In the news toolbox |
---|
|
This page provides a forum for editors to suggest items for inclusion in Template:In the news (ITN), a protected Main Page template, as well as the forum for discussion of candidates. This is not the page to report errors in the ITN section on the Main Page—please go to the appropriate section at WP:ERRORS.
This candidates page is integrated with the daily pages of Portal:Current events. Under each daily section header below is the transcluded Portal:Current events items for that day (with a light green header). Each day's portal page is followed by a subsection for suggestions and discussion.
|
How to nominate an itemIn order to suggest a candidate:
There are criteria which guide the decision on whether or not to put a particular item on In the news, based largely on the extensiveness of the updated content and the perceived significance of the recent developments. These are listed at WP:ITN. Submissions that do not follow the guidelines at Wikipedia:In the news will not be placed onto the live template. Headers
Voicing an opinion on an item
Please do not...
|
Suggestions
October 25
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
October 24
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
2019 Bolivian general election results
Blurb: In Bolivia, incumbent president Evo Morales (pictured) is re-elected to office, after days of violent protests and claims of electoral fraud over delayed results.
Alternative blurb: In Bolivia, incumbent president Evo Morales (pictured) is re-elected to office, after days of violent protests.
Alternative blurb II: Amidst days of violent protests and claims of electoral fraud, incumbent Bolivian president Evo Morales is re-elected to office.
Alternative blurb III: In Bolivia, incumbent president Evo Morales (pictured) is re-elected to office, though his party loses their majority in the Chamber.
News source(s): BBC
Article updated
One or both nominated events are listed at WP:ITN/R, meaning that the recurrence of the event should in itself merit a post on WP:ITN, subject to the quality of the article and any update(s) to it.
Nominator's comments: Now the result has been officially announced, a general election blurb nom (see protests one below - they can be combined). Kingsif (talk) 11:18, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support ITNR election nomination with a succinct article, with prose for all suitable sections. Also incorporates the Bolivian protests (which for some reason have not yet been posted). Accessible.130.233.2.235 (talk) 11:25, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
- Also added a shortened altblurb130.233.2.235 (talk) 11:29, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
- Comment Ugh, should we really post this? I mean, this was clearly a fake election. We dont post election news in North Korea or China or Russia and being mentiioned on the main page of the 4th post popular website in the world would give this dictator more legitimacy when we should --5.44.170.9 (talk) 11:41, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
- Consensus is firmly in favor of posting the results of sham elections. We do have a history of contextualizing with "reactions," which we don't do for legit elections. GreatCaesarsGhost 12:13, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
- Weak Support/Comment what if we combine this nom with the Bolivian Protests nom and make both the election and protests the target articles? I added alt2 to reflect this. Make sense, or too much in one nom? ~mike_gigs talkcontribs 11:53, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
- Comment There's also the potential to include that his party lost their majority in the chamber; that would then definitely be too many things in one blurb. Kingsif (talk) 11:54, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
Quantum supremacy
Blurb: Google claims to have achieved quantum supremacy by completing a 10,000-year calculation in 200 seconds.
News source(s): [1]
- Nominated by 128.62.69.171 (talk • )
128.62.69.171 (talk) 19:15, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
- Nice suggestion, but which article are we pointing to (with a bold wikilink) and has that article been sufficiently updated and is it of sufficient quality? I will look and form my own opinion, and others will hopefully weigh in. I am a little concerned that Google's claim may be hyped up. One commentator said that a more efficient standard platform could solve the problem in three days. Three days to three minutes is still a big improvement, but if so, the claim needs to be adjusted so that it's not puffery. Jehochman Talk 19:20, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose, as premature. The article quantum supremacy looks good but from it I learned that Google's claim is not yet accepted science, and doesn't meet the requirements of quantum supremacy. See IBM's cricism. Jehochman Talk 19:23, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose due to the skepticism that is evident in the article, and per Jehochman. Perhaps we wait for wider confirmation ~mike_gigs talkcontribs 19:28, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
- Snowpose per Jehochman. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 19:33, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
- Weak oppose claiming that it's not accepted science is unfair because a peer-reviewed article has already been published [2]. However, there seems to be scant coverage in the mainstream media. It's in the science sections, but not the actual headlines. Weak oppose for now, can switch to support if there's more coverage. Banedon (talk) 01:29, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose This is just a claim that requires verification through practical application. Normally, it is not notable for inclusion per se unless it yields solutions to yet unsolved problems due to the quantum barrier.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 07:10, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose Every current claim of quantum supremacy is marketing fluff. In general, there's no one moment that would definitively mark quantum supremacy, but currently all Google, IBM etc claims revolve around very narrow problems carefully chosen to be as hard as possible for classical computers and as easy as possible for quantum ones, with no real world applications. Smurrayinchester 08:56, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose – Meh. – Sca (talk) 12:24, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
WPV3 eradicated
Blurb: The World Health Organization certifies the eradication of wild poliovirus type 3.
News source(s): WHO, BBC
- Nominated by TompaDompa (talk • )
TompaDompa (talk) 17:42, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support A couple cn's in the 2000-2005 history section but nothing that should be hard to fix. Otherwise updated and looks good, and a significant event. --Masem (t) 17:48, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose While the article itself isn't bad, there are only a couple sentences on the 2019 eradication (the "event"), and more or less they simply say "WP3 was declared eradicated in October 2019". There really hasn't been a major update in the article reflecting the eradication ~mike_gigs talkcontribs 19:24, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose No, 'cause it's only one of many strains. I expect Overwhelming support for the nom once all strains are eradicated and the disease seizes to exist --5.44.170.9 (talk) 23:17, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
- I wouldn't say
one of many strains
. Only WPV1 remains now, and there were only three strains to begin with. TompaDompa (talk) 23:52, 24 October 2019 (UTC)- There are also further vaccine-caused strains, at least as far as i understand. --5.44.170.9 (talk) 23:59, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
- I wouldn't say
- Support based on the source, 2/3 of the way there which is a significant milestone. Banedon (talk) 01:31, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose notability/impact. PV3 is a terribly niche virus and has been a non-issue, from an epidemiological standpoint, even decades ago. The pre-fixing of "W" onto the beginning of viral names is a tactic that borders on marketing. Essentially, they're taking credit for "eradicating" a genetically narrowly-defined virus to get press and funding. PV3 cases are still going to occur, just not this WPV3 strain. Contra the above, there are hundreds of PV strains, they are just categorized as -1, -2, and -3 ('type strains') for historical reasons. Heck, PV1 is still around even while having one of the most efficacious vaccines available for decades.130.233.2.235 (talk) 05:41, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose of course we should reconsider when polio is eradicated full stop. Until then, this is just another incremental step towards a real news story. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 07:30, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose This is a step in the right direction but this isn't the full eradication, and it nowhere near reaches the smallpox level of news. Nonstopmaximum (talk) 08:02, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose – Arcane and obscure. – Sca (talk) 12:27, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose. If/when polio is eradicated then it would be appropriate to post. One particular strain of the virus is only an incremental step towards that goal. Modest Genius talk 12:35, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose per TRM and Modest Genius.-- P-K3 (talk) 12:38, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
October 23
Disasters and accidents
Health and environment
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
RD: James W. Montgomery
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): Episcopal Diocese of Chicago
Article updated
Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: 9th Episcopal Bishop of Chicago Teemu08 (talk) 14:21, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support - Article looks just good enough ~mike_gigs talkcontribs 19:29, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
- Weak support not a hugely comprehensive article, but what's there is adequate. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 19:30, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
Bolivian protests
Blurb: Violent protests (pictured) erupt across Bolivia in response to accusations of electoral fraud in the recent general election.
