Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
4iamking (talk | contribs)
Line 46: Line 46:
:*'''Oppose''' This is why we have the ongoing.
:*'''Oppose''' This is why we have the ongoing.
:[[User:Masem|M<span style="font-variant: small-caps">asem</span>]] ([[User Talk:Masem|t]]) 21:09, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
:[[User:Masem|M<span style="font-variant: small-caps">asem</span>]] ([[User Talk:Masem|t]]) 21:09, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
:'''Wait''' This is mostly covered by ongoing, I think the 4 upcoming referendums in the LPR, DPR and two other Ukrainian regions (and potential annexation afterwards) might be the bigger story in all this. I do think this is the beginning of a major escalation which could be blurb worthy even with the war in ongoing, but it's not there yet. ✨ <span style="background:linear-gradient(maroon,red,orange,gold,green,blue,darkviolet,deeppink);border-radius:1em;text-shadow:2px 0#000;color:#fff"> '''''4 🧚‍♂<small>am</small>'' [[User talk:4iamking|<span style="color:#fff">KING</span>]]&nbsp;'''</span> 21:14, 21 September 2022 (UTC)


==== RD: Darrell Mudra ====
==== RD: Darrell Mudra ====

Revision as of 21:14, 21 September 2022

This page provides a place to discuss new items for inclusion on In the news (ITN), a protected template on the Main Page (see past items in the ITN archives). Do not report errors in ITN items that are already on the Main Page here— discuss those at the relevant section of WP:ERRORS.

This candidates page is integrated with the daily pages of Portal:Current events. A light green header appears under each daily section - it includes transcluded Portal:Current events items for that day. You can discuss ITN candidates under the header.

Jeremiah Manele in 2023
Jeremiah Manele

Glossary

  • Blurbs are one-sentence summaries of the news story.
    • Altblurbs, labelled alt1, alt2, etc., are alternative suggestions to cover the same story.
    • A target article, bolded in text, is the focus of the story. Each blurb must have at least one such article, but you may also link non-target articles.
  • Articles in the Ongoing line describe events getting continuous coverage.
  • The Recent deaths (RD) line includes any living thing whose death was recently announced. Consensus may decide to create a blurb for a recent death.

All articles linked in the ITN template must pass our standards of review. They should be up-to-date, demonstrate relevance via good sourcing and have at least an acceptable quality.

Nomination steps

  • Make sure the item you want to nominate has an article that meets our minimum requirements and contains reliable coverage of a current event you want to create a blurb about. We will not post about events described in an article that fails our quality standards.
  • Find the correct section below for the date of the event (not the date nominated). Do not add sections for new dates manually - a bot does that for us each day at midnight (UTC).
  • Create a level 4 header with the article name (==== Your article here ====). Add (RD) or (Ongoing) if appropriate.
Then paste the {{ITN candidate}} template with its parameters and fill them in. The news source should be reliable, support your nomination and be in the article. Write your blurb in simple present tense. Below the template, briefly explain why we should post that event. After that, save your edit. Your nomination is ready!
  • You may add {{ITN note}} to the target article's talk page to let editors know about your nomination.

The better your article's quality, the better it covers the event and the wider its perceived significance (see WP:ITNSIGNIF for details), the better your chances of getting the blurb posted.

Purge this page to update the cache

Headers

  • When the article is ready, updated and there is consensus to post, you can mark the item as (Ready). Remove that wording if you feel the article fails any of these necessary criteria.
  • Admins should always separately verify whether these criteria are met before posting blurbs marked (Ready). For more guidance, check WP:ITN/A.
    • If satisfied, change the header to (Posted).
    • Where there is no consensus, or the article's quality remains poor, change the header to (Closed) or (Not posted).
    • Sometimes, editors ask to retract an already-posted nomination because of a fundamental error or because consensus changed. If you feel the community supports this, remove the item and mark the item as (Pulled).

Voicing an opinion on an item

Format your comment to contain "support" or "oppose", and include a rationale for your choice. In particular, address the notability of the event, the quality of the article, and whether it has been updated.

Please do...

  1. Pick an older item to review near the bottom of this page, before the eligibility runs out and the item scrolls off the page and gets abandoned in the archive, unused and forgotten.
  2. Review an item even if it has already been reviewed by another user. You may be the first to spot a problem, or the first to confirm that an identified problem was fixed. Piling on the list of "support!" votes will help administrators see what is ready to be posted on the Main Page.
  3. Tell about problems in articles if you see them. Be bold and fix them yourself if you know how, or tell others if it's not possible.

Please do not...

  1. Add simple "support!" or "oppose!" votes without including your reasons. Similarly, curt replies such as "who?", "meh", or "duh!" are not helpful. A vote without reasoning means little for us, please elaborate yourself.
  2. Oppose an item just because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. We post a lot of such content, so these comments are generally unproductive.
  3. Accuse other editors of supporting, opposing or nominating due to a personal bias (such as ethnocentrism). We at ITN do not handle conflicts of interest.
  4. Comment on a story without first reading the relevant article(s).
  5. Oppose a recurring item here because you disagree with the recurring items criteria. Discuss them here.
  6. Use ITN as a forum for your own political or personal beliefs. Such comments are irrelevant to the outcome and are potentially disruptive.

Suggesting updates

There are two places where you can request corrections to posted items:

  • Anything that does not change the intent of the blurb (spelling, grammar, markup issues, updating death tolls etc.) should be discussed at WP:Errors.
  • Discuss major changes in the blurb's intent or very complex updates as part of the current ITNC nomination.
Skip to top
Skip to bottom

Archives

September 21

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Sports


RD: Allan M. Siegal

Article: Allan M. Siegal (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The New York Times
Credits:

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

 Bloom6132 (talk) 20:43, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mobilization in Russia

Article: 2022 Russian mobilization (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Russian president Vladimir Putin announces partial mobilization in the country. (Post)
News source(s): CNN, etc
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: The first such step in Russia since WWII and front page news in some outlets which may justify blurbing in addition to ongoing invasion item. Article appears generally ok, but further copyedit is welcome. Brandmeistertalk 20:05, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment - he mobilized troops in February didn't he, moving them to the border with Ukraine prior to the invasion? I'd have thought the blurb would need to be more specific about what's changed... as I understand it conscription may be on the cards now...  — Amakuru (talk) 20:12, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    No, he did not. Russia started its illegal invasion mainly with contract soldiers. The professional army. A mobilization means 'random' civilians will be conscripted and forced to fight in ukraine or face punishment of up to 15 years in prison for refusal. Your last sentence is exactly what has happened. Just that conscription will be happening now, has started today and isn't a maybe anymore. 188.118.189.42 (talk) 20:26, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait: (ec) while possibly a major development for the invasion, I'd rather wait to see how does this deploy, because this could easily be relegated to Ongoing -Gouleg🛋️ harass/hound 20:28, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose good faith nom. This is already at ongoing. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:48, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose This is why we have the ongoing.
Masem (t) 21:09, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wait This is mostly covered by ongoing, I think the 4 upcoming referendums in the LPR, DPR and two other Ukrainian regions (and potential annexation afterwards) might be the bigger story in all this. I do think this is the beginning of a major escalation which could be blurb worthy even with the war in ongoing, but it's not there yet. ✨ 4 🧚‍♂am KING  21:14, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Darrell Mudra

Article: Darrell Mudra (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [1]
Credits:

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

 – Muboshgu (talk) 19:21, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Raju Srivastav

Article: Raju Srivastav (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC Khaleej Times
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Start class, well sourced Venkat TL (talk) 10:42, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support - Cited and updated. It's a short article, but not to the point of being a stub.--🌈WaltCip-(talk) 12:34, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Well sourced and updated. -- 125.59.140.165 (talk) 12:55, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Marked ready after 3 supports including mine.--Venkat TL (talk) 13:01, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Correctly structured, and all the information, albeit short, is cited properly. Mjeims (talk) 14:50, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted. Thryduulf (talk) 17:02, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

September 20

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

Politics and elections

Sports


September 19

Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections


RD: Herb Lusk

Article: Herb Lusk (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Philadelphia Inquirer; WPVI-TV (ABC); WTXF-TV (Fox)
Credits:

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

 Bloom6132 (talk) 03:21, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Looks good enough. --Vacant0 (talk) 09:21, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mostly good enough, but one part of the professional career section makes little sense to me: In the third game of his career on September 27, 1976, he fumbled the ball with 12 seconds remaining in the first half after he opted to run instead of running out the clock. This led to the Eagles' 10–3 over the Washington Redskins, with Philadelphia ultimately losing the game in sudden-death overtime. Could you reword this? BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:31, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: Article is of sufficient quality for ITN. BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:05, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Maury Wills

Article: Maury Wills (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ESPN, LA Times, NY Times, AP
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: This one will need work, but he was awesome and I'll put in whatever effort is needed. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:15, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

From 38 sourced cited to 60, ready for review.[2] – Muboshgu (talk) 03:17, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Nicely done, Muboshgu. Maury was indeed an awesome player. (His stint as a manager was another story!)--🌈WaltCip-(talk) 12:32, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) 2022 Carlsen–Niemann controversy

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


Proposed image
Article: 2022 Carlsen–Niemann controversy (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Five-time reigning world chess champion Magnus Carlsen (pictured) resigns after one move in a match against Hans Niemann amid allegations of cheating against the latter. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Five-time reigning world chess champion Magnus Carlsen forfeits a match after one move to 45th-ranked Hans Niemann (pictured), who snapped his 53-win streak earlier this month.
News source(s): Guardian ABC Australia
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: A bit left field, but a big scandal in the chess world. Bumbubookworm (talk) 03:35, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Depends The article notes Levon Aronian saying young players are often suspected of cheating and high-level players are "pretty much paranoid". Is this true? If so, what makes this episode different? InedibleHulk (talk) 03:57, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well, MC is the five-time reigning WC, and walked out/forfeited a game after one move, so he basically disrupted the tournament directly in protest. Not sure if your edit summary was rhetorical, but cheating would be from getting external assistance ie looking up suggestions from a chess supercomputer during toilet breaks, or other smuggling/transmission events Bumbubookworm (talk) 04:04, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Cool, thanks. As his title wasn't on the line, and the tournament seemingly continued with him in it, I think I'll pass. The lack of any actual allegation of cheating in this game or the earlier tournament he quit also lessens the oomph, to me. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:10, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment @Bumbubookworm: Could you please explain how this is notable? It appears to be just an online game. NytharT.C 04:15, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    The alt blurb appears to be saying Hans Niemann made one move; I think he made 2 moves and Magnus Carlsen made 1 move (see the board in the article). NytharT.C 08:02, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    It was an online match, but it was part of the Champions Chess Tour 2022, a prestigious tournament. Davey2116 (talk) 08:46, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Niemann made two moves, but only one before buddy flipped out; I've changed "by" to "to", hope that helps! InedibleHulk (talk) 09:10, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. It's been much discussed because of how unusual it is, but there has been (as far as I was last updated on this) no formal accusation, no formal investigation, no clear aftermath or clear lasting effects on the circuit. It's a lot of murmuring, rumor, thoughts but little concrete facts. Just a lot of speculation about what happened. It may be worth it to consider again if significant moves with tangible consequences on the field are made, such as truly bombshell accusations or an incredibly disruptive investigative launched. ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 05:00, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Agree that it's not fit for the main page, but I want to point out that it's remarkable either way - Either it's actual cheating in over-the-board play by one of the best players in the world, or it's extreme unprofessionalism and borderline witch hunt instigation by the world champion. There isn't any concrete evidence of cheating, but it's still a major event regardless of the outcome. AviationFreak💬 05:04, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oh for sure. I do agree it's a major thing. The intangibility (for lack of a better word) created by lack of a straightforward and formal accusation is, in its own way, remarkable even if that very intangibility is a major reason for me why it isn't a good fit. I do wish it had more of a... shape (again, lack of a better word, it's late...) to it to qualify because of how fascinating and remarkable it all has been. ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 05:11, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose - (edit conflict) While this is certainly the biggest news in the chess community worldwide, I don't think it warrants a blurb. This was not a major event (not even OTB) and the game itself (where the one-move resignation occurred) is likely not notable enough for an article (the article covers the controversy as a whole, which started a couple weeks ago). As much as I want this to be a blurb because of my love of chess, I don't think it meets the blurb standard. AviationFreak💬 05:02, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Support (Altblurb) The more I look into this, the idea of today's hottest grandmaster and reigning (but not defending) world openweight champion rage quitting to a relative noob for the second consecutive loss on a previously stellar record is a pretty big deal. Imagine if Amanda Nunes just up and left the first next time she was eyepoked or kicked in the junk by Julianna Peña and the ref didn't see it. Granted, in her case, such an unsportsmanlike tantrum would cost her the strap, but chess is too much a game of wits to draw too fine an analogy with "human cockfighting". Plus, it would show those regulars in the peanut gallery (who know who they are) that ITN is not purely a Caroline royal mouthpiece. Again, the kings and queens in chess are different than in "human chess", but you get my point, one small step for a pwn. InedibleHulk (talk) 05:31, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Would expect at least a formal investigation with reported findings and penalties, not mere allegations. That said, Houston Astros sign stealing scandal and Deflategate were not blurbed.—Bagumba (talk) 06:01, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose – It's a relatively minor tournament, but if this article were of particularly high quality, I would definitely be open to seeing it featured. Right now, it's unclear from the article what the impact of this issue is. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 06:41, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. There isn't a lot of chess news on ITN other than winning a championship. This would be different and interesting. 331dot (talk) 06:43, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    But pretty much every sports-related blurb, not just chess, is about winning a championship. —Bagumba (talk) 07:40, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    And every world champion typically played the game through to whatever may be his or her equivalent to checkmate (or inescapably near). Except in pro wrestling, of course, for screwy reasons. This is (maybe?) a brand new low. InedibleHulk (talk) 08:02, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Except one certain ITNR item about rowing! Howard the Duck (talk) 11:58, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Allegations and innuendo are improper per WP:SUSPECT. And the idea that there was cheating in a game after just one move is absurd. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:57, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    The cheating is insinuated to have occurred in a different match between these two players earlier this month. Davey2116 (talk) 08:46, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support Huge news in the chess world, certainly has gotten some RS coverage due to the more... sensational aspects of the story. However, I see it is also nominated for DYK and I'd be just as content to see it featured there. Davey2116 (talk) 08:46, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support Interesting, unusual, in the news. Great way to dilute the usual postings of random unelected monarchs deaths and wars in places where wars have been endemic for centuries 5.44.170.26 (talk) 10:33, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Unusual situation, but forfeiting one match in an obscure tournament isn't much of an impact. Carlsen hasn't even accused Niemann of anything - it's all gossip and speculation. I do find chess interesting but Carlsen's increasingly eccentric whims (e.g. his decision not to defend the world championship) aren't suitable for ITN. We'll blurb the new world champion when that happens next year. Modest Genius talk 12:23, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – A niche sideshow without general significance. – Sca (talk) 12:26, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    A career-defining series of upsets. If it worked for X-Pac, it can work for this plucky kid, too. In a general notability way, I mean, details better vary. InedibleHulk (talk) 12:40, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Does chess have kayfabe the same way wrestling does? It honestly wouldn't surprise me if it did. 🌈WaltCip-(talk) 12:53, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I only learned it had cheating today, no clue. But I've always figured this is the "sport" that retained the primal competitive nature while wrestling stayed athletic. Again, absolutely an assumption, no reason to trust it. InedibleHulk (talk) 13:06, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Commen The candidates tournament was a more significant chess event. Kirill C1 (talk) 14:51, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Big story as Carlsen is the world's top rated player and this is definitely getting coverage. Article looks fine.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 15:01, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – Not generally in the news. Absent from primary RS main pages AP, BBC, Guardian, DW, France 24 (AFP) and NYT. Only CNN offered an account under its 'Live Updates' heading. – Sca (talk) 15:38, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    "The cheating row that is rocking chess", says The Guardian. Pawnkingthree (talk) 15:59, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Local boy quietly makes good, politely interjects the CBC. InedibleHulk (talk) 16:17, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. About as big of news as it gets in the chess world. Probably bigger news than the INT/R items we have for yearly chess tournaments. DarkSide830 (talk) 16:26, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • (edit conflict) Comment I'm leaning oppose here, but only because there is quite a lot of backstory and circumstance that you need to know to understand the significance of the story. That isn't something we can give in a short blurb, and it doesn't appear that we have anywhere to send people that they can learn all this in one place. Thryduulf (talk) 16:27, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per my comments immediately above and Gotitbro's comments below. Thryduulf (talk) 01:07, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Chess controversies of this scale are extremely rare and a potential cheating incident against the reigning World Champion is a major deal. I remember that the last major cheating controversy involved Borislav Ivanov, but it was a suspected case at tournaments with significantly lower rated players. The article is also in very good shape. Great work!--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:29, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The lead para does not make clear the significance of this for chess. Why is this/should be in the news now and not when the first allegation of cheating occurred? Why is "their" used in "losing their first match"? And for a continuing controversy/scandal whose scale is not clear (in the form of no official action) this appears to be better suited for DYK than ITN. Gotitbro (talk) 21:35, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    It's not about cheating now, it's about the world champion throwing a match to a mediocre opponent, and "their" is tidier than "Carlsen and Niemann's". InedibleHulk (talk) 04:24, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – Meh. ZZZzzz.... – Sca (talk) 00:41, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. 🌈WaltCip-(talk) 00:55, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose This feels to me more like Carlsen's personal drama. Carlsen also announced last year that he would not defend his title in the 2023 world championship unless one particular other player competed, and subsequently announced that he won't be playing in the tournament just a couple months ago. We don't really know why he resigned this game, or what's going on. TarkusABtalk/contrib 01:52, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose This is certainly something interesting in the chess world, but the article goes too far to make claims this is a controversy. This really should be a section in Carlsen's own article, barring further developments of the story. --Masem (t) 01:59, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose - I'm not inherently opposed to this being posted, but I struggle to see the main page relevance when nothing has been proven. If Niemann did cheat, then I'd support this. Anarchyte (talk) 06:45, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    It's been proven that Carlsen forfeited a match/resigned after one move. That's highly controversial. I don't know what sport or game you find best, but if its top-ranked player(s) "took the ball and went home", wouldn't that matter regardless of why? InedibleHulk (talk) 07:00, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I completely agree that it's a news story. However, we didn't blurb when Lewis Hamilton failed to attend the compulsory award ceremony after losing the 2021 F1 season. The blurb we ran in ITN for the end of the season didn't even mention the controversy. It was relevant to those that follow the sport, but it wasn't important enough for ITN. Anarchyte (talk) 07:38, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Did/does that controversy have an article? Was it nominated? If not, that's the difference; can't hit what we can't see. Less objectively, I feel pulling out of a race after one lap would have been more equivalent than skipping a ceremony (with advance notice) after losing normally. Especially if it was for no apparent reason (rather than, say, crashing the car). InedibleHulk (talk) 07:49, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Posted) RD: Brian Binnie

Article: Brian Binnie (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [3]
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Died September 15, announced today – Muboshgu (talk) 23:52, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Article is a bit short, but seems in good shape. --Bedivere (talk) 17:34, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 00:19, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Valeri Polyakov

Article: Valeri Polyakov (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Associated Press; The Moscow Times
Credits:

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

 Bloom6132 (talk) 12:40, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Looks ready to go - The page is classified as a good article. Besides the categories (which could be reorganized better/organized in alphabetical order) there are no issues with the page. Dunutubble (talk) (Contributions) 18:01, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Nothing to complain. Grimes2 (talk) 18:04, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Clean and neat, looks ready to go — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lizstomania716 (talkcontribs) 18:15, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted A couple of outstanding "citation needed" tags, but only on relatively minor points. Generally well cited.—Bagumba (talk) 07:53, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb I mean, why stop there? He is a record holder after all and we did post the guy who was the first to go into open space or wahtever 5.44.170.26 (talk) 11:19, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    This is a GA, so in that sense it would be a lovely page to feature. But even as a space travel aficionado, I was unfamiliar with him and his particular record. The first spacewalk is (to me personally) more famous. The shortness of the article (despite it being a GA) suggests to me that he isn't really a major figure. Perhaps on a similar level as ~ten of the twelve people who have walked on the moon. I don't expect we'll be blurbing most of them either. I'm fairly neutral on the idea, though. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 11:38, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting support for RD, neutral for a blurb due to significance - most people that go to space end up doing something for the first time. That said I wouldn't oppose it.Polyamorph (talk) 11:58, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) State funeral of Elizabeth II

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



Proposed image
Article: Death and state funeral of Elizabeth II (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The state funeral of Queen Elizabeth II (pictured) takes place at Westminster Abbey in London. (Post)
News source(s): BBC, The Guardian
Credits:
Nominator's comments: I'd like to think it is worthy of a blurb because of the wide amount of coverage of it (similar to her actual death) XxLuckyCxX (talk) 12:38, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose It is fair to add an event to ongoing if it has a long tail, as this one has. But the funeral is not sufficiently distinct from the death and mourning period to warrant a separate blurb. GreatCaesarsGhost 13:08, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Plus Elizabeth II is already the featured article, so an additional blurb about her on ITN is completely unnecessary. rawmustard (talk) 14:04, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    The featured article, featured image and DYK are all centred around her because of the fact her state funeral is today XxLuckyCxX (talk) 14:26, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, and it is in ongoing. If it is blurbed it will still be on the main page for up to a week or so. I originally supported the blurb but this is too much. Let the ongoing go tomorrow and get back on with our lives! Polyamorph (talk) 14:58, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support It's much more in the news than the current ITN blurbs. And it would be consistent with the other main page sections today, which are focussed on this major event. Andrew🐉(talk) 14:13, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment This specific article is already in ongoing. If the nomination is suggesting swapping the ongoing for a blurb, that seems alright. I would also think it's reasonable to blurb once it drops from ongoing after the funeral concludes. ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 14:22, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    That would be okay with me & just let it move down the ITN list naturally, yes. XxLuckyCxX (talk) 14:25, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose we've had some discussion about this below. It is currently in ongoing and that will be removed tomorrow. Polyamorph (talk) 14:32, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Largely talked about and has been long awaited Prodrummer619 (talk) 14:46, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The funeral is a known consequence of the death. A somewhat analogous comparison is the swearing in of a head of government after an election - there is no need to blurb the swearing in because it is a known consequence of the election outcome. It is sufficient for the Death and state funeral of Elizabeth II to remain as an Ongoing item for another 8 (or more) hours. But I don't see the need for the article to be a blurb again. Chrisclear (talk) 15:07, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose There are already plenty of references to Her Majesty and the monarchy on the front page. Further, this is an ongoing event. No need to add to ITN. BiscuitsToTheRescue (talk) 15:09, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – With all due respect to her late majesty, coverage of this royal saga has been omnipresent – and overly detailed for non-Commonwealth audiences. – Sca (talk) 15:12, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Blurbs are not awards we give for "worthiness" or "level of coverage". Ongoing is sufficient. --Jayron32 15:13, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose We had the death, and the current ongoing. The ceremony is not the important matter compared to either. As established with the ongoing (in addition to TFA being about the the Queen) Masem (t) 15:19, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose does not meet WP:MINIMUMDEATHS. Abcmaxx (talk) 16:09, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Also already in ongoing, featured article and already was an ITN item. Enough. Abcmaxx (talk) 16:09, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I struck part of my comment because I, actually, totally forgot that we ran the death itself lmao. The death was blurbed, so blurbing this is unnecessary. ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 16:19, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support swapping out the ongoing for a blurb—if for no other reason than it is the largest gathering of heads of state that we may not see the likes of it again. (This American is saying this knowing that it is unlikely to change the outcome here at all.) Imzadi 1979  16:34, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - we covered her death, and we included the general mourning period and funeral in Ongoing. We don't need to reblurb the actual funeral. GenevieveDEon (talk) 16:47, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose It's getting a bit ridiculous now, isn't it? The front page currently has an Elizabeth II Featured Article, the article in Ongoing, every single DYK article is about her or the monarchy, and on top of that she's also the Featured Picture. Perhaps we should replace the Wikipedia logo in her honor as well? YD407OTZ (talk) 17:01, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support although I realize this is futile at this point, and I recognize the consensus is firmly in the oppose camp. This doesn't happen every day. The news coverage of the death and funeral has been intense and ongoing. --🌈WaltCip-(talk) 17:00, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - This is not the Commonwealth Wikipedia. This is The English Wikipedia. --RockstoneSend me a message! 17:15, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Already in Ongoing, Elizabeth II is TFA and all of today's DYK hooks are items related to the funeral. Perhaps all a bit too much. -- Pawnkingthree (talk) 17:53, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I commented in that discussion. At the time, I didn't realize ALL of the DYK hooks were related to the funeral. Holy shit. Perhaps I'm not in such a hurry to support this after all. 🌈WaltCip-(talk) 18:13, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Removed) Ongoing Removal: QE II

Article: Death and state funeral of Elizabeth II (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item removal (Post)
News source(s): [4], [5]

Nominator's comments: Queen has been laid to rest. I suggest removal at 00:00 UTC. NoahTalk 22:15, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support but I would let it run one or two more days max. Its still has a small news tail. --Masem (t) 22:56, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Wait until midnight on Canada's west coast. She was Queen there too and Canada has also declared a day of mourning and commemoration. 2A02:C7F:2CE3:4700:A047:2435:58BF:7E8F (talk) 22:57, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Burial completed, remove now The burial was completed.[6] The funeral is no longer ongoing.—Bagumba (talk) 23:03, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait until end of day USA/Canada as per 2A02 XxLuckyCxX (talk) 23:20, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait No harm in having it up an extra day or two - it will be in tomorrow's newspapers, after all. Pawnkingthree (talk) 23:24, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    We are not a newspaper. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:02, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Never said we were, I meant that it was still in the news. And receiving regular updates, too. Anyway, moot now. Pawnkingthree (talk) 15:52, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't see any need to rush this off the template. We don't have other things waiting in line for the space. I'd let this stay till maybe end of 20 Sept., UTC, but no longer. I believe editors are still active there. --PFHLai (talk) 23:53, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait 24 hrs or so. It's going to be THE news tomorrow in most of the world. But after that I'm fine with removal. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:59, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove at midnight Vancouver time per the IPv6. The ongoing event is "over" and the day of mourning will officially end in British Columbia in seven hours. People will continue to find the articles on Queen Elizabeth II they want even if it's not in ITN. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:02, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait in consideration of the fact that this will be in the news for most of the world tomorrow. --🌈WaltCip-(talk) 00:16, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Misnomer comment There was no consensus above to blurb the funeral, where it would remain on the MP for days/weeks. While this might be an IAR case, it's a misnomer and a sloppy presentation to have a past death and completed funeral continue to be listed as "Ongoing".—Bagumba (talk) 00:40, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    No more or less so than having anything in "ongoing" where the initial event has concluded but reaction, fallout, consequential events, etc are still ongoing. The end of the day in Canada's westernmost timezone (the westernmost Commonwealth Realm) seems the appropriate point to take it down to me. Thryduulf (talk) 00:58, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I'd figured that, too, but Niue seems to have taken this honour (UTC-11). InedibleHulk (talk) 04:24, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I would never have guessed that a territory with such close ties to New Zealand would place itself on the opposite side of the date line to it. Thryduulf (talk) 11:01, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    It's strange for sure. In New Zealand (UTC +12 hours) it is just after 11pm on Tuesday 20 September. However in Niue (UTC -11 hours) it is just after midnight on the same date. Chrisclear (talk) 11:04, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove it now --Bedivere (talk) 01:38, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    But an explanation why, please? Dunutubble (talk) (Contributions) 02:29, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    It is no longer an ongoing event, isn't it? Bedivere (talk) 06:42, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove it now -- this whole thing was completely ridiculous. Wikipedia is not a newspaper, and we did not need to make the entire frontpage about the Queen. I was told that we would remove this from ongoing after the funeral... the funeral is over. Now is the time. --RockstoneSend me a message! 02:20, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Midnight Pacific Time The funeral is over, but the holiday is directly connected and ongoing. Retrospective news tomorrow is too indirect. No offense, America. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:56, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait Australia will be holding a national memorial day for Queen Elizabeth II on September 22; New Zealand will be holding a public holiday and state memorial service for Queen Elizabeth II on September 26. It's not taking up that much room in ongoing, and it's evident that we're not quite finished with the story yet. NorthernFalcon (talk) 03:18, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    It's the 20th, 21st, 23rd, 24th and 25th I'm worried about; what are we supposed to tell people who say there's nothing going on in that majority of the week? InedibleHulk (talk) 07:26, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove Now. Funeral is over. DarkSide830 (talk) 03:30, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove this crap. Wikipedia is not an arm of the United Kingdom, the British Royal Family, the Commonwealth, or any other memorial based consideration. Who gives a crap if the public holiday continues. This didnt even have consensus to post to begin with. nableezy - 03:31, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove while I don't approve of some of the language here and in previous discussions, it is now time to remove. Polyamorph (talk) 07:30, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose This is still very much in the news. For example, it's on the front page of the NYT, with multiple items such as "Queen Elizabeth was the anchor of Britain’s identity. King Charles now will take on that role." Most of our other blurbs don't even get a mention because they are stale.
As for updates, there is still furious activity. For example, Death and state funeral of Elizabeth II shows 41 updates on my watchlist. That's more than 10 times the number of updates to 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine in the same period.
Andrew🐉(talk) 07:41, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Who knew someone beloved would attract more people than something despised? InedibleHulk (talk) 07:48, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment -- still waiting for this to be removed... consensus is overwhelmingly in favor. Although given what happened with the COVID-19 ongoing removal, I don't blame admins for being more cautious. --RockstoneSend me a message! 08:34, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    In contrast, this discussion has at least been going on for hours. —Bagumba (talk) 10:32, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support & remove now The circus has left the town The event has ended, and let's revert back to Wikipedia from Elizapedia. Abcmaxx (talk) 08:35, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Or embrace Chuckopedia. InedibleHulk (talk) 08:50, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait until midnight UTC this evening, per PFHLai and Ad Orientem above. The item is in the news today, and people are likely to still be looking for it on Tuesday (which is the purpose of ITN, lest we forget), but beyond that I agree it's not ongoing any more.  — Amakuru (talk) 12:07, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove. It made sense to put this in ongoing, but the events are now over. Time to move on. Modest Genius talk 12:18, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – Moot. Suggest close. – Sca (talk) 12:29, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • The events are not over. There's the ceremonies in other realms, as detailed above. And the royal family is still in mourning so some UK government functions are suspended -- I was just listening to a report that new ministers can't be appointed until next week by the new PM for this reason. So, there are continuing events and impacts. The relevant articles are still being actively updated and that's what matters for ongoing entries. Andrew🐉(talk) 12:28, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Moot as far as general significance is concerned. This isn't UK/ANZAC Wiki. -- Sca (talk) 13:35, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Australia and NZ are not the UK. There have been multiple ceremonies in multiple places and they are not over yet. This is still ongoing. We'll know it's over when the news coverage stops and the article updates cease. Andrew🐉(talk) 13:48, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support removal Is the funeral over? Yes, has she been buried? Yes. It needs to be removed now. Whatever else is done in the next few days, it's not that relevant anymore. Let her rest. _-_Alsor (talk) 14:22, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment it is not even on the BBC news anymore. --RockstoneSend me a message! 14:24, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    A reminder: news websites tailor the stories on their front page based on IP geolocation. For me in the UK, stories about the funeral are currently third and sixth on the BBC News home page. The ranking of stories on website home pages is not a good basis for supporting or opposing any ITN nomination. Modest Genius talk 14:45, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove As it is now Tuesday (at least) everywhere. GreatCaesarsGhost 15:07, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove - Still in the news but not ongoing. EditMaker Me (talk) 15:11, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Removed. There will still be link to Elizabeth II for two more days in the FA box. --Tone 15:21, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

September 18

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Politics and elections

Sports


2022 Guizhou bus crash

Article: 2022 Guizhou bus crash (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A bus carrying people from Guiyang to a quarantine facility crashes in Guizhou, China, killing 27 people and injuring 20 others. (Post)
News source(s): CNN, NBC, BBC
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Significant amount of deaths, yet somehow not nominated yet. Nahnah4 (talk | contribs) 03:10, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • I would require further expansion of the article before featuring it on ITN. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 06:44, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support It appears long enough to post, and the connection to China's "zero COVID" policy suggests enough importance for this disaster outside of meeting WP:MINIMUMDEATHS. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:42, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Not a casual bus accident, raising a lot of questions in the press and Chinese population. Notable enough and article being long enough. 109.37.130.69 (talk) 20:19, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I feared for my life when being driven in a similar way for an event at the HK Wikimania and so sympathise with the victims. But it's still just a bus plunge and the COVID connection seems incidental. These things happen all the time: "Death toll in northern Mexico bus crash rises to 20"; "Twenty bus passengers burn to death after horror crash in Nigeria"; "Bus plunges into 75-meter-deep Costa Rican ravine"; "Jharkhand: 7 killed, several injured as bus falls off bridge in Hazaribag"; "Poonch: Death toll in mini-bus accident rises to 12"; "Death toll rises to 7 in tragic accident in Jharsuguda as bus hits coal laden truck"; "16 children and 3 adults die in South African collision"; "Myanmar bus crash death toll climbs to 13"; "Nineteen persons burnt to death in Abuja auto crash". These are just in the last week. Andrew🐉(talk) 20:52, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Andrew Davidson: I looked at every article you stating and I agree they are all bus plunge stories. But after reading the Wikipedia bus plunge article and the main reference, this particularly accident is not a bus plunge. Even note that this bus accident is also published in the New York Times (that stopped writing bus plunge articles) (see here). 109.37.130.69 (talk) 22:01, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      The NYTimes, and most other major sources covering it, are covering it in context of China's zero-COVID policy, making it more a footnote there, rather than its own separate story. Masem (t) 02:00, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose in truth the problem with this article is that it really is an adjacent part of China's response to COVID and not a major transport accident that will have ramifications for a long time. It has highlighted the problem of China's quarantine approach and should be discussed in that context. --Masem (t) 21:05, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Isn't part of the news cycle, and doesnt have any broader importance. 2607:9880:2D28:A8:45AF:B4E8:4F21:88E8 (talk) 01:44, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Uh, zero COVID isn't "broader importance"? – Muboshgu (talk) 02:20, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    If this crash affects the policy somehow, that could count as a broadening, but the policy affecting the crash is a narrowing. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:33, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, Heavy loss and enough coverage makes it notable for ITN.Alex-h (talk) 13:15, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per Alex-h. DarkSide830 (talk) 15:09, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Nick Holonyak

Article: Nick Holonyak (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [7]
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Inventor of LED. The "Awards and honors" is a gross proseline mess, but I didn't write it and it shouldn't impede posting. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:20, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support. I also did a quick conversion of "Awards and honors" to a bulleted list to make it a little more coherent. ~Cheers, TenTonParasol 15:10, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hurricane Fiona

Article: Hurricane Fiona (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Hurricane Fiona makes landfall in the Dominican Republic after causing vast devastation in Puerto Rico. (Post)
News source(s): CNN, NBC News
Credits:

Nominator's comments: No word on fatalities yet, but "Puerto Rico is 100% without power due to a transmission grid failure from Hurricane Fiona." – Muboshgu (talk) 21:34, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Wait An outage is not significant enough to post on its own, again noting the situation with the typhoon hitting Japan too. --Masem (t) 21:43, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support President Biden has declared a state of emergency and we have an article for this one. Andrew🐉(talk) 21:48, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Routine storm, no deaths as of yet, poor power grid... NoahTalk 22:00, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose ordinary storm, no damage or victims reported (yet). Stop taking "emergency declarations" as decisive for ITNR. _-_Alsor (talk) 22:23, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait per Masem. That blurb also won't work, it's all over the place. DarkSide830 (talk) 23:43, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hold off until it becomes a major hurricane (would be the first this AH season) or has a major impact somewhere. Drdpw (talk) 00:11, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – Fiona heads for Domincan Republic after "catastrophic" damage in Puerto Rico. – Sca (talk) 11:58, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I'd recommend switching up the blurb before considering to post that. Very untidy. Kline | yes? 13:31, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait for damages to be known, obviously. Even a category 1 has the potential to be catastrophic, but it's just too early to know if Hurricane Fiona was.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 18:37, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Currently is a Cat3 as it heads into more Caribbean islands this morning. But Cat size is not a reason to post, obviously. Masem (t) 12:39, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – Tues. coverage indicates relatively few casualties despite the storm's violence. [8] [9]Sca (talk) 12:36, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait per Vanilla Wizard. The damages are yet to be determined/known.

This system is over the Turks and Caicos islands and is potentially heading for Bermuda. However, it's too early to tell. Sarrail (talk) 13:58, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Looks to be 5 people dead now. The power and water damage to Puerto Rico is starting to look significant. It just got upgraded to Category 4 - might even hit 5, though looks like it will only side-swipe Bermuda. Otherwise there's not much left to hit - though I suppose it could be a big problem if it hits Cape Breton Island as a Category 2. Though based on the Puerto Rico damage alone this might be hitting ITN. Nfitz (talk) 06:58, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Typhoon Nanmadol

Proposed image
Article: 2022_Pacific_typhoon_season#Typhoon_Nanmadol_(Josie) (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Typhoon Nanmadol makes landfall in Japan. (Post)
News source(s): BBC; FT; Japan Times, AP, France24, Reuters
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Seems to be an exceptionally powerful typhoon. I'm not sure why there's not a separate article yet but the season article has a detailed entry. It is expected to move north over the Japanese mainland towards Tokyo in the coming days and so I suppose this is just the start of something big. Andrew🐉(talk) 21:09, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Only as a comment, we also have Hurricane Fiona making landfall in Puerto Rico. Obviously would not combine them, but without significant death tolls, the landfall of either is not significant, and posting one w/o the other would be bias. Masem (t) 21:18, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait. No impacts yet to make this worthy of posting. No sense in jumping the gun right now. DarkSide830 (talk) 21:24, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait per DarkSide830. -Ad Orientem (talk)
  • Oppose Not worthy of being posted unless a significant amount of fatalities occur. NoahTalk 22:02, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've seen my share of FA typhoon articles, so I'm not impressed by a list entry. One to keep our eye out for, I hope someone will write an independent article on it. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 07:39, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – Two fatalities reported. – Sca (talk) 12:02, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    It could still go up but only losing 2 over the storm makes it rather benign and while we have no MINIMUMDEATHs, still probably doesn't merit posting. Masem (t) 12:26, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Update The latest BBC report is "Mudslides and flooding as typhoon batters Japan" It seems that Japan has got off lightly as the super typhoon slackened in strength after making landfall. So, that's good news compared to initial forecasts. But we only do bad news here, right? Andrew🐉(talk) 08:01, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    We do good news, just never acknowledge not-so-bad weather. InedibleHulk (talk) 08:13, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

September 17

Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Politics and elections


(Posted) RD: Vlado Milunić

Article: Vlado Milunić (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Associated Press; Radio Prague
Credits:

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

 Bloom6132 (talk) 08:31, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • All fine here, posting. --Tone 08:15, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Cal Browning

Article: Cal Browning (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Oklahoman
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Died on September 14, but obit posted on September 17. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:08, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Protests in Iran against Guidance Patrol

Articles: Death of Mahsa Amini (talk · history · tag) and September 2022 Iranian protests (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Protests take place in Iran over the death of 22 year-old Mahsa Amini, due to police brutality by the Iranian Morality Police, for not wearing proper hijab. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ The death of Mahsa Amini, arrested by the Guidance Patrol in Tehran for not wearing proper hijab, prompts protests in Iran.
News source(s): DW, BBC, Guardian
Credits:

Nominator's comments: current event, highlights the internal situation in Iran which doesn't get a lot of coverage Ideophagous (talk) 13:46, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose From what I can see, this doesn't appear to be a major widespread protest at this point, and certainly the article doesn't give the impression of ongoing daily coverage of this story. --Masem (t) 13:59, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I removed "ongoing" from the title, since it's not clear if the protests are still on. At the same time, I think the news is important enough to feature on the first page, even if it took place only over 2 or 3 days. Ideophagous (talk) 15:41, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    The protests are still ongoing. See Guardian article from a few hours ago. Ideophagous (talk) 19:24, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Pretty major at this point actually. Please check the article and the news again. -- Ideophagous (talk) 22:29, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment There are three types of nominations- recent death, blurb, and ongoing- and you're the first person I've ever seen use all of them in a single nom. What, exactly, do you want? -- Kicking222 (talk) 14:17, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • As the nominated wikiarticle is not a biography, it cannot be an RD nom. The Biography section currently has only one sentence. Looks like a case of WP:BLP1E. I'm removing RD from the nom template. --PFHLai (talk) 14:26, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Fixed.-- Ideophagous (talk) 22:29, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support blurb Nominator removed ongoing from the title. Noteworthy protests, international coverage and good article quality. --NoonIcarus (talk) 20:38, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose for now. Generally, we require protests to be very large scale and receiving extensive new coverage. Conceding some coverage, I'm not seeing enough to meet our usual standard here at ITN. If the situation changes, I am open to reconsideration. -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:54, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Ad Orientem:, Wide scale and extensive coverage already achieved at this point I believe. Ideophagous (talk) 22:30, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Ad Orientem. _-_Alsor (talk) 22:35, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Alsoriano97: check my response to Ad Orientem. Ideophagous (talk) 22:31, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I still think the same. Just another wave of protests with clashes. No exceptional political measures have been taken to bring order, so it's not ITNR. For now. Happen in Iran, France or the smallest island in the Pacific. _-_Alsor (talk) 14:53, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose These were/are protests against mandatory hijab rules, not police brutality. This idea that a beating even happened is far from certain, and certainly denied. There's wide coverage, sure, but it does no good if we misreflect it. The allegations in the title and the lead are not covered in the body. Even if they were facts, that's bad writing. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:57, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • The altblurb is better now, as is the lead, but not enough to change my vote. The body still needs elaboration. The line between whether most see this as a big death or big protest story remains blurry (maybe that's OK?). InedibleHulk (talk) 02:19, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    The recent protests are clearly about Mahsa Amini's death, not specifically or only about hijab rules. Read Washington Post.-- Ideophagous (talk) 06:23, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    If the protests are the main thing here, the section about them should be considered the target article. As such, it should be clearer about what most protestors wanted. It currently only suggests "Women, Life, Freedom" and "death to the dictator". InedibleHulk (talk) 06:49, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    The death of the young women is clearly the trigger of the recent protests, as indicated by the sources. Obviously the protests are not going to be about her specifically, since there are many different concerns the protestors have (which this recent incident re-triggered, again as the sources indicate). Protests have been taking place in Iran on and off since 2019, over the economic situation, prices, treatment of women (usually women take their headscaves in public in protest), the corruption in the whole system, the Islamic rules, etc. Ideophagous (talk) 17:56, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    The beating is certainly denied, but not "far from certain", unless you choose to take a side in the matter. Feel free to suggest improvements though. Ideophagous (talk) 22:34, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    When I see claims that contradict each other on how something I didn't witness occurred, they're all far from certain. I suggest WP:NPOV. If I happen to want to improve anything beyond today's lead corrections, which is unlikely, I just will (as can you). InedibleHulk (talk) 05:14, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose – Article looks decent and up to par, but the scale of the protests is unclear. Expansion of the article might help, but I don't know if these protests are getting quite enough traction for an international newsstory. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 07:38, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
RD - It doesn't look like there's consensus to blurb, so I guess we should put it in RD? Imposterbruh (talk) 15:01, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think we need a copy edit before that. Example "broadcasting various videos of the violent method of arresting women by Mortality police officers in the cyber space, indicates the violent treatment of the police against women." Also, it should be noted that qualification for an RD requires a standalone article. ITNC is free to support an RD in these cases (and usually does), but it is not automatic. GreatCaesarsGhost 15:46, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • RD is for biographies. This wikiarticle is not a biography. --PFHLai (talk) 01:02, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Massive protests in Iran against the theocratic government. --Bedivere (talk) 01:29, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    True as that may be, the article describes them as "protests against Mehsa's murder". Calling it a murder in Wikipedia's voice and referring to her by (misspelled) first name is bad enough, but missing the point only makes it worse. The lead is just awful. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:28, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    If you have a problem with that particular sentence, you can simply fix it. "Mehsa" or "Mahsa" are probably both correct given that the name is non-European to begin with, but that also can easily be fixed. You opposition over these minor issues is rather puzzling.-- Ideophagous (talk) 05:30, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    The synthesis of unnamed witness accounts and unspecified medical opinions into original research not stated explicitly by any of the sources (some of which have a conflict of interest) isn't a minor problem. Using that OR to side with the activists' agendas and downplay the police's provided evidence and explanation instead of presenting the information neutrally is not a minor problem. This article has serious problems, through and through, and changing another "murder" to "death" or e to a won't make them go away (though I will fix that much, if you insist). InedibleHulk (talk) 06:04, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I wound up fixing considerably more, but it's still pretty bad, and will no doubt become worse again. InedibleHulk (talk) 06:46, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree that there are issues of neutrality with the article, and that's to be expected in such topics, but the purpose here I believe is to highlight the event. At this rate, by the time the article had been sufficiently improved and reached an acceptable level of neutrality, the whole thing will probably be old news. What we need is more experienced editors to contribute to the improvement efforts, and supervise the edits by less experienced users. Ideophagous (talk) 17:19, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strongest possible support huge event plus people there need our help! 5.44.170.26 (talk) 15:43, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strongest support Very important events are taking place in Iran related to women, which are reflected in the world's important media every day. It would be an excellent work in Wikipedia to put Death of Mahsa Amini on the front page.Caravaneternity (talk) 19:54, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Time has shown that this has grown in scale and significance into worldwide news and of grave importance in Iran. I suspect sone of the earlier oppose votes may be different now. Abcmaxx (talk) 01:39, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Per above. MSN12102001 (talk) 09:22, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The protests have a standalone article now, which would normally be more appropriate than a section, but it's also relatively shitty. InedibleHulk (talk) 09:39, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Quality and significance are both well below par here. GreatCaesarsGhost 12:00, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Because it's a major incident that's all over the news. It forms part of the ongoing problems concerning Human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran, and while it's not an isolated incident, it is turning out to be a major one. Alex-h (talk) 13:02, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - this is picking up steam, not dying down. Widely covered with an increasing death toll. nableezy - 16:00, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Admin comment. I don't see a consensus either way at present, but equally I don't think consensus is impossible. I'm going to leave it open but remove the "(Attention needed)" for now, it can be re-added if it looks like a consensus is emerging. Thryduulf (talk) 17:00, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    There are more supporting votes than opposing ones I believe (I counted 8 support to 6 oppose). Is there a level of support that should be reached before it's accepted? I don't know if the nominator can vote as well, but I obviously support, though I think the article still needs a lot of improvement, especially by adding a background section after the lead. Ideophagous (talk) 17:47, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's worth noting that at the time of posting this looked like a national event, within time it has become major international news. This is why most of the opposes are at the beginning and supports at the end. Consensus should be time sensitive in this case. Abcmaxx (talk) 21:06, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong support Death of Mahsa Amini has triggered massive protests, especially by women, in many Iranian cities. A major event that has been covered globally by the media. NMasiha (talk) 19:34, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Ongoing: Inflation

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


Article: 2021–2022 inflation surge (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
Credits:
Nominator's comments: This should have been added to ongoing many months ago. This has been getting lots of news coverage over the past few months. Interstellarity (talk) 14:01, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Economies go through booms and busts all the time, and this has no well-defined point where it would be considered over. Its similar to why "Climate Change" isn't ongoing - just too broad in scope. --Masem (t) 14:27, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Masem. Nor does it make sense for an article based on rising global inflation to talk mostly about the United States, but for some people Americancentrism is not a problem, but those who criticize it. _-_Alsor (talk) 15:38, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Masem. DarkSide830 (talk) 15:43, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose -- this will be indefinite. --RockstoneSend me a message! 17:40, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose inflation happens, it is quite high at the moment due to the ongoing energy crisis and post covid supply chain issues but it's just a normal aspect of free market capitalism. Polyamorph (talk) 17:46, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Masem, Polyamorph and others. Khuft (talk) 22:16, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - this could potentially have merit if multiple G7/8/20 countries or global stock markets post successive quarterly drops and officially declare a global recession. Until then, however, this is a goal with no posts in sight. - Floydian τ ¢ 14:20, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Closed) Ongoing: Floods in Pakistan

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: 2022 Pakistan floods (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
Credits:
Nominator's comments: Not the dominant narrative on the web but significant and still ITN nonetheless. Jiaminglimjm (talk) 12:57, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Lingering weather disasters are generally hard to justify for ongoing, particularly when there are weather problems all over the world. --Masem (t) 13:38, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I argue this crisis is of exceptional proportions, given that it continues to warrant a national state of emergency. Weather disasters are not isolated disasters; these floods are also a health disaster impacting millions due to its unprecedented severity. –Jiaminglimjm (talk) 15:07, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    There is also life-threatening flooding in China and India - it is of course their wet season there. While the initial flooding in Pakistan was unusual, it would be like having an ongoing for hurricane season in the Atlantic region. --Masem (t) 15:53, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I would actually be open to that type of ongoing nomination. Currently, the 2022 typhoon season article is very actively being maintained, for example. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 11:35, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The floods are nearly over and slowly clearing up. Unless I am missing something. If you wanted this you should have mentioned it a few weeks ago at it's peak Haris920 (talk) 22:03, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah.. nevertheless if it's still ongoing for even a few more days, I think that that shouldn't impact the nomination. If really ITN worthy, we should have nominated it way back then. But this is a shortcoming of Wikipedia I guess. –Jiaminglimjm (talk) 10:57, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    No shortcomings in this case. It was nominated as blurb at the time, and posted.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 18:04, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The only substantial update in the past week is with regard to malaria case numbers. Not meeting the consistent substantial updates criteria for Ongoing. SpencerT•C 01:38, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support – Article looks good and is being actively updated every day, which is the most important requirement of ongoing for me. Human toll and significance is clear. That being said, I am worried that we're at the tail-end of the disaster. It will remain relevant for a long while, though, with all the death and displacement... ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 07:34, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Posted) RD: Henry Silva

Article: Henry Silva (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Washington Post
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Died September 14, announced within last 24 hours. Article looks okay from a quick look but Filmography will need to be sourced. ETA - I added a strong BFI source to cover many, but not all, of the films. A few more sources will be needed just for the films listed. --SitcomyFan (talk) 10:53, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support, Per nom., article is fine. Alex-h (talk) 15:26, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Too many citations needed. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:50, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Change to support now that the article has been sufficiently improved. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:12, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Several sources added now to address cn tags. Also added more sources to filmography. Article almost fully sourced now. --06:43, 18 September 2022 (UTC)SitcomyFan (talk)
  • Update Article now completely sourced and should be ready for posting.--SitcomyFan (talk) 07:36, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Is there a delay with posting articles at the moment? This one has been ready for a couple of days, not much movement here. Worried due to timeframe.--SitcomyFan (talk) 18:06, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • I hadn't noticed your comment on Sunday. Re-reviewing, I see this as ready and have marked it so. (Don't worry about the time, this has several days to be posted before it would go stale.) – Muboshgu (talk) 18:12, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Seems to be ok. Grimes2 (talk) 18:14, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Stephen 03:33, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) Kyrgyzstan–Tajikistan clashes

Article: 2022 Kyrgyzstan–Tajikistan clashes (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ At least 81 people are killed in renewed fighting between Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. (Post)
News source(s): Reuters (Sep.16), Reuters (Sep.18), Guardian, Area News
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Similar case to border conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan., but article needs more updating. - Indefensible (talk) 06:38, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support per nom. If Armenia/Azerbijan was posted, then why not this? EditMaker Me (talk) 06:49, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. Important border clash. —Brigade Piron (talk) 08:46, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Like with the Armenia/Azerbaijan escalation, I think these developments should have a separate article.Abcmaxx (talk) 08:53, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Theoretically support if there’s a new article with details & sources. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 11:13, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – One more flareup in the long-running internecine war between Tajiks and Kygyz. Doesn't seem particularly significant. – Sca (talk) 12:18, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comparable to Armenia vs. Azerbaijan which establishes recent precedent. - Indefensible (talk) 21:56, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Update & amended nomination I created 2022 Kyrgyzstan–Tajikistan clashes; firstly because of the consensus, but also there was really a large gap between the ceasefire and summer of 2021 and January 2022, so it merited its own article anyway.Abcmaxx (talk) 12:53, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose This border conflict is so minor and routine that it doesn't even get an entry in the long List of ongoing armed conflicts. We should stick to the level of the six major wars which have caused thousands of casualties so far this year. Andrew🐉(talk) 13:09, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    It should be added then, I will update that list. - Indefensible (talk) 21:40, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose - Expansion needed Prodrummer619 (talk) 14:45, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Of similar importance as the Azerbaijan-Armenia clash. Another consequence of Russia's rapidly waning influence over the post-Soviet space. Khuft (talk) 22:20, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Per the addition of the Armenia/Azerbaijan Clashes to the In the News section. Physeters 00:07, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • It seems we are heading toward support to post, however, the update regarding the current development is still rather short, most of the article is about earlier events. Some expansion and I'll support. --Tone 09:31, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – On Sunday, Reuters put toll at 71. – Sca (talk) 12:02, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • The same article says 81 dead now. Seems to have been updated. --BorgQueen (talk) 14:35, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      • Just updated the blurb to 81. --PFHLai (talk) 14:43, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support On the same level of Ar/Az from a few days ago. Curbon7 (talk) 18:19, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Significant death tolls, target article is updated and properly sourced  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 18:21, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posting. --Tone 18:31, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Phantom of the Opera Closing

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


Proposed image
Article: The Phantom of the Opera (1986 musical) (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: The Phantom of the Opera, the longest running production in Broadway history, announces it is closing shortly after it's 35th anniversary. (Post)
News source(s): [10] [11] [12]
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Longest running production in Broadway history. it may be better to save this for when it actually closes on February 18, 2023, but the announcement is big news as well. Found5dollar (talk) 03:48, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Whatever the merits of posting this kind of thing ITN, the time to do so is when it actually ends. We do not cover press releases. —Brigade Piron (talk) 08:48, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per above. While I support posting it, we should wait until Feb 18th when it closes. echidnaLives (talk) 10:05, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait just like the retirement announcement stories or television show cancellation announcements they can be reversed; however notable when no longer continued. Abcmaxx (talk) 10:11, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose now and later Just as it makes no sense to include sportspeople retirement, neither does this. _-_Alsor (talk) 11:08, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I saw the story but the show started in London and still running there, despite a pandemic hiatus. The Broadway run is therefore secondary. Andrew🐉(talk) 13:22, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    It's one of the 2 most important such records in the world. In the Americas it's the more important of the two. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 15:57, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose it hasn't happened yet. Polyamorph (talk) 13:39, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Andrew. DarkSide830 (talk) 15:42, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(Posted) Ongoing:Death and state funeral of Elizabeth II

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


Article: Death and state funeral of Elizabeth II (talk · history · tag)
Ongoing item nomination (Post)
Credits:
Nominator's comments: The Emmys have been ready to go for 48 hours and should get posted anytime now. That would bump this, so the time has come to make a call. GreatCaesarsGhost 01:40, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Rather than have a new blurb for the state funeral on the 19th, this covers the ongoing aspects, and likely can be expected to be "done" in the week or more. --Masem (t) 01:51, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom and Masem. Thryduulf (talk) 02:09, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support once her death rolls out of ITN. EditMaker Me (talk) 07:01, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Adding to ongoing until Monday when the state funeral likely gets a blurb. --Tone 07:27, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't see how the state funeral gets a blurb honestly. We've never blurbed the funerals of any other heads of state. I also think this should be pulled from ongoing, I don't see enough consensus. --RockstoneSend me a message! 17:38, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I could spend the effort to come up with policy based reasons to oppose this, but frankly this shows that ITN's bias isn't pro-American; it's pro British. Rockphed (talk) 13:41, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post Posting Support as previously discussed the death and state funeral would move to ongoing once it falls off ITN. It can be replaced by the funeral blurb on Monday. Polyamorph (talk) 14:00, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Oppose -- Although I'd rather this than blurbing the funeral. Unless there is now a new precedent to blurb the funeral of every head of state, which is silly. --RockstoneSend me a message! 17:38, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Perhaps you don't appreciate the magnitude of the funeral? 500 heads of state and foreign dignitaries will attend. This will be enormous world-wide news. Polyamorph (talk) 19:42, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    The funeral is a conclusion of a event that was clearly notable, much like the inauguration ceremonies for the US president. It is clearly an important event for those in the Commonwealth, but we already have reported on her death and this ongoing includes all the worldwide reactions to it. Masem (t) 20:00, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    The funeral is a much bigger event than an inauguration ceremony for the US president, which hundreds of heads of state and royalty from across the world do not attend. Ongoing obviously covers this but I support removing that and replacing it with the blurb on Monday. Polyamorph (talk) 20:09, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I see your argument, but I really don't think it makes sense to blurb what is in effect the same event twice. But I would much rather see this in ongoing for the mourning period rather than as a blurb, so I'll change my oppose to a weak oppose instead. --RockstoneSend me a message! 20:47, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Post Posting Support. I would support either option. The evnt is enormous and is a number one story in UK for a week. Kirill C1 (talk) 19:33, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • WP:IAR Support Normally I would oppose this. ITN has never as far as I can remember covered a funeral, and I will strenuously oppose this being treated as a precedent to that end. But this is easily the biggest one of the biggest news stories of the year, with the global coverage being off the hook. So yeah, sometimes you just gotta roll with it. But I reiterate that I regard this as a one off exception, not as a green light for funerals getting covered at ITN. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:52, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment edited to acknowledge the Russo-Ukrainian war. -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:58, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is a big news story, but it’s nowhere near as big of a news story as the Russia-Ukraine War. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 20:30, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    That's not how ITN works. We don't exclude legitimate news items on a relative basis.--🌈WaltCip-(talk) 20:43, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    If we blurb this, then we're effectively saying that we think the Queen of England was more important than the leaders of other heads of states. It does set a precedent. --RockstoneSend me a message! 20:47, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    It probably depends on how much coverage a world leader’s funeral gets. The last funeral I remember that got significant coverage was Mandela’s funeral. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 20:55, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    She is more important than other heads of state though, based on the length of her reign and the number of countries she reigned over. Steelkamp (talk) 08:08, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I completely disagree. Unlike other heads of state, she had no real authority. --RockstoneSend me a message! 09:26, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I don’t have strong feelings about whether or not this should be ongoing. I’m just noting that the Russia-Ukraine War has been in the news & frequently at the top of the news for 6 months. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 20:52, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting support As a sui generis case, not a rule, because the level of global news coverage is nearly unprecedented for the death and funeral of a head of state.Jackattack1597 (talk) 20:05, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting support per above.--🌈WaltCip-(talk) 20:43, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I just wanted to comment - she was mentioned as the Queen of England earlier. She was not the Queen of England. The Queen of England has not existed for hundreds of years. Just think it’s worth pointing out as the erroneous title grossly understates things. Humbledaisy (talk)
    For what it's worth, I'd reminded the same guy how she was the queen of several states and provinces shortly before he apparently forgot again, so I don't think it's going to work. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:19, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I wasn't going to say anything, but to the average American, this distinction doesn't really matter. --RockstoneSend me a message! 02:13, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I know. The average American also probably forgets why Manifest Destiny claims didn't work on Canada. Up here, we still appreciate the Royal Navy's help. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:58, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    What the average American might believe is irrelevant, to be honest. It's wrong. Humbledaisy (talk) 16:14, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support inclusion in Ongoing until after the final private burial on Monday; but Oppose posting the funeral as a separate event, as it is a highly predictable sequel to the death, which we have already covered. GenevieveDEon (talk) 20:06, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Ongoing, Oppose Reblurb InedibleHulk (talk) 23:11, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose all the above, this should be pulled from ongoing. Somebody having a funeral after they die is the literal opposite of news. This is incredibly silly, and the IAR support but no this isnt a precedent are absurd. Even more so because this head of state, unlike say Abdullah of Saudi Arabia, had absolutely no authority over anything. This is just absurd. nableezy - 02:01, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pull per Nableezy. BilledMammal (talk) 02:41, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Nableezy's argument is incredibly silly. This funeral procession didn't make Ongoing because of precedent, ignoring rules or perceptions of power. It's just a subject that's been world news for eleven days straight and whose article is scheduled to stop receiving substantial updates in a few more hours (which is all Abdullah's took); you can wait. InedibleHulk (talk) 03:19, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Some old lady dies, and, shocker of the year, is buried, and the entire main page is a tribute in her honor? And Im the one being silly? World news for eleven straight days? There has been 0 news about this since she died. What happened to the people saying we only blurb a death when it is something unusual, when its old person dies peacefully in their sleep it isnt worthy? Oh that only applies to non-British people. This fetishization over a family that is of 0 consequence in the world and that a tiny percentage of people give half a shit about is what is silly. nableezy - 13:01, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Sure, I do think the Featured Article, Featured Picture, and dedicated DYK box is extreme. I have a hard time being too upset about a small link in the ITN box for an extra day, tho. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 13:25, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting Oppose per Nableezy. It is mostly in the Anglo-Saxon world this is still considered news. Yakikaki (talk) 06:24, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-posting... neutral? – After today, this is no longer relevant news, and today this is featured in every section of the front-page. How long is this 'ongoing' item planned to stay on the page? That all being said, the article is very impressive and well put-together, so I can't be too spiteful towards it. It's a good article to feature, but I hope we're not going to be featuring this for the whole week. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 07:24, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The on-going item should be removed tomorrow, after the funeral today. Polyamorph (talk) 07:28, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
My reaction too. Wikipedia has a Commonwealth bias, and it's kind of annoying. --RockstoneSend me a message! 09:28, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I no longer support a blurb. The on-going item should be removed tomorrow. Polyamorph (talk) 08:24, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I'm still of the opinion that a blurb is not needed. I also agree that, unless something unexpected happens, the ongoing can be removed tomorrow. Thryduulf (talk) 10:32, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Concur. This was part of the virtue of ongoing vs. reblurb, in that a reblurb would be dated for today and thus linger for a week. GreatCaesarsGhost 12:31, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note someone has opened a duplicate discussion for blurbing above. Polyamorph (talk) 14:59, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Close I suggest this discussion (ongoing add) should be closed. Discussion of blurb or ongoing removal does not belong here. GreatCaesarsGhost 15:38, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Does if it should never have been posted to begin with. There were three comments when this was added, how is that consensus for ongoing? nableezy - 18:58, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That's fair; but that ship has sailed. You are not going to get it pulled as a bad post before it gets pulled due to the ending of events. Intent of many was to pull Tuesday, which is 2 hours away in the UK. GreatCaesarsGhost 22:01, 19 September 2022 (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.

September 16

Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Business and economy

  • American computer hardware company EVGA terminates its partnership with fellow hardware manufacturer Nvidia and withdraws completely from the graphics card market, alleging that the latter forced them to sell their cards at a loss and would refuse to disclose important information, such as sales numbers. (The Verge)

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

Law and crime

Politics and elections


(Posted) RD: Allen Aylett

Article: Allen Aylett (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ABC News; Brisbane Times; Australian Football League
Credits:

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

 Bloom6132 (talk) 08:33, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • More than long enough to qualify (700+ words of prose). Formatting seems fine. Footnotes can be found in expected spots. Earwig has no complaints. This wikibio is READY fo RD. --PFHLai (talk) 09:06, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Stephen 02:57, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Shelby Jordan

Article: Shelby Jordan (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Fox News
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Died September 9, announced today – Muboshgu (talk) 21:03, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Izium mass graves

Article: Izium mass graves (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Numerous mass graves are uncovered in Izium, Ukraine, evidencing further Russian war crimes. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Over 445 bodies are unearthed from mass graves in Izium, Ukraine, evidencing further Russian war crimes.
Alternative blurb II: ​ Over 445 bodies are found buried in Izium, Ukraine, after its reconquest from Russian forces.
News source(s): The Guardian, AP, BBC, Reuters, Kyiv Post
Credits:

Nominator's comments: Just started the article, but already likely even larger scale than the Bucha massacre. If someone can get this some level of protection like other topic-related articles too that would be great. Abcmaxx (talk) 11:35, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment – Quite widely covered. UN to investigate, says AlJazeera. Not another incremental report on the fighting. – Sca (talk) 12:17, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Added this to article, thank you! Abcmaxx (talk) 12:40, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on principle We posted the Bucha massacre as well. This isn't your average war progress update, but the article needs expansion. The Kip (talk) 14:04, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose covered in ongoing. Really shouldn't be arbitrary about this. If we apply "covered in ongoing" logic to the many developments in the war, we should apply it here too. Banedon (talk) 16:23, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Conditional Support if the article is expanded. This isnt a typical war development. NoahTalk 16:43, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per Sca, if the article is expanded adequately. --BorgQueen (talk) 16:51, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per all above. Alexcalamaro (talk) 17:26, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Support - Not quite Katyn massacre, but this might just be the tip of the iceberg.--🌈WaltCip-(talk) 18:09, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Wait ... pending careful development of article. Favor Alt2, offered above. (Note that a police spokesman said some apparently killed by artillery fire or bombing.) – Sca (talk) 19:01, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose There's a claim this is a Russian war crime, but that's not yet proven out in international court, so all that we can say is that mass graves were found. This is covered by ongoing to that point. --Masem (t) 19:14, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Which is why I said careful development, and restricted Alt2 to saying bodies were found. -- Sca (talk) 19:27, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Alt2's mention about the reconquest from Russian forces implies they (Russians) put the bodies there. I mean, there's Occam's razer that Russia was very likely behind it, but we should not be trying to point fingers even if the media is rushing to make the claim. Masem (t) 19:30, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Maybe they all committed suicide – after being tortured [13] [14]. – Sca (talk) 22:29, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support' significant event, unfortunately Bumbubookworm (talk) 20:11, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Notable event. NytharT.C 20:28, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support this is a major revelation in the war similar in scope to the notable Mỹ Lai massacre, not a run-of-the-mill territorial update. CJ-Moki (talk) 21:21, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nomination and Sca. Similar scale to the Bucha massacre, which was featured in the main page, and good article quality. --NoonIcarus (talk) 21:55, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait - there is a move nomination for the article which is likely to be approved which changes the subject from "mass graves" to "massacre" so the blurb should reflect accordingly. - Indefensible (talk) 22:49, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It did initially, and that's what I called the article when I created it, but someone unilaterally moved it so I amended the nomination. Abcmaxx (talk) 23:03, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wait - seconding this. CJ-Moki (talk) 23:42, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose covered by ongoing. Posting the Bucha massacre was a mistake as well. YD407OTZ (talk) 23:44, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support either original or Alt 1. These are Russian warcrimes, it's plainly obvious to all. We can call a spade a spade here. --RockstoneSend me a message! 23:59, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Between Bucha and Izium, Tadamon was discovered. I don't really know what makes Ukrainians more special than Syrians. EditMaker Me (talk) 06:57, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I would support the discovery of the Tadamon massacre nomination too.Abcmaxx (talk) 08:57, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's a bit too late for that as several months have passed since its discovery. Dunutubble (talk) (Contributions) 13:49, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Looking through the archives, I'm seeing that this article wasn't nominated. Nothing forbids a similar item from being proposed to the main page, just like similar events in the future. --NoonIcarus (talk) 10:32, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait – Scanty coverage on day two. Further detail seems advisable given the complexity of the situation. [15]Sca (talk) 12:30, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Seems pretty certain what happened here now thanks to continued reporting. I think AB II best describes the situation. IMO the "evidencing Russian war crimes" component should be implied by this blurb. DarkSide830 (talk) 15:52, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Thin at 315 words, of which about 250 are narrative text. Further info/development needed. -- Sca (talk) 16:09, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose good faith nom. This is why we have the war at ongoing. That Russia is committing war crimes is already common knowledge. This is not news so much as the latest chapter in a long running event. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:05, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Lacks the significance to warrant a a blurb when the general topic is already an item in "Ongoing".—Bagumba (talk) 11:50, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - the presence of the war itself in Ongoing ought not to deter us from posting this distinct, serious, and clearly relevant story in its own right. GenevieveDEon (talk) 20:07, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. This isn't covered by ongoing, as the massacre isn't mentioned in the article linked in ongoing. In addition, ongoing doesn't prevent us from posting stories that are related to the ongoing event but independently significant, which includes this massacre and other war crimes. BilledMammal (talk) 02:47, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, the discovery of a war crime on this scale can be considered an event on its own, apart from the events on the battlefield. Yakikaki (talk) 06:28, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Alt2 – Even just on significance alone, this is a horrifying discovery. I do hope to see the article expanded more as details surface and reactions develop, but the article is up to par. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 07:44, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Per Bagumba. SpencerT•C 10:35, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support any of the blurbs. Per above. MSN12102001 (talk) 10:51, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support alt blurb II but change "reconquest" to "recapture" or "retaken". Dunutubble (talk) (Contributions) 13:15, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – No real new info for several days; we should continue to wait for such. – Sca (talk) 15:25, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – There is an ongoing investigation about what has happened exactly, and ongoing discussion on the talk page about whether to call this a 'massacre' or not (I and several others oppose such a title because it violates several core Wikipedia policies on accuracy, neutrality, no original research etc.). Although no doubt very important and tragic, a sensitive subject like this should not be rushed to the front page, but carefully investigated and discussed. I say this as a historian: we really need to be careful about how we talk about events like this, especially before we know all the facts. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 20:30, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

September 15

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology


RD: Gopanarayan Das

Article: Gopanarayan Das (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Pioneer
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Indian former MLA. Curbon7 (talk) 06:23, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Liam Holden

Article: Liam Holden (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Belfast Media
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Last person to be sentenced to death in the United Kingdom (the sentence was later commuted) - Dumelow (talk) 06:19, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: Almost ready, just needs some restructuring so all information in the introduction appears in the body of the article. SpencerT•C 10:34, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Maanu Paul

Article: Maanu Paul (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Waatea News
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Māori leader - Indefensible (talk) 21:38, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • This wikibio currently only has 314 words of prose. This is a bit stubby. Any more to write about? Maybe when and how he joined and later became Co-Chair of the New Zealand Māori Council and when he left? Maybe his involvements as a negotiator in the Treaty of Waitangi claims and settlements? Perhaps other things he did as Co-Chair of the Māori Council? Please be reminded to also refresh the references. Right now, the first two links in the list of references are deadlinks. --PFHLai (talk) 15:35, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Jörg Faerber

Article: Jörg Faerber (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): SWR, Stimme.de
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Founder, artistic director and CEO of the Württemberg Chamber Orchestra Heilbronn, leading them to international fame with well-known soloists, making more than 500 recordings. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:16, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support - article seems to meet requirements. Also my bad for nominating this again, not sure what happened but I may have been looking at an old version of the page. - Indefensible (talk) 21:33, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    No worries. No harm done. :-) --PFHLai (talk) 21:38, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Article appears to be in good shape.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 04:49, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Good enough. Grimes2 (talk) 10:41, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 14:57, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: John Stearns

Article: John Stearns (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ESPN
Credits:

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

 – Muboshgu (talk) 16:45, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Good depth, fully referenced. Marking ready. SpencerT•C 04:22, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted Ks0stm (TCGE) 04:26, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Fritz Pleitgen

Article: Fritz Pleitgen (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Der Spiegel
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: German journalist Grimes2 (talk) 12:43, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for updating! Can you give him a bit of a lead, please. WDR - East Berlin - WDR, quite a story! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:00, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Eddie Butler (rugby union)

Article: Eddie Butler (rugby union) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Welsh rugby player and commentator. Article's not bad but a bit light on his playing career. Will take a look at it - Dumelow (talk) 07:03, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support – Although Butler captained the Wales rugby union team, he's primarily known as a broadcaster, so the article is fine, in my opinion. SethWhales talk 05:39, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 23:00, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Asad Rauf

Article: Asad Rauf (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ESPN; Associated Press; International Cricket Council
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: A bit of help required to source some text and it will be good to go. Oriental Aristocrat (talk) 13:40, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support – article is well-referenced and meets minimum depth of coverage for ITN. —Bloom6132 (talk) 13:29, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted. --PFHLai (talk) 19:00, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Roger Federer retirement

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: Roger Federer (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Swiss tennis player Roger Federer retires from professional tennis. (Post)
News source(s): https://www.ft.com/content/15c35803-d550-467d-a87e-c7eaf6eb2c40
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Seems worth placing ITN as ostensibly one of, if not the, best players in tennis history — Ixtal ( T / C ) Non nobis solum. 14:37, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Was unsure of who to name as updaters, feel free to suggest. — Ixtal ( T / C ) Non nobis solum. 14:38, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose I'm less opposed to sports retirements than most editors, but after the Brady incident we should probably hold off on posting any. The Kip (talk) 14:41, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. I was against retirement blurbs for Tom Brady and Serena Williams, and am against them still today, even for legitimate GOAT contenders. When Federer (or Nadal or Djokovic) passes away, in many decades time, I shall probably support a blurb then, if I'm still around on the planet myself!  — Amakuru (talk) 14:43, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose. Much like The Kip above, I'm concerned that these sorts of retirements don't end up lasting forever, and I doubt we want to run a blurb announcing their return to the sport. Anarchyte (talk) 14:45, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose per growing consensus that the sporting retirements we did post were a mistake. – Muboshgu (talk) 14:47, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Serena Williams' retirement was a SNOW close less than two weeks ago. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:36, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose - Oh, I so badly want to support this one! This guy is damn near top of his field in an internationally-played sport. Unfortunately, as stated above, sports retirements are very easily reversible.--🌈WaltCip-(talk) 15:03, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • oppose he was hardly playing lately. Had he retired after winning a notable tournament, why not, but like this I oppose.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 15:08, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose has hardly been playing the past few years, and sports retirements in general seem to be too prone to changes to post. AryKun (talk) 15:35, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Think we've all quietly agreed sports retirements, whomever the GOAT, aren't worth posting. Kingsif (talk) 16:03, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait he announced that the retirement will take place next week. Wait until the retirement actually occurs before nominating/posting. NorthernFalcon (talk) 16:06, 15 September 2022 (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.

September 14

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime


(Posted) RD: Naresh Kumar (tennis)

Article: Naresh Kumar (tennis) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): ESPN
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Indian tennis player and coach. Article needs some work. I will get to working the article, unless someone wants to get started before me. Thanks. Ktin (talk) 20:38, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support – article is well-referenced and meets minimum depth of coverage for ITN. —Bloom6132 (talk) 08:43, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Long enough to qualify (400+ words of prose). Formatting seems fine. Footnotes can be found in expected spots. Earwig has little to complain about. This wikibio is READY fo RD. --PFHLai (talk) 16:15, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted to RD. SpencerT•C 02:59, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Harry Booth (coach)

Article: Harry Booth (coach) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Philadelphia Inquirer
Credits:

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

 – Muboshgu (talk) 20:27, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Long enough to qualify (400+ words of prose). Footnotes can be found in expected spots. Formatting seems okay as things are right now, but I think it would be better if the list of references shows the actual title of each newspaper articles, instead of showing the date twice. Earwig has no concerns. This wikibio is READY fo RD. --PFHLai (talk) 21:04, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted to RD SpencerT•C 03:20, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Robert P. Maginnis

Article: Robert P. Maginnis (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): CatholicPhilly.com
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: American catholic prelate. I've added a short paragraph on his death - Dumelow (talk) 09:38, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: Any additional details/depth about his work in any of these roles that can be added to the article? As of now, article is basically a CV in prose format. SpencerT•C 03:28, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Rommy Hunt Revson

Article: Rommy Hunt Revson (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): New York Times
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: American inventor of the scrunchie. Died 7 September, but first reported 14 September as far as I can see - Dumelow (talk) 08:12, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: John Gamble (baseball)

Article: John Gamble (baseball) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Nevada Sports Network
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: First reported today (September 14); died on September 1. —Bloom6132 (talk) 07:40, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak support Sourcing is not great, most citations to B-Ref rather than newspapers, but SABR bios are thorough and this is good enough. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:29, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Care to re-review, please, Muboshgu? Cbl62 has added more. --PFHLai (talk) 11:34, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Why would a re-review be necessary? A "weak support" is still a vote in support, not an oppose. —Bloom6132 (talk) 12:48, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      I am hoping for another pair of eyes on the new additions. --PFHLai (talk) 12:53, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      Support. – Muboshgu (talk) 14:46, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Posted --PFHLai (talk) 14:54, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Earl J. Silbert

Article: Earl J. Silbert (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Washington Post
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: First reported today (September 14); died on September 6. —Bloom6132 (talk) 21:54, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

RD: Harry Landis

Article: Harry Landis (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): The Argus Evening Standard
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: British actor with long career and numerous credits TrottieTrue (talk) 20:57, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose on quality, needs ref improvement per banner. - Indefensible (talk) 04:20, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support actor from a number of well-known roles across a many decades Denham331 (talk) 19:01, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Denham331, as per the template, 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. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:03, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Filmography is still unsourced. Prose could use more footnotes, too. Please add more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 19:09, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Posted) RD: Irene Papas

Article: Irene Papas (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): iEdidiseis (in Greek)
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Greek actress and singer, a Good Article - Dumelow (talk) 09:05, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support article seems good to go. _-_Alsor (talk)
  • Posting, excellent article. --Tone 09:53, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I remember discussion on Vangelis, I think, here where it was said that she fits the threshold for blurb more. Now that id posted, propose blurb. Golden Lion Award, Berlin International Film Festival win, starred in Zorba the Greek film. [16] Kirill C1 (talk) 10:58, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    All I said was she's near his fame level. A bigger star than the president, PM or sex tape drummer. Quite good actress. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:44, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Old Woman Dies, end of story. If she's a true household name, it'll draw its own attention in RD. No objection to a photo, if that's the main goal. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:48, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(Closed) Kazakhstan re-names capital city to Astana

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: Astana (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: Kazakhstan announces change to name of capital from Nur-sultan back to Astana (Post)
Alternative blurb: Kazakhstan announces the changing of their capital city's name from Nur-Sultan to its former name of Astana.
Alternative blurb II: Kazakhstan renames its capital city from Nur-Sultan back to Astana.
News source(s): The Guardian
Credits:
Nominator's comments: This is unique and I believe encyclopedic (as well as political). The last I can think of such an event is St Petersburg > Leningrad > St Petersburg and took over decades rather than 3 years. Abcmaxx (talk) 09:01, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would support posting but the update is one-sentence. Changing the name of the capital is a rare event, and yes, there is a political backstory. --Tone 09:58, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on significance, oppose on quality; the update needs to be more significant first. BilledMammal (talk) 10:01, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Country capital information has been all encyclopedias' hottest selling point for generations and I think the entire article now repeating "Astana" instead of "Nur-sultan" is enough of an update to hammer the idea home, geographically. InedibleHulk (talk) 11:05, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait – Developing. – Sca (talk) 12:25, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Noting that this is not a unique event in the history of this city; this is the sixth time a name change has happened here, all in just the last sixty years. Gotitbro (talk) 14:06, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Countries don't exactly change their national capitals' names all that often. Article needs some work however. The Kip (talk) 15:51, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Ineresting trivia, but 1) there's no actual geopolitical importance, 2) this is the fourth time they've changed the name just since Kazakhstan became independent, and 3) the article update is completely insufficient for a main page posting. -- Kicking222 (talk) 16:58, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose just trivia. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 17:02, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Support upon Quality Improvement it's interesting and encyclopedic, but currently the article includes no rationale why the name was changed again besides the trivial statement that some members of parliament requested it. If there were to be more (sourced) informations e.g. relating to how the current president of Kazhakstan Kassym-Jomart Tokayev is striving to erase the symbols of former president Nursultan Nazarbayev, then I'd be more enclined to support. In any case, this could alternatively also feature on DYK? Khuft (talk) 17:40, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on the one hand, this city was last renamed in 2019, and that wasn't that long ago. On the other hand, this is encyclopedic information that is important and relevant for our readers. I think the second point trumps the first, so I support. NorthernFalcon (talk) 19:38, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The article is back at Nur-Sultan now... Khuft (talk) 20:23, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's back now to Astana with a WP:MOVP protection. Abcmaxx (talk) 21:58, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose We didn't post the name change in 2019 and, as it hasn't stuck, it's easiest to pass over their transitory mistake. Name changes are a headache for Wikipedia and so we shouldn't encourage them. Andrew🐉(talk) 22:17, 14 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Do you really think people are worried about moving articles around on Wikipedia when they're considering a major geopolitical change? 174.113.161.1 (talk) 12:34, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – I'm unimpressed by our coverage of this temporary namechange. I do agree that the initial namechange in 2019 was probably the more significant event; this seems to merely be a return to 'normalcy.' The three-year namechange is an interesting subject, and if it had a high-quality article on its own I might've supported a blurb. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 09:18, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – Per TRM, Andrew. Devoid of impactfulness. – Sca (talk) 12:52, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on notability, not ready on quality. I supported posting when Astana was renamed to Nur-Sultan in 2019, and I find it interesting that the complicated political situation in Kazakhstan where Nursultan Nazarbayev has waning yet lasting importance resulted in the capital dropping his name after just 3 short years. The arguments against posting 3 years ago pointing to how frequently the city's name changed were very unconvincing, as most of the name changes were from when the city was being renamed by the Russians and Soviets from the 1800s to the 1950s, not by the independent Kazakhstan. However, I agree with other editors who've stated that there should be more prose explaining why the city's name was changed before posting.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 17:45, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    How about going back to Akmolinsk just to keep things interesting? – Sca (talk) 19:08, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I like the sound of Akmola more, personally. I'd go back to it if I could, but unfortunately I am not the president of Kazakhstan.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 19:55, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Trivia really; not seeing significance here. Pawnkingthree (talk) 01:35, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Pawnkingthree. DarkSide830 (talk) 17:12, 17 September 2022 (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.

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: