protests, these are definitely still occuring in a large scale. As Curbon pointed out, yesterday alone there was a 10,000-strong protest.
PrecariousWorlds (
talk)
17:52, 20 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose The linked article has covered events from nearly every day in the past week. That's literally a textbook definition of an article that qualifies for an "ongoing" link. --
Jayron3219:48, 20 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose It’s still definitely a large thing going on, many media outlets still covering it, and still large scenes of the protest, unlike the Mahsa Amini protests.
Vriend1917 (
talk)
21:00, 20 January 2023 (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.
Nominator's comments: Updated blurb as the Congress has finished, I consider that it's relevant enough for Wikipedia to have in its main as its the re-election in a competitive race of the President of the SADR, a state recognised by 45 country (including two of its neighbours) and with the POLISARIO Front considered as the legitimate representative of the Sahrawi people as per UN resolutions.
Tidjani Saleh (
talk)
23:51, 20 January 2023 (UTC)reply Tidjani Saleh (
talk)
21:59, 23 January 2023 (UTC) (updated)reply
Oppose: no significance even in the region this territory is situated. We need to stop prioritizing political articles over all other classes of articles.
Colipon+(
Talk)
02:54, 21 January 2023 (UTC)reply
This has some significance in Western Sahara itself, but this was not even a top-10 news story in, say, Tunisia, when it happened. It has very limited impact.
Colipon+(
Talk)
15:42, 21 January 2023 (UTC)reply
1. The Congress didn't happen in Tunisia, but in the
Sahrawi refugee camps in Algeria, where they've been the top story in Sahrawi press (see
ECSaharaui or
the Sahrawi Press Service. As linked, it was mentioned and covered by the press of other neighbouring countries.
I think that POLISARIO getting a competitive race in the middle of a
war and it having a mandate to further escalate the war is relevant enough. Maybe not in your home region, but it does affect the Maghreb region and recently Morocco-EU relations.
Tidjani Saleh (
talk)
22:59, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose That
Polisario Front is something I've never heard exists. As such, it might be important for others in my boat to read. But the lack of citations could mean we're all learning a bunch of bullshit. Fix those up and we'll see. But it's not going to be easy.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
03:40, 21 January 2023 (UTC)reply
You not hearing about it doesn't mean it's less important. Wikipedia is currently showing elections in Antigua and Barbuda and Benin, why not one in Western Sahara especially when it has done a significant change for the political situation of said country?
Tidjani Saleh (
talk)
04:30, 21 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I didn't say it was less important than anything, I said it seemed interesting and needs more citations for verification. Antigua and Barbuda's elections made for the most boring story I've ever read, but the article didn't have an orange tag. Orange means bad, so far as educational values go. Anyway, can you elaborate on this "significant change for the political situation"? It seems vague.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
04:38, 21 January 2023 (UTC)reply
1. What do you exactly mean by orange tag in this context?
2. The Congress has given a mandate to the newly-elected president to "intensify the armed struggle" (unprecedented language since 1991) in the first Congress after the ceasefire was broken in Western Sahara in 2020, apart from being a competitive race for the first time ever in the country (the president also got the lowest score ever obtained by a winner).
Thanks. I'll need some time to wrap my head around that. Meanwhile, the orange tag is the box before the article starts, saying "This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed." It's not a good sign. It's also not technically the target article, which seems to work as a loophole sometimes. Good luck!
InedibleHulk (
talk)
05:02, 21 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Well, intentionally or not, you've proposed two blurbs containing a link to that article. If it wasn't central to understanding what Brahim Ghali did here, I'd say just unlink it. But people who don't know the bookshelves you do are probably going to want that for background first. This nom is doomed, I think, though it was nice meeting you and opening my eyes to a world I've mostly just thought of as sand till now.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
05:43, 21 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oh, fair enough, POLISARIO Front being linked isn't necessary for the blurb. I get the "Western Sahara is just empty sand", but if it was only that then it wouldn't be at the centre of who knows how many diplomatic crisis between Morocco and X countries.
Tidjani Saleh (
talk)
17:45, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Hmm. I'm very conflicted on this story. On one hand, I think an election for a head of state is notable, but on the other hand, this is a partially recognised state which doesn't get too much coverage.
PrecariousWorlds (
talk)
14:04, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
It has got decent coverage in Sahrawi, Spanish, Moroccan, Algerian, Mauritanian and pan-African media, apart from being carried by press agencies such as RFI. I do think it's a bit more relevant than the Antiguan election tbf ^^Tidjani Saleh (
talk)
17:43, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
The ITN/R on elections of heads of state never had consensus and I do not regard it as legitimate. Why are we always prioritizing heads of state and heads of government? A CEO leaving one of the top American tech firms is probably more consequential (and newsworthy) than a change of government in most of the world's sovereign states, let alone a mere continuation of a specific incumbent. Why do we prize political leaders more than other subjects? I don't get it.
Colipon+(
Talk)
15:37, 21 January 2023 (UTC)reply
If you feel the heads of state ITNR is illegitimate, please start a discussion on
WT:ITN to remove and/or validate it. But until that happens, we assume that that ITNR is legitimate.
Masem (
t)
15:46, 21 January 2023 (UTC)reply
With respect, can you please find me the diffs or collective discussion where it was originally established as consensus that head of state/government changes and elections in all sovereign states automatically qualify as ITN/R? I have attempted to find this myself many times but could not find in our archives. For such an important rule there should at least be a paper trail on how the rule was first established.
Colipon+(
Talk)
15:55, 21 January 2023 (UTC)reply
That there was no resulting consensus either way from that discussion implies that the status quo (that is, keeping the ITNR item on elections) should remain. I agree that there was probably no RFC-type consensus where it was originally added to the list - several of ITNR items are like this - so it is fair to ask the simple question "Is there support for the election allowance on ITNR?" as to remove it. If that has consensus, then elections would be removed. If not, then that RFC would likely be established as the reference discussion for including elections. That's how we've been handling other ITNRs that have no clear discussion where they were allowed but have been on the list seemingly forever.
Masem (
t)
20:59, 21 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I suppose whether you subscribe to the logic of "this was not clearly overturned in previous discussion so it remains part of ITNR" vs. "this was never clearly established as consensus in the first place so the rule itself is illegitimate" is honestly a matter of interpretation and personal preference. I'm not going to insist I am right, only that I hold this view myself and have good reason for it.
Colipon+(
Talk)
21:59, 21 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support - I'm making no judgement as to whether this is ITN/R or not - it seems highly newsworthy in its own right. And if edit-warring around SADR topics means they're always flagged, and that means they can't be bold links on the homepage, doesn't that worsen our systemic bias?
GenevieveDEon (
talk)
08:52, 21 January 2023 (UTC)reply
There are plenty of articles about all manner of people and things, from all walks of life, that don't let edit warring stand in the way of citing paragraphs at least once at the end. Two entirely distinct core policy issues. Since yesterday, I sympathize with these rebels' plight more than ever, but we're not about to start holding the Polisario Front's en.wiki article to a different quality standard than David Crosby or Gina Lollobrigida's simply because they've had a harder time finding acceptance in the wider Western zeitgeist. Get good, all articles what dare enter here!
InedibleHulk (
talk)
20:45, 21 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose SADR/Polisario Front is an ethnic liberation movement that controls less <25% of the territory they claim - the majority of the land they claim is governed by Morocco. Additionally, SADR is a government in exile based out of Algeria, and this election took place in a refugee camp in Algeria. I do not think this counts as ITN-worthy for two reasons:
1. Whether or not Ghali is a head of state is contentious, but he is definitely the leader of a nationalist/separatist movement, and to the best of my knowledge ITN has never before posted change of leadership (or re-election) for a nationalist/separatist movement.
2. The situation in Western Sahara is far too complicated to sum up in 1-2 sentences. I don't think either of the blurbs fully cover the situation, as they both exclude SADR's status as a government in exile and the location of the voting in Algeria. The page for the 16th Congress needs significant expansion and improvement in order to provide adequate context.
e.b. (
talk)
21:56, 21 January 2023 (UTC)reply
He is the head of a state that's internationally recognised by at least 45 countries and the African Union. The article covers both concerns you said about the government-in-exile and the vote being held in Algeria (and it being a first provoked by the war, as they're usually held in
Tifariti).
Tidjani Saleh (
talk)
22:20, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose For the reasons laid out by Ebacas. I think for a state like Somaliland or Abkhazia or Northern Cyprus (i.e. stable, self-governing, controls the vast majority of their claimed territory), it is generally ok to post ITN/R elections. However, the situation is so complex in Western Sahara and the SADR controls such a little portion of territory.
Curbon7 (
talk)
22:32, 21 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Moving to support. After mulling it over, exceptions beget exceptions and could become a slippery slope. As this is on the list of sovereign states, even if it only controls a portion of its claimed territory, it is ITN/R.
Curbon7 (
talk)
17:29, 25 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Even if Western Sahara was as recognized as South Africa (or pick one), this wouldn't be an ITN/R nomination. There was no change in leadership or general election. A Secretary General election isn't close enough.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
02:44, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The Constitution of the SADR stipulates that the president is whoever is elected General-Secretary by the Congress of the POLISARIO Front. The Congress includes representatives directly elected by the population of the refugee camps the SADR administers and representatives of the army, diaspora and occupied territories. I didn't add the full origin due to POLISARIO's reticency to give detailed numbers of where they come from but I will add this information to the article if that helps.
TL;DR: This counts as a general election as it renews indirectly (and democratically) the top leadership of the SADR and it's relevant enough due to it being competitive and not consensus-driven as previous elections.
Tidjani Saleh (
talk)
22:23, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
You may be right. Wikipedia's article on
general election describes different deals from this, but is also almost exclusively focused on the US and UK. It's probably missing something very relevant to this political situation.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
01:07, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
In this political situation it is, as the Congress determines a broad main line of action SADR politicians cannot change until the next Congress. For example, this Congress demands more military action and the SADR will have to provide that or else they won't be reelected in the next Congress due to failing to answer to the priorities set by the national liberation movement (not a party).
Tidjani Saleh (
talk)
01:39, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose ITNR already covers a lot of ground for elections and there is a reason states with limited recognition are not included therein and have not been posted including the recent Northern Cyprus, Hong Kong et al etlections.
Gotitbro (
talk)
12:15, 22 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support. The way I see it, we have a real serious grey area here in regards to if partially-recognized states are eligible for the INT/R elections item. To me, I don't see any good way to fix the problem, in large part due to the status of the ROC, which is largely recognized and agreed as an item for posting by the editing base here, but from what I can see is only recognized by 13 UN member states (many of them regional allies). By contrast, the SADR is recognized by 45 UN members. Taiwan's position as an item of desire by the CPC may elevate it here in regards to international attention, but I believe it stands to reason that the SADR's elections should land in the same bin as far as notability.
DarkSide830 (
talk)
22:44, 22 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support - Wikipedia editors dont determine what is a state, other states do that, as this is a state that has won some recognition as a state and since it does control some territory, this qualifies as ITNR and should be posted. nableezy -
03:05, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Again, without a general election or change in leader, the Polisario Front could control the entire galaxy and still be ineligible for the R boost here. If you want to support it, fine. But it needs to be because you think it's the right thing to post.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
03:22, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Then why did we post Xi Jinping? That was not a general election and the post did not change hands. I dont think the only thing we should be blurbing is when Western style democracies have an election, that just reeks of systemic bias. "Our" way is the only way we recognize, the end. nableezy -
17:52, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
If I recall correctly, Xi was posted due to being the first Chinese leader to serve three terms. If it’d been his second it probably would’ve been ignored.
The Kip (
talk)
18:07, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The problem then is that when ITN posts worthy competitions, it's naturally in the style of x beating y in the z. In this case, y equals
Bachir Mustafa Sayed. I don't remember ever seeing a redlink on the mainpage, but someone here longer than I might correct me. If you hurry, you can create a new biography for this gamechanging challenger. But it won't be easy.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
01:05, 27 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support. This is
WP:ITN/R, per elections bullet point 1, because the country appears in the
List of sovereign states. ITN/R does not tell us to only consider states in the top part of the sovereign states list. And yes, it also has a clause later on about dependent territories and disputed countries, but that does not say it overrides bullet point 1, it would merely cover cases not already covered by bullet point 1. If editors wish to change what's ITN/R they should do so at the talk page, not by opposing individual noms. —
Amakuru (
talk)
11:32, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Weak support – Article looks a bit messy, but I've seen worse posted. Western Sahara is likely the country most strongly on the ITN/R edge, but in the spirit of the guideline and this quite competitive election I would definitely include this. I'm still a bit concerned about the article's quality... ~
Maplestrip/Mable (
chat)
13:21, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Theoretically support since this seems important enough to post, but weak oppose on quality due to the lack of a prose summary for the election results (the article’s quality is good enough otherwise).Support Now, that there's a prose summary, I think it's important enough & good enough to post.
Blaylockjam10 (
talk)
20:22, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
What do you mean exactly? I'm currently expanding the article with stuff such as international delegations/reactions and results for the National Secretariat (with the vague information we're getting), so I don't mind adding more text :)
Tidjani Saleh (
talk)
21:54, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support I largely echo the comments of Nableezy and Braganza, this seems like a significant election in the region at a point which has the potential to have major consequences. SADR is recognised by quite a large group of countries from my understanding as well.
Quinby (
talk)
02:11, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Posted Rough consensus to post. A couple of the opposes were due to quality, which no longer appears to be a concern. Tangentially, the point about
WP:ITNR being met was not rebutted, yet another path to posting. I didn't include the "the first competitive" portion to the blurb, as "competitive" was not directly worded as such on the page, and the word is a bit ambiguous when the vote was also 69–31. Feel free to discuss the point, if needed.—
Bagumba (
talk)
09:01, 27 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Thanks, I'd still add competitive but I thought that "For the first time ever, the candidate for general-secretary wasn't agreed on before the Congress" made it clear enough ^^. I will reword it in the article if that's alright, in that case you can feel free (or not) to update it! @
BagumbaTidjani Saleh (
talk)
11:25, 27 January 2023 (UTC)reply
actually, my biggest concern with "competitive" in the blurb was that 69–31 wasn't very close (i.e. competitive), as opposed to the intended meaning that there was another candidate. —
Bagumba (
talk)
13:09, 27 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Just to note, neither "global significance" nor being listed on ITNR is a requirement for being posted on the main page. We post many items not on ITNR all the time, and as noted in the instructions on this page "please do not...Oppose an item solely because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. This applies to a high percentage of the content we post and is generally unproductive." Your objections are hollow as neither can be used to disqualify something from posting. --
Jayron3216:48, 27 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Sixteen
VDP members and 14 civilians are killed during four attacks by
Islamic extremists in
Burkina Faso. At least ten attackers are also killed.
(VOA)
Britishcatalog retailerArgos says that it will close all of its stores in the
Republic of Ireland by June, with the loss of 580 jobs, saying that the investment needed to modernize its operations in the country was "not viable".
(BBC News)
One person is killed and around 60 others are injured during a
stampede at a stadium in
Basra,
Iraq. It is suspected that the incident occurred when some people tried to push their way into the stadium.
(BBC)
A day of strikes and demonstrations occurs throughout
France against the
government's pension reform project, which proposes to raise the
retirement age to 64.
(Le Point)
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.
Comment Can the citations from the lede be moved to the article body? If stuff is already referenced in article body, why do we need extra citations in the lede? It would be better if the death section is also modified and put in a paragraph format instead of a quote-format. Best, ─
The Aafī(talk)11:53, 22 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
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.
There is nothing in the article that supports this point. Perhaps the bands he were in did that, but he himself isn't (yet) documented as having that much significance in the musical world.
Masem (
t)
21:14, 21 January 2023 (UTC)reply
As I've said, "nothing in the article" that talks to him being important or significant. Memorials from social media mean nothing, we are looking for reliable sources.
Masem (
t)
21:40, 21 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Not yet - This article is a mess, for such a well-known person: bloated lead, poor referencing. Needs work before it's ready for primetime.
Moncrief (
talk)
23:16, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support RD once updated, weak oppose Blurb I can't see Crosby being a blurb-able musician on his own. Maybe arguable if included in blurb was
The Byrds and
Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young, with CSNY arguably being one of the first
Supergroup (music) (
Cream (band) might be a first, depending on how someone sees it). However, once article is updated to a decent state for RD, I'd support based on legacy, long running career, and pop culture icon on the Vietnam War generation and early 70's music.
TheCorriynial (
talk)
00:07, 20 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose blurb no indication of being a leader of the musical community by way of legacy or impact. He was part of two influential groups, but that doesn't make him influential. --
Masem (
t)
00:34, 20 January 2023 (UTC)reply
OMD Nobody gets into the business thinking, "I want to sound like David Crosby". That's not to say he wasn't involved in a lot of really good songs, bands and movements. He just didn't blow anyone's mind with this or that innovation. Fix up the usual and get him a Photo RD. A beautiful man we lost here today.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
01:00, 20 January 2023 (UTC)reply
That is simply not true. It may be true nowadays, but since the mid-60's David Crosby has been a model for dozens for how one might sing. Check Jesse Dayton's homage in FB the last couple days.
Kurnkerner (
talk)
02:03, 22 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Following the Spanish wiki isn't policy on the English wiki. If I were on the Spanish wiki, I would've still opposed. Too many deaths are nominated for blurbs recently. The ⬡ BestagonT/C12:48, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment "Support RD when ready" might be the dumbest 4 words on Wikipedia. Everyone, by default, supports every RD when it's ready. Anyway, oppose blurb because Crosby himself, while a stellar musician, was not hugely transformative or impactful, and the article is still far from ready for RD. --
Kicking222 (
talk)
14:52, 20 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I see your point, but my hope is that providing those kinds of comments as part of a somewhat broader statement provide suitable encouragement to editors who know about the subject (and in this case I am not nearly well-enough informed) to actually go and fix it so that it can be posted.
GenevieveDEon (
talk)
15:02, 20 January 2023 (UTC)reply
My silence is rarely an unspoken Support. I'm on record at several places on this board saying the majority has gone too far with posting literally any bio that's ready. Once more, my default preference (no matter how dumb or upon deaf ears) is to see dead famous people's articles in the "In The News" box, exclusively.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
02:10, 21 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose blurb, Support RD. This was the reason RD was created. To post deaths of old people who were famous but not quite so globally transformative.
Colipon+(
Talk)
02:56, 21 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support blurb [getting the hang of this]. David Crosby (as well as Jeff Beck) are both listed under the respective 'notable deaths' of several major Wiki languages. In Spanish he gets a picture, too. Besides being on the varsity bench of the musicians of his prime-time he is notable for his representation of/participation in the zeitgeist of the 60's/70's.
Kurnkerner (
talk)
04:15, 21 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support. The role of David Crosby over the decades was not one that, by its nature, stands out. He was one of the rock-and-roll musicians that played the role of influencer.
Kurnkerner (
talk)
07:01, 21 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I have never seen that asserted here before. FWIW I am opposed to a blurb. But the standard you are proposing is way too high and would all but eliminate death blurbs. -
Ad Orientem (
talk)
22:35, 21 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I have asserted it here for years. And if you look through the results, you will see that blurbs that get posted conform to the standard a goodly percentage of the time. This nomination will fail, and it should never have been made in the first place. Abductive (
reasoning)13:20, 22 January 2023 (UTC)reply
You have kept asserting it, but it isn't policy, or even an opinion that seems to have much traction beyond yourself. Last time you did it, I asked you to show me where it was so written, and you didn't.
GenevieveDEon (
talk)
12:20, 26 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment As long as there are so many cn tags in the article, this is not getting posted. Work on the article first instead of discussing RD vs blurb. --Tone13:26, 22 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support: "RIP David Crosby. As a member of The Byrds, 1 of the historically essential Artists that created the Artform of Rock. The Byrds, Bob Dylan, Beatles, Stones, Kinks, Who, Beach Boys & Yardbirds, showed future generations like us what was possible. We owe him, and them, everything." - SVZ. One of dozens of tributes on Facebook. The David Crosby topic deserves blurb and photo. The main article might need some work.
Support Wikipedia is in the process of completely missing the boat on this one. Crosby featured in a substantial obituary in the
New York Times and numerous other publications. His
1971 album has become a cult classic. His membership in The Byrds, one of the most significant bands of the 1960s, and CSNY, one of the biggest bands of the 1970s, is enough. For those who say "well, it's the bands he was in, not Crosby himself" are overlooking the fact that it is the band members, and their individual creativity brought into the group, that gave rise to the work and its influence. Crosby also formed two other working groups - his partnership with Nash and
CPR, and started a new phase of his career with tours and albums in his 70s - that last an especially notable achievement. It's also not so much whether he is significant to younger generations now, but was he significant at one time and for how long. Crosby was significantly notable for decades; again, that's enough.
PJtP (
talk)
00:20, 26 January 2023 (UTC)reply
That is all hand-waving reasons, not backed by necessarily secondary coverage (to avoid OR) in the article to support a blurb. The article documents his life but doesn't make clear why he was transformative. (Also lots of famous people get long form orbits in the NYTimes and other media, that's not a reason to go with a blurb)
Masem (
t)
00:30, 26 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Hand-waving reasons? What does that even mean? If the Wikipedia article doesn't identify why Crosby was notable, that's the fault of Wikipedia editors, not Crosby himself. For instance, Wikipedia dropped the ball with the death of
Ornette Coleman in June of 2015 - if I remember correctly they didn't even mention him in RD never mind a blurb, and at least one editor brought forth the argument that the article itself on Coleman wasn't up to snuff. Again, the fault of the editors themselves, not the man who was a major, if not the primary, creator of an
entire school of jazz. If most of the editors here don't believe Crosby should get a blurb, okay, that's how it works, but it is based on belief, and he should probably be mentioned in RD before too much time has passed.
PJtP (
talk)
01:35, 26 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Nobody knows what "hand-waving", "transformative" or "significant" means here. I mean, we all have our ideas, but a definition was never agreed (including the future).
WP:OR has likewise never applied to these discussions, and we have never let the lack of a secondary source using one of our homegrown buzzwords to describe a "major figure" stand in the way of a "blurbing".
InedibleHulk (
talk)
01:44, 26 January 2023 (UTC)reply
And when those buzzword are in reliable, secondary sources, someone will still oppose and downplay them as "vague descriptors". Welcome to ITN. —
Bagumba (
talk)
04:32, 26 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
Oppose - As Black Kite said, this is only a charge, not a conviction. Not only that, ITN isn't a celebrity news-ticker either. Good faith nom, but I don't think this should be posted.
PrecariousWorlds (
talk)
18:14, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose. According to the BBC News article, it's not even a charge yet it's an intention to charge. We don't post announcements of intentions to do things, we post when things are actually done. However, when it comes to criminal prosecutions ITN's convention is that the verdict (or conclusion if that happens before a verdict) is the best time to post in almost all cases, in part because that has the fewest BLP issues.
Thryduulf (
talk)
18:22, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose there has been a rough consensus in the past that we post convictions, not other steps along the judicial process. I see no reason to deviate from that norm here. --
Jayron3218:45, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose Charges haven't even been filed yet. The district attorney announced her intention to file charges by the end of the month. But regardless, I support the consensus that only convictions are ITN-worthy.
e.b. (
talk)
19:03, 19 January 2023 (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.
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.
Support. The personal life section could do with improvement so a third of it isn't about a minor conviction, and more than a sentence about his death would also be good. However what is there is sourced and good enough for RD.
Thryduulf (
talk)
18:26, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support Sources are good. Decent summary of his club career, comparable to other footballers' pages. I second the above comments re: improvements, and agree that it's good enough to post as is.
e.b. (
talk)
19:14, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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: A senior Muslim scholar who deserves to be given recognition for what he did as a scholar and a notable one. Article updated and expanded enough. ─
The Aafī(talk)08:43, 19 January 2023 (UTC) (updated at 13:50, 19 January 2023 (UTC))reply
Support RD, but I would ask the nominator to understand that inclusion here is not some kind of accolade or quality mark for the person - anyone who has a Wikipedia page that is in decent condition, and who dies, is eligible to be posted here without any need to further weigh their achievements.
GenevieveDEon (
talk)
13:03, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Thanks for the support
GenevieveDEon. Although this is possibly my 13th RD nom, I had no other sentence in my mind and just posted what came into my mind quickly, and I know RD's is not any kind of accolade. Thanks
User:The Bestagon, I'm expanding the article as the resources allow me. ─
The Aafī(talk)13:50, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Weak support. Expansion would be good, as would improvement to the prose such that nearly every sentence doesn't start "He", but it's OK for RD.
Thryduulf (
talk)
18:28, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support Page could definitely be expanded, but what is there is well cited and coherent. Similar to other academics/published authors, ISBN numbers/other IDs (or even just a link to WorldCat) would enhance the list of his published works.
e.b. (
talk)
19:22, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
You are right @
Ebacas. I tried very hardly searching variants of his name in English/Urdu on VIAF and WorldCat but could not find anything. His books are not online so I do not have access to ISBN numbers either. I hope all this can be taken care of in few upcoming days. ─
The Aafī(talk)03:00, 20 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
Oppose on a number of reasons: arrests without convictions are generally not posted, none of the attempts were successful, only local politicians involved.
YD407OTZ (
talk)
05:01, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose As stated we only post arrests in rare circumstances. I don't want to downplay this incident, but I don't think the degree of significance is there for this to be one of those circumstances.
Curbon7 (
talk)
06:00, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose - As ever, single arrests tend not to be notable. In the event of a conviction, I would be interested in potentially supporting that being posted.
GenevieveDEon (
talk)
13:03, 19 January 2023 (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.
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.
Questions Is this ITNR? Do we normally mention the ancestry of the winner? It does seem a particularly American obsession to give everyone hyphenated labels.
HiLo48 (
talk)
03:15, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose and speedy close Beauty pageants have been repeatedly and decidedly shut down at ITN, and for good reasons- they're frivolous non-news with no impact that almost nobody cares about. --
Kicking222 (
talk)
04:37, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Weak oppose – I would be interested in seeing this on ITN, but I don't believe the
Miss Universe 2022 article currently goes in enough depth about the event itself. I like the #Background section and the list of the selection committee, but the rest of the #Pageant section (which might be the meat of the article?) is unsourced and fairly short. It doesn't quite feel up to par for ITN yet, as a subject that isn't in ITN/R. (I quite like the way you formatted the blurb, by the way! Though I'm not sure everyone will appreciate it) ~
Maplestrip/Mable (
chat)
08:21, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose Fairly significant, I must say. Though there have been several Filipinos and Americans who have been crowned in the past, she is the first Filipino-American to win both Miss USA and Miss Universe. However, I don't think beauty pageants – specifically the
Big Four – have been featured on ITN before.
Vida0007 (
talk)
08:35, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
We should not be using the ridiculous American custom of double barreled labelling of people to declare this person to be somehow special. It doesn't happen in other countries. If I won a beauty pageant I would be the first French-Danish-Scottish English-Australian winner. Would that make me special?
HiLo48 (
talk)
09:22, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
There is a broader Americas custom here, due to colonialism. Something like "indigenous Brazilian" or "Chinese Mexican" could also be used in these manners, for example. ~
Maplestrip/Mable (
chat)
09:43, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose - Per Kicking222. Good faith nom, but I don't think we should post beauty pageants. I also think at the very least the article should have an image of Gabriel.
PrecariousWorlds (
talk)
10:40, 19 January 2023 (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.
Oppose -- wait until she actually resigns next month... or, even better, wait until her replacement is confirmed, which should also be next month. No need to post two blurbs about the same event. --
RockstoneSend me a message!01:11, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Wait for her successor to be elected, which should be "in three days' time" according to
NYT. The election of the new Labour leader and thus the new PM would be INTR.
rawmustard (
talk)
01:50, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support - This announcement is obviously In The News today, in many countries already. That's what this page is about. And let's not get too excited about the calling of the election. New Zealand has maximum terms of three years for its parliament. The previous election was on 17 October 2020. So 14 October 2023 is actually the latest an election can be held. (It must be on a Saturday.) Circumstances could still lead to the government calling an earlier one.
HiLo48 (
talk)
02:06, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I should comment on that. I moved the election article from
Next New Zealand general election to
2023 New Zealand general election just the other day as there were enough reliable sources for a 2023 election. And whilst it is correct that an early January 2024 election is theoretically possible, this was never going to happen as the country basically shuts down for 2 weeks on 24 December of each year. Hence, calling an October 2023 election is no surprise and it had been known for a while that the election date would be announced while the Labour recess (where the resignation announcement was made) was happening. Schwede6603:49, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
And having now listened to her resignation speech, I can report that caucus will vote on Sunday. If somebody gets 2/3 of the votes, that person will become party leader and thus the new prime minister. Once that person is confirmed, Ardern will resign her PM role pronto. I'd say the chances of somebody getting that much support is realistic, so this might all be sorted this Sunday. Schwede6604:15, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I am curious about your logic. This is obviously In The News right now, in many media outlets all over the world. We come here to nominate items that are In The News. This is in the news now. Please don't just repeat what you already said. Explain how we can ignore the fact that it's in the news now!
HiLo48 (
talk)
02:22, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
We are not a news ticker. We don't post announcements, even widely reported announcements. For the same reason we don't post retirements. Nothing has actually happened yet. When it does, we will post it, assuming article quality is up to scratch. Normal procedure here is that we post transitions, except in elections when we post those results. -
Ad Orientem (
talk)
02:30, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
We can ignore the fact that it's In the News for the same reason that we ignored the post about McCarthy's speakership, even though that was also In The News. We can wait until she officially resigns. --
RockstoneSend me a message!05:53, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Comparing this to McCarthy is apples and oranges - McCarthy isn't a head of government, and the public event - the general election - which led to the ballot on his speakership had already happened, and been posted.
GenevieveDEon (
talk)
10:28, 20 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The House election was, but McCarthy's election bid was never posted. It's a moot point now (using "moot" in the American way), because the new leader to replace Ardern has been announced. --
RockstoneSend me a message!21:39, 20 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Wait for new leader, then the blurb can say Jacinda Ardern resigns and X takes over as new leader of the NZ Labour Party. I also oppose the proposed blurb mentioning the general election; the election would've been held at about this time regardless, all this does is confirm the specific date as October 14, which is not internationally newsworthy. For context, general elections in New Zealand have to be held at most every (roughly) 3 years, and the last one was on October 17, 2020, meaning it would've probably been held sometime in
September to November-ish if there wasn't a snap election. (
edit conflict)
Endwise (
talk)
02:35, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
@
TheCorriynialBoris Johnson's succesor (Truss) was not elected within days but actually over the course of two months. He resigned on July 7, and Truss was declared the winner of the contest on September 5. Johnson's resignation announcement was still blurbed.
Estar8806 (
talk)
03:55, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Changing my vote to support per Nableezy and Patar knight's points below. The leadership election might be longer than expected – no one (as of this writing) has been confirmed to stand (although there have already been several others who have publicly declined to join the leadership race).
Vida0007 (
talk)
05:23, 20 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support. We posted Boris Johnson and Liz Truss, no reason not to also post this one, unless we're asserting that some countries are more "important" than others and therefore refusing to take a
WP:WORLDWIDE view on this. And post immediately (once quality is assured) - this is in the news now, suggesting we wait is absurd. If a successor is chosen quickly, we can simply amend the blurb; otherwise we can do what we did with Boris and Liz's successors and post that separately at the time. —
Amakuru (
talk)
08:36, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support - immediately, we posted each of the British PM's resignations when they were announced, not when they took effect. And unlike the British PMs, the PM resigning in New Zealand is non-routine and out of the ordinary. nableezy -
08:40, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose I don't know how many times it has to be said that resignations are not ITNR, but the appointment of the successor. It was already warned that including the resignation of Johnson and Truss was a dangerous precedent. Time to stop that drift.
_-_Alsor (
talk)
09:24, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Which part of In the news doesn't make sense to you? This obsession with attempting to be "logical" about when we post stories, and fitting everything into neat ITN/R shaped boxes, is
WP:Wikilawyering at its finest and does a disservice to our readers. And dangerous? Exaggeration much. This is a headline story and it's in the news now, not at some unspecified point in the future. —
Amakuru (
talk)
09:42, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
That's an uninformed comment. The election has to happen every three years or thereabouts, but it is the PM's job to set the specific date. Schwede6620:32, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Weak wait - It isn't that the UK is "more important" than NZ, but pre-election resignations are not so uncommon in New Zealand. Post when a successor is chosen/takes over. The ⬡ BestagonT/C12:22, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support - We don't need to argue that she's a 'major world leader'; changes of heads of national government are ITN/R. But as with Liz Truss (but not Boris Johnson) we should post the resignation now, and update the blurb once her replacement is chosen, as the timescale is short. No need to re-promote the story separately at that point - just update the then-existing blurb.
GenevieveDEon (
talk)
13:06, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support NOW!!! - This is in the news now. The selection of a leader, however much it might be within our guidelines to favor, is nowhere near as newsworthy as the resignation itself. We already look a bit silly debating the minutia when this is already front page headlines. Consider how the presses stopped when U.S. President
Lyndon Johnson announced in 1968 that he wouldn't seek re-election.
Comment I would also point out that Ardern has been referred to as a celebrity politician. Her resignation is being covered substantially in the news.
Estar8806 (
talk)
01:15, 20 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Johnson didn't resign; he just simply chose not to run for that cycle yet still served out his term to its conclusion.
Comment - The World Darts Championship is still in the ITN box. That event ran from December 15th to January 3rd. We have two-week old news in the box and yet we are apparently beside ourselves at the prospect of posting today's news.--🌈WaltCip-(
talk)13:45, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Article is in good shape, but I think we should wait and post it as a combined blurb once her successor is known. Makes more sense to me to do it that way. --
Jayron3215:39, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support now - this is in the news now. I don't understand why some create these little rules like, "only when there's a successor".
WP:ITN says what the purpose of ITN is, and it's to help readers find articles that are in the news. Waiting defeats the purpose. If there is an update in the story while the blurb is posted -- like a successor being elected -- we just update the blurb, and continue to fulfill the stated, consensus purpose of ITN.
Levivich (
talk)
16:38, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
ITN prioritizes quality over quantity, or speed in this case. We know her replacement is to be named within a day or so, and this event will still be in the news when that happens. The article will be of better quality once we can write about the replacement. If it were a month off, then posting now makes sense, but not in the current situation
Masem (
t)
16:42, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Ah, Levivich, I see you added a little emphasis to the word "now". Unfortunately, you should have put it in all caps and added a minimum of three exclamation points. That's the minimum amount of emphasis to grant your vote extra weight. Since you didn't do that, unfortunately, your opinion counts the same amount as other people's. If you had put those extra exclamation points in, I'm sure an admin would have ignored all of the rest of the comments in the thread and immediately done your bidding. Ah, well, live and learn. Next time I'm sure you'll remember. --
Jayron3216:44, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
He can always strike out the now and append the "NOW!!!" after it. That carries the extra benefit of it looking like there's two "now"s which might subliminally influence the majority of posting admins that count nows versus waits. 🌈WaltCip-(
talk)16:47, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
This is getting silly. Looking at the discussion, it seems we have a rather decent consensus to wait a couple of days and post a combo blurb with the successor. MayI close this now? --Tone17:05, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Hat the silly, but leave the discussion open. If ITN can wait three days to post this, then there is no rush to close the discussion about it.
Levivich (
talk)
17:19, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support. When her replacement takes office it will merit posting per ITN/R, but that item can be combined with this into a new blurb; we wouldn't need to post two separate stories. This is in the news now, I don't see a strong reason to wait. Vanamonde (
Talk)17:06, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose. This isn't a resignation, this is an announcement that she will resign in the future - we don't post people announcing their intention to do something in the future, we post when they actually do the thing.
Thryduulf (
talk)
18:33, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Johnson and Truss are not directly comparable given that it was a major escalation of an ongoing political scandal that was borderline blurbable in itself (I think I was arguing for it to be added to ongoing shortly before Truss threw the towel in). Posting May before she actually resigned was definitely wrong for the reasons posting this now would be wrong - we should not post intentions to do things, we should only post the actual doing of things.
Thryduulf (
talk)
23:57, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
For a major full-time position like this, resignation is a process, not a instantaneous event. The process has been initiated and will take some time to complete but it seems reasonably irrevocable.
Andrew🐉(
talk)
23:28, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
"The process has been initiated" the same is true when people are arrested or charged or trials begin but we wait until the conclusion to post. Elections are more than just "seemingly reasonably irrevocable" when they begin but again we don't post even when polls open. We didn't post the abdication of the Dutch monarch when they announced a few months in advance they intended to do so, even though carrying through with it was equally reasonably irrevocable.
Thryduulf (
talk)
00:02, 20 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Lots of things are in the news now that we don't post. McCarthy's contested speakership, for example. Or the announcement that the US House was captured by Republicans... I'm tired of the double standard here. It was wrong to post Johnson/Truss' announcement to resign, let's not make the same mistake here. We can wait three days. --
RockstoneSend me a message!22:31, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The difference between McCarthy and these isn’t a “double standard” with the US or anything. McCarthy’s simply not the head of government, Ardern/Truss/Sunak/Johnson are. That’s what makes this notable.
The Kip (
talk)
23:12, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
In honestly, it depends on what you consider a "government". People more familiar with the Parliamentary system might argue that the "government" of the US is only the executive branch. Actually, someone made such an argument on ITN a while back. --
RockstoneSend me a message!00:58, 20 January 2023 (UTC)reply
In terms of defining "government" in "
head of government", the orthodox definition, except in semi-presidential republics and more autocratic forms of government refers to the executive branch. So while it's totally fair - at least casually - to say McCarthy is part of government, he's not a "head of government".--
Patar knight - chat/contributions04:53, 20 January 2023 (UTC)reply
My reference to it being in the news now is not about a threshold for posting any item, but about the best time for this particular item to be posted to help readers. This story will eventually get posted as part of an ITN/R story, unlike McCarthy. Johnson and Truss was posted, and I would bet that if Biden announced that he would be resigning in a month, that would get posted at the time of announcement as well. Also, looking at
2023 New Zealand Labour Party leadership election, it's also uncertain if January 22 will provide a name, since there might not be a consensus pick in caucus. If so, it would take even longer for a successor to be chosen. There's no harm in posting a blurb now, when it is in the news, and updating/reblurbing whenever a successor is chosen. --
Patar knight - chat/contributions04:53, 20 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Wait and see whether the new leader recognizes the Tooth Fairy and Easter Bunny as essential workers. Even if he doesn't, that's cool. Or if she doesn't.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
02:02, 20 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose. We can post when something actually happens instead of just an announcement. The fact that we posted prematurely before doesn't mean we should do it now.
Thebiguglyalien (
talk)
04:36, 20 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Just as a point of order, just because something wrong was done in the past, doesn't mean we are bound to do that same wrong thing forever... --
Jayron3212:02, 20 January 2023 (UTC)reply
That's fair enough, but probably something that should be discussed on the talk page, rather than sporadically whenever someone resigns.
Anarchyte (
talk)
10:29, 21 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support Why not put the resignation announcement up today and then post the results of the new leader elected by the labour party caucus in a few days when they finish voting.
Flyingfishee (
talk)
15:30, 20 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose for now. Makes more sense to post this when Ardern's replacement is chosen. Her resignation is, in theory, just as significant as the choosing of her replacement and both events will be in the news when the replacement is chosen.
DarkSide830 (
talk)
15:55, 20 January 2023 (UTC)reply
You just gave a damn compelling reason as to why we should post this event now and update the blurb later once we get news of her replacement. So it's a bit strange that you voted "oppose". 🌈WaltCip-(
talk)21:02, 20 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Posted Well, I'm about to post this; just awaiting media protection. The Labour caucus was disciplined enough that there was just one candidate be put forward by 9am local time this morning and that seals the deal; we have a new prime minister. I've put Altblurb2 into the box; change it to whatever is better. I'll be offline for a few hours shortly. Schwede6621:29, 20 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Good call, this was the time to post. As a side note, I usually leave the previous image in the box if the blurb is still there, until the new image is ready. Tone21:42, 20 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment - Can we have 'Jacinda Ardern (pictured) announces her resignation as Prime Minister of New Zealand and leader of the New Zealand Labour Party, and Chris Hipkins is selected to succeed her' until the handover, and 'Chris Hipkins (pictured) succeeds Jacinda Ardern as Prime Minister of New Zealand and leader of the New Zealand Labour Party following her resignation' afterwards?
GenevieveDEon (
talk)
21:49, 20 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment - One problem with waiting to post this and posting about the choice of successor instead of the resignation, is that the story that's in the news isn't that Chris Hipkins succeeded Jacinda Ardern, it's that Jacinda Ardern resigned. Ardern was the world's youngest female head of state, only the second elected head of government in the world to give birth while in office, and only the third female PM of NZ. What makes this story significant isn't that it's just a change in PM, it's that this PM resigned. And now, instead of a blurb about a woman of historical significance resigning, with a picture of a woman, we have a blurb about a man succeeding her, with a picture of a man. Friends, this is how systemic bias happens. Nobody here intended to let the story about a man overshadow the actually-more-important story about a woman, but it is the result.
Levivich (
talk)
22:48, 20 January 2023 (UTC)reply
At the risk of turning babyface on you, pal, I like things just the way they are. Back in the day, when resignation was all the rage, it made sense to focus on the loss because we didn't know the winner. If you check the news again and ignore the past, you'll see her apparent successor has apparently succeeded her in popularity. That's fleeting popularity, of course. Time will tell who history remembers in the '30s and/or '40s. But for now, it's Hipkins' party, superficially. So wake up or start eating that trash can!
InedibleHulk (
talk)
01:52, 21 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment It seems like a picture of Ardern would be more appropriate. Her resignation seems to be the main reason it’s in the news. The resignation of a prime minister from New Zealand usually wouldn’t get this much attention.
Blaylockjam10 (
talk)
00:02, 21 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment Could Ms Ardern please be allowed to be the focus of the story for at least a day? I proposed a possible pair of blurbs above. Our 'wait for the replacement' approach has meant that she barely appears in a story that she initiated.
GenevieveDEon (
talk)
08:49, 21 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment - Come on, folks. Wikipedia already has a systemic bias problem. Is it that severe of a suspension of disbelief to have the focus be on the former PM for a short period of time? It's bad enough we waited this long just to post the story in the first place. --🌈WaltCip-(
talk)14:56, 21 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment If the item had been posted before
nominations for the leadership had closed, then a photo of Ardern would have been appropriate. But now that Hipkins is almost certain to become the leader, his photo is more appropriate. The fact that Ardern is a woman and Hipkins is a man is irrelevant. The fact that more people know Ardern (especially readers outside of New Zealand) than Hipkins is also irrelevant. Ardern's perceived celebrity is also irrelevant. As stated by Rockstone35 above, "The story is that the head of government of NZ is being replaced". Wikipedia is not the place to
right great wrongs.
Chrisclear (
talk)
18:07, 21 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Thinking that this story is about a change in the head of government of a country is the bias. Not recognizing that this story is about the resignation of a female PM is the bias. Treating this PM resignation like any other PM resignation is the bias. Look at how reliable sources cover this:
Jacinda Ardern resigns: Departure reveals unique pressures on PM
For millions around the world, Jacinda Ardern's resignation comes as a shock - but some women will pore over her words with particular interest.
With her charm and leadership philosophy rooted in kindness, the New Zealand prime minister has earned widespread popularity. Many of her fans are women, who have avidly followed her journey from newbie PM to working mother and have looked up to her as a role model.
Ardern is not the only prominent figure to make the news in recent years for announcing a shock withdrawal because of burnout - others include athletes Naomi Osaka, Ash Barty and Virat Kohli; and bosses like James Packer.
But Ardern also holds that very rare position of being a working mother while leading a country. She gave birth while in office, only the second world leader to have done so after Pakistan's Benazir Bhutto.
NPR: ...announced her intent to step down in a shock move that rocked the country's political landscape.
Reuters: Ardern's resignation resonates for women in power
Fortune: Jacinda Ardern’s resignation says 5 things about women in power, according to a scholar who studies women in politics
Indian Express (op-ed): Priyanka Chaturvedi writes: New Zealand PM Jacinda Ardern’s resignation spotlights the hard choices that women in politics often face
Stuff NZ (op-ed): Shame on our misogyny: It's no wonder Jacinda Ardern was driven from office
The Age: New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has stunned the world by announcing she will step down as leader within weeks and will not contest the upcoming election
NYTimes (op-ed): Jacinda Ardern, the New Zealand prime minister, shocked nearly everyone by announcing this week that she would resign...Watching her speech I was struck by how Ardern has had to navigate the complicated gendered expectations that often create barriers to women’s success.
All over the world, people are saying that (1) the resignation was shocking, and thus a news story, and (2) the story is about women in power. It's not just "NZ changes PMs", and viewing it that way, is biased. Meanwhile, Wikipedia's summary? "Chris Hipkins is chosen..."
Levivich (
talk)
20:14, 21 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Why you believe that the "story is about women in power"? Is this true for every situation in which a female head of government resigns?
Chrisclear (
talk)
20:28, 21 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Because it is about a woman in power (and because, as per all those sources, the rest of the world sees it that way, too), and yes, it is true for every situation in which a female head of government resigns, which is extremely rare, because it's extremely rare to have a female head of government. Failure to appreciate this aspect is an example of systemic bias. The failure to perceive that gender matters here is due to systemic bias, pro-male bias, the viewpoint that a female PM resigning is no different than a male PM resigning. That's the bias.
Levivich (
talk)
20:31, 21 January 2023 (UTC)reply
You're not really doing women any favors by highlighting Ardern's gender, one would assume most members of the "fairer sex" are less enthusiastic to be linked to a prominent example of a person being elevated to a position they weren't qualified for, on the basis of their age and gender, and who, in office, demonstrated that they weren't up to the (admittedly daunting) task.
Danthemankhan00:36, 22 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I sympathise where
Levivich is coming from. Yes, it looks like systemic bias. However, it's too big an issue to sort out in an ITN nomination discussion. The reason we've done what we've done is that we don't usually post about resignations; we post about succession instead. I agree that Ardern was a prominent enough figure that a resignation posting would have been appropriate (which, by now, we would have updated to what the blurb currently says, though). Reading the room, I don't think such a proposal would have ever flown given how these discussions usually go. If we wanted to change that, it would be good to have a generic discussion, for example on the talk page, how we want to identify what makes a resignation ITN worthy. In my view, being a significant female world leader would be a strong argument that should be put forward in such a discussion. Schwede6601:02, 22 January 2023 (UTC)reply
It is why the ITNR is spelled out as "changes to" and why we should have waited until we could have a blurb that said Ardern resigned and was replaced by Hipkins. Which we knew was likely within 3-4 days of the announcement of the resignation (which was not happening itself for several weeks). We would have had one simple blurb that would have been neutral and done all parties justice, while the switchover was still in the news (maybe not the above-the-fold news, but in the news nevertheless). Too many editors in ITNC now are looking for instant gratification of news stories when as an encyclopedia we look to the long-term. If one wants to write to the moment, Wikinews is better suited for that, we want to make sure that the appropriate articles are all updated as well as what we present on the front page.
Masem (
t)
01:15, 22 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Dan, that's extremely strong (and very weird) opinions about a NZ politican from an Tennessean. I understand your interests include "the female sex", as per your userpage, but please try to keep this strange soapboxing a to minimum on project pages like this.
Parabolist (
talk)
06:56, 22 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Update Just a couple of comments on what's happening:
The Labour caucus started meeting at 1pm NZ time (100 minutes ago) and media report they heard loud cheering and clapping coming from that room, interpreting this as Hipkins having been formally confirmed as Labour leader (and TBH, anything else would be hugely unexpected). There's a press conference scheduled for 3pm when we'll learn about this officially.
Secondly, a lot of media (especially international media) are reporting that Ardern will "resign on 7 Feb". That is a clear misunderstanding; what she said during her resignation speech is that she'll resign by 7 Feb at the latest. That allowed for the case that the caucus couldn't agree on a leader and the then-required process of organising an electoral college would have taken a good couple of weeks. My expectation (the media hasn't reported this; it's my best guess) is that with Hipkins now having (supposedly) been confirmed, they'll go to see the governor-general tomorrow (Monday) and that'll be the formal changeover of the prime ministership. Thus, my hunch is that 23 January will be the date when the formal changeover occurs. Schwede6600:52, 22 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment A better way to stick it to the white man (so to speak) might be to work future deputy prime minister
Carmel Sepuloni into the picture. She's not only a winner, but a woman and a Tongan. The very first Tongan MP in New Zealand, I'll add, as well as only the third Tongan I recall becoming globally famous at all, after
The Faces of Fear.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
02:45, 22 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
Weak oppose A relevant prose summary of the results is a minimum quality standard for election results. So far, all we have is data in tables. --
Jayron3216:15, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support - the amount of prose looks fine to me; even if it had less prose, I would support; data in tables is useful information to the reader, it doesn't help further ITN's purpose (helping readers find articles they're looking for because they're in the news) to require a certain amount of prose.
Levivich (
talk)
16:42, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I was surprised to see this blurb added. Antigua has a population of 100K. Yes, it's technically a country, but in what sense would we consider this item to be "in the news"? I sought out this discussion and the new sources referenced here are local news-type stories. A quick search of Google News doesn't show other major news outlets covering this story. Reuters did pick it up at <
https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/antigua-and-barbuda-pm-browne-secures-third-term-in-general-elections>, so I can't say that even the wire services ignored it, but this is a strange addition for sure. --
MZMcBride (
talk)
02:20, 20 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Recurrent items don't need to be in the news. They're like recent deaths. If there's an article, the only next step is to tidy it. Unless it's one of the unbold ones. Then it's ready for the main page already.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
02:38, 20 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The newsworthiness of a country is not solely a function of its size or population, and one of the functions of the inclusion of certain political events in ITN/R is to counter our systemic bias in favour of large, white-majority, anglophone countries. And you can bet that major news outlets in Antigua are covering it.
GenevieveDEon (
talk)
09:49, 20 January 2023 (UTC)reply
We posted the elections in Nauru, population 10,000. This topic is ITN/R, we post all election of this kind (assuming quality is up to par), no matter if it's the United States or San Marino.
Curbon7 (
talk)
16:17, 20 January 2023 (UTC)reply
There's an argument to be had that the political situations in larger countries are more notable than smaller countries, since more people live there. However, there's really no way to do that fairly. ITN/R is clear: as long as country is sovereign in the
Westphalian sense, changes in head of government are inherently notable. --
RockstoneSend me a message!23:14, 20 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
Less than 280 words of prose? Anything else to write about this person? Just one ref supporting the entire article? Any other refs providing footnotes? Please expand this article and put in more footnotes. --
PFHLai (
talk)
06:25, 24 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose Only one reliable source cited. We shouldn't feature a page who text doesn't inherently demonstrate that
WP:GNG is met, with significant coverage in multiple, independent, reliable sources.—
Bagumba (
talk)
15:46, 25 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Nominator's comments: The last time the timeline article was updated with a protest in Iran was on the 9th of January. I think we should start to consider if this qualifies as ongoing anymore.
PrecariousWorlds (
talk)
18:21, 18 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Remove Last significant updates to article cover events that happened 9 January, over a week ago. Not really receiving enough significant new information to qualify as ongoing. --
Jayron3219:23, 18 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Remove because a) coverage has largely faded into the background, and b) the updates to the article are not frequent and/or sufficient enough to merit continued inclusion. The ⬡ BestagonT/C02:23, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Weak remove – There have been two nice expansions in the past ten days, but new developments in the protests themselves don't seem to be happening anymore, and the Jan 6 and 9 dates are all about number totals. ~
Maplestrip/Mable (
chat)
08:27, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Nominator's comments: While some might argue this is covered in ongoing, the fact that eighteen people have died, including many top-ranking Ukrainian officials, is enough to make this notable.
PrecariousWorlds (
talk)
10:22, 18 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support once the article is developed, and name-check Denys Monastyrsky in the blurb, thereby taking account of the nomination below as well. Major news.
GenevieveDEon (
talk)
10:24, 18 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support. Death of a high ranking government official. It's unclear right now if this was directly related to the war; it was foggy and there is little to no electricity to light buildings for a helicopter to see.
331dot (
talk)
11:29, 18 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support Alt2, the high profile nature of the victims is noteable in and of itself, regardless of the circumstances of the crash.✨ 4 🧚♂amKING11:42, 18 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose. There's a war going on, and unfortunately people die during wars. The loss of a helicopter is a roughly weekly occurrence in Ukraine these days, and we wouldn't blurb the death of an equivalent minister in other countries. The war is already covered in ongoing and the article is a 3-sentence stub with barely any more information than is in the blurb. Monastyrsky's article isn't much better. Unless Zelenskyy or Putin are killed, I don't think any individual casualties of this war would justify a personal blurb.
Modest Geniustalk12:43, 18 January 2023 (UTC)reply
regardless of the war happening or not, cause is not attributed to the war at this time, and the dead are not combatants of the war or on the front line. Having the leadership of any major government department all die in the same accident is blurb worthy imo... I think it's wrong to write this off as "of course people die in war". ✨ 4 🧚♂amKING12:52, 18 January 2023 (UTC)reply
As for the moment it doesn’t appear to have been anything combat-related, so I don’t believe it makes sense to file it under the ongoing item.
The Kip (
talk)
18:36, 18 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose for now for quality reasons. Article is WAY too short for posting on the main page; it contains scantly more information than the blurb would. Ping me once it is expanded for a re-evaluation. At this time, it is NOT main page ready. --
Jayron3212:49, 18 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Changing to Support Article is still short (so PLEASE keep expanding it!) but it has grown to where it has enough additional information to be worth directing readers to. --
Jayron3216:05, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Wait on quality, Support on principle the current crash article is indeed too short. Principle-wise, though, while Ukraine is in a state of war this crash appears mostly unrelated (no claims from either side that Russia had caused it to crash).
Juxlos (
talk)
12:51, 18 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose on quality - article needs decent structure, like the Yeti Airlines article has. Significant enough to feature, but this needs to be addressed first.
Mjroots (
talk)
12:57, 18 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I agree with the sentiment, but I'm going to say again that the specific use of 'notable' in
WP:GNG means that it's not a term which will carry much weight in arguing for things to be promoted to the home page.
GenevieveDEon (
talk)
14:34, 18 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support - government minister dies in office seems blurbable to me, especially as unrelated to the war covered in ongoing, but even then wouldnt be opposed to a blurb here if it was related. nableezy -
18:23, 18 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose on quality. A dozen or so people dying at the same time is not notable, but the sudden death of a cabinet minister of a country engaged in the world's largest ongoing war definitely is.
Thebiguglyalien (
talk)
22:39, 18 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support once article is expanded. This would be posted if it occurred in any country not at war, and since this incident is not directly related to the war in Ukraine, it is not covered in ongoing. --
RockstoneSend me a message!00:34, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose on quality for now. Unless the article has been expanded, I do not see this getting blurbed. However, I could support the inclusion of Monastyrsky's article to the RD section, as that looks to be well-cited (although personally I still find it a bit short).
Vida0007 (
talk)
05:32, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support now, as it looks like this is already good enough to be posted, although I still find it somewhat short, just like Monastyrsky's article. Speaking of Monastyrsky, his article is about to be bumped out of the RD section too (unless nothing gets approved in the coming days); I think it would be better to blurb this helicopter crash once his article is no longer on the RD.
Vida0007 (
talk)
00:15, 21 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Weak oppose – Article is very stubby. The quality is good for its length, but there's not much here. This is not a great representation of Wikipedia's ability to describe recent events. ~
Maplestrip/Mable (
chat)
08:30, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support Pretty significant for Ukrainian politics, and comparing it to the Nepal airline crash article, it stacks up pretty alright. Not Wikipedia's best work, for sure, but I think it's acceptable enough to go on the main page.
TheBlueSkyClub (
talk)
16:34, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment I expanded the article with details about the aircraft involved, passengers and crew. I also added a picture of the actual helicopter from 2020, which was originally published by Ukraine's Interior Ministry:
[23]. I believe this doesn't present a copyright issue, as it is from an official government source, but I'm not fully sure. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
YD407OTZ (
talk •
contribs)
YD407OTZ, the image appears to have been licensed properly, so i don't think there is a copyright issue. however, your upload appears to be a duplicate of a file that already exists on commons,
here, which was uploaded at a higher quality. it may be better to simply use that file instead and request that the duplicate be deleted.
dying (
talk)
04:00, 20 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Thank you, you're right. I searched for "Airbus H225" on Commons before uploading, so that's why I didn't find it. I updated the article to link to the higher quality file and requested deletion for mine.
YD407OTZ (
talk)
04:28, 20 January 2023 (UTC)reply
no worries,
YD407OTZ. i also sometimes fail to find pictures on commons, only to realize later that there was an obvious query that i had overlooked. in this case, i happened to be aware of the previously uploaded photo simply because i had seen it used in
the uk wikipedia article, and had been thinking of adding it to the en wikipedia article myself.
dying (
talk)
10:45, 20 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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: Haven't looked in depth, but looks fine at a surface level. Could see the helicopter crash being blurbed (16 dead / 10 injured) as an alternative, if an article appears.
Anarchyte (
talk)
08:53, 18 January 2023 (UTC)reply
There is an
article already, but in its current state (a stub) I doubt it is up to ITN standards yet. My personal opinion would be to support on the notability basis, but I say we should wait for the article to be developed more before posting.
SBS6577P (
talk)
09:46, 18 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I already called for this move in my response above, but this isn't what
WP:SNOW is for, IMHO. Until the proposed blurb above is posted, I think it may be helpful for this proposal to exist as an alternate.
GenevieveDEon (
talk)
13:04, 18 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support - This should be added to RD, and pulled if mentioned in the blurb on the helicopter crash if that gets posted. Article is in fair shape.
Mjroots (
talk)
13:18, 18 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support Article is minimally adequate for RD. Marking as ready. Given the crash nomination above is nowhere near adequate for posting, I suggest we go with this for now. -
Ad Orientem (
talk)
02:18, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
A
polar bear attacks and kills a woman and her son in
Wales,
Alaska,
United States, after charging several others, in the first fatal attack since the early 1980s. The bear is shot and killed following the attack.
(CNN)(BBC News)
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.
Death date conflict The cited NYT article says she "died on Monday in Syosset, N.Y",
[24] which would be January 16, but the WP page says January 17.—
Bagumba (
talk)
21:50, 21 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
Not yet ready I added 2 cn tags in the first paragraph, where the footnote did not support the entire text before it. Also, the Coaching record section is uncited.
Curbon7 (
talk)
13:09, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose Lead is too sparse. Also, it seems
WP:OR that he is (only) "known for" the 1st 3-pointer, but some background is needed in the body of this (e.g. new rules, multiple games that night without exact timing) either way.—
Bagumba (
talk)
05:41, 21 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
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: Just had a brief look, mainly to check sourcing. There seem to be some unsourced statements here and there, but not too many.
Sunshineisles2 (
talk)
03:07, 18 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Not yet ready, but close First half has a couple cn tags, but the second half has quite a bit more. Also, the Championships and accomplishments is partially uncited.
Curbon7 (
talk)
16:05, 20 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
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.
She didn't llve through COVID-19, she tested positive for
SARS-CoV-2 and felt fine until she tested negative. It happens to some people. Sometimes it's down to the person's immune response, sometimes the test is wrong.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
04:39, 18 January 2023 (UTC)reply
In what sense is 'testing positive, not dying, then testing negative' not 'living through Covid'? She may have been affected by complications, but so may millions of us. We still live, until we die. (Also, what is the relevance of your comment to the progress of the nomination?)
GenevieveDEon (
talk)
15:02, 18 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The D in COVID stands for
disease and the A in asymptomatic stands for no such thing. The article notes no initial symptoms nor further complications, so this idea that she may have had any is baseless speculation. We know she tested positive, meaning she was likely carrying the virus that can cause COVID. Likewise, a person holding a gun or vial of poison is at risk, but nobody should say that person thus survived a shooting or poisoning. Here, two people wrote she had or lived through a disease, which is just as false. My bolded Support and "article looks fine" are relevant to posting this, the rest is just an attempt to counter COVID misinformation online.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
22:42, 18 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support Fourth oldest verified person ever. I think that is notable enough to get a blurb, tbh. But at the very least she should definitely be in the recent deaths section. Article looks good, well cited.
e.b. (
talk)
16:11, 18 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose pending article fixes. Much of the article is uncited. I've added a blanket refimprove tag, but as of right now, the article is missing cites for 1) the second half of the first paragraph for the "Early Life" section 2) about two thirds of the "Political Career" section. Additionally, the political career section has major issues regarding
WP:PROSELINE problems. --
Jayron3213:23, 17 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose Since the President of Vietnam is purely ceremonial, this really doesn't mean anything outside of Vietnam, maybe the scandals in the government but despite that, this really carries no significance.
Vriend1917 (
talk)
15:21, 17 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support According to our article, the Presidency in Vietnam has considerable power on paper, comparable with the US President, but the de facto situation depends on the individual. In this case, the main story seems to be the anti-corruption drive in which this person has been caught out. It is therefore comparable with the EU corruption scandal which we blurbed recently. As the scandal related to Covid, it's also similar to the fall from grace of Boris Johnson.
Andrew🐉(
talk)
19:40, 17 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose on article quality - Political career needs work and citations. I want to Support on notability but I don't immediately see any links to scandals he was involved in? Those should be linked in the blurb, if the blurb is to be posted.
QueensanditsCrazy (
talk)
23:09, 17 January 2023 (UTC)reply
As best I can tell, there were no scandals. He just accepted that 539 of his underlings had done wrong, and so quit, with grace. Mystery, hell yeah, but no (apparent) scandal.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
23:48, 17 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose – Quality of the article is currently not up there. Article doesn't go into much depth about the recent events either. If the article is improved, I can see this being posted, yes. ~
Maplestrip/Mable (
chat)
08:50, 18 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support once the article is in good enough condition. Ideally time the blurb to appear after the resignation has been accepted, and include mention of his successor. A head of state being replaced is on ITN/R.
GenevieveDEon (
talk)
10:26, 18 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose on quality, support with edits His article needs work. Also, if this corruption scandal is notable enough, why doesn't it have a page? Does anyone know if it has a page in Vietnamese?
e.b. (
talk)
16:18, 18 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Strong oppose on qualityNguyễn Xuân Phúc is of extraordinarily poor quality. It would take a Herculean feat to get it even remotely ready. Prose is atrocious, sources are practically nonexistant.
Curbon7 (
talk)
15:32, 20 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
Oppose The first half of the article is fine, but the second half is very poorly sourced, with about a dozen unsourced statements. The Awards section is also entirely unsourced.
Curbon7 (
talk)
15:26, 20 January 2023 (UTC)reply
At least six people including three children died and 176 people were injured from cuts and falls while flying kites during Uttarayan festival in
Gujarat. Some bled to death as revellers used sharp strings that entangled around the necks.
(The Tribune)
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.
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.
Close, but not yet ready The second half of the article is fine, besides the Awards section which is partially unsourced. I fixed up the first half a bit, there were spots where the footnote only partially cited the text before it that I think have now been fixed, but it would still benefit from a source spot check. Case in point: I added a cn tag into the 2nd para of the section as the footnote did not fully cite the paragraph.
Curbon7 (
talk)
15:21, 20 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The lone footnote in the "Early life and education section" cannot support much of the materials in that section (failed a spot check). The footnote is therefore moved up and a few {cn} tags were added there. More than half of the table under "Honours and awards" needs sources, too. Please add more REFs. --
PFHLai (
talk)
00:54, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose - Similar to my opinion on
a similar story earlier this month, the arrest itself is not notable. If it leads to any violence/clashes, then maybe we could talk about the arrest not for its own notability, but for that of the clashes it has caused. Either way, the article is not currently updated enough for a blurb. The ⬡ BestagonT/C16:23, 16 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support he was considered "one of the ten most wanted and powerful criminals in the world", the news has been reported in the home page of many important newspapers around the world (The Guardian, El pais, Le monde, BBC news, Folha de S. Paulo, Süddeutsche Zeitung, for example)
Support Arrests can be problematic for us because of the presumption of innocence. But, in this case, sentence has already been passed and it's a life sentence.
Andrew🐉(
talk)
18:26, 16 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support Among the world’s most wanted fugitives, this doesn’t happen too often. A semi-similar comparison might be the death of Al-Zawahiri a little while back, which did get blurbed.
The Kip (
talk)
18:34, 16 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose on quality This absolutely isn't getting posted until the multiple unsourced statements and even paragraphs are fixed. Also, this is a BLP, remember - so unsourced sntences like "(he) and committed his first of many murders at 18.", "Messina Denaro gets his money through an extensive extortion racket", "He was involved in olive oil production in a corrupt business, which used cheap African labour. " and "...is said to be the father of an extramarital child" can't stand. There are a lot of "allegedly"s, "said to be"s "believed to be"s and so on. Needs a lot of work.
Black Kite (talk)20:02, 16 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support on significance, oppose on quality right now - We posted
El Chapo and
Whitey Bulger, we should post this, too: a top-10-most-wanted fugitive apprehension is global news. However, the article is not yet ready as BK points out above; I've fixed a little bit earlier, but there is still more to be done for this BLP.
Levivich (
talk)
20:06, 16 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Weak Support due to quality The capture of a major criminal, especially mafia boss is quite important, although the quality of the article needs to be improved immediately if this would be posted.
Vriend1917 (
talk)
22:10, 16 January 2023 (UTC)reply
There’s a pretty sizable difference between the son of El Chapo, a somewhat important cartel boss, and the actual capo dei capi of the Sicilian mob.
The Kip (
talk)
00:09, 17 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The subject was already tried in absentia, and convicted, and sentenced to life in prison, 20 years ago. He was already a fugitive for 10 years at that point. He was given another life sentence ten years ago. This is the capture of literally one of the most wanted men in the world for decades.
Levivich (
talk)
00:36, 17 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose on quality, support on principle. Already convicted in absentia, and role as the head of the Sicilian Mafia is significant enough to merit a blurb. Article obviously needs a ton of referencing work though. --
Patar knight - chat/contributions07:14, 17 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support, one of the most wanted top European mafia criminals. His 30 year-long run is notable as much as his responsibilities and the fact he will get one of the most severe punishment in the world (article 41-bis), and should be specified in the blurb.
Lone Internaut (
talk)
07:44, 17 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support on significance, but the article still needs work. It's pretty rare to capture such a major organised crime boss and it made headlines in global media. We have usually avoided posting arrests, sticking to convictions, but he has twice been convicted in absentia and given life sentences, so now is fine to post. Unfortunately there are still several paragraphs of the biography that have no citations, and a section of
WP:PROSELINE. There have been a lot of edits in the last 24 hours though, so hopefully those issues can be addressed soon.
Modest Geniustalk19:35, 17 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support in principle as this is making global headlines and we're often too stingy to post things on ITN. However, while the article has many citations, it still needs work per Modest Genius et. al.
Ed[talk][majestic titan]02:21, 18 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
Support I cleaned-up the article as best I could. Sourcing issues appear to be fixed and the article is holistic enough. Man that article was a mess.
Curbon7 (
talk)
14:56, 20 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Weak oppose Insufficient depth of coverage about the subject's political and legal career; essentially a resume in prose format. SpencerT•C03:37, 23 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
Support blurb. Dubbed most beautiful woman in the world. Co-star of Connery, Curtis, and others. Glittering career in various fields.
Kirill C1 (
talk)
15:02, 16 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support blurb once the quality issues are addressed which I assume will happen shortly with the current level of editing activity. Very influential figure in her fields. Regards
SoWhy15:23, 16 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose blurb nothing in article points to a legacy or other qualification as a transformative figure in the field. I know her name is extremely well known, but the reason to post a blurb should not be on popularity but merit, and that's simply not demonstrated in the article currently (that could be added to resolve that issue, if sources exist for that). --
Masem (
t)
15:30, 16 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose RD for now Missing ```sources in just about every single section. Once that's addressed, I'd say weak oppose blurb- certainly a highly notable individual, but still an old woman who retired decades ago (so no extra newsworthiness based on immediacy) and was never close to being the most famous or most acclaimed person in her field. --
Kicking222 (
talk)
15:48, 16 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support RD pending article improvement, but oppose blurb regardless of quality. Not even as notable as some of the recent nominations for which there was no consensus to post. The ⬡ BestagonT/C16:25, 16 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose blurb She's definitely a major figure but I don't think Lollobrigida is quite the most famous or acclaimed in her field. I don't wish to sound dismissive but there is a more famous and more widely acclaimed Italian actress who is also best known for her 1950s and 60s film roles and her beauty. When the time comes, I'd support blurbing
her.
Humbledaisy (
talk)
18:50, 16 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support blurb but the article does need some serious work. Maybe RD now and blurb when the article is in a better shape. --
jonas (
talk)
08:58, 17 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Old Woman Dies BBC notes her career faded in the 1960s, moved into photography and politics, hardly changed those games. Never heard of her myself, but her article makes clear her film career was nothing to sneeze at, and she was more famous than Constantine II in Europe and abroad. Not who I'd call one of the most beautiful women of any era, but far from ugly; a Photo RD might make sense eventually.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
18:39, 17 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I can't help it if many sources and some preceding voters brought up the fact that she was known as a screen beauty in a widely sexist cinematic era. All I'm saying is yeah, that isn't a good reason to blurb someone when they die much later. It is a good reason to remember them with a photograph, since photography is all about capturing physical beauty.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
03:12, 18 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Do I at least get
credit for correcting "not what I'd call" to "not who I'd call"? I meant the first revision in an idiomatic way, but still. I have long appreciated the fact that women described as beautiful are people, too, whatever you people want to believe.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
05:58, 21 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support in principle per this sentence in the lead, which establishes her importance over an extended period of time: "She was one of the highest-profile European actresses of the 1950s and early 1960s." Unfortunately, this article needs a good amount of work to bring it up to main-page standards, including a citation for that quoted sentence (which isn't backed up in the article, as far as I can see).
Ed[talk][majestic titan]02:27, 18 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Photo RD I think a photo RD would make a lot of sense here as a compromise position, and this subject would be a great choice for one due her symbol as a sex icon and as an empowered woman.
Curbon7 (
talk)
12:25, 20 January 2023 (UTC)reply
So if you're not notable enough for a blurb, you can still get a photo RD by being attractive. Is that the message I'm getting from your !vote? Jeez, and all this coming shortly after the failed Barbara Walters blurb nom... 🌈WaltCip-(
talk)13:53, 20 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I did not participate in the Barbara Walters nomination, so I have no opinion there. I'm just saying that Photo RD is a valid option for these marginal cases where it also makes sense.
Curbon7 (
talk)
03:58, 21 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Thanks for the new footnotes. I clicked on the linked refs, but I was unable to find the first three films listed in the table (Lucia di Lammermoor, This Wine of Love, and Black Eagle) in the linked refs, and I stopped looking. So, I wonder if the {{failed verification}} tag is in order. Some of the films can be found
here. Useful? --
PFHLai (
talk)
22:56, 21 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Not a requiremeent, but the most transparent approach to show what is sourced or not is to footnote the individual entries with a specific source(s). —
Bagumba (
talk)
11:07, 22 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
Oppose blurb, support RD - Article could use a little work, but I think it could be posted. This is not notable for a blurb however, unfortunately this will happen a lot in Afghanistan from now on.
PrecariousWorlds (
talk)
11:06, 16 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support RD pending article improvement, but oppose blurb regardless of quality. Not even as notable as some of the recent nominations for which there was no consensus to post. The ⬡ BestagonT/C12:41, 16 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Young Woman Assassinated This is a legit news story, as opposed to an already famous person's obituary. Since it happened in a country where journalists and police suck at cooperation, though, the article is probably going to stay too short for me to support a blurb. Support RD and may they find the bastards, whoever "they" are.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
18:57, 17 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment - Whatever the hell happened to the "death as the main story" criterion for
death blurbs? Is that now just plain not applicable to situations like this, even when there's an actual assassination? Since when did "unless this happens in Afghanistan" become an exception to the rule?--🌈WaltCip-(
talk)20:20, 17 January 2023 (UTC)reply
After much half-assed analysis, it seems Afghanistan death must come in high numbers or contemporarily with an American political situation to stand a shot at posting. Historically, I mean. The future always has a chance...unless.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
22:20, 17 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
Support. Just added/replaced a few citations, removed a few duplicated ones. Seems good to go now, although "He missed most of the 2002–03 season due to concussion from a puck hitting him in the back of the head during pre-season practice, and was subsequently suspended in February 2003 by the Canadiens for failure to report to the minor-league AHL team in Utah." could use a better source.
Mooonswimmer12:52, 16 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Former lawmaker
Mursal Nabizada and one of her
bodyguards are shot and killed in
Kabul inside her home, while her brother and a second security guard are injured.
Taliban police spokesman Khalid Zadran condemns the killing and says that a "serious investigation has been launched".
(AFP via Arab News)
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.
Comment Article is well-sourced and holistic. As stated by nom, once sources are added for the works, it should be good to go.
Curbon7 (
talk)
14:12, 20 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
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.
You'll notice that there is no "blurb removal" template. Ongoing items can be removed, but I don't think regular blurbs can be removed without a replacement ready, for Main Page balance reasons if nothing else. Would be good to see something else posted though. Maybe expand the Nepal crash article?
Pawnkingthree (
talk)
16:33, 15 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support - I'm not sure what my colleagues are talking about, but it's absolutely possible to remove the bottom two bullet points from the ITN box. It won't break anything to do so. I mean, just look at the front page: the ITN box is already longer than the TFA box, and the top-right (ITN, OTD) is already longer than top-left (TFA, DYK), so removing these two and shortening the ITN box will actually make the main page look more balanced, not less. There is no requirement that the ITN box have a certain number of bullet points or lines. Worst case scenario, we could copyedit the other blurbs to make them longer if we had to, or even just add some line breaks. It's perfectly possible. It's not usually how ITN works -- usually, things just roll off -- but I agree that it's better to remove these now rather than have stale news from last month still on there. It's unorthodox to nominate a removal, but in this case, I strongly support it.
Levivich (
talk)
18:51, 15 January 2023 (UTC)reply
It has to balance with the main page (specifically, TFA). Right now it does. Removing two items will imbalance it. Given that the aircrash story will likely be promoted soon with article expansion, then we can remove them. Just how ITN is supposed to operate.
Masem (
t)
18:58, 15 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose Just because they have been on the main page for a while, doesn't mean we have to remove them immediately. Eventually other major events will remove them from the front page.
TomMasterRealTALK19:31, 15 January 2023 (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.
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: Very famous public figure in the post-Soviet sphere (to this day), one of the most famous Georgians. With due respect, far more notable than this
Sinikiwe Mpofu for example.
Synotia (
talk)
15:01, 15 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment A blurb has not been proposed for either individual, notability is relevant only so far as a standalone article existing - otherwise only article quality matters. This article needs work and contains plenty of unsourced statements.
-- a ladinsane(channel two)15:21, 15 January 2023 (UTC)reply
What about Sinikwe Mpofu though, that article is far shorter. I don't understand you guys' priorities, how some Zimbabwean cricket coach apparently has a greater legacy than one of the most famous Georgian and Soviet actors and singers.
Synotia (
talk)
16:37, 15 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Every statement in this article should be referenced, and Career section still has some citations missing. Ancestory section should be either referenced or removed. Then this will be posted, nothing more is required for RD.
Kirill C1 (
talk)
16:46, 15 January 2023 (UTC)reply
It was shorter but it was referenced. Your nomination has entire sections without any citations. It won't be posted until that is fixed. The current rules are that anyone with an article is eligible for RD, so we don't have to have arguments over whether this person is more notable that that person, and just focus on article quality.
Pawnkingthree (
talk)
16:46, 15 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose The nominator clearly did not read the part of
WP:ITNRD where it says that "Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post". Large portions of this article are completely unsourced. ITN articles don't have to be GAs, but they need to meet at least a basic level of quality.
Curbon7 (
talk)
03:47, 16 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The sentence about this recent death remains unsourced (date needs to be specific). Many bullet-points in the Discography and Filmography sections are also unsourced. Please add more REFs. --
PFHLai (
talk)
18:13, 21 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support as an editor updating the article. Major loss of life (45 out of 72) makes it an extremely significant event. I was just typing an ITN nomination myself when I got pinged. Also added picture of aircraft involved.
SBS6577P (
talk)
07:50, 15 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support Sadly not that rare of an occurance given the airline involved, but it is generating significant media attention. ✨ 4 🧚♂amKING08:28, 15 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Removed Article has 6 sentences in the body about the flight and crash itself; insufficient depth of coverage at present that does not meet minimum ITN standards. (Per
WP:ITN: "In the case of a new, event-specific article, the traditional cut-off for what is enough has been around three complete, referenced and well-formed paragraphs"). SpencerT•C09:04, 15 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment. Admin attention needed. What is there now seems to meet the citation requirements and also the three paragraph minimums. Should be good to repost.
Ktin (
talk)
16:24, 15 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support Significant aviation accident, largest in Nepal since 1992, and ATR-72 is operated by dozens of airlines worldwide
Ppt91 (
talk)
18:30, 15 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The death of Pelé had more impact on the world, as cynical as it may sound. Not even Nepalis care about Nepal's aviation safety.
Synotia (
talk)
21:26, 15 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I get what you're saying, but those 72 people had families, and this has sent shock and sadness through Nepal. Not only that, it's being extensively covered In The News.
PrecariousWorlds (
talk)
09:22, 16 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose Only affects a minor amount of people. What happened in Brazil a few days ago is more important, it would feel wrong to sideline it for this. --
Synotia (
talk)
21:28, 15 January 2023 (UTC)reply
It's not a competition; news tickers roll over, and that's how they work. We don't have a duty to keep surfacing older news if there's newer stories. And I still don't consider 72 lives lost in one incident to be a 'minor amount'.
GenevieveDEon (
talk)
14:39, 18 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
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.
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.
Wait - The article contains a CN tag, and two of the awards are unsourced. These issues, IMO, are not enough to bring down the nomination, but it is preferable to wait until they are fixed, especially that we still have a few days until this item becomes stale. The ⬡ BestagonT/C15:55, 16 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Are the two unsourced awards you are referring to Member and Chancellor of the Order of Ontario? I believe any Lieutenant Governor of Ontario is ex officio Chancellor of the Order and a member as well. Should the former even be included in the Honours and Awards section?
If one searches for David Onley in the table of Order of Ontario members
here, there is a result. The source also states "The Lieutenant Governor of Ontario serves as Chancellor of the Order of Ontario, and Honorary Chair to the Council." Would this be enough to source both "awards"?
Mooonswimmer19:38, 16 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support. Since the Canada 125th medal has been commented out since it didn't have independent sourcing, I think it's good to go now. Definitely needs more coverage of his time as the LG, but it's sufficient for the purposes of ITN/RD. ----
Patar knight - chat/contributions19:50, 18 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
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.
I agree. Regarding the article's sole tag (the {when} tag), Akbari served as Deputy Minister of Defence until 2005. This Reuters
article states that: "According to a caption in a video aired by Iran's state news agency IRNA on Thursday, Akbari moved to Britain after being briefly detained and released on bail in 2008. Reuters could not verify if Akbari had moved to Britain in 2008, or when he returned to Iran."
How do you think we should rephrase "After leaving office,[when?] Akbari moved to the United Kingdom, where he became a British-Iranian dual national citizen."?
Mooonswimmer13:54, 18 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I think we should the say that he left office in 2005, and later moved to Britain. We could then proceed to mention the ambiguity about when he moved to the UK. The ⬡ BestagonT/C14:44, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The
British government announces a ban on
single-use plastic cutlery, plates, polystyrene cups, bowls, and balloon sticks in
England beginning in October as part of an effort to reduce
plastic pollution. The ban will apply to all retailers, takeaways, and food vendors.
(BBC News)
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: Hong Kong DJ that hosted the longest running radio program in Hong Kong from 1970 to 2021. Named "The World's Most Durable DJ" in 2000 by the Guinness Book of World Records. I've added sources to at least every paragraph.
Yeeno (
talk)
21:42, 14 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
Comment Added and replaced quite a few citations. Only one {cn} tag left. I'm unsure about how reliable EVEL*WAYS, A Daring Approach to Life (published by GraF X Publishing) is as a source. Couldn't find anything solid for the unsourced "Business ventures" section, although a bit more digging might turn up something.
Mooonswimmer18:57, 14 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
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.
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.
Support - Not only was her father incredibly famous, but she is a well-known musician in her own right and she had ties to many other well-known people, including her marriage to
Nicholas Cage.
Aaarrrgghh Can we please get over the pointless "I've heard of this person and liked her" comments and start to address the citation needed tags?
HiLo48 (
talk)
02:45, 13 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Aaarrrgghh again Can we please get over the pointless "I've heard of this person and liked her" comments and start to address the citation needed tags?
HiLo48 (
talk)
03:35, 13 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I agree with the aaarrrggghs—every RD candidate has the text "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." appended to it. Focus on quality of the article, not importance of its subject.
DecafPotato (
talk)
04:23, 13 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Articles should be well referenced; one or two "citation needed" tags may not hold up an article, but any contentious statements must have a source, and having entire sections without any sources is unacceptable.Knightoftheswords281 (
talk)
04:55, 13 January 2023 (UTC)reply
People appear to be adding unsourced content. I just tagged an entirely unsourced paragraph that I don't think was there when I first looked at the article. -
Ad Orientem (
talk)
04:00, 14 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Reminder - ITN doesn't give a rats how awesome or significant someone is when it comes to RD. This isn't the place to give your plaudits or obituaries. Any discussion should focus on getting the article updated, fixed up, and ready for the main page, unless we are considering a full-blown blurb. --🌈WaltCip-(
talk)13:34, 13 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support once ready Still some sourcing issues in the discography section but otherwise the article looks good to me. Moved this to January 12 as well, as she died on that date (and the first reports of her death were also on that same day, at least in the U.S.).
Vida0007 (
talk)
17:12, 13 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
Support - It needs some work but there's just one cn tag and many of the bibliography that is not cited does have ISBNs which counts as a citation right? If someone does a bit more work on it, it would be up to scratch, and as it looks right now, I still think it's fairly okay, though I can see why others opposed it. Maybe more work has already been done on it.--
SitcomyFan (
talk)
19:35, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Update - I don't have time to do a lot of work on this article, but I gave it a very quick clean-up. Sourced the one cn tag. Moved unsourced titles from bibilography to talk page (as it wasn't a complete bibilography to begin with) - they can be moved back into article once sourced. I wouldn't normally dot his but as I said it was only a Partial Bibliography to begin with and needs a lot of work. Otherwise, the article looks well referenced, no other tags, and given this is the last day for this nom and it was kind of languishing, I thought a quick clean-up was in order. If other editors still feel this isn't up to snuff, fair enough, but I think it looks okay - so if it's suitable for the main page, then maybe add your support and/or do some work on it too if you like.
SitcomyFan (
talk)
19:51, 19 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
Oppose Sadly, our articles on Indian politicians tend to be very poor and this is no exception. Large blocks of unsourced text and a completely unsourced table which is entirely unsuitable for an article appearing on the main page. The infobox also needs major clean-up.
Curbon7 (
talk)
01:35, 13 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Interestingly, the article had about 60K organic page views on the day of subject's unfortunate death, which goes to illustrate the magnitude of his popularity. Unfortunately, by neglecting noms like this we do a great disservice to ourselves and to the audience.
MBlaze Lightning (
talk)
16:56, 15 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Yeah, thanks for posting, PFHLai, and don't get me wrong, I was concerned that the nom would get stale and be occluded by other more recent deaths. But good to see the entries being arranged in the order of date of posting these days, and not by date of death, which hardly gave older entries sufficient main page exposure.
MBlaze Lightning (
talk)
19:11, 15 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support A big leader whose death attracted a large amount of coverage. I agree that the nom has done good work with the article.
Dympies (
talk)
17:05, 15 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
Oppose for now. For a biographical article, it is light on actual biography. Needs a significant expansion to be considered for the main page. --
Jayron3216:13, 12 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment - Filmography now almost completely sourced. Film section is fully sourced. Television section not fully, but mostly. BFI and TVGuide sources I found, along with a couple more. Another editor might be able to find more? @
PFHLai, is today the last day for this nomination? I might have a look for more sources later if another editor doesn't find them first.--
SitcomyFan (
talk)
13:04, 18 January 2023 (UTC)reply
@
SitcomyFan While the nominated article may be READY for RD, there is only a single support vote and there are more oppose votes. So, there is no consensus to post. And now, this is late. Please feel free to post an appeal at
Wikipedia talk:In the news. Thank you. --
PFHLai (
talk)
13:54, 21 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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: Not being widely reported by English RS yet. However, Steve Lee, McCarthy's own son, and many prominent figures in the Twin Peaks community have been reporting it for days. WP Film has also posted it. Was waiting for more English RS to pick this up but as of yet they have not and am concerned if we wait much longer to post it on ITN it will no longer be eligible. It happened sadly 5 or more days ago, but was also reported by WP Film 2 days ago, so should go from that date or date of being nominated here. If we wait for English RS to pick this up, can it go from that date? If so, this nomination could be made later, but thought it best to put it here now just in case. --
2001:BB6:4E52:7D00:C18F:75D2:3719:418E (
talk)
10:18, 12 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose I agree with my six-sided friend above, the article is rather light on biographical details. I'm sure that her entire life is not sufficiently summarized in 12 lines of text. This needs expansion before it is main-page ready. --
Jayron3216:15, 12 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment/update More information has been added to the article, including some more career info and tributes from actors, also some more personal info, but as mentioned in one of the sources, she was very private about her personal life, so not much info is out there unless another editor here can find more. Most of the info is about her career. I think the article should be long enough now for ITN especially given all the references?
2001:BB6:4E52:7D00:85B5:AB97:266A:8B4D (
talk)
09:30, 14 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Another update - More information, including some personal/biographical information, has been added. I think this as much as can be found now given the actress's prefereance to keep her private life private. But it covers her career in detail and there's quite a bit about her personal life too. Is it considered ready/applicable now?
2001:BB6:4E52:7D00:2C12:61F4:4248:6BD (
talk)
14:50, 15 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment - Still hasn't been picked up by many English-speaking sources. I think it will be as most Twin Peaks actors who die get picked up eventually, so I think this is still within date and could be for awhile until it's picked up more widely, but at the same time, if we're going to post it, it should probably be posted soon. @
PFHLai, could you take a look?
SitcomyFan (
talk)
20:44, 18 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The
United Kingdom's
postal serviceRoyal Mail tells people to stop sending mail abroad due to a "cyber incident" that is causing severe disruption to mail delivery, with "minor delays" to mail coming into the UK also being reported. It is later confirmed to be a
ransomware attack from a
Russia-linked
hacker group.
(BBC News)
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.
Support blurb, oppose article The article is a stub, it has to be expanded if this would make it on ITN. Despite that, this definitely could make it as this election can change the outcome of Beninese democracy.
JoeBidenReal1942 (
talk)
05:44, 12 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose Article is not in a state which is appropriate for highlighting on the main page. It is far too short, and has very little prose about the election. At this point it consists of a table and a paragraph describing how elections work in Benin. --
Jayron3213:39, 12 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose Article is way out of shape, and some parts of the article are written as if election results have yet to be announced. Not to mention, pretty short and gives no real detail on the election.
TheBlueSkyClub (
talk)
16:41, 12 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
Support The article is in great shape, not even any citation needed templates. Her death / obituary is reliably sourced by Vogue and other possible sources include the Associated Press.
Trillfendi (
talk)
19:28, 11 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I boldly rerated this article as C-class. Articles getting rated lower than their actual quality are somewhat common, since the wikiproject templates tend to get updated pretty infrequently.
Duckmather (
talk)
01:02, 12 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Agreed. I even think this meets all requirements for B-class and have changed it accordingly. Probably could be a GA if someone wants to take the time to shepherd it through the process. Regards
SoWhy11:29, 12 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
Oppose Article is a seriously short stub. It is not appropriate for the main page at this time. Ping me when it isn't, and I'll re-assess what is there. --
Jayron3213:20, 11 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose As FAA has started green-lighting airports to let flights take off, the core crisis is ended, and while some 3,500 flights were delayed (not cancelled) this becomes a first-world problem that will be forgotten within the week. --
Masem (
t)
13:31, 11 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose. Flights in one country were delayed for a few hours, but have now resumed. Whoop de doo. Article is a stub and there's no sign of any lasting impact.
Modest Geniustalk14:35, 11 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Strong oppose - This is similar to the one in the Philippines which wasn't posted (and rightly so). This is no different and any impact would disappear in 2-3 days. The ⬡ Bestagon[t][c]14:42, 11 January 2023 (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.
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: German voice actor for decades, the voice of Roger Moore and others, in long-term television series. No article yet. --
Gerda Arendt (
talk)
11:54, 16 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
Support 3055 characters (505 words) "readable prose size", short but in limit; sufficient sourced (5 refs). I'm not enthusiastic, but the article seems to be ok.
Grimes2 (
talk)
15:06, 14 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
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.
I mean in terms of influence, he is looked up at by a lot of rock guitarists as one of the greatest to command the instrument. One has to wonder if we would consider a blurb for Jimmy Page, Eric Clapton, David Gilmour, etc. I.e. what field are we looking at when deciding a musician was top of their field? The music genre? The instrument? - Floydianτ¢17:11, 12 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Exactly. If one were to apply the term "legendary" to a guitarist, Jeff Beck's name repeatedly comes up as one that would be so associated. 🌈WaltCip-(
talk)20:07, 12 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Page, Clapton and Gilmour are on the classic rock radios (and newfangled equivalents) every single day. Beck's one of those "underrated" legends. Well above a "hidden gem", but still someone you kind of have to seek out.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
23:04, 12 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The deal with Beck was that he was a brilliant instrumentalist who failed to catch on with any popular groups, except for some brief stints here and there. Page had Led Zeppelin, and Clapton and Gilmour could both sing. If nothing else, it's a testament to how good Beck was that he was as popular as he was, given that the bulk of his catalogue are instrumental tracks. --
Jayron3212:17, 13 January 2023 (UTC)reply
He caught on with the subfaction of my family that was fairly popular locally, too. But yeah, contrary to idiomatic opinion, the cream does not always rise to the top. At least guitar virtuosos get the mainstream rub by association and fable, though; it's almost pathetic how often I hear a ridiculously nuanced and moving horn, string or woodwind solo and don't even think to check who's playing. Just some faceless wonder signed to whichever major symphonic/philharmonic/pops recording machine. Sad!
InedibleHulk (
talk)
21:30, 13 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose for now. Still too much uncited material. About 1/2 of the 1970s section, for example, seems to lack any sourcing, and there are sporadic passages from other parts of the article as well that are missing sources. After someone fixes that, ping me to re-assess. --
Jayron3215:54, 12 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support Oh my God this is Jeff Beck people! I don't give a tinker's curse about your article issues. People will fix them if we give them a chance. This is JEFF BECK! Same as Jimi Hendrix or Stevie Ray Vaughan!
Billyshiverstick (
talk)
01:05, 14 January 2023 (UTC) just do it!!reply
So fix it - We shouldn't post an article to the main page simply because it will be fixed. If the article quality doesn't meet
WP:ITNRD, it is not posted, no matter how high the chances of it being fixed are. Fix it first, and all the opposing !votes will become supportive of the nomination. The ⬡ BestagonT/C04:27, 14 January 2023 (UTC)reply
IPs are blocked from fixing anything over there. Still nine tags after three days. Surprised by the lack of effort from regular editors for this guitar titan.
86.187.175.101 (
talk)
12:43, 14 January 2023 (UTC)reply
support - I'm still furious that you are disrespecting someone who is in the Rock and Roll hall of fame twice!! over Elvises daughter of all people. If I knew how to do it I would. So disrespectful. Shame on you.
Billyshiverstick (
talk)
06:26, 16 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose - 7 CN tags is far too much. If you feel so bad about this article not getting to the main page, perhaps you should spend some time improving it, rather than lament this "disrespect" that you're describing. The ⬡ BestagonT/C12:49, 16 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Forget 7, there's dozens of unsourced statements that don't have the tag. I couldn't even be bothered to tag them all last week because it would have taken too long to filter out which statements in an entire paragraph are covered by the single source at the end. The 1970s section in particular is pretty bad for a BLP. Most of it could be done pretty handily by someone with one of his many biographies, but not in time unfortunately. - Floydianτ¢16:38, 16 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose - there was no way I was up to the task, and barring some miracle, nobody else is. On one hand I lament that IPs were blocked (as opposed to using pending changes), but on the other, I doubt that would have made a difference on the sourcing end of matters. How unfortunate, either way. - Floydianτ¢16:32, 16 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
Comment: IMO don't think there is enough depth regarding his journalistic contributions, but will leave to another admin to assess. Essentially a CV in prose format, with one additional sentence regarding his reporting ("his reporting on the Arab Spring made him a Livingston Awards for Young Journalists finalist"). SpencerT•C05:09, 17 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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 Catholic cardinal found by a Royal Commission in Australia of having known about child sexual abuse by priests and not taken adequate action to address it.
HiLo48 (
talk)
23:45, 10 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support Article is in very good shape. Fully referenced (although there is one "page number needed" tag"). Page size is 9,877 words, close to the 10,000 word ideal, with 262 citations.
Hawkeye7(discuss)00:08, 11 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
13 for a blurb, 1 weak agree, 11 against 12 supports plus my own. While not Thatcher, Elizabeth II, or anyone quite as notable as they are, he was a king of a nation and also the last king of a nation. I think that merits a blurb.
MyriadSims (
talk)
02:02, 12 January 2023 (UTC)reply
No blurb This isn't a newsworthy death in the way that Elizabeth II was newsworthy. How many people knew there was a king of Greece? –
Muboshgu (
talk)
22:51, 10 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support blurb He was the last monarch of Greece before it turned to a republic. He was an important person in history, and deserves to be posted in my opinon.
TomMasterRealTALK00:44, 11 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose blurb No indication of being a major world figure or transformative or top of their field. (particularly in contrast to the UK royalty). More a curiousity that Greece still had royalty but had long since shifted power to a democratic process. --
Masem (
t)
01:51, 11 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Actually to correct myself the royalty was abolished 40 some years ago, so this is even less relevant as a blurb.
Masem (
t)
02:26, 11 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The UK has been through the same process as Greece, just without abolishing it all together. Power shifted to democracy over time. Constantine II was still head of state.
Support blurb He was the last king of Greece, yes many people may not know that a Greek Kingdom even existed but he was definitely an important person in modern Greek history, as said above.
JoeBidenReal1942 (
talk)
05:48, 12 January 2023 (UTC)reply
30 supports for blurb (both immediate and conditional on article quality), 15 opposing a blurb Seems sufficent enough to post. I may be off on some numbers, but that's just human error.
MyriadSims (
talk)
16:23, 16 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Indeed you are off. Don't know where you got 30 from. I count 25 at the most, even including Mablestrip's "Note" and The Corrinyial's "Undecided/Weak agree."
Pawnkingthree (
talk)
18:35, 17 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support blurb Surely the death of any (European) monarch, reigning, abdicated or deposed warrants RD and blurb. If Elizabeth II is our standard for how much coverage a death requires to be posted, how many people will qualify for that?
Estar8806 (
talk)
02:36, 11 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support blurb on principle, oppose on quality as he was one of the most significant Greek former heads of state, I believe he merits a blurb. Article quality is not sufficient to post at this time.
NorthernFalcon (
talk)
04:25, 11 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The amount of coverage about the death shouldn't be the standard, but the demonstration of importance to the world at large, which clearly was documentable for QEII, but not here.
Masem (
t)
04:47, 11 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose on quality There are multiple completely unsourced paragraphs and even sections. This article needs a significant amount of work to even be considered for posting.
Black Kite (talk)08:21, 11 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose blurb. King or not, he was not, while in office, a figure of international prominence comparable to a Thatcher, Mandela, Pélé, etc. Sandstein 10:25, 11 January 2023 (UTC)reply
In that case, we'd blurb the death of every head of state from every nation, not to mention plenty of other politicians, for being transformative figures in their own nations. --
Kicking222 (
talk)
13:58, 11 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Not every head of state or head of government is transformative in their own nation (let alone other politicians), indeed far from it, but Constatine II absolutely was. He was responsible directly or indirectly for the collapse of a democratic government, a military coup and the most acrimonious changing of political systems (monarchy to republic) in Europe since the Russian revolution.
Thryduulf (
talk)
18:34, 11 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support blurb. Last king of Greece. There are sometimes votes opposing blurbs saying that it's only "Person X dies at age". Now we can write more than that, that he was last king of Greece - maybe a film will be made about him.
Kirill C1 (
talk)
10:56, 11 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Person X is always given a job description in the format "some people" dislike; all that's changed here is it goes after the name instead of before. That's enough change to make me not want to Oppose it, but not enough to Support.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
22:29, 12 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose blurb. No more or less important than any other head of state of a small country who lost power almost 50 years ago. That is, not very important at all.
Ghmyrtle (
talk)
10:58, 11 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support blurb when the article quality is up to scratch. I don't know how more transformative you can get than being a monarch whose actions (in part) resulted in the abolition of your own monarchy - especially when you've previously been responsible for the collapse of a democratically elected government and its overthrowing by a military coup.
[32] Unquestionably more important than the average former head of state.
Thryduulf (
talk)
11:51, 11 January 2023 (UTC)reply
that's exactly the point. Btw, I wouldn't say he had responsibility for the fall of democracy. Rather that the political instability he generated helped the coup to happen.
_-_Alsor (
talk)
12:04, 11 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose blurb. There's no way he merits a blurb, I'm shocked anyone even suggested it. He reigned for just four years before being forced into exile, and has done nothing notable since the monarchy was abolished in 1973. Not a major transformative figure and doesn't come close to the Thatcher/Mandela standard. In addition, the article has an orange-level tag because numerous paragraphs are unreferenced, so is not ready for RD.
Modest Geniustalk14:42, 11 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I'm shocked that anyone can be so dismissive of him - he is by far the most notable leader of Greece of the 20th century and a supremely influential figure in the history of both that country and of national monarchs. He meets the Mandela-Thatcher standard by a country mile.
Thryduulf (
talk)
18:30, 11 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Ehhh... I don't see this guy on the same level as Mandela. That's an extraordinary claim that needs some evidence. Do kids outside of Greece learn about this guy in school?
Zagalejo (
talk)
00:13, 12 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment Taking a brief look at the international news coverage, it doesn't seem like there's very much discussion of this. Certainly I would have expected more based on his biography.--
Sunshineisles2 (
talk)
15:14, 11 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose blurb. I don't think it's dismissive to require significant coverage of someone's death when deciding whether to post a blurb and for all his accomplishments, there simply has not been any major news coverage, with most news sources treating his death as a miscellaneous news item. I checked various news sites and despite his death only being a day ago, I couldn't find any sustained coverage like we have seen with Thatcher, Pele etc. And I don't think we should start deciding who was a transformative figure, if (and especially if) there is no equivalent coverage in reliable sources. Regards
SoWhy18:57, 11 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose blurb Elizabeth II reigned for 70 years across many countries and her family were regularly front-page news around the world. Constantine reigned for nine years, in practice three - and was out of power for nearly 50 years when he died. Being the last ruler isn't per se a reason to blurb either - Gorbachev was the leader of a world superpower and actively dismantled its system rather than being removed from office, so that's completely different. The most similar case I can think of is
Michael I of Romania who was not blurbed in 2017 even though his role in his country was far more active than Constantine - he led a coup against his Holocaust collaborator prime minister and switched the country to the Allies.
Unknown Temptation (
talk)
10:06, 12 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose blurb, support RD once ready While Shinzo Abe, Mikhail Gorbachev, QE2, Benedict XVI and Jiang Zemin were all blurbed, not every former head of state has been blurbed. The best examples that I could think of are: 1)
José Eduardo dos Santos, who was not blurbed but got featured in the RD section; and 2)
Fidel V. Ramos, who was neither blurbed nor featured in the RD. I do think Constantine II falls in the same category as them, albeit slightly more notable by the mere fact that he was the last Greek monarch. I don't think he's notable enough to warrant a blurb, but he could still be featured in the recent deaths section (as long as the 15 {cn} tags have been addressed).
Vida0007 (
talk)
12:03, 12 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Your first example
was posted, while the second example is a bit misleading IMO - In
the discussion, it is evident that the reason for not posting was the state of the article at the time, with some comments explicitly stating that he was notable enough for a blurb, or close to being notable for one. The ⬡ BestagonT/C12:27, 13 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oh I forgot, my bad. I only used
this one as reference for dos Santos's. And yes, I remember the discussion for Ramos (I even commented there), but I think that Constantine II was still not as influential as the two aforementioned leaders (although mainly that was because of
Greek junta). However, I would support the RD – after all, he's also an Olympic gold medal winner – but I would switch my vote to oppose on quality for now as there are still a lot of "citation needed" tags that need to be addressed.
Vida0007 (
talk)
17:23, 13 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose blurb Not convinced that being the last monarch of somewhere is a sufficient reason to blurb. Not seeing any special or sustained coverage of his death.--
Pawnkingthree (
talk)
16:38, 12 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose An article that is orange-tagged shouldn't end up on RD. I think you could say he's blurb worthy, as he is both the last monarch and a monarch both exiled and not allowed to return to office by popular opinion, but the article just isn't up to par at the moment.
TheBlueSkyClub (
talk)
16:50, 12 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support Blurb once referencing issues are fixed. I think the death of a current or former monarch of any sovereign nation, whether or not that monarchy has since been disestablished, warrants consideration for ITN. Especially given how quiet ITN has been in the last few weeks.
2A02:C7F:2CE3:4700:E8D1:8804:7424:446D (
talk)
18:49, 12 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose blurb. Constantine was not a major international figure or cultural icon or an individual of unusual renown or accomplishment in a particular field of endeavor. Just having been a former monarch or even the last monarch in a specific country is a much lower bar than what we usually require for an ITN blurb. Tellingly, the news coverage of Constantine's death has been much more limited compared to Benedict XVI or Elizabeth II or Pele, who had recent blurbs.
Nsk92 (
talk)
23:54, 12 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support blurb - The death of a former head of state (and the last of his kind in his country) merits a blurb IMO, especially with us not having new blurbs (and the general decrease in new blurbs) for quite some time now. The ⬡ BestagonT/C12:00, 13 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support blurb in principle, oppose for now on quality - Not only the last king of Greece, but also an Olympic gold-medal winner, and unique among deposed European royals for being treated by the remaining reigning monarchs as a peer. I would like the blurb to mention his sporting achievement.
GenevieveDEon (
talk)
14:22, 13 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment I'm improving his article, I hope to have it finished for tomorrow. If someone wants to help me to expand the content and fix the cn tags will be more than welcome.
_-_Alsor (
talk)
22:06, 14 January 2023 (UTC)reply
COMMENT I've finished expanding the content and everything is duly cited with RS. There are typo and grammatical errors to be polished, but I think it's ready to be included. Decide whether in RD or blurb, but there seems to be slightly broader support for the second option.
_-_Alsor (
talk)
23:20, 16 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Post-posting support for blurb. Major figure in Greek politics, and a former head of state. While not all former heads of state/monarchs will automatically get death blurbs, I think the role that Constantine II played in how he became the last Greek monarch elevates him above others (e.g. inexperience and right-wing sympathies that lead to a military coup, failed counter-coup, and exile). Olympic Gold helps a bit too. --
Patar knight - chat/contributions06:59, 17 January 2023 (UTC)reply
There were several opposes that used as argument that other persons who were in reality blurbed were not, so this one shpuld not. I would discard such votes, in fairness one of these was by its author.
Kirill C1 (
talk)
19:13, 17 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose blurb. I thought this was long since stale, didn't even consider it might be posted so I didn't vote. He wasn't a transformative or longlasting leader and Definitely no consensus for a blurb here. —
Amakuru (
talk)
20:51, 17 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support BlurbFormer head of state who was the last king of Greece. He directly had a role in the dissolution of the monarchy, which is significant.
NoahTalk20:59, 17 January 2023 (UTC)reply
No consensus to post. And looking at how the discussion to add this to ITN is going, I doubt this will change. Feel free to nominate again next year. --Tone16:18, 10 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
March Madness is listed at ITNR, but the CFP Championship isn't, for the record. Worth noting that the former is officially NCAA-sanctioned, however; the CFP isn't.
The Kip (
talk)
04:39, 10 January 2023 (UTC)reply
@
Thriley: we don't have this year's viewing numbers yet, but
ESPN said last year's championship was the most watched non-NFL sports event in 2 years. I am skeptical it beat the World Cup, but it is a pretty widely watched event in the US.
Legoktm (
talk)
04:55, 10 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support By far the most one-sided of the 55 national championship games. No team has ever won by more than 38 points or scored more than 62 and the Georgians just went crazy and beat Texas Christian 65 to 7.
Sagittarian Milky Way (
talk)
04:40, 10 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The blurb should include the score, since that was really the most notable part of the game. Per
ESPN this was the biggest margin of victory in any bowl game, ever.
Legoktm (
talk)
04:51, 10 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support I suppose the determination of notability is just going to be a matter of disagreement between users but I believe this merits inclusion, especially with such an historic win.
Kafoxe (
talk)
07:23, 10 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support on importance, oppose on quality College Football is massively popular- the average mid-season game between two top-25 teams gets more news coverage and viewership than a lot of ITNR sports items, much less the national championship game- but the article has no prose about the game itself. --
Kicking222 (
talk)
11:46, 10 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose college football championship, not particularly important. Viewership is a weak statistic to use for posting sports championships, otherwise we'd have an endless stream of regionally important, otherwise irrelevant tournaments from large countries like US, India, and China.
AryKun (
talk)
11:55, 10 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I don't know. We seem to change our mind every year on how significant this is, based on who shows up to bat for or against the CFP.--🌈WaltCip-(
talk)12:28, 10 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Strong oppose like every other student sporting competition, which I have consistently opposed for over a decade. This is not the top level of American football (which is a minority sport anyway, in global terms), the competition is open to only a narrow range of athletes, progress in the competition is based partly on a selection committee and yearly rotation (not on-field performance), and TV viewership is not an appropriate way of deciding ITN blurbs (otherwise we'd have a constant stream of reality TV and game show stories). Also, the article has no prose summary of the game.
Modest Geniustalk12:56, 10 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose on quality; article lacks a prose summary of the game in question. Would support based on coverage of the event, which shows significance, however article cannot be posted on the main page based on quality of article. --
Jayron3213:21, 10 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose not only on the issues related to being a limited amateur sport and article quality, but also due to the fact that once the teams were decided over last weekend, this result (short of the final score) was pretty much taken for granted. --
Masem (
t)
13:32, 10 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose per my comments at the ITN/R discussion. We already post the NFL, so just as we don't post the
FA Cup in England, we also wouldn't post the second-tier domestic contest in the States. Cheers —
Amakuru (
talk)
14:16, 10 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I'm not sure if this really qualifies as "second-tier" given the amateurism/collegiate aspect of it. I wonder if
Arena Football League would be considered the second-tier to the
NFL (well, apart from that it just went bankrupt recently). 🌈WaltCip-(
talk)15:39, 10 January 2023 (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.
One person is killed and eight others are injured after a
magnitude 7.6–7.9 earthquake hits off the coast of eastern
Indonesia, causing damage to buildings, and shaking buildings as far away as
Darwin,
Australia.
(Maluku Terkini)
Protests break out in the city of
Gyumri in
Armenia against the
Russian military presence in the country and the Russian peacekeepers' inaction in ending the Lachin corridor blockade. Dozens of protesters are arrested by police after they attempted to reach the Russian military base near the city to blockade it.
(OC Media)
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.
There is a {cn} tag in the longest paragraph in this short article. I don't know maths, but this paragraph appears to explain the significance of the subject's work. Can someone in the know get more footnotes into this paragraph, please? Thanks. --
PFHLai (
talk)
17:03, 15 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Regretful oppose - Article quality is amazing, but this is not the sort of news we post on ITN, especially that we posted the floods themselves per above. The ⬡ BestagonT/C12:30, 13 January 2023 (UTC)reply
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
The example I've seen is
Barry Chuckle from 2018, and I'm getting this information from administrator Thryduulf's comments then: "while a person having an individual article is a requirement for an automatic RD entry, being covered only on an article about the duo or group the deceased was a notable part of (as here) does not prevent them being listed". Assuming the person's considered notable enough as a member of a group to receive an RD post, the practice is to post the name of the person but link to the group article.
Blythwood (
talk)
05:54, 10 January 2023 (UTC)reply
There is an orange-tag asking for sources in the Works section. Some of the bullet-points above the orange-tag need sources, too.[Just added a few footnotes there. Never mind. --
PFHLai (
talk) 16:18, 15 January 2023 (UTC)] Please add more REFs. --
PFHLai (
talk)
16:06, 15 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose Sourcing issues. The article flow is also substandard, placing his numberous drug problems throughout his life before a (too) short section on his acting career.—
Bagumba (
talk)
04:34, 9 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support on notability, oppose on quality article needs a lot of work. Adding altblurb. What makes it even more notorious (and extremely worrisome) is that the three branches of state power have been assaulted. I don't know to what extent it would be considered a coup attempt, because unlike the 6 January or the 23F in Spain, they are not trying to block a transcendental constitutional procedure.
_-_Alsor (
talk)
19:33, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Disagree with form of wording' but Complete and total support for inclusion of the event on the merits that this is a major world event that is ongoing. My support is dependent on revised wording of the formSecretName101 (
talk)
19:43, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Post posting comment This is undoubtedly something that should be in the ITN box on the main page, but we probably could have waiting until the key section of the article, the "Events", was fleshed out better. The article is weighed out of balance by background context and reactions, and we can easily do better than that given a few more hours as news develops. --
Masem (
t)
21:07, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Post-posting comment I see now that the entry on the front page reads 'invade', whereas i recall (perhaps incorrectly) yesterday it said 'Storm'. What is the reason for the change?, do news sources about this say 'storm' or 'invade' or use other words? Is 'invade' a more accurate english translation of whatever Portuguese word that portuguese-language sources are using to describe the event? Am curious to hear, I'm not challenging the prose at all. Thanks!
QueensanditsCrazy (
talk)
14:09, 11 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Well, per precedent, death tolls are an important factor in notability. But generally I am uncomfortable saying "This tragedy is more notable than this one because more people lost their lives.". I don't know why, but it seems... sadistic.
I think we shouldn't look at death tolls for notability unless they are extraordinarily high, instead look at coverage, precedent, and other factors, which I don't really see here. So, oppose. This is an awful tragedy though, and shouldn't be understated.
PrecariousWorlds (
talk)
17:43, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Agree, if this happened in the U.S. it would be on the main page before the bodies were cold. Few similar incidents have happened in Africa, apart from the
Dschang bus-truck crash (2021). Senegal has declared three days of national mourning, which again underscores how exceptional the incident is.
Sheila1988 (
talk)
19:53, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
If a shooting in America kills 40 people, it would be posted. So the argument about bus crashes in Africa being as common as shootings in America doesn't apply IMO. The ⬡ Bestagon[t][c]13:48, 9 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I apologize, I wasn't responding to you; I was responding to Andrew. The indentation might not have been very clear on my part. 🌈WaltCip-(
talk)15:03, 9 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Suppose per Bestagon, with hopes of seeing this article improved, although the location of the crash may doom the possibility of reliable coverage.--🌈WaltCip-(
talk)15:04, 9 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose - Too short. It has
currently three paragraphs of one sentence each. A total of 68 words of prose using 401 characters. This discussion has more prose than the article. Heck! My !vote so far has has more then half of that. If I could think of more to say about it, I could get up to two thirds. I did get up to two thirds! Should I go for more prose then the article? Too late! I already did!
online word counters are cool.
Richard-of-Earth (
talk)
07:28, 10 January 2023 (UTC)reply
A single-sentence lead section is followed by two sections of prose with zero footnotes. Please beef up the intro and add more REFs. --
PFHLai (
talk)
06:29, 14 January 2023 (UTC)reply
We work with what's made public, and often the death of a teenage girl is a mostly private affair. Only the intimate details of her pro MMA finishes are required (by us and the law). Also, I don't believe you're the nominator; Support.
InedibleHulk (
talk)
22:50, 9 January 2023 (UTC)reply
No article can ever be considered as complete as there is always new information surfacing even after someone has long died. We can only present what is out there. Beyond what is available out in the open, it is either primary source (that's if you somehow have first hand knowledge) or speculations. For now, it is what it is.
– robertsky (
talk)
17:00, 10 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support. This was a historic event as this many rounds haven't been required since before the U.S. Civil War. It's had extensive news coverage, and is worthy of being placed on the main page.
Unknown-Tree (
talk)
05:52, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The Speaker of the House is an important role, and we post election results from much smaller countries (Fiji recently) all the time. The way this was conducted hasn't happened in a century; it's not your standard speaker vote.
Unknown-Tree (
talk)
05:54, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Please don't say that smaller countries aren't as important. That's was pretty much my point. There's nothing special about the result. The real story here is probably that American politics is in a mess. Where is the article on that?
HiLo48 (
talk)
05:58, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I don't see anyone saying that smaller countries are not important - although it's unrealistic all the countries have the same weight. Anyway why making such a fuss? It's not even the point of who's more important. And I'm frankly baffled by that comment about American politics, which is totally useless. Please, stay on the matter.
Lone Internaut (
talk)
06:09, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Strong Oppose. Took a little longer than usual. The US has a system unlike a lot of other countries where it's a long quicker typically to form a government. The length of time/number of ballots even is not that unprecedented, nor was the eventual winner. Nothing-burger story that has no lasting impact and tells us nothing we didn't already know about US politics.
DarkSide830 (
talk)
06:11, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support - a mainly American event certainly, but still a notable, historic event given the circumstances, who made news around the world. The blurb should say that it's been 150+ years since the last time.
Lone Internaut (
talk)
06:15, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
It's funny that you say that, since this has literally been 150+ years since the last time something similar happened. We won't see such a thing, probably, at least for decades.
Lone Internaut (
talk)
06:30, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
That's not an answer. Did the US government shut down? No. Did the President lose his executive powers? No. Did the Supreme Court have to step in? No. What long-term impact has this effected outside CSPANs viewing figures?
doktorbwordsdeeds07:31, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
It doesn't take a catastrophe to end into ITN, Doktorbuk. Also, your definition of "long term impact" is not absolute. We won't see such a thing at least for decades, this is already having a long term impact. By extension, the event marks a partisanship in the GOP which, even looking back, is sure to have a long term impact.
I'm trying to pin down "long term impact". Nobody here can see a long-term impact, the Ink is barely dry on the documents confirming him as Speaker. There have been no consequences to the House, nor the running of the levers of governance. I can't see how this is front page worthy when it's taken less than a week for one house of a Parliament to choose a Speaker. That's not news, it's admin.
doktorbwordsdeeds08:08, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Literally the first bullet point of
WP:ITN is
Template:Xt There is nothing in
WP:ITNCRIT that we should speculate on an event's impact when deciding to post or not, however. We cannot by definition know the impact because that is the future but there are quite a lot of people in various news sources who argue that this indeed will have long term impact (such as
Dana Milbank whose recent op in the WaPo is titled
"To save himself, McCarthy just destroyed the House"). Regards
SoWhy14:05, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support - While the speaker itself isn’t really ITN, when combined with the amount of rounds unseen for more than a century and a half, it makes it much more important.
DecafPotato (
talk)
06:27, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose If an election is not on
ITNR it is a good statement of measure that results of it are not considered particularly notable for ITN, especially when it is below the level of
head of state/
government (whoever holds the actual executive power).
Speakers have not been posted on ITN [in recent times] at all regardless of the unusual circumstances that might have lead to their election. The situation here is the same (not to mention the outcome expected) and I am not convinced that we need to move away from ITN precedent.
Gotitbro (
talk)
06:46, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose. This is not an event of significance; the event of significance was the Republican party winning a majority, which we posted. Given that, the identity of the speaker is just intra-party squabbling. This isn't even comparable to post-election coalition-building in other countries, as the party's majority was assured. Vanamonde (
Talk)06:50, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose A domestic issue, not notable on the world stage. Not a historically high number of ballots. Would not pass if nominated for any other country. The US is not global. Wikipedia is not American.
doktorbwordsdeeds06:57, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
"Please do not... Oppose an item solely because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. This applies to a high percentage of the content we post and is generally unproductive." Also, the US is not global, but it is part of the globe. ITN applies to the US as much as it does anywhere else. --
RockstoneSend me a message!08:36, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
User:Rockstone my vote is not solely against because it's the US. It's a factor, of course it is. What's happened is a democratic vote inside a democratic parliament for a Speaker. That's all. A democratic , adminstrative decision. Yes, it's taken a week and the media have baked up a cake of controversy, but that's all it is. Everything around it is because, being American politics, there are various narratives about Trump and Biden and this and that, it's all inflated and blown up to appear notable, to appear historic, to appear like there are long term consequences. But take away that and it's just a vote for Speaker that lasted a week; we wouldn't post that for any other country. We shouldn't because it's the US House of Representatives.
doktorbwordsdeeds09:23, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose per above,and my point last time. Just because something unusual happened during the process doesn't mean we should break precedence to post this mostly procedural story. Same as the nomination of Kavanaugh story really. —
Amakuru (
talk)
07:34, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support This is clearly in the news much more than the existing blurbs, which are all stale. And the argument about other countries is false. Some countries have a crude system in which just one person wields power – African despotisms and totalitarian dictatorships. But sophisticated democracies and republics like the US have systems which are deliberately constructed to prevent such concentration of power. The EU has three Presidents and a large parliament and we recently ran a blurb about it. The Swiss have a Federal Council and we recently ran a blurb about that. So, there's plenty of precedent for running a similar blurb about the US's complex politics. ITN's rules state clearly that one should not "Oppose an item solely because the event is only relating to a single country" and so such opposes should be discounted.
Andrew🐉(
talk)
07:43, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose. Your only shot was if it dragged on for months or years. Instead, it resolved itself rapidly, with the outcome everyone expected. Breathless gawking by the 24 hour news cycle does not make something noteworthy. Though I do appreciate the irony of repeatedly nominating the exact same thing over and over, hoping for a different result.
Danthemankhan08:09, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Strong support -- it's over. It's in the news. It was historic. I get that it's an American news story, but we can't ignore stories just because they happen in America. I'm tired of the anti-American bias on ITN (which is probably a good-faith effort to counter
systemic bias, but is still annoying). --
RockstoneSend me a message!08:32, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support in principle but I don't think a consensus would build on this one (as seen in the plethora of oppose votes on this particular nomination and the previous ones).
Vida0007 (
talk)
11:47, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support - It appears this has become another debate on whether or not ITN is being too America-centric. If I am to offer a controversial opinion, I think an election like this holds more weight because it is American, and like it or not, internal American politics have a gigantic impact on the rest of the world. This is literally In The News, is being talked about, and will have a considerable effect on not only American congress, but the world.
PrecariousWorlds (
talk)
11:47, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose I am quite aware that the US version of Speaker has quite a bit more power and/or influence than those in equivalent positions in other countries, but given that this is a Republican majority electing a Republican Speaker, I can't see that it rises to the level of ITN. The only thing that made it even vaguely "in the news" was that the process was somewhat more torturous than usual - would we have posted it if McCarthy had been elected in the first round? Almost certainly not; so I can't see why a bit of internecine squabbling gives us any more reason to do so.
Black Kite (talk)11:53, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose I'm usually a proponent of "we should look at what's actually in the news for In The News", but in this case, it's still an election for a federal legislative body's leader of the person who was always going to win that election. The impact is minimal, and the historic aspect of how long it's been since such a protracted election took place is nothing more than a piece of trivia in the long-run. --
Kicking222 (
talk)
13:38, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose. Doesn't fall under
WP:ITNR, and I'm not convinced that the fact it took a few days longer than usual makes this an exception. My !vote has nothing to do with country. — Coolperson177 (
message |
about me)
13:39, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support. Arguing that something that is objectively in the news (it was for example the first item on my German news broadcast) should not be ITN because of some arbitrary restrictions is silly. There is no rule that ITN cannot cover this event and just because we previously did not, does not mean we can't. In fact, the very reason we did not feature previous elections was that they were run of the mill elections that were not in the news. And yes, we should and would not have featured this one if McCarthy had won on the first attempt. But that is the whole point. He did not and in the end, it was the most contested election in over 150 years with news top of the page coverage all around the world (e.g.
Tagesschau.de (Germany),
LeMonde (France),
Corriere della Sera (Italy),
El Pais (Spain),
Times of India,
Japan Times,
Sidney Morning Herald (Australia) etc. pp.). I would suggest emphasizing the historicity of the vote in the blurb, e.g. by mentioning it needing the most attempts since 1859-60. Regards
SoWhy13:50, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support The non-election was rightly rejected, as would have been the non-weird election, but an election after 14 non-elections is weird enough to be In The News for several days in Canada (and elsewhere).
InedibleHulk (
talk)
13:50, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose A non-McCarthy win would have been notable enough, but this is basically just a routine procedure that happened to take a few days longer than usual.
Teemu08 (
talk)
14:13, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
There's a quarter-pound of beef over whether to beef up tax enforcement or beef up border security. More "manufactured" than "organic", of course, but that's life in Washington. Nothing's been squashed, even if "quashed".
InedibleHulk (
talk)
15:51, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose The buildup to this is just political realignment. As HiLo said once again, this is not something we would see posted in other countries. I'm sympathetic to votes that complain about anti-American bias, but the fact is that the event on its own still needs to demonstrate significance, and I'm not certain that it does. This is evident by several of the oppose !voters asking where the long-term significance behind this non-ITN/R election is, and not getting a straightforward answer. 🌈WaltCip-(
talk)15:23, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support Multiple votes have not happened in a century, and there are election results and leadership changes from other countries all the time at the legislative level, let alone from the country that has the largest GDP and is a world leader in numerous other categories.
Royal Autumn Crest (
talk)
15:49, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment This is the third time this has been nominated in as many weeks. Additionally, your second to last sentence in the nom is leaning into
aspersion-territory.
Curbon7 (
talk)
05:39, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Okay, I'll remove that, but I will say that consensus sometimes cannot form because a topic is related to a very hot conflict, which I do not think is a legitimate reason to keep something out of ITN, and that if it does, then something is broken here.
RaffiKojian (
talk)
06:27, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose. You've already nominated this, and consensus did not form to post. There are other far more extreme conflicts going on around the world right now. Being argumentative and making accusations is not going to win your proposal additional support.
Thebiguglyalien (
talk)
05:53, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose on quality... again. "and even", "gives additional reason to doubt", etc. Blockade timeline is also pretty much just a dotpoint list.
Anarchyte (
talk)
06:02, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose Not being regularly updated. Most recent update in timeline appears to be from Dec 31, so this would not meet criteria to stay on Ongoing. Previously was interested in a blurb item for this, but no consensus for this at a previous nomination, and IMO a blurb for this would now be stale. SpencerT•C07:11, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
So am I allowed to withdraw the nomination? It seems there's a consensus :/ Either way I would appreciate feedback on what specifically the article could use in terms of improvements so I can try to work on it (you alls help would be fantastic as well). And yes, maybe be back in a week - though I really hope it's not ongoing by then. --
RaffiKojian (
talk)
18:52, 7 January 2023 (UTC)Template:Abotreply
Comment: Grand Slam Finals/Performance Timeline needs a reference (didn't see it mentioned in the prose or covered by a ref there). SpencerT•C17:34, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support Well-cited. Mostly holistic, besides a big hole between 1981 and 2008; that said, the important bits are well-covered.
Curbon7 (
talk)
03:57, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support This is notable by any definition of the word. The most powerful government in the world is unable to function. Initial opposition seemed to think that it would blow over quickly but it hasn't. As such we should post this like we should any instance when a stable government is rendered unable to govern.
Idislikenames (
talk)
10:31, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I'm going to point out again that 'notable' is the criterion for inclusion in Wikipedia, not inclusion on its homepage. Using it as a generic 'hooray-word' diminishes the utility of its particular application in
WP:GNG and similar places.
GenevieveDEon (
talk)
11:44, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose and snow close This is getting quite obnoxious. A repeat nomination only 2-3 days after the previous one is over the top. This is a
global encyclopedia and whether or not the US is the "most powerful government in the world", this perception of power is not relevant for ITN purposes. It's difficult to believe a similar nomination for the position of speaker in most countries would be posted to ITN. Most people would just have the common sense not to nominate it in the first place.
Chrisclear (
talk)
10:43, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
It's not over the top given that going past 11 ballots hasn't happened since before the Civil War. Since there doesn't appear to be an end in sight, it's technically an ongoing event at this point, so if it doesn't get a blurb, it should at least be placed there. --
RockstoneSend me a message!11:02, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The notability isn't the election. Your right nobody outside of the US cares about who is the speaker of the house. The notability is that the government is incapable of action. I'd like to think we would at least nominate any event where any government was rendered unable to take any action.
Idislikenames (
talk)
11:07, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I see your point in theory, but thanks to the Separation of Powers, the US has a functioning executive branch and thus the government can continue to take action. However, it's my recollection that during the 2010 UK government coalition negotiations, we posted an interim 'Conservatives have the plurality' headline for the election itself, and then replaced it with 'Cameron becomes PM' one once the negotiations were done. The fact of the negotiations themselves didn't make the home page. In this case, we already posted both the legislative result (in 2022) and the head of state/government one (in 2020). This more junior role wouldn't make the headline when elected, so it certainly shouldn't when not elected. I'd also be interested in knowing what we've done about the government stalemates in Belgium over the years.
GenevieveDEon (
talk)
11:48, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose. For better or worse, ITN doesn't post things just because they're in the news, we assess the significance of them. And just like the
Brett Kavanaugh Supreme Court nomination, which gained a lot of headlines but was eventually pulled from ITN, the ongoing comedy at the House of Representatives is peculiar and unusual but not of lasting significance. The Republicans control the House, we already posted that some time ago, and who ultimately becomes Speaker isn't something we'd ever usually post. The oft-quoted adage about "better suited to DYK" probably applies to this article. —
Amakuru (
talk)
10:45, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
We did NOT post the results of the House election. Or more accurately, we DID post the results, but then it was pulled and never posted back despite many of us asking for it. --
RockstoneSend me a message!11:00, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Strong Support, or alternatively, as per
DrewieStewie, post in Ongoing. This IS In the News, and most of the opposition seems to be arguing that we wouldn't post this if it was happening in another country, and that's simply not true. We posted Truss' resignation, and Johnson's resignation, even before they actually did resign, and even before the new PM was chosen. This is no different; in fact, it's the same basic process. The Speaker is not as powerful as a PM, since the PM is head of Government and the executive, that is true, but until a Speaker is chosen, the House cannot do anything whatsoever, which has paralyzed half of the Legislative branch of the US Government. That's notable, especially since this hasn't happened since 1923 -- before any of us were alive (I'm guessing). I find that ITN has a huge bias against posting American news (for example, we posted, and then pulled, the blurb announcing that the GOP had won the House). It's annoying, I know people are trying to avoid systemic bias, but that doesn't mean we should go the other way on this. --
RockstoneSend me a message!10:57, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I just wanted to clarify my thinking: the reason this was closed before was that while three rounds of voting was historic (it was the first time it had happened since 1923), it wasn't notable enough for ITN and it was looking likely that the GOP's temper-tantrum would end and the far-right members of their caucus would fall in line. Now though we're on 11 rounds and there's no end in sight, and the House has not been able to do basic business (like put people on committees). That's why it's been proposed: it's now a story with actual effects. --
RockstoneSend me a message!11:13, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support if not a blurb, then ongoing. I think people are missing the point here. The story here is the historic nature of this deadlock, not the deadlock itself. The longer it goes on, the more of a story it is. This is getting worldwide attention, not just in the US.
331dot (
talk)
11:04, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support. So long as this portion of the Main Page isn't named "body counts, national elections, and sporting results", there is a place for items about unusual, highly newsworthy events. And despite the continued insistence of some, "avoiding US-centrism" still does not mean "pretending that things that happen in the U.S. aren't important". --
Tamzincetacean needed (she|they|xe)11:05, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose - I still don't see this as having an overall impact, so far it just seems to be bulls on parade. We can wait until it causes an impact on the wider public (government shutdown, default,
gigantic custard pie fight, power-sharing agreement) and then post.
Blythwood (
talk)
11:36, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
That's the point. The editors above speak of an impact on the governance of the country but don't point out what the actual, ongoing consequences of this are. It just seems that the most salient thing now is the symbolism and the (irrelevant and typical) party political drama.
_-_Alsor (
talk)
11:42, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Template:U The House can do nothing else until this is resolved, paralyzing the government of a large country. Some of those in Congress holding this up see this as desirable. Even the Senate can do nothing other than confirm judges until this is resolved(bills they pass can't be voted on by the House).
331dot (
talk)
11:46, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
but the President of the United States continues to maintain executive powers and the States continue to legislate thanks to the -enviable- federal constitutional system. So there is no "paralyzed government" at all.
_-_Alsor (
talk)
11:57, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
If something urgent comes up that the President need a new law to address, the government is paralyzed. This is why it is reported as such.
331dot (
talk)
12:00, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose - This proposal was already closed below. But more than that - we don't post this when they succeed in electing a Speaker; why on earth would we post when they fail?
GenevieveDEon (
talk)
11:43, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
'In a historic manner' is a bit
WP:CRYSTAL for my tastes. We have no way of knowing, yet, whether history will view this as an amusing footnote, or part of 'events leading up to...' with lots of flags and arrows. And many things occur for the first time, or the first time after a long hiatus, without making the front page. The relevance of the long duration presupposes the relevance of the event itself.
GenevieveDEon (
talk)
11:50, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
It's not looking forward to see it's historical, it's looking backward. I believe this selection is already sixth on the list of most ballots required to choose a speaker(and it could increase further today)- and again, this hasn't happened in 100 years. Saying we don't know how the future will view this is an argument to not post anything at all about any event.
331dot (
talk)
11:54, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Wait until the election is finished. I was leaning towards oppose at first, but I am currently rethinking my stance on this one; however, if this would be blurbed, I think there should be a definitive result first, much like in other elections that have been blurbed in the past. For the suggestion to put this as “ongoing,” I would support that in theory, although I think that should have been done last Tuesday/Wednesday as it now appears that a deal between McCarthy and the rebel Republicans is about to be reached.
Vida0007 (
talk)
12:06, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
WP:SNOW only applies if the consensus is very clearly swinging unanimously towards oppose. This is not the case here with multiple substantive support !votes. 🌈WaltCip-(
talk)12:14, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose - We couldn't post this as a blurb, because if we post it and they happen to successfully elect a Speaker the following day, it would immediately become dated. At that point, the discussion would then turn to either pulling the blurb or updating it to reflect the successful election. And I might not be best friends with
Template:U, but he's 100% right - we wouldn't ever consider this for any other country.--🌈WaltCip-(
talk)12:16, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
That's great to hear, but we need to actually go out and nominate those other instances in order to provide a data point, otherwise we are just talking hypotheticals. 🌈WaltCip-(
talk)13:13, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose: too US-centric. This is not really a huge deal in the grand scheme of things; they don't have a speaker right now because of some in-party squabbling, which is an oddity, but presumably they will have one soon and life will go on as if nothing happened. If similar, offbeat domestic politicking were happening in say the parliament of Brazil or Indonesia (which have populations comparable to the US), I highly doubt we'd be here having this discussion.
Endwise (
talk)
13:03, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Strong oppose. We wouldn't post a new speaker even if they had been elected on the first attempt, so 'no speaker has been selected yet' is even less of a story. I don't think ITN has ever posted the selection of speaker for any other legislature, let alone deadlocked selection processes. Just because the US House has disfunctional procedures, and we're currently in a quiet new period, doesn't mean we should treat it any differently.
Modest Geniustalk13:04, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose for nowTemplate:EC. I disagree with those who think this is not newsworthy, US-centric or whatever. It's something that has not happened
in more than 150 years and something that has attracted coverage all around the world in a way that normally internal proceedings of a national parliament do not (e.g.
SZ.de (Germany),
LeMonde (France), even the Italian
Corriere which dedicates most of his homepage to the death of
Gianluca Vialli speculates on what will happen). However, I agree that the news story is more about how long it took, so we should wait until the proceedings finish; ideally, we also know then how historical it really was. Regards
SoWhy13:12, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose I would point out that this more significant than similar instances in the parliamentary system, as the speaker is considerably more powerful. The news here is the MAGA movement has triggered such a schism in the two-party system that is it now preventing governance for the first time in a century. This is the most salient symbol yet demonstrating that we are not merely witnessing intra-party squabbling, but the unmaking of the America political system. HOWEVER, this is just a moment in that long process; not the beginning or end. A Speaker will be chosen eventually, but it will do nothing to settle the conflict. The concessions being sought show the splinter group intends to keep the new speaker on a very short leash. GreatCaesarsGhost13:31, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose. Much as I enjoy ice hockey, ITN has consistently avoided posting junior-level competitions in any sport. We stick to the highest level of competition in each sport and that's not a convention I want to change. The IIHF World Championship is already on
WP:ITNR; I don't see a case for posting the under-20s version as well. Besides, this year's competition wouldn't have got anywhere near as much attention if Canada didn't make the final (or if Bedard wasn't playing).
Modest Geniustalk13:08, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose for now Article length is fine for our purposes. However, the "Selected television serials" and "Filmography" sections are almost entirely unsourced.
Curbon7 (
talk)
03:46, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Template:Ping Blurb has been updated. This is far beyond a single arrest; there was a huge gunfight in Mexico where 29 people were killed, including 10 soldiers (which is unusual). There were attacks to commercial airplanes, looting of businesses, road blocks set by cartels with burning vehicles, etc. Article is updated.
MX (
✉ •
✎)
22:05, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Template:Ping He was arrested and shortly released during a gunfight with the military. I kindly ask you re-evaluate the blurb again since much more as updated. There was a huge gunfight in Mexico where 29 people were killed, including 10 soldiers (which is unusual). There were attacks to commercial airplanes, looting of businesses, road blocks set by cartels with burning vehicles, etc.
MX (
✉ •
✎)
22:07, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose and suggest close per above. Obviously good faith nomination but based on longstanding precedent here I don't think there is any chance that a consensus to post will develop. -
Ad Orientem (
talk)
00:21, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Template:Ping Hi there - There have been more developments since your vote. There was a huge gunfight in an attempt to free him where 29 people were killed, including 10 soldiers (which is unusual). There were attacks to commercial airplanes, looting of businesses, road blocks set by cartels with burning vehicles, etc. If this is enough to reconsider your decision, please let us know as others have as well. Thanks,
MX (
✉
Weak oppose - As much as I think Mexico's drug war is under-represented and I would want this posted on the mainpage, I don't think this passes the bar. The first arrest could have, given that
Culiacan went under siege by cartel members and Ovidio was also released by higher government orders to avoid more bloodshed. That arrest, release, and the chaos that ensued was notable. But this re-arrest may not be as notable standalone. There's another Mexico story that could make it to the mainboard if we expand and nominate:
2023 Ciudad Juárez prison attack. Ping me if you want to work on this together.
MX (
✉ •
✎)
02:38, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment, conditional supportSupport - I would support this for a blurb if there an article on the arrest and aftermath. The Sinaloa Cartel carried out several attacks in Culiacan and authorities cancelled flights and travel throughout the entire state. There were road blockades with burning vehicles in 19 points across the city, in addition to attacks to airplanes, businesses, etc. It was similar to the 2019 incident but at a smaller scale, yet still notable.
MX (
✉ •
✎)
05:44, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Agreed. Arrests in itself are not notable. But arrests where large organize crime groups cause civil unrest across an entire state in Mexico, that is notable. These arrests and violent aftermaths are very particular to Mexico and are still quite rare (i.e. reserved for top cartel bosses). This was on the front page of international outlets.
MX (
✉ •
✎)
19:27, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support Official sources claim there were 29 dead (10 soldiers, 19 cartel members) and 35 injured. An
Aeroméxico Embraer jet was shot at while taxiing and was forced to abort take-off. Generalized unrest and looting were also present. Several blockades in Culiacán, Los Mochis, and Mazatlán etc. It was a major event in the
Mexican Drug War. --
2806:109F:1:2923:D578:C5DF:76F7:7F10 (
talk)
20:12, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Marking as Ready. With 4 Supports (5 if you include nom), and 2 Opposes that were made prior to this story's development, this is ready for the main page. Article has been updated.
MX (
✉ •
✎)
01:23, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support ALT2. The newsworthy thing isn't necessarily just his arrest, it's more the violent military conflict that has ensued.
Endwise (
talk)
03:04, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment: Needs a couple citations, resolution of the orange tag, and the bullets about children should be converted to prose. Additional detail about his business career would be a plus but what's there meets minimum standards. SpencerT•C00:58, 9 January 2023 (UTC)reply
This is still breaking news, let's wait for facts to settle, - I ran into edit conflicts so will certainly not be the only one, and I only did the normal adjustments, have a sentence about her death with a ref, fix tenses, fix the place of birth. She has in German what would be a Good article here, - I hope for someone to get some of that here. I have no time, at least not right now. --
Gerda Arendt (
talk)
09:17, 5 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Not yet ready Some major prose issues; the article contradicts itself (
Template:Green vs
Template:Green); formatting, while generally out-of-scope for our purposes, needs a redux due to the very short paragraphs and sections. Additionally, the results sections need to be sourced (
WP:ITNQUALITY).
Curbon7 (
talk)
09:22, 5 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The contradiction was there only for minutes, while fixing an edit conflict. It would have been easier to do that than making a note here. --
Gerda Arendt (
talk)
10:03, 5 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment: Lede mentions that she was a "sports ambassador and non-fiction writer" but I don't see that mentioned elsewhere in the article. Any chance we can incorporate any of the info from the de.wiki article into this one? SpencerT•C18:06, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I took that from the German Wikipedia. The "writer" part is covered by the section Publications, and the other is perhaps a euphemism for advertising, will change. --
Gerda Arendt (
talk)
08:06, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Done, per
[33] which also has that in 1997 she was a declared a national ambassador for sports, but I believe that is kind of marginal. Please add if you disagree. --
Gerda Arendt (
talk)
08:21, 7 January 2023 (UTC)reply
On the matter of flags. While they are fine for competitors, their use on the TV stations fails MOS:FLAGS (there is no national representation there)
Masem (
t)
22:21, 4 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support Article quality looks good, especially as there is adequate and well-referenced prose describing the event itself (usually the major hold-up for most of these kinds of events). --
Jayron3215:10, 4 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support. The article is in excellent shape. I've removed the orange-level tag from the 'representation' section because I don't think it was warranted - simple counting is not original research per
WP:CALC.
Modest Geniustalk15:31, 4 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The only issue on the talk page is you demanding a reference that splits all the competitors down by nationality. Given there are already references for the nationality of every player, and counting them is not original research, I still don't see the issue. There's certainly no signs of any NPOV problems. There's nothing that would merit an orange-level tag or should hold up posting on ITN.
Modest Geniustalk11:31, 5 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose Violates
MOS:FLAGCRUFT as there seem to be over 500 of them. As I understand it, this is a professional event in which competitors represent themselves rather than a country. Giving undue weight to flags in this way is excessive nationalism contrary to
WP:NPOV. One might equally have symbols representing their age, ethnicity, religion, sex or other characteristics.
Andrew🐉(
talk)
14:55, 5 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I don't believe I've ever seen FLAGCRUFT invoked in an oppose vote at ITN/C, including for the egregious
F1 articles. If you want to suggest we change that practice, I'll vote for it. But we shouldn't hold this nomination to a standard that does not exist. GreatCaesarsGhost16:38, 5 January 2023 (UTC)reply
There's some flag-waving at F1 Grand Prix such as the national anthems at the podium ceremonies and the orange flares for Verstappen. But the teams are corporations rather than nations – Mercedes, Ferrari, Red Bull &c. I'm not so familiar with darts but, checking the
BBC report, it all seems to be about the individuals with little emphasis on the nation, sponsor or the like. The hundreds of flags in this case are therefore not appropriate.
Andrew🐉(
talk)
20:18, 5 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose per
MOS:FLAGCRUFT as stated above. It's not enough that we have a prose update; remember quality also takes into consideration that the article has to meet encyclopedic standards. There's no reason for those flags to be listed there. --🌈WaltCip-(
talk)18:24, 5 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support this event has been routinely posted with all the flags. F1 was just posted with a sea of flags. None of those noms even hint at this objection. This reeks of bad faith. GreatCaesarsGhost20:54, 5 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support I do not believe that the article even violates
MOS:FLAGCRUFT. Aside from anything else, the flags prevent the article from deteriorating into
MOS:BLUESEA. The MOS specifically outlines how FLAGCRUFT can emphasise "the importance of a person's citizenship or nationality above their other qualities"—forgive me for asking which other qualities could possibly be overshadowed?
~~ AirshipJungleman29 (
talk)
00:55, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Bagumba, I have every respect for you (and indeed Sandstein and WaltCip) but - and I apologise - this is possibly the most daft reason for opposing I've ever seen. It's a sporting event. Do the flags need to be there? Not really. Do the flags actually disqualify the article from being posted. No.
Black Kite (talk)01:38, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
To be clear, my opposition is specifically regarding the table in the section
Template:Section link. That's pretty much
WP:OR to push a POV, boasting nationalism on a per round basis, that is not presented as such in any other reliable sources. Delete the table, and I think I can give a pass, for ITN purposes, on the other issues.—
Bagumba (
talk)
01:48, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Agreed with Bagumba. This is relatively easy to resolve; the change being requested does not detract from the quality of the article while bringing it into compliance with MOS and
WP:NPOV. The rest of the article is in good shape. 🌈WaltCip-(
talk)13:12, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose. In it's current state. The item is broken. We've long since gone past the times when a psuedo ranking list based on player performances by country has been deemed encyclopaedic, and the
WP:FLAGCRUFT issues. Lee Vilenski(
talk •
contribs)13:18, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
No longer oppose after fixing the issues with overdraw of templates. I've done quite a bit of work to make it usable, but there's still a lot of cruft in the article that I'd rather wasn't there before I could support. Lee Vilenski(
talk •
contribs)13:59, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support I've removed the biggest issue, which was the National representation table orange-tagged for neutrality. The rest of the flagcruft issues should be handled article-side, as it is generally out-of-scope for our purposes.
Curbon7 (
talk)
14:39, 6 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose Article is woefully underdeveloped. The career section lists basically a few random events from his life (some of which are entirely unreferenced!), many of the things in the lead are not visited in any sufficient detail (or even at all) in the body. This is not main-page ready. --
Jayron3215:13, 4 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support Apologies for reverting some IPs who updated the article but failed to supply a source. I was following discussion on Twitter, but it was unconfirmed.
Hawkeye7(discuss)22:24, 3 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Wait - Wait until an outcome is achieved or the first day of this session has concluded before crafting a blurb. It is clear some type of unprecedented situation has taken place on this day, January 3, 2023, but we should wait to understand what it might be before deliberating on wording and notability. -
Fuzheado |
Talk20:56, 3 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Serious question - Would we post something like this in any other country? I guess the question is whether or not the
Speaker of the House is an important enough role where we'd be able to find some type of equivalent in other parliamentary or democratic nations. --🌈WaltCip-(
talk)21:05, 3 January 2023 (UTC)reply
If the gears of government for a country were halted for an extended period of time, then yes I do believe it would be ITN worthy, even if it was not the U.S. We're not there at this point, but it is a possibility. The U.S. Congress cannot proceed with any business until a Speaker is selected. -
Fuzheado |
Talk21:29, 3 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Most simplistically, the Speaker's job is to choose when and how to present legislation on the floor. Very powerful politically, but not quite a Head of Government in the same way a prime minister is.
Curbon7 (
talk)
21:30, 3 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Changes to the head of government are
WP:ITN/R, which is what I thought WaltClip was referring to. Obviously it can be ITN-worthy without meeting the ITN/R provision.
Curbon7 (
talk)
22:16, 3 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose Something happening for the first time in a hundred years is not automatically ITN-worthy. What happens with the HoR leadership is strictly local, with no international impact or interest and is by far not the most relevant political news so far this year. Again: this is not a news journal.
_-_Alsor (
talk)
21:09, 3 January 2023 (UTC)reply
"No international impact"? The U.S. Congress is responsible for the nation's budgeting, spending, and declaration of war. So yes, it would have an international impact in areas such as military aid and international security. No one needs to show love to the U.S. but one shouldn't overcompensate with a bias against it either. -
Fuzheado |
Talk21:36, 3 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The US is more important for international security and military aid than most other countries. Also, the fact that this only relates to a single country is not a valid reason to oppose it. --
RockstoneSend me a message!22:29, 3 January 2023 (UTC)reply
But that doesn't mean that every little thing that happens in the United States has to be magnified and focused on in every possible way. Leaving aside the too–much–known American patriotism is a good way to avoid
WP:BIAS.
_-_Alsor (
talk)
22:40, 3 January 2023 (UTC)reply
"everywhere" because anything that happens in the USA has to be in the news (even a fly landing on the head of a vice president seeking re-election), no matter how irrelevant or globally insignificant it may be. The world is more concerned about sending delegations to Benedict XVI's funeral than about seeing what casino is going on inside the Capitol. And not everything that is not routine becomes ITNR-worthy. Nor is it the goal of ITN and it isn't technically feasible.
_-_Alsor (
talk)
22:58, 3 January 2023 (UTC)reply
No one is saying that everything that happens in the US has to be on ITN, but we are saying that just because it happened in the US doesn't mean it shouldn't be posted ITN. I felt that the excessive posts about Queen Elizabeth's death and state funeral, as well as the blurb about Truss' decision to resign followed by a second blurb for Sunak's election was excessive as an American, but I recognized that it was indeed ITN and deserved posting... as this does. --
RockstoneSend me a message!23:02, 3 January 2023 (UTC)reply
It isn't a good comparison. The examples you explain refer to a HoS and head of the Anglican Church, and a PM. In the case at hand, we are not even talking about executive power (although you say it may seem so). Biden's hypothetical death would have to be included in ITNR, in the same way as the appointment of his successor, and I personally wouldn't mind if it involved two or more blurbs.
_-_Alsor (
talk)
23:13, 3 January 2023 (UTC)reply
OpposeTemplate:Ec unless and until it materially affects partisan government control. We posted the election result already. At the moment, this is just intra-party fractiousness; nobody is going to be materially affected as long as a Republican keeps the speakership. If that changes, we could consider posting. Vanamonde (
Talk)21:14, 3 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Important to few outside the US since it isn't the head of state or head of government. We don't blurb anything other than general elections, changes of heads of government and state.
NoahTalk22:28, 3 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support -- this is the first time this has happened in 100 years. But if we aren't going to post this as a blurb, could we consider posting it in ongoing? At least if it lasts longer than a day. --
RockstoneSend me a message!21:39, 3 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Wait. At the moment this is little more than interesting trivia, but it has the potential to become something a lot more significant. ITN doesn't require international significance or involvement of the head of state, so those points are irrelevant, but it does require some actual impact on something significant. A day or two of intra-party political squabbling is nothing (waves from the UK) but the longer it goes on the more significant it gets. If the minority party's candidate were elected that too I think would be notable.
Thryduulf (
talk)
21:55, 3 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Wait This is not the first time Mccarthy has failed, it seems. Back in 1923, 11 ballots were required so we should wait on an outcome and then see where we are.
Andrew🐉(
talk)
22:09, 3 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose - The Speaker is neither head of state nor head of government. We don't post the Leader of the House of Lords, and I don't think we should post this.
GenevieveDEon (
talk)
22:37, 3 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The Speaker is the closest thing to a Prime Minister we have, though. Anyway, I doubt anyone is saying this should be posted as a routine matter. This is only notable because McCarthy has failed to get the votes he requires to become speaker, the first time this has happened in 100 years. --
RockstoneSend me a message!22:44, 3 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The PM is the head of government in the UK while the speaker is not. The POTUS is the head of government in the United States. The Speaker is much weaker than the PM. The Speaker does not run the government in the US.
NoahTalk22:48, 3 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Yes, I get that. The Head of Government and Head of State are one in the same in the US system. Still, the Speaker does have tremendous power to block legislation within the House. That's what I mean by the Speaker being the closest thing the US has to a prime minister. If a Speaker is not chosen, then no legislation can ever be passed. --
RockstoneSend me a message!22:51, 3 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose This is all very amusing, but the Republican Party's efforts at throwing toys out of their pram at each other does not rise to the level of an ITN blurb. Would we post a similar internecine spat from any other country? You know we wouldn't.
Black Kite (talk)22:58, 3 January 2023 (UTC)reply
In practical terms though, are there? Congress is blocked from doing any business until the Speaker is chosen. But I think Andrew's point is that we post partial changes to the Executive all the time, why not post about the Legislature in unusual circumstances? If this happened in the UK, we would post it (because of the fusion of powers making the Prime Minister part of the Executive), we shouldn't not post it just because the US has a different setup. --
RockstoneSend me a message!23:57, 3 January 2023 (UTC)reply
As Black Kite says below, it's something that in a very short time will be resolved, when some decide to stop crying and others decide to give in. If it's prolonged in time and the blockade to the legislative activity has irrevocable national and even international impacts, perhaps it would be time to rethink it. But this will not happen. And as for the debate you propose, I have no problem in discussing it. But we would be opening Pandora's box, and I don't think it would be appropriate. For example, would enter the blockage that has been in Spain to the renewal of the positions of institutions such as the Constitutional Court or the General Council of the Judiciary since 2018? I don't think so.
_-_Alsor (
talk)
00:10, 4 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Q5. Why are the Speaker of the House and Chief Justice listed as leaders in the infobox? Shouldn't it just be the President and Vice President?
The President, Vice President, Speaker of The House of Representatives, and Chief Justice are stated within the United States Constitution as leaders of their respective branches of government. As the three branches of government are equal, all four leaders get mentioned under the "Government" heading in the infobox.
Because of this, I believe that the House speaker would qualify as a "head of state" as listed at
WP:ITNR, but obviously we should at least wait until the winner has actually been decided.
DecafPotato (
talk)
23:16, 3 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The Speaker in Australia doesn't do as much as the Speaker in the US. Which might explain the argument here. The Speaker in the US has the power to block legislation. Beyond that, if the House fails to appoint a Speaker, it won't be able to do anything else, and the Speaker is not impartial like in your country. --
RockstoneSend me a message!00:16, 4 January 2023 (UTC)reply
You don't understand the "impartiality" of the speaker in Australia. This isn't the place to discuss it. My point is simply that this is a flawed area of argument.
HiLo48 (
talk)
00:29, 4 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Despite being non-American, I do know what the Speaker's role is, and this is still not ITN-worthy (unless a Democrat was appointed, which isn't going to happen). When they've stopped acting like children a Republican Speaker will be appointed. It's just taking ... a little longer than usual.
Black Kite (talk)00:04, 4 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose Does not rise to ITN level. If this were perhaps a dispute over a president's inauguration, for example, then that would be appropriate, but not with a position like Speaker.
Kafoxe (
talk)
23:45, 3 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment - Why does the blurb say "cardiac arrest?" It's not in any of the news sources given, and is not in the current article. Poor nomination. -
Fuzheado |
Talk05:03, 3 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I was actually being kind because there are multiple issues with the nomination. Not only was it an incorrect blurb but it was premature speculation about the death of the individual, which is very much a
WP:BLP issue. -
Fuzheado |
Talk05:42, 3 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Strongest possible oppose Please don't be so callous as to assume he will die. We do not consider nominations prior to the event happening. If he were to pass away, then it would be considered for RD; though hopefully, we won't have an RD nom for him for another 50 years.
Curbon7 (
talk)
05:07, 3 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment I think the blurb needs to be changed to remove the reference to cardiac arrest, which isn't mentioned in sources about Hamlin.
CJ-Moki (
talk)
05:09, 3 January 2023 (UTC)reply
It doesn't really matter, as the blurb won't get posted anyways. By the very nature of sports, injuries happen. Bad injuries. This is a
Clint Malarchuk-level injury. However, these are not quite what we cover here.
Curbon7 (
talk)
05:12, 3 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The article's talk page says that it was on the top 25 report 2 times, so it looks like there is broad interest from the people who read Wikipedia (nerds like us who write it aside) in this sort of stuff. Should be on Wikipedia's main page. Maine🦞05:15, 3 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Slight disagree in that Malarchuk's game continued on later that night while this game is currently postponed indefinitely, but I do agree that this blurb should not posted at this time. --
Super Goku V (
talk)
05:44, 3 January 2023 (UTC)reply
He hasnt even been reported to be dead, and its a BLP violation to be spreading a rumour like that. Dont think the collapse by itself is blurbable, and in the absence of any other information dont think this merits more discussion here. nableezy -
05:14, 3 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose unless you're from the US this isn't major news. Many athletes sadly get seriously injured all the time, and just like we do not support retirements for ITN we should not report injuries either, however serious; more so for a sport only professionally played in 1 country.
Abcmaxx (
talk)
07:45, 3 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Template:U, thanks for the comment. Actually, there are increasing protests across the region due to this terror attack, and today, on January 3, there were a number of calls for a shutdown or strike by various organisations across the region, in which many protests were called for today. That's why I focused on protests. But I was new to ITN, and if there can be any suggestions to improve it, I would love to do that.❯❯❯ Chunky aka Al Kashmiri (
✍️)
13:29, 3 January 2023 (UTC)reply
OK. Based on the sources cited, I just didn't see the protests being a major story yet to not have the blurb say how many were killed and by who (or even why, if known). —
Bagumba (
talk)
13:50, 3 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Inclined to oppose I've my doubts that terrorist attacks committed in a particularly volatile area like Kashmir are notorious if they only result in six deaths.
_-_Alsor (
talk)
11:40, 3 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Dear
Template:U, The geography of Kashmir is a bit different; the
Rajouri district is in the
Jammu region, and there were no major attacks like this in past decades in this place, which makes this attack notable and significant. There are allegations of security lapses that gave rise to protests across the Jammu region and parts of the Kashmir valley. However, the whole region is generally known as "Kashmir," but inside Kashmir there are many subregions that may or may not be affected by the
Kashmir conflict.❯❯❯ Chunky aka Al Kashmiri (
✍️)
13:29, 3 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support Blurb may need some tweaking, but the article is in good shape and definitely main page ready, and this is a story that is being appropriately covered by the news. --
Jayron3214:06, 3 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose unless this results in an escalation of the India–Pakistan conflict over the following days. An act of violence on its own is not significant.
Thebiguglyalien (
talk)
04:28, 4 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support. This is big news and we should have big news on our front page. Just because this is not of interest to the West does not mean that it is not significant. Maine🦞04:29, 4 January 2023 (UTC)reply
"Just because this is not of interest to the West does not mean that it is not significant"
That's not the issue here; not to truly invoke WP:MINIMUMDEATHS, but the issue is that disasters/attacks with this few deaths usually don't make ITNR, period. There's been plenty of mass shootings in the US and/or Europe that we haven't blurbed, due to low death tolls indicating a lack of overall significance.
The Kip (
talk)
00:14, 5 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Template:U, you are confusing terms. ITN/R does not apply to disasters or incidents like this. It applies only to recurring items. Moreover, it's also not true that a low death toll alone will be the deciding factor in whether something like this gets posted. I can cite numerous examples of disasters with low or no death tolls that have still been posted due to extenuating circumstances. 🌈WaltCip-(
talk)01:52, 5 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose Filmography is entirely without sources, and career section is far too incomplete for posting. Needs some serious expansion and referencing to be main page ready. --
Jayron3214:08, 3 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Thanks,
BeanieFan11, for the extra footnotes. Upon further review, I find this wikibio in need of some rewriting, or some materials need to be re-arranged. The lead section is supposed to be a summary or highlights, and yet it has details not mentioned in the main prose. That one year in the NBA is trivia and looks out of place in the intro.
NYT and
WaPo call McNally the "father of instant replay", and yet this was just mentioned as a bullet-point in Awards section, not to mention that this is not an award. The Career section probably should be beefed up a bit to explain why McNally is a Hall of Famer. --
PFHLai (
talk)
11:28, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment.
Template:Re I have taken a pass at expanding the article and have also fixed the CN tags. Meets minimum expectations for homepage. Please have a look when you have a moment. Thanks.
Ktin (
talk)
03:51, 8 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Weak support – Impressive work on the article here. Based on quality alone, I would want to see this featured in ITN. However, I recognize that the impact and "encycopedic value" is lower than what we tend to admit here; the aftermath section doesn't suggest any long-term implications for this incident. No one died, tens of thousands of people just had a bad time this New Year's, and will hopefully move on. ~
Maplestrip/Mable (
chat)
10:03, 2 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose Not notable enough despite the good article. Does not leave a lasting impact since the problems have seemingly been fixed. I just had a flight cancelled last week as part of Southwest's
>15,000 cancellations (compare to 361 here). The uproar it would elicit from some users if that article were nominated is funny to think about. Point being, mass flight delays and cancellations are unfortunately increasingly common.
Belugsump (
talk)
11:44, 2 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Weak oppose. Had this incident occurred on a different week I would vote "weak support". Article looks impressive, but I doubt that this is just as notable as the other current ITN items (Croatia joining the eurozone, Benedict XVI and Pelé dying, and the December 2022 winter storm). The airspace closure was notable and did have massive impact; it is also true that it became a huge news in the region as I think this was the first time it happened there. However, the closest precedent would be the Southwest Airlines flight delays (as brought up by Belugsump), which was not blurbed at all.
Vida0007 (
talk)
18:18, 2 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support It's affected a population equal to a mid-sized town, not many events do that. We posted the Iceland volcano for example.
Abcmaxx (
talk)
08:35, 3 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose We posted the results of the election. Why do we have to post the winner being inaugurated? If we hadn't posted the results of the election, then we could do what we did for the results of Nepal's elections, but we have already posted it, so it would be unnecessary. -
TomMasterRealTALK03:36, 2 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I remember wikipedia posting about world leaders getting inaugurated when they got into power (US, UK, China, even Brazil with Temer and Bolsonaro).
We are talking about a historical president, in a historical election, in one of the biggest and most influential countries geopolically in the world.
179.83.196.117 (
talk)
05:26, 2 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support, pretty notable and the EU is one of the few international associations where joining it makes a pretty big difference to a country.
AryKun (
talk)
04:51, 1 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support A currency change in any country is probably notable in itself, as is joining the Schengen area, which a huge impact on the whole EU and a large swathe of its population.
Abcmaxx (
talk)
09:58, 1 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose This is just some Balkan bureaucracy comparable with the fuss about number plates in Kosovo. One of the key points about such developments in the EU is that it is preceded by a period of alignment and stability so that the change is not disruptive. So, when the change happens it's not actually very significant. There's much bigger currency news elsewhere such as the collapse of crypto-currencies or the hyperinflation in other places.
Andrew🐉(
talk)
10:13, 1 January 2023 (UTC)reply
I strongly disagree. The freedom of movement involving so many countries is a huge change for those going to and from Croatia and all those holding passports. Same with adopting a multinational currency, significant economic impact, whether done gradually or not. Also the "fuss about number plates in Kosovo" had both armies on standby so it's somewhat dismissive to say it's nothing on a sensitive point for all those in the region.
Abcmaxx (
talk)
11:13, 1 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support Significant change for the country itself both in international standing and practical effects for the citizens living day to day with the new currency. Notable imapct on the wider Eurozone and Schengen area, who are 400+ million people, most of whom are English speakers of various levels of competence and thus
enwiki audience. The relevant articles are updated and highly detailed.
Melmann11:48, 1 January 2023 (UTC)reply
The
Eurozone article has little about this and has plenty of quality issues – lots of
Template:Tl and paragraphs without citations. There's a table about debt in which Croatia is a complete blank. And so on.
Andrew🐉(
talk)
12:54, 1 January 2023 (UTC)reply
Support - It's safe to say that a country joining the Eurozone in full for the first time would probably be considered an automatically significant item. --🌈WaltCip-(
talk)18:23, 1 January 2023 (UTC)reply