News source(s): CNN
Nominator's comments: Bolivian elections reported as fraudulent (Monday), two years after president claims human rights violations to change the law and allow himself to run again. Mysteriously missing results and protestors decapitating a statue of Hugo Chávez to leave outside a politician's door (Tuesday). President calls it a coup, OAS says to redo but doesn't expect he will (Wednesday). Kingsif (talk) 00:00, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
- Comment: Suggest blurb nomination; could you provide a possible blurb for the protests? SpencerT•C 00:54, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support - Article is in good shape. Event is very signficant.--SirEdimon (talk) 01:57, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
- Comment Two CN's need addressing before posting, but they should not be too difficult. Otherwise, would support. Very interesting that this country had a popular referendum overturned by a supranational convention almost two years ago, and now they're suffering political instability and protests. This is becoming a trend!130.233.2.47 (talk) 06:06, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support per above, but as we haven't posted anything about the election, perhaps the blurb could go into more detail about it. Davey2116 (talk) 08:50, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
- I think that would be hard to do, concisely and objectively. The immediate and stated cause of this is electoral irregularities of the most recent election (which is hard to take seriously, seeing that pre-election and exit polling are all in general agreement with the official results). More likely, the near-half of the country that voted for someone other than the winner, are upset that the winner is now taking on a fourth consecutive term in a country whose constitution explicitly bans any more than two consecutive terms, but this is still allowed because someone 50 years ago signed a treaty. The article gets this point across in, I think, an even-handed way, but I can't come up with a blurb that does as well. Best to just point to the article and let readers find out for themselves.130.233.2.47 (talk) 09:18, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
(Posted) 2019 Grays incident
Blurb: In Grays, England, 39 dead bodies are found in an international freight chiller lorry believed to have originated in Bulgaria.
News source(s): The Guardian, BBC
Article updated
Nominator's comments: International mass murder/organised crime investigation & Brexit implications. (There was an AfD closed as Speedy Keep). Kingsif (talk) 18:04, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support - I do not know it this gets attention world wide because it happens in England. But it is for sure all over the world media and the article seems ready for posting. sourced and good to go.BabbaQ (talk) 18:15, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support - Mass killing, apparently of illegal immigrants, by an international organised crime group. Of significant historical notability to the world, not just Europe. Similar to the 2000 Dover incident. Jim Michael (talk) 19:18, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support - worldwide notability indeed, and well built article. Sad we have to post it ~mike_gigs talkcontribs 19:44, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support - per above supports. Seems well-sourced at first read. I notice a discussion on the Talk page regarding proposed alternate article titles. Jusdafax (talk) 20:17, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
- Wait – It's widely published all right, but something about it makes me nervous. For one thing, the Guardian and the BBC say the driver/suspect is named Mo Robinson, but both are quite dodgy about it. Guardian: "believed to be Mo Robinson," BBC: "named locally as Mo Robinson." Neither statement is in the nominated article; if this were an official identification it would be there. Instead, we say he was a 25-year-old from such-and-such. I don't like it. Further, we know nothing about the victims or where they were from. Also, the 'Reactions' section conveys no real information. Suggest we wait for more details. – Sca (talk) 22:03, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 22:50, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
- Post-posting comment – Sources re China: AP, Guardian, BBC. – Sca (talk) 12:26, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
- Commenet For info, there's a discusion on the talkpage regarding the current page title. Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 19:02, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
(Posted) 2019 Japan Series
Blurb: In baseball, the Fukuoka SoftBank Hawks defeat the Yomiuri Giants to win the Japan Series (MVP Yurisbel Gracial pictured).
News source(s): Japan Times
Nominated event is listed at WP:ITN/R, meaning that the recurrence of the event should in itself merit a post on WP:ITN, subject to the quality of the article and any update(s) to it.
– Muboshgu (talk) 14:01, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support - This is what an article on a recurring event should look like. Includes prose, pictures, and appropriate updates.--WaltCip (talk) 14:11, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support per WaltCip.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 14:16, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support almost as good as some of those bloody Boat Race articles... The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 14:40, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
- The Rambling Man, damn those races and their high quality. – Muboshgu (talk) 14:47, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support. I agree the article is good. Some prose on the reaction or aftermath would be nice, but it's fine to post as it is. Modest Genius talk 15:10, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support per everyone else. A refreshing ITN/R article! ~mike_gigs talkcontribs 15:13, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support. Let the boat race klaxons sound in support of the winners! Well sourced, plenty of prose between the tables, and a couple pictures. Rockphed (talk) 15:15, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
- Posted. SpencerT•C 16:58, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
October 22
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Disasters and accidents
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
WeWork CEO Severance
Blurb: Following a failed IPO, WeWork founder Adam Neumann is awarded a $1.7 billion severance package
News source(s): CNBC
- Nominated by 130.233.2.235 (talk • )
- Created by Fourbin (talk • )
- Updated by Jtbobwaysf (talk • )
Both articles updated
Nominator's comments: Absolutely gobstopping malfeasance, even by the standards of our latter day tech bubble/guilded age, that has dominated financial press for days. Decent articles. I can't find recent data, but as of 2012, the largest severance package for a CEO was $417 million, for Jack Welch of GE, in 2001. 130.233.2.235 (talk) 10:32, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose really nice piece of trivia well suited to other parts of the main page. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 10:38, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Zeng Rongsheng
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): The Paper
Article updated
Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.
Zanhe (talk) 01:20, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Rolando Panerai
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): Il Messagiero and others (some say 23 Oct, but also say Maggio is an opera house - which it isn't)
- Updated and nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk • )
- Created by Grendel1988 (talk • )
Article updated
Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: One of the best-known Italian baritones, partner of Mria Callas, long career, many recordings, active as director until last year. I did what I could about an article with no references. - Sad job. --–
- Support - Good job sourcing everything! -Zanhe (talk) 01:23, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 03:42, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Hans Zender
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): NYT
- Updated and nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk • )
- Created by Jerome Kohl (talk • )
Article updated
Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: German composer better known as a conductor. Stephen Climax, where more sources could be found. Sad. I once talked to him. Mostly out today. Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:52, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
- Comment Article looks good, but spot check of refs has some problems. I'm having trouble getting ref. 7 from archive and the original is apparently gone.130.233.2.47 (talk) 06:22, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
- Sorry, that's ref. 8, Rheingau music fest. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.233.2.47 (talk) 06:24, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you, replaced by a concert review from one of the concerts. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:12, 24 October 2019 (UTC) ... and found one for the other as well. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:19, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
- Sorry, that's ref. 8, Rheingau music fest. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.233.2.47 (talk) 06:24, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support, then.130.233.2.47 (talk) 10:52, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support good to go. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 10:27, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support Looks good.-- P-K3 (talk) 12:29, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
- Posted — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:51, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Chris (sheep)
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): Sydney Morning Herald, BBC
- Nominated by Spokoyni (talk • )
- Created by Sigehelmus (talk • )
- Updated by Whiteghost.ink (talk • ) and Stephen (talk • )
Article updated
Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Article is well sourced, and seems to fully cover the subject, despite its short length Spokoyni (talk) 23:18, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
- Spokoyni, need to apply {{convert}} to a lot of those measurements, because we Americans are not converting to the metric system. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:21, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support Looks ok. P-K3 23:43, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support Looks good, well referenced. RebeccaGreen (talk) 05:43, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
- Posted — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:00, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Marieke Vervoort
Recent deaths nomination
- Nominated by MSGJ (talk • )
- Updated by RebeccaGreen (talk • )
Article updated
Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Needs expanding a bit. I'm nominating to draw attention to this article in case anyone has the inclination to improve it. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:53, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
Weak opposewhat's there is mostly okay, but it's hard to believe this is all we have to say about her. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 09:57, 23 October 2019 (UTC)- Support this is good to go. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 19:32, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
Oppose the article is on the brink of being a stub. Many parts of it are vague or brief (eg. "Marieke Vervoort was a Belgian Paralympic athlete and Paralympic champion who suffered from an incurable muscle disease." What disease? That's the whole summary) but if extra work can be done on this article I'd support it, especially because of the way she died. Rockin 12:44, 23 October 2019 (UTC)- Support Looks good now, thanks @RebeccaGreen:! Rockin 13:11, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support - just barely, but it seems sufficient for RD.--BabbaQ (talk) 14:02, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
Oppose per Rockin. The article is basically a stub and is lacking in details. Nonstopmaximum (talk) 14:15, 23 October 2019 (UTC)- Support The article is still short but is much more satisfactory on information now. Nonstopmaximum (talk) 12:49, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support I'll try to update and add to it - there are several good obituaries to use as sources. RebeccaGreen (talk) 15:56, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
Oppose per others, sadly it's basically a stub ~mike_gigs talkcontribs 16:50, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
- Comment I have started adding to the article, from obituaries and from articles in the Dutch, French and German Wikipedias, which all have more information about her and the early part of her career. None, I think, name the disease, so it should not be a problem that the English Wikipedia article doesn't name it either. I will continue working on this tomorrow, including finding and adding more sources for the information. RebeccaGreen (talk) 18:59, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
- Comment @The Rambling Man, RockinJack18, Nonstopmaximum, and Mike gigs: please have a look now. Does it need more work?
I realise that there is no medal record in the info box.(I have added a medal record in the info box.) There is more info available in the other Wikipedia articles still, which I will check again in case there are more essential events and achievements, but this now has a summary of her major sporting achievements from 2012-2016, as well as more details of her illness, honours, etc. RebeccaGreen (talk) 05:39, 24 October 2019 (UTC)- Much better, could still use some expansion but is good enough for RD now. I've changed my vote. Nonstopmaximum (talk) 12:49, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support Good article, sad tale.130.233.2.47 (talk) 06:11, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support, the article looks to be in sufficiently good shape now. Nsk92 (talk) 15:42, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 23:02, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Raymond Leppard
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): NYT
- Updated and nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk • )
Article updated
Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Per the discusion on my talk, I nominate before I did the slightest thing. Planning to work on it, help welcome. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:07, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose about half is unreferenced. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 09:44, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
- I said I didn't update, no? But I did now, please look again. His school is not referenced,
nor his concertmaster of 14 years. I like such details, even if I can't find a ref. Drop them when they break the rules ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:16, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
- I said I didn't update, no? But I did now, please look again. His school is not referenced,
- Support Sufficiently referenced now.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 14:29, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support Following the addition of more references ~mike_gigs talkcontribs 16:51, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 23:01, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
(Closed) Emperor Naruhito enthroned
- 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.
Blurb: Japanese emperor Naruhito is enthroned
News source(s): [3] [4]
- Nominated by Banedon (talk • )
- Updated by 123.20.101.102 (talk • )
Article updated
- Support on significance, but oppose due to quality at time -
the emperor's article is okay, butthe transition article is rather full of overdetailed timelines and Japanese that the majority of English-language readers can't understand. -A lad insane (Channel 2) 03:19, 22 October 2019 (UTC) - Oppose – both articles are in violation of BLP with scores of uncited claims about living people. The entire Foreign Dignitaries section, for example, and also see tags placed on Naruhito. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 03:53, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose on article quality only. There are some referencing gaps but I think most of them should be easily fixable. -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:29, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose Naruhito's article is a BLP disaster zone, the transition article is full of unreferenced and non-updated claims. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 09:46, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose. We already posted the abdication & succession in May. No need for the formal ceremony as well. Modest Genius talk 11:24, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose posting the formal coronation/inauguration, which we don't usually do except in unusual circumstances. As noted, he's already the emperor, this is just the formality. 331dot (talk) 11:32, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose – Per previous. Ceremonial formality, etc. – Sca (talk) 12:47, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose - No, on all counts. STSC (talk) 13:51, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose – Has already been posted in the past.BabbaQ (talk) 18:10, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
- The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
October 21
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
Northern Ireland direct rule
Blurb: The deadline to form a new Northern Ireland Executive passes without agreement, meaning that laws decriminalising abortion and recognising same-sex marriage come into effect.
News source(s): Guardian, BBC News, BBC News 2, BBC News 3
- Nominated by Smurrayinchester (talk • )
Both articles updated
Nominator's comments: News coverage is a bit confusing: Although abortion services won't open in NI until 2020, it was decriminalized in NI as of midnight last night meaning women can access English services without paying and without committing a crime. Similarly, same-sex marriage won't be available until early next year when Northern Ireland's pension laws etc get updated, but the law mandating it has already come into effect. Smurrayinchester 08:40, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
- Weak oppose certainly newsworthy but all three target articles suffering in their own ways from lack of quality. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 09:51, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose. Whilst this is good news, we've stopped posting the legalisation of same-sex marriage in even large & populous sovereign countries. NI is a small non-sovereign region with 3% of the UK population. Modest Genius talk 11:17, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose The blurb is unenlightening, and visiting the bold link did nothing to clarify the issue. What's going on here? An Act has been proposed, and did not pass, and this leads to new laws being made re: LBGT and abortion? And according to the article this has something to do with Brexit and a renewable energy scandal? The lede states that this places the burden of legalizing these things onto the British (London) government in 2020; where and how does this new government/laws come into effect, then? If this is a routine change in government, I would support it on ITNR. If this is about legalizing sex and abortion, I would need more information before !voting. If this is about Brexit and/or some other scandal, the update should go to those respective articles and re-nominated. In any case, some clarification is needed before posting.130.233.2.47 (talk) 13:02, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose - both article and blurb issues that needs to be completed before posting. Not opposing posting when completed, ping me.BabbaQ (talk) 22:40, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose Sorry, but we have long since passed the point where we need to be posting each legalization of SSM. If Russia or Saudi Arabia legalize it drop me a line. Otherwise, this is just more of the same. At some point we need to stop posting these events, and IMHO that point was a couple of years ago. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:22, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
- Comment: Agree with the opposes above on same sex marriage but am I the only one who finds the abortion part surprising enough to post, considering that GB legalised abortion half a century ago. I can't help but think that Northern Ireland just now legalising abortion is notable enough to deserve some thought. WP:LOGGEDOUT. 69.140.120.9 (talk) 04:14, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
- No, I agree, the abortion aspect is by far more significant than the same-sex marriage issue which appears to have fixated most commentators here. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 09:45, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
- I agree the abortion part affects more people, but my opinion is the same: this law affects a non-sovereign region with a population of less than two million. We would not post the legalisation of abortion in just, say, Multan. Modest Genius talk 18:55, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
- No, I agree, the abortion aspect is by far more significant than the same-sex marriage issue which appears to have fixated most commentators here. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 09:45, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose per Ad Orientem. Legalization of SSM among countries around the world is steadily increasing. The abortion part is also rather unnoteworthy here on similar merit. Nonstopmaximum (talk) 10:21, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support on notability; an interesting, newsworthy story which is being covered here in the U.S. as well. However, the issues with the articles still have not been addressed. Davey2116 (talk) 08:45, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Bengt Feldreich
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): [5]
Article updated
Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Death announced today. --BabbaQ (talk) 19:21, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support Short but well-sourced. – Ammarpad (talk) 03:00, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
- Posted Stephen 05:38, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Thomas D'Alesandro III
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): The New York Times
- Updated and nominated by TDKR Chicago 101 (talk • )
- Updated by 138.88.67.185 (talk • )
Article updated
Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Article updated and well sourced --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 14:29, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support article is all sourced, looks ready to go PotentPotables (talk) 16:13, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support Looks well sourced ~mike_gigs talkcontribs 16:49, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support per above. Brother of U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Article is ready. Davey2116 (talk) 17:19, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Posted — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:12, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Eric Cooper
Recent deaths nomination
- Nominated by Newyorkbrad (talk • )
Article updated
Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Active Major League Baseball umpire (worked the playoffs just a couple of weeks ago), died unexpectedly at 52. Article is cited and has been updated. Newyorkbrad (talk) 14:06, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support, looks short but decent. Do we know anything about his early life? Just curious.Please add a source here. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:11, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Posted (though details about early life would be nice) Kees08 (Talk) 15:28, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Post Posting Support Article looks good enough, but I am concerned about how quickly this was posted with little chance of reaching a true consensus. One support is not enough, even for a RD ~mike_gigs talkcontribs 16:49, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- mike gigs, precedent has established that an experienced nominator and an experienced admin together constitute consensus for recent death nomination. An RD nom doesn't even need a single support. If an admin is confident the article quality is good enough, they can post. I haven't seen an RD being pulled from ITN for at least the past year and half. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 19:38, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- mike gigs does have a valid point; this article is definitely on the brief side and I welcome Kees08 to joining ITN as the most recently promoted admin (and thus "experienced admin" may be pushing it, no offense intended), but unless the article is of more solid quality, I do prefer to wait for more improvement/expansion (and I would have preferred to wait longer for this particular nomination). Just my 2 cents. SpencerT•C 03:27, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
- You can pull it if you like, will not bother me at all. Though including the nominator and myself, there are four supports. I took a look for more sources and did not see anything interesting to add, though that does not mean it doesn't exist! Kees08 (Talk) 07:24, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
- I don't think you did anything wrong - quick turnarounds on RDs are to be encouraged, not discouraged.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 14:33, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
- You can pull it if you like, will not bother me at all. Though including the nominator and myself, there are four supports. I took a look for more sources and did not see anything interesting to add, though that does not mean it doesn't exist! Kees08 (Talk) 07:24, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
- mike gigs does have a valid point; this article is definitely on the brief side and I welcome Kees08 to joining ITN as the most recently promoted admin (and thus "experienced admin" may be pushing it, no offense intended), but unless the article is of more solid quality, I do prefer to wait for more improvement/expansion (and I would have preferred to wait longer for this particular nomination). Just my 2 cents. SpencerT•C 03:27, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
- mike gigs, precedent has established that an experienced nominator and an experienced admin together constitute consensus for recent death nomination. An RD nom doesn't even need a single support. If an admin is confident the article quality is good enough, they can post. I haven't seen an RD being pulled from ITN for at least the past year and half. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 19:38, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
2019 Canadian federal election
Blurb: In the Canadian federal election, the ruling Liberal Party, led by Justin Trudeau (pictured), loses its majority but wins the most seats in the House of Commons.
News source(s): CBC, AP, BBC, AFP, Reuters
- Nominated by 99.244.174.197 (talk • )
Nominated event is listed at WP:ITN/R, meaning that the recurrence of the event should in itself merit a post on WP:ITN, subject to the quality of the article and any update(s) to it.
Nominator's comments: Pre-emptive nomination. Listed in WP:ITN/R. Results will be close so pre-emptively providing blurbs for the two front-running parties gripped in a tie in opinion polls. Blurbs and pictures can be updated as the results become more clear into the evening. 99.244.174.197 (talk) 06:18, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support but I'm not sure the pre-emptive nomination was necessary. You're right - it's on ITN/R, and so there's no question this will be posted. However, we must avoid posting in haste - we will only put a blurb up when it is clear whether it's a majority/minority parliament, and who has won the majority or won the most seats. As you say, if it's really close, that may take some time to work out. We will only post when we are 100% sure. 88.215.17.228 (talk) 11:06, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Unable to vote until we have a completed article with properly cited final prose synopses of the completed election. Unless and until we have that, we cannot assess quality. --Jayron32 12:09, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose -
Just domestic politics.STSC (talk) 13:28, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- STSC General elections are on the recurring events list, meaning notability is not at issue. If you disagree with general elections being on the list, you are free to propose its removal on the ITNR talk page. 331dot (talk) 13:34, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- By the time this is posted the election will be decided so I don’t see that as an issue.--69.157.252.96 (talk) 18:09, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support Important international event. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:56, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support when the results are added to the article. The networks have called a minority government for Trudeau. Davey2116 (talk) 02:37, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support,
but the Liberal Party isn't "them". (The) Liberals are. The party lost its majority, see?InedibleHulk (talk) 04:02, October 22, 2019 (UTC)- Merci. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:18, October 22, 2019 (UTC)
- Support upon condition - Prose required in results section. Otherwise article looks good. Sherenk1 (talk) 04:37, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose until we have a prose summary of results. We have held up many other elections for that reason. We need to be consistent. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 06:38, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support - the results are basically tallied and final. For the same reason, a couple of people who opposed above would presumably withdraw that opposition now. Alsadius (talk) 10:33, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support. Although there are a few seats still to resolve, the outcome is clear (Liberals largest party but without a majority). The article looks fine to me, admittedly on only a quick look. Modest Genius talk 11:20, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support - Results give Trudeau two more years. (Four sources added above.) – Sca (talk) 12:56, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
- Minority governments tend to last about that long, but not as a rule, and the leaders can stick around for another shot at a majority afterward. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:01, October 22, 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose per Coffeeandcrumbs, we still need some prose on the results. GreatCaesarsGhost 13:04, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose Article is extremely wordy, and in my opinion gets far too granular. Except, for the one section that actually matters: Results. I'm not certain that intraparty events going back to 2015 are really necessary, nor is a whole paragraph about one institution's "promises kept" publication. But at the very least, flesh out Results.130.233.2.47 (talk) 13:32, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose - Reading through the article, you'd think that the election hasn't finished yet, even though it has. Agreed with above that results prose is needed.--WaltCip (talk) 13:38, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose for now. The background is well developed, but the results section, which is the only current event worth posting, has not yet been updated with an adequate amount of well-referenced prose. --Jayron32 15:20, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose per WaltCip and the IP above him. This article seems to be more about the results of the 2015 election than the current election. Rockphed (talk) 18:10, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose TBDs?! The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 09:47, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
- Comment Article has now been updated so no more TBDs but I would like to see some prose in the results section before supporting.-- P-K3 (talk) 13:25, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
October 20
Armed conflicts and attacks
Disasters and accidents
Politics and elections
|
(Posted) RD: Nick Tosches
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): New York Times
- Nominated by Spengouli (talk • )
- Updated by Coffeeandcrumbs (talk • )
Article updated
Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Bilbiography/discography/etc. is an issue. Spengouli (talk) 17:29, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose per nom, spot on. The majority of the article is just fine, but the 'ography sections need work. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 20:09, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- Working on the 'ography sections. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 02:42, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support – "I've gone more than 40 years without having to use an alarm clock or go to an office. At this point, I don't think I'd be capable of it. I don't think I could deprive myself of that sky. It would be like putting an animal in a cage."[6] --- Coffeeandcrumbs 10:08, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support - Nice work C&C! ~mike_gigs talkcontribs 12:06, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Comment I seem to recall that bibliography, discography, and film and television appearances do not require inline citations. Wanted to verify that is accurate before I posted it. Kees08 (Talk) 15:21, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Posted — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:25, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
October 19
Disasters and accidents
Politics and elections
|
(Posted) RD: Erhard Eppler
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): Der Spiegel
- Updated and nominated by Gerda Arendt (talk • )
Article updated
Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Influential German politician, minister, - yes, still some refs missing, but I need to go out now, - would be so pleased if the refs miraculously appeared when I return ;) Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:57, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- Weak oppose looks like it's 88% of the way there but still too much unreferenced for a BLP. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 20:11, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- Please look again. I dropped a few details, such as exactly which election district sent him when, because I think they are of little relevance in the long run, and I'm tired. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:43, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support Referencing improved; covers political career beyond just listing positions. SpencerT•C 02:06, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support - everything is referenced. -Zanhe (talk) 06:08, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Posted Kees08 (Talk) 06:16, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
(Closed) Parliamentary votes on Brexit | Letwin amendment
- 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.
Blurb: The UK parliament passes the Letwin amendment (Oliver Letwin pictured) forcing a delay to Brexit until legislation implementing a proposed withdrawal agreement has been passed.
News source(s): The New York Times, Reuters
- Nominated by Coffeeandcrumbs (talk • )
- Updated by This is Paul (talk • ) and Wiz9999 (talk • )
- A lot of things are going to happen quickly in the next few days. I can certainly understand a blurb but I wonder if this is the right point at which to do it(for example, Johnson's deal may yet still pass) or if so much is going to happen that it should remain where it is. 331dot (talk) 18:53, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose UK actually leave the EU, UK revoke Article 50 okay blurb. All other steps along the way, keep it Ongoing. -- KTC (talk) 19:47, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- Neutral. An historic moment certainly, and a surprise. Perhaps the most startling aspect being Johnson's apparent insistence that he is prepared to defy the Benn Act and break the law. But tend to agree with 331dot. The next vote, a re-run of the intended "meaningful vote" of today, is now tabled for as soon as Monday. Although the numbers look like they will be very similar to today's. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:50, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oh my goodness. It seems that Johnson has now sent the required letter to Donald Tusk, but has refused to sign it. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:23, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- Martinevans123, never trust a son of a toilet, especially two of them. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 22:35, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oh my goodness. It seems that Johnson has now sent the required letter to Donald Tusk, but has refused to sign it. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:23, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support but maintain it in ongoing, as well. This is certainly making international headlines. However, if we're making this a blurb, then the Letwin amendment section of the article needs to be fleshed out a lot. If the story changes drastically soon, then we can always edit the blurb. Davey2116 (talk) 20:26, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support conditional on removal from ongoing like we ought to have done a month ago. --LaserLegs (talk) 21:27, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose This is what ongoing is for. Although a significant skirmish in the never ending political bickering between those who want out and those who are desperately (and somewhat successfully) trying to scupper Brexit, ultimately it is a not a major shift in the status quo. The next blurb on this should be either the UK leaves the EU or they revoke Article 50. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:41, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- Yes, as long as it continues to receive sufficient news coverage to justify it. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:10, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose Totally agree with Ad Orientem, it's blurb or ongoing, not both. This is just one more incremental step in the process. Enough with nominating every single step. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:44, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- My proposal is to remove the ongoing. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 22:47, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- Coffeeandcrumbs, that would be far superior to having an ongoing and a blurb, but this delay doesn't end Brexit, so its still ongoing. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:54, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- My proposal is to remove the ongoing. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 22:47, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose The focus has already moved on to the sending of the letters. Next up is the parliamentary manouevring to get the latest deal back into the schedule alongside the Queen's Speech. It's too fast-moving and indecisive for a blurb. Andrew D. (talk) 07:35, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose – It ain't over yet. – Sca (talk) 12:24, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose per Andrew. Lots going on, will likely be hard to nail down a specific blurb for a few days so let's wait in Ongoing until there's something clearer to post. Sam Walton (talk) 11:26, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Weak oppose. Brexit is (correctly) already in ongoing, and we can't post a blurb every time Boris Johnson loses a vote (that's roughly one a week at the moment). Whilst there is an awful lot going on in Brexit, the situation is moving quickly and Letwin's amendment is just one more twist in the tale. I would be more supportive of a blurb about the large protest march that was going on simultaneously, which appears to have been the second-largest protest in British history. Modest Genius talk 17:11, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose we're not far away from some news which may be digestible by our readers rather than this somewhat esoteric move which, while important, will soon be actioned with results. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 19:01, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Ongoing: replace "Brexit" with "Brexit negotiations in 2019"
Ongoing item nomination
- Nominated by Coffeeandcrumbs (talk • )
- Updated by Hebsen (talk • )
Article updated
Nominator's comments: Brexit is a horrible uninformative article that is not helpful to link to. We should link to Brexit negotiations in 2019. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 09:42, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- Sounds reasonable, fixing. --Tone 10:22, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- The negotiations finished Thursday, so not sure that target is appropriate anymore. Currently, it is up to the House of Commons, so perhaps Parliamentary votes on Brexit, though it is not really updated. Still thinks the main Brexit article is the best target. Also, can you please elaborate on why the Brexit articles is
horrible uninformative
. I find it very informative, but a bit difficult to navigate. ― Hebsen(previously Heb the best) (talk) 10:37, 19 October 2019 (UTC)- Mostly agree, Hebsen. But I think Parliamentary votes on Brexit might be a better target once updated. May be less of a wait than anticipated, as voting on Oliver Letwin's delaying amendment is currently underway. First House of Commons Saturday sitting for 37 years. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:39, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- Hebsen, I have on several occasions visited Brexit to find out what is going on and came out uninformed. I agree, however, that Parliamentary votes on Brexit may in time make a good substitute if updated. My personal criteria for an ongoing link is where can the reader easily find the most up to date information. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 18:04, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- WP:ERRORS was solely created to deal with issues like this. Please let's direct further "fix this" issues there. – Ammarpad (talk) 19:53, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- I will try that next time this ever comes up but I think I would have been referred back to here. I would think replacing an article should be vetted and discussed here. This was not an error or a minor update. This was a proposal to delist and replace in FPC parlance. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 21:05, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose "Brexit means Brexit". The focus of the affair keeps shifting between the diplomatic negotiations; the various parliaments and personalities; the street protests; the courts; &c. Trying to identify the news focus with blurbs or the suggested sub-article is misleading as the story soon moves on. The timeline section in the main Brexit article might be a good place to start but we shouldn't assume that the reader already knows what Brexit means and so it's best to start at the top. Andrew D. (talk) 07:26, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- I have reverted the link back to Brexit per comments above — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:01, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support - Yes, it does make sense. STSC (talk) 13:32, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support and I'm invoking my super special and meaningful "strongest possible" enhancement for this !vote. The Brexit article is too long to serve the intended purpose of providing information on what's in the news. GreatCaesarsGhost 18:39, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Deborah Orr
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-50122643
- Nominated by Miraclepine (talk • )
- Updated by MootsieOrangeville (talk • )
Article updated
Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Scottish journalist. Upgraded from stub to start. While there are obituaries, I picked a BBC one because the article makes no indication that she worked for them so it should be independent. Some of the paragraphs are one sentence and could be merged, but other than that, article is decent. ミラP 16:49, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
October 18
Armed conflicts and attacks
Arts and culture
Business and economy
Disasters and accidents
International relations
Law and crime
Politics and elections
|
(Posted) 2019 Santiago protests
Blurb: Protestors in Santiago, Chile attack the metro, bringing the whole system to a standstill and a declaration of emergency by President Sebastián Piñera.
Alternative blurb: Violent protests in Santiago, Chile over increased metro fares cause President Sebastián Piñera to order a declaration of emergency.
News source(s): NY Times, BBC, Le Monde, El País
- Nominated by 130.233.2.47 (talk • )
- Created by MSG17 (talk • )
- Updated by Moscow Mule (talk • ) and B1mbo (talk • )
Article updated
Nominator's comments: Riots/protests that have disabled Chile's capital metro system, more than half of the population of the entire country now living under state of emergency, which will persist for at least another 10 days. 130.233.2.47 (talk) 08:27, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support alt1 Appears to be significant, well covered in the media, and article is well sourced. Sam Walton (talk) 11:32, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support - updated and ready.BabbaQ (talk) 11:43, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support, on notability. In addition to what others have said above: Chile's President has declared a state of emergency, and military troops have been deployed to contain civilian unrest for the first time since the fall of Pinochet in 1987. Nsk92 (talk) 11:47, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support on notability and quality of the article. Lots of protests lately! ~mike_gigs talkcontribs 12:01, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support - It's getting bigger now. STSC (talk) 13:38, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Administrator note: I came to post, but I'm wondering about bringing the whole system to a standstill and a declaration of emergency by President Sebastián Piñera. Do we need to know that it brought the whole system to a standstill, and is "bring" the right verb to use with a declaration. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:49, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Post-posting support. Major protests in a location which hasn't seen this sort of violence for decades. Modest Genius talk 17:16, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Post-posting support per above. Davey2116 (talk) 17:21, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
(Closed) RD: Kamlesh Tiwari
- 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.
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): The Hindu, Times of India
- Updated and nominated by Harshil169 (talk • )
- Updated by Lord Bolingbroke (talk • )
Article updated
Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.
- Oppose There are significant gaps in basic information. Dates are missing. The article reports criminal cases lodged four years ago w/o explaining their outcome. It doesn't even explicitly identify the subjects nationality although that can be guessed from the body. The subject is clearly notable but the article is going to need serious expansion before it can be posted. -Ad Orientem (talk) 05:24, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- @Ad Orientem: Kindly revise your vote. I have updated the article. -- Harshil want to talk? 06:43, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- There is now an orange POV tag at the top. That's a showstopper until whatever issues it refers to are corrected. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:23, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- It’s no more. — Harshil want to talk? 08:08, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- There is now an orange POV tag at the top. That's a showstopper until whatever issues it refers to are corrected. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:23, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- @Ad Orientem: Kindly revise your vote. I have updated the article. -- Harshil want to talk? 06:43, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose There's nothing in the article about his life up until 2012. Indeed, apart from one sentence there's nothing about him apart from his comment about Muhammad and his death. Black Kite (talk) 13:38, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- Comment I agree with the above !votes. However, you might make an article Assassination of Kamlesh Tiwari and re-nominate that, using the information already in the BLP. There's enough sourcing to show notability and religiously-motivated political assassinations are newsworthy.130.233.2.47 (talk) 07:19, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Looking better now. I don't understand the following sentence: Thousands of Muslims protected in Muzaffarnagar and demanded death penalty for Tiwari. Perhaps it needs proof-reading, but it's getting there. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 17:49, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
- The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
(Closed) Wreck of the Japanese aircraft carrier Kaga found
- 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.
Blurb: The wreck of the Japanese aircraft carrier Kaga has been found, seventy-seven years after being sunk during the Second World War's Battle of Midway.
News source(s): Associated Press, Washington Post, The Independent, United States Naval Institute
Article updated
- Support Everybody loves shipwrecks. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:50, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose trivia. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 19:54, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose Contrary to Hawkeye's opinion, not everyone loves shipwrecks. Some of us are quite indifferent to them. A ship that was sunk during WWII is brought back up... so what? It's not significant. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:04, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
- Comment Worth pointing out that the general location of the ship has been known since 1999...--Trans-Neptunian object (talk) 22:05, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
- Weak Support Conceding an element of trivia, it's in a popular genre. Also the article being FA is always a plus. That said the blurb is a bit wordy. -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:16, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support May not be as notable as the likes of Titanic or Bismarck, but this wasn't an ordinary ship either. The article itself is also in very good shape. Nonstopmaximum (talk) 04:58, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose – The remains of Kaga lie more than 3 miles below the surface and won't ever be "brought back up," nor will she be accessible to divers. Discoveries of sunken wrecks have become frequent. RV Petrel has found 31. This one doesn't seem particularly significant. – Sca (talk) 13:29, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose Like, what's going to happen, man? ——SerialNumber54129 18:29, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose Uninteresting trivia at best. --qedk (t 桜 c) 21:36, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- PS: – Now the wreck of Akagi has been found in similar circumstances. That makes 32. – Sca (talk) 14:33, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose. Whilst the FA-class article gave me pause, this doesn't seem to be a particularly notable wreck (unlike Titanic, or Mary Rose). The implications of a more precise location seem extremely limited, and Sca makes a good point that this research vessel is finding several large shipwrecks every year. Modest Genius talk 17:15, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- I would support this as an interesting story and an opportunity to showcase one of our best articles. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 17:50, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
- The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
(Closed) First all-female spacewalk
- 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.
Blurb: American astronauts Jessica Meir and Christina Koch complete the first all-female spacewalk.
News source(s): CNN, NYT
Both articles updated
- Oppose it's a nice piece of trivia. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 19:33, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose Interesting indeed but not really ITN-worthy. Could be a cool DYK if the articles are promoted to GA, which they very well could be ~mike_gigs talkcontribs 19:49, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support Another milestone. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:50, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose.--WaltCip (talk) 20:21, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose. This is a good example of something typically found in the DYK section. LefcentrerightTalk (plz ping) 20:33, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support I agree this would have been a great DYK (especially because of the reason the first planned all-female spacewalk was scrapped) but that doesn't make it not worthy of ITN. --valereee (talk) 20:56, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose Trivial. "First female X" is often going to be trivial. Sometimes it could be a true breakthrough, but sometimes it's this. What's so significant about two women doing a spacewalk together? This isn't even the first female spacewalk. – Muboshgu (talk) 20:59, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support Internationally, not trivial.[7][8] Alanscottwalker (talk) 21:31, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
Come on, you two.--WaltCip (talk) 21:30, 20 October 2019 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
- Oppose Interesting trivia. More suited for DYK. – Ammarpad (talk) 21:51, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support International reliable sources report this rare feat. Trillfendi (talk) 22:15, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose – Eileen Collins was breaking the glass ceiling. This is just nice trivia. Wait for the first all female crew. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 23:48, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose Chasing the headlines only. -- Harshil want to talk? 03:15, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support It is the 221st spacewalk on the ISS alone (I think we are somewhere are 400 spacewalks all time? Had trouble finding the exact number). Important enough of an achievement to be featured in my opinion. If every ~400 spacewalks and 35 years (time between Svetlana's spacewalk and now) we feature an achievement like this, so be it. Kees08 (Talk) 06:18, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- Weak support in that this is being made a big deal by the news, and I think is fair to post, though acknowledging that it was "just" another spacewalk otherwise. That said, Meir's article has sourcing issues, a visible CN and the awards need a proper source (the only one goes to the home page of JSC which is not sufficient). --Masem (t) 13:59, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- I took care of those issues and many others, perhaps Coffeeandcrumbs would be able to spend time citing the last little bits and whatever other work needs done...? Kees08 (Talk) 06:43, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose - as above, the important glass ceiling regarding spacewalks was broken in the past, leaving this as little but a nice bit of trivia worthy perhaps of DYK. Stormy clouds (talk) 17:27, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support Huge news for 1/2 population of the world 5.44.170.9 (talk) 20:03, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose Meir's article indicates that this was done in the execution of routine maintenance. I don't think even avid female space enthusiasts are going to be interested in changing batteries.130.233.2.47 (talk) 06:43, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose. A welcome but trivial development. The first woman to spacewalk was notable, but that was Svetlana Savitskaya in 1984. That no men were outside during this particular routine spacewalk is not something that's going to break any glass ceilings. Modest Genius talk 12:37, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose, per Modest Genius. —Brigade Piron (talk) 18:51, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Comment time to put this one out its misery methinks. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 18:57, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
(Posted) 2019 Lebanese protests
Blurb: After government plans to tax calls made through WhatsApp, protests break out in Lebanon.
Alternative blurb: Country-wide protests erupt after the government of Lebanon announces plans to tax gasoline, tobacco, and online phone calls.
Alternative blurb II: Several cabinet ministers resign amid protests in Lebanon which began after the government announced plans to tax gasoline, tobacco, and online phone calls.
News source(s): [15]
- Nominated by PotentPotables (talk • )
- Created by Shahen Araboghlian (talk • )
- Updated by Emptyfear (talk • ) and Greyshark09 (talk • )
Nominator's comments: Country-wide protests, just coming into the news PotentPotables (talk) 17:53, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
- Agreed, corrected! --Shahen books (talk) 18:01, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support Alt Blurb - Good article but I thought the blurb could be improved in wording a bit so i proposed Alt1 ~mike_gigs talkcontribs 19:44, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose trivial. If these protests rise to something notable, perhaps revisit. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 19:48, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support - the most violent protest events in Lebanon in the 21st century.GreyShark (dibra) 11:49, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- @Coffeeandcrumbs: what is your opinion on this item? (I notice you have looked at the article.) — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:58, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- @MSGJ and PotentPotables: things are heating up and there have been a few government resignations. The article, however, is difficult to read and understand. The article sourcing looks good but needs copy editing for grammar and style. The timeline of events also contributes to making this article hard to understand. For example, there is no context offered for why "Samir Geagea, chief of the Lebanese Forces, calls for Prime Minister Saad Hariri's resignation" and then the next day announces "the resignation of the Ministers of the Lebanese Forces". If we got rid of the list and turned to paragraphs for October 18 and 19, I would support. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 19:20, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- @Coffeeandcrumbs: I've changed the lists into paragraphs, and they make a lot more sense now a la explaining why people did things/what they said. I'll give the rest of the article a quick read through for style/grammar, but it should be good now. PotentPotables (talk) 01:06, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- @MSGJ and PotentPotables: things are heating up and there have been a few government resignations. The article, however, is difficult to read and understand. The article sourcing looks good but needs copy editing for grammar and style. The timeline of events also contributes to making this article hard to understand. For example, there is no context offered for why "Samir Geagea, chief of the Lebanese Forces, calls for Prime Minister Saad Hariri's resignation" and then the next day announces "the resignation of the Ministers of the Lebanese Forces". If we got rid of the list and turned to paragraphs for October 18 and 19, I would support. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 19:20, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support alt2 which I added. I used "amid" because it is not exactly clear if the ministers resigned because of protests or in support of the protests. Perhaps it should be "during". I also toned down the puffery and colorful language (i.e. "erupt" and "country-wide"). --- Coffeeandcrumbs 01:18, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support alt2 as Nominator PotentPotables (talk) 01:28, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support alt2 per Coffeeandcrumbs. -Zanhe (talk) 06:03, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Posted — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:01, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- Post-posting comment – While domestically significant, these events seem below ITN's usual criteria, and the article is less than lucent. – Sca (talk) 13:15, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
(Posted) RD: Mark Hurd
Recent deaths nomination
News source(s): CNN
Per this RFC and further discussion, the nomination of any individual human, animal or other biological organism with a standalone Wikipedia article whose recent death is in the news is presumed to be important enough to post. Discussion should focus only on the quality of the article. See also WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Doesn't seem that far from postable at the moment. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:14, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support I added a sentence about his death in the article as it wasn't mentioned, but other than that it looks good ~mike_gigs talkcontribs 17:22, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support satis. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 19:33, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
- Support. Aviartm (talk) 21:11, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
- Posted Kees08 (Talk) 00:37, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
(Closed) 2019 Military World Games
- 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.
Blurb: The 7th Military World Games officially opens in Wuhan, China
News source(s): prnewswire, Xinhuanet, The Telegraph, U.S. Department of Defense
Article updated
- Would like to see some of those sections in the article expanded significantly, but support in principle — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:30, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose It's not in the news. PR Newswire is just a distributor of press-releases. Andrew D. (talk) 10:08, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose. Not a significant event. Modest Genius talk 11:16, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose – Per previous. – Sca (talk) 12:40, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose I have added Telegraph and US DoD sources. The time to nominate this is probably the conclusion of the games, when results are in and the article is finalized.130.233.3.131 (talk) 13:08, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks but the DoD is not a news organisation and the Telegraph article was published back in July. Compare this with the space walk which is in all MSM. Andrew D. (talk) 22:23, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
- Wait until conclusion of the games. Will assess quality at that point. Until we have a concluded games and a relatively complete descriptive prose of them, there's nothing to post. --Jayron32 13:09, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose time to close. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 19:34, 18 October 2019 (UTC)
- The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
References
Nominators often include links to external websites and other references in discussions on this page. It is usually best to provide such links using the inline URL syntax [http://example.com]
rather than using <ref></ref>
tags, because that keeps all the relevant information in the same place as the nomination without having to jump to this section, and facilitates the archiving process.
For the times when <ref></ref>
tags are being used, here are their contents: