Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click here to nominate an item for In the news. In the news toolbox
Shortcut

This page provides a forum for editors to suggest items for inclusion on In the news (ITN), a protected template on the Main Page, as well as the forum for discussion of candidates. This is not the page to report errors in the ITN section on the Main Page—please go to the appropriate section at WP:ERRORS. Archives of past nominations can be found here.

This candidates page is integrated with the daily pages of Portal:Current events. Under each daily section header below is the transcluded Portal:Current events items for that day (with a light green header). Each day's portal page is followed by a subsection for suggestions and discussion.

A blurb is a one sentence summary of the news story. An alternate suggestion for the blurb is called an altblurb, and any more suggestions get labelled alt1, alt2, etc. A blurb needs at least one target article, highlighted in bold; reviewers check the quality of that article and whether it is updated, and whether reliable sources demonstrate the significance of the event. Other articles can also be linked. The Ongoing line is for regularly updated articles which cover events that remain in the news over a longer period of time. RD stands for the "recent deaths" line, and can include any living thing whose death was recently announced. In some cases, recent deaths may need additional explanation as provided by a blurb; this is decided by consensus.

Devon Conway in April 2023
Devon Conway

view — page history — related changes — edit

How to nominate an item[edit]

In order to suggest a candidate:

  • Update an article to be linked to from the blurb to include the recent developments, or find an article that has already been updated.
  • Find the correct section below for the date of the event (not the date nominated).
    • Do not add sections for new dates. These are automatically generated (at midnight UTC) by a bot; creating them manually breaks this process.
  • Nominate the blurb for ITN inclusion under the "Suggestions" subheading for the date, emboldening the link in the blurb to the updated article. Use a level 4 header (====) when doing so.
    • Preferably use the template {{ITN candidate}} to nominate the article related to the event in the news. Make sure that you include a reference from a verifiable, reliable secondary source. Press releases are not acceptable. The suggested blurb should be written in simple present tense.
    • Adding an explanation why the event should be posted greatly increases the odds of posting.
  • Please consider alerting editors to the nomination by adding the template {{ITN note}} to the corresponding article's talk page.

Purge this page to update the cache

There are criteria which guide the decision on whether or not to put a particular item on In the news, based largely on the extensiveness of the updated content and the perceived significance of the recent developments. These are listed at WP:ITN.

Submissions that do not follow the guidelines at Wikipedia:In the news will not be placed onto the live template.

Headers[edit]

  • Items that have been posted or pulled from the main page are generally marked with (Posted) or (Pulled) in the item's subject so it is clear they are no longer active.
  • Items can also be marked as (Ready) when the article is both updated and there seems to be a consensus to post. The posting admin, however, should always judge the update and the consensus to post themselves. If you find an entry that you don't feel is ready to post is marked (Ready), you should remove the mark in the header.

Voicing an opinion on an item[edit]

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

Please do...[edit]

  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. Maybe the previous reviewer has missed a problem, or an identified problem has now been fixed. Piling on the list of "support!" votes may also help administrators identify items that are ready for promotion to the ITN template on MainPage.
  3. Point out problematic areas in the nominated article and, if appropriate, suggest how to fix them. If you know exactly what to do, by all means, go ahead and fix it as you see fit.

Please do not...[edit]

  1. Add simple "support!" or "oppose!" votes without including your reasons. Similarly, curt replies such as "who?", "meh", or "duh!" are usually not helpful. Instead, explain the reasons why you think the item meets or does not meet the ITN inclusion criteria so a consensus can be reached.
  2. Oppose an item solely because the event is only relating to a single country, or failing to relate to one. This applies to a high percentage of the content we post and is generally unproductive.
  3. Accuse other editors of supporting, opposing or nominating due to a personal bias (such as ethnocentrism). Conflicts of interest are not handled at ITN.
  4. Comment on a story without first reading the relevant article(s).
  5. Oppose a recurring item here because you disagree with the recurring items criteria. The criteria can be discussed at the relevant talk page.
  6. Use the discussion section of an item as a forum for your own political or personal beliefs. Such comments are irrelevant to the outcome of a nomination and are potentially disruptive.

Suggesting updates[edit]

A posted ITNC item that needs correcting can be addressed in two ways:

  • For simple updates, such as updated death tolls in a disaster, linking issues, spelling or grammar corrections, or otherwise anything that does not change the intent of the blurb should be discussed at WP:ERRORS in the ITN section.
  • For more complex updates that involve a major change in the blurb's intent, that should be discussed as part of the current ITNC nomination.
Skip to top
Skip to bottom

Archives[edit]

June 3[edit]

June 3, 2023 (2023-06-03) (Saturday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

Sports

June 2[edit]

June 2, 2023 (2023-06-02) (Friday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

International relations

Law and crime

(Posted) RD: Kaija Saariaho[edit]

Article: Kaija Saariaho (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): BBC New York Times
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: Finnish composer. BangJan1999 22:31, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Posted) 2023 Balasore train collision[edit]

Article: 2023 Odisha train collision (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ More than 200 people are killed in a collision between two passenger trains and a goods train in Balasore, Odisha, India. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ More than 200 people are killed and more than 900 injured in a collision between two passsenger trains and a goods train in Balasore, Odisha, India.
News source(s): Guardian Hindustan Times
Credits:

Article updated

Nominator's comments: Serious train collision in India. Information still coming in, hence article is still a stub. Black Kite (talk) 18:29, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Support on significance, oppose on quality information on this story is still very fresh, and the death toll is very likely to rise significantly. Because information is still fresh, the article cannot possibly be ready for the front page, but I expect that the article will be ready for the front page soon. NorthernFalcon (talk) 18:58, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support once article quality improves presuming more information comes out which I'm certain it will. Kcmastrpc (talk) 19:06, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support in principle Article quality needs to be improved, and once it's expanded enough consider this a support. No doubt about notability, deaths have already risen to ~150. TwistedAxe [contact] 19:50, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Support - WP:ITNMINIMUIMDEATHS is not a thing, but 150 70 deaths clearly establish notability per WP:NEVENTS. Article quality ought to be improved however. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 20:33, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I support it, but it’s at least 70 killed, not 150. The Kip (talk) 20:43, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
My fault. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 21:11, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The idea that WP:NEVENTS grants notability on the basis of "death count" is a common falsehood that people need to stop perpetuating. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 23:07, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Death count is a good indicator of notability, though, especially when it's greater than 50 people. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 00:04, 3 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support upon expansion Article isn’t great but seems notable enough for the front page. The Kip (talk) 20:44, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support on significance due to number of casualties. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 21:20, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Sources (mainly Reuters and BBC) are now saying over 200 have died, so I would support even if the quality is lacking. RandomInfinity17 (talk - contributions) 22:40, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Agreed. The train that was involved regularly cruises at over 115kph, and all indications are pointing towards a full-speed collision given the casualties. What a sad tragedy. Kcmastrpc (talk) 22:44, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Strong Support even if quality is lacking, this is huge news given the number of deaths (> 200). Rest in peace to all the victims. :( --RockstoneSend me a message! 22:43, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Support once the article's quality improves This is obviously significant enough to post, but the article's quality isn't good enough yet. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 22:57, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Posted Article is beyond stub stage and will expand. Subject is a massive transportation related disaster and a no brainer for ITN. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:01, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Post-posting support. This is a good example of striking a balance between swiftly posting an article around a newsworthy event in the public interest while also being in an acceptable and useful state. Good work around a tragic event. - Fuzheado | Talk 23:18, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

June 1[edit]

June 1, 2023 (2023-06-01) (Thursday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

Politics and elections

RD: Cynthia Weil[edit]

Article: Cynthia Weil (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Rolling Stone
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 songwriter who wrote many songs together with her husband Barry Mann, e.g. "You've Lost That Lovin' Feelin'" 86.187.174.181 (talk) 19:44, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Posted) RD: Margit Carstensen[edit]

Article: Margit Carstensen (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Süddeutsche Zeitung
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 actress, Tatort and Fassbinder films. Grimes2 (talk) 13:50, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well-referenced, seems ready to post --- Crecy1346 (talk) 14:06, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

RD: Vellayani Arjunan[edit]

Article: Vellayani Arjunan (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Manorama 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.

 Fahads1982 (talk) 09:39, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Oppose for now - Article is too short, in my opinion. ⇒ Lucie Person (talk|contribs) 16:07, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Article looks ok for ITNRD, it's not a blurb we're nominating. The article could obviously use some more work but it's okay in its current state. TwistedAxe [contact] 20:24, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose for now – Article needs to be given a decent structure. Much of the prose is in the lead; the lead is supposed to be the summary of the article's content. Schwede66 02:44, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose on quality Only prose is in the lead and most of the article is made up of tables. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 10:48, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Closed) 2023 Europa League Final[edit]

NOT POSTED
Consensus is against this going on ITN. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 21:32, 1 June 2023 (UTC) (non-admin closure)Reply[reply]

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

Proposed image
Article: 2023 UEFA Europa League final (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Sevilla FC beat A.S. Roma 4-1 on penalties to win the 2022-23 UEFA Europa League (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Sevilla FC beat A.S. Roma 4-1 on penalties to secure their 7th Europa League title
News source(s): BBC Guardian Reuters
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Congratulations to Sevilla. Notable enough to post to ITN in my opinion... Crecy1346(talk) 10:25, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Probably the same reason used to post NCAA Division I men's basketball tournament.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:11, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Is there a "March Madness" pop culture equivalent? —Bagumba (talk) 15:47, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose - Champions League yes, Europa League and Europa Conference League no. -- KTC (talk) 15:12, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support for multiple reasons. Firstly, it’s not true that football is well represented on ITN, with the 2022 FIFA World Cup Final being the last story posted five months ago (it’s true that there are many ITNR items, but they don’t get posted regularly). Secondly, the argument that this is a second-tier competition is simply not valid. Yes, it’s superior to the Champions League, but it’s far above the quality of second-tier domestic leagues. For instance, Barcelona (winners of this season’s La Liga), Arsenal (runners-up in this season’s Premier League), Machester United (third-placed team in this season’s Premier League) and Juventus all played in this competition this season. Thirdly, this is clearly a newsworthy event with decent media coverage worldwide and very high viewership figures. Fourthly, the article on the final is in good shape. Fifthly, in the absence of posting domestic leagues this year, this could be a perfect ad hoc substitute. Sixthly, the last time this was posted was in 2010, so it’s good to refresh memories from time to time. There are many practical reasons why this merits inclusion, and it’s completely irrelevant if the Champions League final is in ten days (the domestic leagues are usually decided in a time span of two weeks, but that doesn’t prevent us from considering them for posting as ITNR items).--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 17:23, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Fundamentally, this is a 'runners up' competition for teams that weren't good enough to qualify for the Champions League, or were knocked out of it early. That's why it's a second-tier tournament - which even our article Europa League states in its lead. Modest Genius talk 17:27, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    #FC_Bayern_Munich_wins_Bundesliga is an active ITNR nomination that hasn't been posted because of quality. La Liga concludes on June 4 and was nominated in May but told to wait. Soccer is plenty represented on ITNR and it's not our fault that the quality of ITNR pages isn't good enough. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:35, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    La Liga was not posted because it lacked (and still lacks) a prose update summarising the season, but was given a second chance when the season ends even though it won’t be news any more (the Premier League received the same treatment and was eventually not posted). It’s clear that sport events are posted when the winner is known (Formula One is an excellent example how does this work in practice). In fact, football is well represented on ITNR, but unfortunately not on ITN, so it’s worth considering ad hoc substitutes.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 17:46, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    No, the solution would be to get the ITNR articles up to posting caliber. That was the point of getting those on ITNR in the first place. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:59, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose - The Europa League does not consistently generate nearly the same global coverage as the Champions League, nor should it be elevated beyond other continental championships. We should try to check our bias at the door and not add yet another European competition to ITNR. SounderBruce 19:38, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose This isn't ITN/R, and I'd argue that these championships aren't as major and notable as championships like the FIFA World Cup. UEFA does host Euro championships every 4 years which deserve to be ITN, however the last one was in 2021 and the next one is in 2024. Also, per Gotitbro, soccer is too well represented in ITN already with Champions League, FIFA World Cup among some other championships being posted every now and then. TwistedAxe [contact] 20:23, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Vehement oppose The quest to be the 33rd-best football team in Europe. -- Kicking222 (talk) 21:11, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[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) US debt ceiling[edit]

WP:SNOW closing, as consensus to post does not appear to be able to develop. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 16:49, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

Proposed image
Articles: 2023 United States debt-ceiling crisis (talk · history · tag) and United States debt ceiling (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The US House of Representatives passes a bi-partisan bill to suspend its debt ceiling until 2025. (Post)
News source(s): BBC; Guardian; FT; NYT; DW
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: The passing of the bill seems like a big milestone in this matter which is all over the news and quite consequential. No doubt there's many ways to blurb this so let's see if we can reach an agreement too... Andrew🐉(talk) 07:40, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • One of the main functions of ITN is to provide helpful links to articles about topics which are in the news. This is in the news now. If we wait until all the formalities are completed, then most readers will have moved on and we won't have helped them understand the matter. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:55, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose for now. Firstly, increases of the US debt ceiling have become quite frequent over the past decade, with the most recent one taking place in December 2021. Secondly, this is a bail-out bill to settle the crisis with no immediate consequences. The main uncertainty in this crisis was that the US Treasury would fail to service its debt, but now it won't happen because they've finally come to a resolution. In similar cases, the credit rating agencies typically respond by downgrading a country's credit rating due to the accumulated risks, which would be substantially more newsworthy as a direct consequence, but that's not very likely because of politics (there was a lot of fuss when S&P downgraded the US credit rating in August 2011). That being said, the two main outcomes from one such crisis, which would merit posting, are a bankrupt (not an option any more) and a downgraded credit rating (not very likely to happen). But let's wait and see.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:13, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose - domestic politics with little impact. Now if the US actually defaulted that would be news worth posting. Idiosyncrasies of the US political system arent needed here. nableezy - 09:12, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose "Thing that happens every 1-2 years happened again" is not news. As Kiril Simeonovski and Nableezy correctly point out, if it hadn't happened, that would have been news. And if some lasting consequences happened, like a downgraded credit rating or (finally) an abolition of the debt ceiling, that would be news. But this is just business as usual, grandstanding by some politicians notwithstanding. Even the stock market was barely affected by it. Regards SoWhy 10:13, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Most of the current blurbs like the Booker Prize are events that happen every year. This item is more like once a decade as the previous article is dated 2013. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:51, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Andrew Davidson: If the Booker Prize was awarded to the same book every year, I would agree with you. Recurring items still have different outcomes. That we do not write an article every time there is a debt ceiling discussion does not mean it does not happen regularly. As pointed out by others, the debt ceiling was raised three times under Trump alone and twice under Biden before, in October and December 2021 ([1]), the last time thus being less than 1.5 years ago. Regards SoWhy 13:04, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Per Ecclesiastes, it's hard to be truly original. The particulars of this debt crisis have some similiarities and some differences with previous ones. It's just the same with books which have common features, influences and allusions too. So it goes. Andrew🐉(talk) 13:14, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose. This happens frequently and is a standard feature of US politics. If there had been a default, that might have been significant enough to merit a blurb. But simply agreeing to keep things running isn't a major event. Modest Genius talk 10:59, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose Even if it passes the Senate. The debt ceiling was raised 3 times under Trump, so this is not an unusual situation. If the US defaulted on it, that would be a different story. --Masem (t) 12:25, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose domestic politics, not that worthy. _-_Alsor (talk) 12:46, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose — Wait for a default, which is unlikely to happen. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 13:54, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose Not unless it defaults. This hasn't even passed the Senate yet. Kafoxe (talk) 16:01, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose per above. This is mundane news unless a default happens. DarkSide830 (talk) 16:45, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[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) Ben Roberts-Smith[edit]

Consensus to post will not develop. Stephen 00:02, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

Proposed image
Article: Ben Roberts-Smith (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Australian soldier Ben Roberts-Smith loses defamation lawsuit after judge finds allegations of war crimes and murder to be substantially true. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In a defamation lawsuit, judge rules that allegations of Australian soldier Ben Roberts-Smith committing war crimes and murder are substantially true.
News source(s): ABC, The Guardian, Sydney Morning Herald
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Significant judicial indictment (even though civil, not criminal) of the actions of a decorated Australian soldier serving in the coalition forces in Afghanistan. A symbolic ruling on war crimes in Afghanistan. Covered widely internationally. Iskandar323 (talk) 07:17, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment - international coverage is undisputed: Associated Press / Reuters / Agence France-Presse / BBC / Al Jazeera. But I am not sure if this should be posted now or after all appeals are exhausted. starship.paint (exalt) 07:46, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Adding on, BBC describes Roberts as Australia's most-decorated living soldier ... Australia's most famous living war veteran. [2] Top of his field. starship.paint (exalt) 12:25, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment We did post about the report that confirmed these warcrimes in Afghanistan. Do we really need do go ahead with a minor update of a defamation lawsuit as to that? I would wait for something more significant. Gotitbro (talk) 10:27, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment: this is a confusing case. As far as I can tell from the article, he hasn't actually been convicted of war crimes. Instead, he's lost a claim against several newspapers, because their allegations against him were probably true. That's a lower standard of proof and won't lead to any punishment of Roberts-Smith (except legal costs and damage to his reputation), right? Even if he had been convicted by a war crimes tribunal or the ICC, it seems to be a pretty minor case compared to other war crimes in Afghanistan. Modest Genius talk 11:08, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I would support on notability/in-the news'ness as part of the interest is he's their most decorated living (ex-)solider, now found by a court of law that most of the claims of war crime are substantially true. -- KTC (talk) 15:16, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose Already having posted the report that confirmed the crimes, with nobody being thrown in jail; just some money being taken away from one rich and famous man to a couple rich and famous media outlets. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 16:54, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose since this is a civil judgment instead of a criminal conviction. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 18:19, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose If he was actually convicted of war crimes, that would be a different matter. Black Kite (talk) 18:24, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose Rich man loses libel case. That's about it, really. The impact and consequences are greatly muted. Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 21:17, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose Maybe if this were a criminal conviction it would be worthy of posting, although I'd doubt it. --RockstoneSend me a message! 23:31, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[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.

May 31[edit]

May 31, 2023 (2023-05-31) (Wednesday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

Science and technology

Sports

(Withdrawn) Trial of Lina E.[edit]

WITHDRAWN
On second thought, it's a bit too early for ITN. Many protests are still planned. 〜 Festucalex • talk 16:15, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

Article: Trial of Lina E. (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A Dresden court finds Lina E., a left-wing activist, guilty of violent attacks against neo-Nazis. (Post)
News source(s): NYT – ABC News – ZDF – DW
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: A widely watched trial in Germany, which prompted violent protests and riots around the country. 〜 Festucalex • talk 11:06, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose. Violent criminals are jailed every day, including for murder, rape etc. While this case certainly affected the six people she attacked, I don't see any broader impacts that would justify a blurb. Modest Genius talk 11:24, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Modest Genius: As mentioned in the sources, there have already been riots in Berlin, Bremen, Dresden, Hamburg, Leipzig and other cities in response to this ruling. [3] This is no common case, it's more of a national spotlight one. 〜 Festucalex • talk 11:36, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    The article has just two sentences about the protests. If those are the main story, that should be reflected in the blurb and the article. But it looks like they're still pretty small. Modest Genius talk 12:13, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose per Modest Genius + notability. Violent criminals like this are arrested and jailed and convicted every day, and have been for forever. I can't see how this one instance is so notable that it deserves to be put on the Main Page as a blurb. If the protests were George Floyd-level (i.e. everywhere and everyone knows about it, and no I'm not comparing the people, just the protest sizes), I could see it. In this instance, however, this is the first time I'm hearing about it. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 12:12, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

RD: Sergio Calderón[edit]

Article: Sergio Calderón (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Variety
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.

 Thriley (talk) 04:40, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Latvian presidential election[edit]

Proposed image
Articles: 2023 Latvian presidential election (talk · history · tag) and Edgars Rinkēvičs (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In Latvia, Edgars Rinkēvičs (pictured) is elected president. (Post)
News source(s): Reuters - ABC - DW - AP - Bloomberg
Credits:

Both articles updated

Nominator's comments: Presidential elections were held in Latvia. Edgars Rinkēvičs won, being noted for the first open homosexual who will take the position. I would like the clarify that although Latvia has a parliamentary system, the position of president is not entirely ceremonial, and from my understanding, is a position of power largely shared with the PM. (NOTE FOR POSTING ADMINS: Edgars2007 (talk · contribs) created the article on Edgars Rinkēvičs). - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 15:46, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Is this really ITN/R? While the president of Latvia isn't purely ceremonial, it's the position is not nearly as powerful as in countries with a presidential system. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 21:04, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    in my opinion, if it isn't voted by a popular vote, it is not notable. did we post the 2022 Indian presidential election? Rushtheeditor (talk) 21:47, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Technically the president of the United States ins't elected by popular vote either... DecafPotato (talk) 00:28, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    It's a bit different though, since people vote for electors who then vote for their candidate. On the other hand... people don't vote for the Prime Minister in Westminster systems by popular vote, but, quite obviously those are notable enough for ITN/R. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 01:41, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Yes, this is ITN/R. It doesn't matter if the country isn't "nearly as powerful" as other countries. All countries listed under the list of sovereign states are to be in ITN, given that the article quality meets the requirements for ITN. TwistedAxe [contact] 00:10, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    You must have misunderstood me, or perhaps I wasn't clear. I didn't say anything about the power of the country; that is absolutely irrelevant here. I said that the president isn't nearly as powerful in Latvia as the president in presidential systems are, and so this arguably does not qualify for ITN/R. -- RockstoneSend me a message! 01:39, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    My apologies, I did misunderstand you. In your case, it could be indeed argued that it might not qualify for ITN/R, but at the same time, if we try to put it in another perspective, would we post the elections of the Finnish president, despite him/her holding little power compared to the prime minister? TwistedAxe [contact] 10:13, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    No worries. Rereading my comment, I realize I wasn't clear. Face-smile.svg I'm pretty sure we wouldn't post the Finnish president. --RockstoneSend me a message! 20:40, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Weak support Article needs some work, but should be ok for ITN. TwistedAxe [contact] 00:11, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oppose Parliamentary system plus Turkey isn’t posted either. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.248.15.100 (talk) 00:46, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment Does not appear to be ITNR, as the prime minister appears to hold the executive powers in Latvia (per List of current heads of state and government) and this was not a general election. May still be considered significant for posting depending on its implications for broader international affairs in the context of the Russia- Ukraine(Neo-Nazi) war. Curbon7 (talk) 00:55, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    According to the article, President of Latvia, the president shares executive power with the cabinet and prime minister. According to the "duties and rights" section of said article, this includes having responsibility over fairy major affairs, such as war/military, representing the country internationally, initiating and suspending laws, and the like. However, it is true that they have a power check in the form of the PM. I'd say that while the PM holds more executive power, the situation in Latvia differs from the vast majority of prez-PM situations in that there isn't as enormous a power and responsibility difference between the two positions. While I'm not entirely certain, I can definitely understand the argument that the executive privileges of the president in Latvia make this at least a gray area that may require invoking WP:IAR. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 01:06, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support per my comments above. While Latvia usually isn't a particularly major nation, the context of the Russia- Ukraine(Neo-Nazi) war gives it a bigger profile than typical. The election of a staunchly pro-western president (a la Petr Pavel) is the culmination of the past year-and-a-half of anti-Russian policy in Latvia and it will be interesting to see how the country's significant Russian minority reacts, which brings big implications for the region considering the current political crisis in Moldova. Curbon7 (talk) 18:32, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose for now There isn’t any prose in the “Results” section. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 19:50, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose Not a general election, no significant power in the President's title, and no prose in the Results section. Pass. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 12:26, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support as a recurring item and for its good quality. --NoonIcarus (talk) 11:58, 3 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support. Election of a president who DOES have power, even if not a terrible amount. DarkSide830 (talk) 16:58, 3 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

RD: Ama Ata Aidoo[edit]

Article: Ama Ata Aidoo (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.ghanaweb.com/GhanaHomePage/NewsArchive/Renowned-Ghanaian-writer-Prof-Ama-Ata-Aidoo-is-dead-1777163, https://citinewsroom.com/2023/05/renowned-ghanaian-author-ama-ata-aidoo-dies-at-81/
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: Notable & renowned Ghanaian author, poet, playwright and academic. Well written article Ampimd (talk) 09:52, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Support this fantastically referenced article and RD entry. --Ouro (blah blah) 12:07, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support per Ouro. TwistedAxe [contact] 00:12, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose Ama Ata Aidoo § Selected works needs citations, or alternatively ISBNs or equivalent. There's an oddly-placed list of bullet items at the end of Ama Ata Aidoo § Honours and recognition, which is otherwise mostly prose. Unsourced too (but maybe already mentioned in sections above).—Bagumba (talk) 08:23, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Comment fixed bullet items at the end of the article, fused the ones that were already not stated in article into the article with citations. Citations have also been provided for Selected works and some with their ISBNs or ISSNs. Article has been updated per above comment. Ampimd (talk) 21:10, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      Struck. There's a couple of Cn tags outstanding though.—Bagumba (talk) 08:55, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

May 30[edit]

May 30, 2023 (2023-05-30) (Tuesday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Law and crime

Science and Technology

RD: John Beasley[edit]

Article: John Beasley (actor) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [4]
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: American actor, 79. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 23:44, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Oppose for now This seems stubby & needs more references, particularly the filmography. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 17:37, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Weak support Honestly, the article could use more referencing and sources but the person isn't notable enough to have a very long article written about him. The article is ok and should be alright to post. TwistedAxe [contact] 19:53, 3 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

RD: Don Bonker[edit]

Article: Don Bonker (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): [5]
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Former U.S. representative from Washington; big player in the trade policy of the '80s. Sourcing is practically non-existent. Curbon7 (talk) 04:29, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Oppose There are no sources in the Early life, Political career, and Later career sections, making this article's quality subpar at best. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 00:44, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose Added CN tags. Early Life section is completely unreferenced. TwistedAxe [contact] 19:50, 3 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

RD: Harvey Pitt[edit]

Article: Harvey Pitt (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Wall Street Journal, Bloomberg
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.

 Thriley (talk) 23:38, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Weak oppose for now, support after CN is fixed. Quickly reading through the article, the first sentence seems to be unreferenced. Once it's fixed, I'll be supporting. TwistedAxe [contact] 00:14, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • CN tag fixed. Thriley (talk) 01:53, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose Lead needs more than one sentence.—Bagumba (talk) 08:52, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Posted) RD: Eusebius McKaiser[edit]

Article: Eusebius McKaiser (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.timeslive.co.za/news/south-africa/2023-05-30-eusebius-mckaiser-dies-from-suspected-epileptic-seizure/
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: South African journalist. Article looks alright. Onegreatjoke (talk) 00:04, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Support—Remarkably well-referenced, comprehensive, and to-the-point. This, ladies and gentlemen, is a biographical article worthy of the main page. Kurtis (talk) 01:19, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support— Article seems in good shape. McKaiser was well-known enough in South Africa to merit mentioning on the main page. Goldfritter 11:31, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Posted—Bagumba (talk) 13:45, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Posted) RD: Bill McGovern (American football)[edit]

Article: Bill McGovern (American football) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://uclabruins.com/news/2023/5/30/football-ucla-mourns-loss-of-bill-mcgovern.aspx
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: American Football coach. Article looks alright. Onegreatjoke (talk) 23:59, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Closed) Drone strikes on Moscow[edit]

Consensus will not emerge for posting. NoahTalk 17:01, 31 May 2023 (UTC) (non-admin closure)Reply[reply]

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

Article: 2023 Moscow drone strikes (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ A series of Ukrainian drone attacks hit Moscow (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ Russia Claims to have intercepted 8 Ukrainian drones over Moscow.
News source(s): [6][7][8]
Credits:
Nominator's comments: May be a serious escalation per 194.102.58.600, Editor 5426387 (talk) 14:48, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This might turn out to be a serious escalation of the Russian invasion of Ukraine(Neo-Nazi) BBC AP CNN. 194.102.58.6 (talk) 14:02, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Welcome to WP:ITN. In order for your nomination to be considered, please create a nomination using the {{ITN candidate}} template. You've already got the sources, we need more information such as a blurb and a target article. Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 14:34, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Noting for the record that this comment was made prior to Editor 5426387 creating a proper nomination, when IP 194 previously attempted to nominate this item. --Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 12:55, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Wait to see just what the nature of this escalation will be. Unless Russia truly ramps up their military response, this may just be considered an incremental exchange in the war (if indeed this was a Ukrainian attack). --Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 15:03, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose — See ongoing. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 15:42, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Wait - per my statement on the Kremlin drone attack. Ukraine(Neo-Nazi) is denying it, but it appears as if Russia's claims are being acknowledged much more by international press this time, perhaps due to greater evidence. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 16:22, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment what interception? The drones hit their targets. --Ouro (blah blah) 17:54, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • oppose - covered by ongoing. nableezy - 18:27, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment If this is covered by the ongoing item, then "Russian invasion of Ukraine(Neo-Nazi) " is no longer a valid label (perhaps "Russo-Ukrainian War" would be more precise). Striking buildings in Moscow is definitely not part of the invasion of Ukraine(Neo-Nazi) .--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:10, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I would support a target change to the entire war article. The invasion is merely a phase of said war. DarkSide830 (talk) 01:23, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose There isn't a target article comparable with 2023 Kremlin drone explosion. Andrew🐉(talk) 21:02, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I've created one (2023 Moscow drone strikes), but its still in an infantile state; it will need expansion before going on the main page. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 21:19, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    That's currently just two sentences and expansion seems difficult because of a lack of reliable sources. Note that Ukraine(Neo-Nazi) denies launching the attack and so we're mostly dependent on Russia's side of the story. Andrew🐉(talk) 22:37, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    There was no reason to create a separate article at this time on that. It is seemingly part of the war, and should be covered as part of the time line. Masem (t) 03:49, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    If it turns out to be insignificant it could later be redirected to the main article on attacks or the war timeline, with any salvageable content merged. --Ouro (blah blah) 05:02, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose Covered in ongoing. The article currently seems to undergo major changes, too. --NoonIcarus (talk) 00:51, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose. First, it's covered by an ongoing event, and second, as for the material impact it's minor. I agree that on the whole it's perhaps significant, as the place lies quite a distance from the invasion area but not ITN-worthy. --Ouro (blah blah) 01:04, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Wait until we receive some type of confirmation that these drones were, in fact, fired by Ukraine(Neo-Nazi) at Moscow. If that is the case, then I think this would be a significant enough development by itself to merit a standalone blurb, ongoing link notwithstanding. However, I'd like to register my extreme skepticism that Ukraine(Neo-Nazi) would order such an attack and risk losing the goodwill of the international community, which has been vitally important in their war effort. Kurtis (talk) 01:13, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment either we decide everything related to the war is covered by ongoing, or we post major developments in the war anyway. I personally prefer the latter, but whatever we choose, we should be consistent. Banedon (talk) 01:19, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose, again. Yet another non-story. So a bunch of drones are shot down or suppressed in a country actively at war with a neighbor. I fail to see why this event is worth posting. DarkSide830 (talk) 01:22, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment We don't have confirmation that Ukraine(Neo-Nazi) is responsible for the drone attacks, so, at this stage, it's unrelated to the invasion already posted onto ongoing. If we evaluate this independently, drone attacks on buildings in the capital of the largest country in the world is a very big deal and notable news, which is proved by the front-page coverage in the media.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 07:08, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment - We're a day out now and I don't see there being any evidence of an imminent escalation. If we get to two or three days out from the drone strikes and still nothing is done, that would hint at this being a false flag operation for propaganda purposes. But even casting my crystal ball of original research aside, it would indicate nonetheless that this would not be a suitable standalone blurb. --Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 12:29, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose per above. Covered by ongoing barring any major escalation, which at this point seems unlikely. The Kip (talk) 13:36, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose The first blurb is a no go since we still can't say as a matter of fact who did it, whether it was Ukraine(Neo-Nazi) , a Russian false flag, etc. Russian claims are that "none of the drones hit their target" and that there were only "two minor injuries" and no fatalities. Despite pledges from Russia to retaliate, it also seems that this (fortunately) has not led to major escalations. So as of right now, this doesn't stand out from the other incidents involving drones in the Russo-Ukrainian war.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 16:53, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

RD: Gershon Edelstein[edit]

Article: Gershon Edelstein (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2023-05-30/ty-article/leader-of-lithuanian-ultra-orthodox-community-rabbi-gershon-edelstein-dies-at-100/00000188-6b72-d2d1-afbe-7f7fd5290000]
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.

 Shibolet Nehrd (talk) 22:10, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is significant not only due to religious and social reasons (over 200,00 people attended his funeral), [1] but also because he was chairman of the Moetzes Gedolei Hatorah - hence wielding significant power in Israel's politics - which has been a topic of interest for the news page for a while.

  • Oppose Maybe his page needs more editing.
  • One of the most poorly referenced biographies that I've seen in a while. Stephen 00:49, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Is it good now? Shibolet Nehrd (talk) 19:33, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No. Stephen 23:46, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose The biography needs heavy sourcing. I've added the required CN tags to the article where the paragraphs are unreferenced. TwistedAxe [contact] 00:20, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

May 29[edit]

May 29, 2023 (2023-05-29) (Monday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

International relations

Law and crime

Politics and elections

RD: Victor Galeone[edit]

Article: Victor Galeone (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.archbalt.org/archbishop-william-loris-statement-on-the-death-of-bishop-galeone/
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: Bishop of the Roman Catholic Diocese of St. Augustine. Article looks like it's nearly there. Onegreatjoke (talk) 23:54, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Support after fixing CN tag One unreferenced paragraph needs to be fixed before it's ready. TwistedAxe [contact] 00:23, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Ready) RD: William O'Neil[edit]

Article: William O'Neil (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Bloomberg
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.

 Thriley (talk) 19:07, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Support after fixing CN tag. There is one unreferenced paragraph that needs to be cited. Once fixed, consider this a support. TwistedAxe [contact] 00:25, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose on quality due to both the CN tag, and too many "For the x person" at the top of the page. Ouch. Support Article's issues have been fixed. Looks good. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 00:46, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Fakescientist8000: Resolved now.—Bagumba (talk) 17:26, 3 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Sufficient breadth and sourcing.—Bagumba (talk) 17:26, 3 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support - and ready to go.BabbaQ (talk) 18:05, 3 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

RD: Michel Côté[edit]

Article: Michel Côté (actor) (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/michel-c%C3%B4t%C3%A9-dead-72-quebec-actor-1.6858108
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: Canadian actor. Article is short but looks okay. Roncanada (talk) 13:47, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Support. Two unreferenced sentences that need to be cited, other than that article looks okay. TwistedAxe [contact] 00:28, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose due to the two unsourced statements with CN tags. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 00:47, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Note – I've added an additional citation needed tag. Schwede66 02:36, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Posted) RD: Jacob Turkel[edit]

Article: Jacob Turkel (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): https://www.ynet.co.il/news/article/ryglh0xgi3
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: Israeli Jurist. Article seems okay. Onegreatjoke (talk) 00:44, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Posted) 2023 Indian Premier League Final[edit]

Proposed image
Article: 2023 Indian Premier League final (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In cricket, the Indian Premier League concludes with the Chennai Super Kings defeating the Gujarat Titans in the final (player of the match Devon Conway pictured). (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In cricket, the Indian Premier League concludes with the Chennai Super Kings defeating the Gujarat Titans in the final (captain M. S. Dhoni pictured).
News source(s): ESPN Cricinfo
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Game just completed. Good game. Congrats CSK. Article looks good and ready for homepage. Ktin (talk) 20:23, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Oppose for now. Good game and congratulations to Chennai. The article for the final needs to be updated with all the statistics and needs to be additionally tidied up to make it ready for ITN. Once that is completed, I would support but right now the article is not ready. Crecy1346 (talk) 21:07, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Crecy1346 -- I think @MNWiki845: has taken care of most of the stats. I filled a couple of minor ones and the article does seem good. Ktin (talk) 21:31, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
👍 - We should post now. Crecy1346 (talk) 21:35, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Support prose added, looks good. Congrats to the updaters! - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 00:30, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Withdrawn) Ugandan Homosexuality bill[edit]

WITHDRAWN
Misread some articles, not really in the news - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 16:32, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

Article: Anti-Homosexuality Act, 2023 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In Uganda, homosexual activities becomes punishable by life imprisonment under a new anti-gay bill. (Post)
News source(s): NYT - Le Monde - The Guardian - WaPo - Reuters - The Independent - La Times - Al Jazeera
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: Uganda just made gay sex illegal. Additionally "aggravated homosexuality" (those between gays who are HIV positive or involving a minor) is punishable by death. This bill has received sustained coverage internationally since it's been introduced, and only more so now that its in effect. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 16:04, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose Per Guardian "Bill retains harshest measures of legislation adopted in March, including death penalty for certain same-sex acts". This is maintaining the status quo for the most part, outside of the expanded penalties. --Masem (t) 16:22, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose — Per Masem. As other editors have noted, additional sources will not help your case. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 16:23, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[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) New Indian parliament building[edit]

Consensus is clearly against posting.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 17:31, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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

Article: New Parliament House, New Delhi (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In India, Prime Minister Narendra Modi inaugurates a new building (pictured) as the new house of the Parliament of India, replacing the previous structure due to structural issues and inadequate capacity for MPs. (Post)
News source(s): NYT - Euronews - AP - Al Jazeera - Time - The Guardian - Politico - BBC - CNN - SCMP - ABC - Reuters - JP Times - Times of India - The Hindustan Times - Econ Times - The Independent
Credits:

Article updated
Nominator's comments: India just opened a new parliament building to replace the old yet iconic 85 year old former building that struggled with capacity and structural issues. For anyone who would oppose, I would like to ask, would you do the same if the US moved Congress away from the Capitol, or if the UK moved their parliament from Westminster (which I've heard is a real proposal that is actually being made)? This is a hugely significant issue for India, the world's largest democracy demographically and soon (if not already) the world most populated country in general, and is already hugely controversial (most opposition parties protested the opening due to various issues [largely orienting around how Prime Minister Narandra Modi inaugurated the building instead of President Droupadi Murmu] as well as other groups such as wrestlers who were protesting sexual abuse) and will definitely be remembered in Indian history for years on end. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 04:05, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose Really? A new building? No, on both notability and on quality (the 'Timeline' section feels quite rushed). Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 04:09, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose — Per Fakescientist8000. I would also oppose both of those scenarios. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 04:44, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Weak support on notability (although I'd remind that Westminster or the Capitol are several times as old, so a direct comparison isn't really possible), but Oppose on article quality for now. Chaotic Enby (talk) 05:28, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose Come on Knight… _-_Alsor (talk) 06:56, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Needs work The article needs copy-editing for grammar, tense and detail. For example, what is the building made of and what is its architectural style? The article doesn't say. And it doesn't seem stable – there's a proposal to change its title (again) – and there's political issues around the various protests. Andrew🐉(talk) 07:27, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Very Strong Oppose. Per Fakescientist8000. Its just a building and is not really important to be posted on ITN. 🛧Layah50♪🛪 ( 話す? 一緒に飛ぼう！) 08:55, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment. The issue of the UK Parliament bodies moving away from the Palace of Westminster shall be in all probability temporary for the purpose of restoration works to this magnificent building. It shall not be permanent, hence, comparison is missed. --Ouro (blah blah) 11:53, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose. A mainly symbolic change, with no significant implications. Nsk92 (talk) 11:56, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose If a new airplane isn't considered newsworthy enough for ITN, then a new building certainly isn't. ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 13:30, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
By the way, you do not need to post 20 news sources in the nomination header. They will not help your argument. Three is fine. ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 13:31, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment If notability is to be further gleaned from the protests then they should be in the blurb. Gotitbro (talk) 14:13, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Very Strong Oppose per Fakescientist8000 and Andrew🐉. Cheers! // 🌶️Jalapeño🌶️ Don't click this link! 14:40, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • No. A million links to articles will not convince me that this should be on ITN. It's getting to the point that when I see an obviously-not-improtant-enough headline, I know who nominated it. (Also, you'd think after this many nominations, said user would learn how to write a usable blurb, but alas.) -- Kicking222 (talk) 14:52, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Sine the snark, I have to agree. This is unproductive and borders on intervention. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 16:22, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose A change in national capital city à la Egypt and Indonesia, postable. Moving to a different building down the street, not postable. Curbon7 (talk) 14:55, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Weak oppose. It's making some news, and was a project of considerable expense, but what lasting significance does it really have? There's no effect on India's administrative organization whatsoever; it's just new chairs and offices. Vanamonde (Talk) 15:26, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose New buildings are not ITN-appropriate topics. --Masem (t) 16:23, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Even if it's something major like the tallest building in the world? Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 17:11, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[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.

May 28[edit]

May 28, 2023 (2023-05-28) (Sunday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Arts and culture

Business and economy

Disasters and accidents

Politics and elections

Sports

Manchester City win the Premier League[edit]

Proposed image
Article: 2022-23 Premier League (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In association football, Manchester City win the Premier League for the third season in a row. (record scorer Erling Haaland pictured) (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In association football, Manchester City win the English Premier League.
Alternative blurb II: ​ In association football, the Premier League concludes with Manchester City as champions.
Alternative blurb III: ​ In association football, Manchester City win the English Premier League (Player of the Season winner Erling Haaland pictured).
News source(s): The Guardian
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: This was nominated last week (20th) when the title was actually won, but wasn't posted since editors wished to wait for the end of the season. The season is now over and this seems to have been overlooked. Unfortunately the article still needs work. Effy Midwinter (talk) 03:41, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Oppose as stale Man City already won the title on 20 May.[9] It was already nominated at Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates/May 2023 § Man City wins Prem, and was not posted. We've posted winners before the season is over on many occasions (Wikipedia talk:In the news/Archive 83 § Adding clarification for sports ITNR) This is old news, and still the article prose is largely unsourced. We shouldn't post early in some seasons, yet conveniently defer in others to buy time for it not being ready.—Bagumba (talk) 08:14, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Weak support alt2. Firstly, this is the correct time to nominate - at the end of the season when all the games have been completed and the final positions have been determined (including relegation, qualification for Europe etc.). I strongly disagree with Bagumba on this point. Secondly, the previous nomination failed because the article lacked prose content. There's now a seven-paragraph summary of the season's events, which isn't particularly well referenced (there are a few {{cn}} tags throughout the article) but does meet our minimum requirements. It would be good to resolve those before posting, but fundamentally this is the correct time for this blurb. Alt2 is our standard blurb phrasing. Modest Genius talk 11:14, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Your suggestion that we post at the end of the season was rejected by almost all participants in the discussion linked by Bagumba above.  — Amakuru (talk) 11:32, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    That's not true. Three editors (including me) argued to wait, one argued against, and the rest didn't mention that aspect. Modest Genius talk 11:51, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Who were the three who argued to wait? As far as I can see, Masem initially proposed codifying that as the rule, but then switched to neutral, with the extra opinion that should we not post when the winner is known, we shouldn't then give a second bite of the Cherry later on, which is what's being proposed here. As far as I can see, every other participant in the discussion bar yourself was for posting as soon as the champion is known, and that's also the precedent in all but one affected year. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 12:00, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Are we looking at the same discussion? In Wikipedia:In_the_news/Candidates/May_2023#Man_City_wins_Prem, Black Kite !voted to wait until the season completed and nableezy agreed saying 'wait for the conclusion of the season'. Kiril Simeonovski then disagreed, though their argument was disputed by the same two users. My comment was right at the end, also arguing for waiting until the season was over. Masem doesn't seem to have commented at all. Modest Genius talk 12:21, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Ha, now I understand the confusion, we are looking at different things. I'm alluding to the 2021 discussion at WT:ITN - Wikipedia talk:In the news/Archive 83 § Adding clarification for sports ITNR - discussing the principle of such things. Everyone but yourself opposed the proposal to set in stone that we post at the end of the season, and rather opined that we should post when the winner's known. And we them posted the 2021 result before season end. That consensus should have been explicity noted at ITN/R really, but in any case it should be binding now per that discussion and the precedence, absent a clear consensus at WT:ITN to revisit that.  — Amakuru (talk) 20:55, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose as stale and speedy close. Per Bagumba The Premier league winner is always posted when the winner is known, not at the end of the season, as per most past precedent and the discussion Bagumba linked above. If this wasn't posted at the time it was actually in the news then that's too bad, apologies I would have supported strongly at the time but missed it. Two wrongs don't make a right though, and we shouldn't post old news now just because it was missed earlier.  — Amakuru (talk) 11:28, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    We were specifically told when it was known to wait until the season ended, and now we're being told it's old news because it wasn't posted when it was known? The Kip (talk) 20:15, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    More people said that the quality was lacking. As for those that said wait, one of them was in the prior ITNR discussion in 2021 that determined that we have posted before the season ends many times, and there was no consensus to have to wait. Another one perhaps just remembered what they wanted to happen in 2021, not what ultimately happened with the nom.—Bagumba (talk) 20:44, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Re "We were specifically told" - who told you exactly? Is there someone in charge here who gets to pronounce on such things with definitive authority? Past precedence, including the meta discussion in 2021,clearly established that we post when the winner is known. That did not happen because the article was (and still isn't) up to scratch and nobody fixed it in time. The boat has now sailed, but everyone will know for next year.  — Amakuru (talk) 20:55, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose for now due to quality issues due to an orange-tagged section & cn tags elsewhere. Neutral on whether or not this is stale. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 18:27, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Definitely not stale, as we didn’t post the winner back then because the seasons article was unstable and incomplete and could not be complete until this weekend as the relegation places were yet to be decided. If the Premier League winner is posted when they clinch and not when the season ends then idk how you’d post it in the case where you could not know who would be relegated. So in sum support when the tags are fixed. nableezy - 21:50, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support when cited It’s not stale. Still needs citations but well-written otherwise. The Kip (talk) 06:19, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    It emphatically is stale. ITN goes by stories that are in the news, per the purpose outlined at WP:ITN, and the story here - "Manchester City win the Premier League" broke in the news on 20 May, when all the media outlets declared it as such - [10][11]. It wasn't posted then due to quality issues, but that doesn't mean it should be posted now.  — Amakuru (talk) 12:44, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    No, it's not stale. The ITN/R listing is for the Premier League which didn't conclude until last Sunday. It isn't for "who wins the Premier League". Having said that, this is probably moot anyway as it needs a lot of citations and I doubt if those are going to be fixed before it does go stale. Black Kite (talk) 12:50, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Exactly. The story here is the entire tournament, not just who won. I appreciate this may be difficult to understand for users who aren't used to leagues having promotion and relegation, but the relegation & European qualification places are just as important to fans of the teams involved as the championship is to the winner. Modest Genius talk 13:07, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Im quite sure Amakuru is well aware of promotion and relegation. But the rest of the comment I agree with. The Premier League concludes with Manchester City as champions is not a stale story since it depends on the Premier League concluding. nableezy - 19:58, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Posted) RD: Harald zur Hausen[edit]

Article: Harald zur Hausen (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): German Cancer Research Center, Telegraph
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: German virologist. 2008 recipient of the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine. Thriley (talk) 00:17, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Posted) 2023 Indy 500[edit]

Proposed image
Article: 2023 Indianapolis 500 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In auto racing, Josef Newgarden wins the Indianapolis 500. (Post)
Alternative blurb: ​ In auto racing, Josef Newgarden wins the 107th Indianapolis 500.
News source(s): The Athletic USA Today
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Okay, after Newgarden made the pass on last year's winner, he takes home his first Indy 500. TheBlueSkyClub (talk) 20:34, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Oppose after looking at the article. No details on the actual race itself (which is understandable, since the 500 just wrapped up.), so probably unfair to review it now, though. TheBlueSkyClub (talk) 20:36, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    We have a summary now, so I'm swinging my vote to Support as the nominator. TheBlueSkyClub (talk) 20:12, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support now that we have a race summary. It's a major sporting event that should be put there if Brooks Koepka winning the PGA championship is there. I would recommend putting "107th Indianapolis 500" in the blurb because it's formally referred to that way. Tableguy28 (talk) 22:12, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Agree with adding "107th" to the blurb. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk)  03:36, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Posted) 2023 Turkish presidential election[edit]

Proposed image
Article: 2023 Turkish presidential election (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Recep Tayyip Erdoğan is reelected President of Turkey in a run-off election, while the People's Alliance retained a majority in the Grand National Assembly. (Post)
News source(s): Al Jazeera
Credits:

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

 elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 17:03, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Oppose for now Article hasn't been updated yet; the final results (let alone any prose) are missing. Schwede66 18:30, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Conditional support Some prose should be added to the section "Results". Once done, it's good to go. Schwede66 19:52, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose for now Several cn tags, no prose in the Results section, the Aftermath section should be expanded too. --Vacant0 (talk) 20:45, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Still oppose the Aftermath section has been slightly expanded, which is good, but there is still no prose in the Results section, and the two cn tags and one clarification needed tags are still present. Vacant0 (talk) 08:57, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose blurb as written—The fact that he won in a run-off election, and that the People's Alliance retained their parliamentary majority, are important details that should also be mentioned. Kurtis (talk) 00:48, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I support the new blurb. 👍🏻 I think the article is serviceable enough for the main page. Kurtis (talk) 07:32, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose on quality for now Lots of tables with little prose as of now. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 03:03, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Article has been improved and updated.Randam (talk) 04:29, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose for now Quality still isn't great, especially the "Reactions" section, most of which is just an unreadable one-paragraph list of people having congratulated Erdogan. Chaotic Enby (talk) 05:35, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support the "Reactions" is now much better and once the results is 100% the page is ready. Shadow4dark (talk) 17:28, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Maybe add that he defeated the united opposition candidate Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu. Kirill C1 (talk) 18:28, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No. In a run-off, the opposition is always united, and we never post losers in presudential elections.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:28, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support after improvements and as a common topic. --NoonIcarus (talk) 23:17, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support once the orange tag in the "Second round" section is resolved (though I do doubt if it is even needed). DecafPotato (talk) 07:39, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support this should have been added already.
DigitalDasein (talk) 09:24, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Support It's been days since the official results were released. GodzillamanRor (talk) 06:52, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oppose I think it's too late to add it now. RobinZwaard (talk) 13:45, 31 May 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:A455:D07B:1:44C0:F60C:B24A:5592 (talk) Reply[reply]
Support Important election in a G20 state and looks comprehensive and good quality — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.248.15.100 (talk) 00:44, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comac C919[edit]

Proposed image
Article: Comac C919 (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ The Comac C919, China's first domestically-built passenger jet, completed its first commercial flight from Shanghai to Beijing by China Eastern Airlines. (Post)
News source(s): https://apnews.com/article/china-comac-c919-first-commercial-flight-6c2208ac5f1ed13e18a5b311f4d8e1ad
Credits:

Nominator's comments: First commercial flight of a new airliner model N509FZ (talk) 14:01, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Support Very long and detailed article. It could do with a copy edit for tense. I count five "citation needed" and two "needs update" tags. Overall, it's good enough to go to the Main Page, though. Schwede66 18:12, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Update: I've deal with a number of the "citation needed" by either removing the uncited content or by adding a reference. I count one remaining cn tag. Schwede66 19:04, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support A maiden flight of a brand new commercial airplane, in keeping with the same consensus that we apply to orbital space flights. We've posted similar instances of Boeing aircraft firsts and lasts. ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 20:36, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose. Are we going to do this for every country? Good for China, but what exactly is the broader significance of this? DarkSide830 (talk) 21:03, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    It's a competitor to the Boeing/Airbus airplane manufacturing monopoly. It'd be akin to a new big tech company being built in direct competition to Google and Facebook. ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 22:51, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    And assuming proper competition will be achieved is CRYSTAL in my estimation. For example, I could start the nest Facebook or Google today, but it's most likely my company won't even merit an article in the near future, much less merit ITN consideration. DarkSide830 (talk) 00:35, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    The difference is that news agencies are taking the time to report on this. This being in the news hints that this is being considered a genuine competitor to the two aforementioned airline agencies, especially with all of the financial and technological horsepower that China and COMAC possess. Crystal ball or not, clearly someone out there thinks it's newsworthy. ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 01:39, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Comac is supposed to be the Chinese competitor of Boeing and Airbus, and it clearly has potential because it comes from the second country with most air passengers. Just for comparison, we posted Boeing 787's maiden flight in December 2009, so it's not uncommon to post such events.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 21:18, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose per DarkSide830. No broader significance. --Kacamata! Dimmi!!! 21:20, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support per Kiril. One of the few states with the economic infrastructure to realistically compete with commercial transport giants such as Boeing/Airbus/UAC. The Kip (talk) 21:42, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Support - could be a harbinger for competition with Boeing and Airbus. - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 22:27, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Comment I'm not opposed to the idea, I think this is noteworthy of being on the front page. The being said, the article has at least 5 Citation Needed prompts. I know the guidelines page said 1 or 2 shouldn't hold an article up, but as this a bit more than just 2 is that fine? CaptainGalaxy 23:50, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Support - It helps emphasizes the importance of the flight of the airline. Rager7 (talk) 00:26, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oppose. This is just another product. No further significance. And personally, for me the significance is reduced further as it was likely manufactured with the help of industrial espionage and IP theft. --Ouro (blah blah) 03:15, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Without commenting on the notability of the maiden flight itself, I don't think espionage and theft mitigate the significance of an event in any way—they might even bolster it. For instance, let's say Venezuela managed to successfully detonate a nuclear weapon, but the only reason they were able to do so is because they used spies in another nuclear-armed state to procure everything they needed. Would we use that information to disqualify Venezuela's nuke from the main page? Kurtis (talk) 08:06, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No, but bear in mind that nuclear arms (and their detonations) are quite a different league than airplanes. Such a case as You described would qualify for ITN either way. --Ouro (blah blah) 09:11, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose Per DarkSide830, this has no significance, it is not ITN-worthy, and, if we do this for every product there is, we'd be having a completely messed up ITN. Editor 5426387 (talk) 03:55, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose This doesn't seem significant. IMO, posting this when less significant stories are rejected would seem like an ad for this jet. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 05:06, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose I'm not seeing the significance. If it was supersonic or had some radical new technology I would support it but from my understanding it is neither of those things.
Aure entuluva (talk) 06:45, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose. Per DarkSide830. Sure it may be a flight on new plane, but its not quite notable for ITN. 🛧Layah50♪🛪 ( 話す? 一緒に飛ぼう！) 08:59, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Weak oppose I can't remember if we posted any of the Boeing maiden passenger flights, but there is something to be said about novel aspects of new technology in planes (like more electric planes, biofuel planes, etc.) The C219 may be a novel design of China here, but its using a collection of existing technology and nothing new in of itself. --Masem (t) 16:25, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Yes. December 2009 as commented on above. Schwede66 19:48, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I think it can be a trap to focus on new technology over the simple reality of a new big piece of traditional infrastructure. It is probably "less WP:crystal" for us to feature a conventional addition to the landscape, and these huge planes are still mighty impressive, as the article hopefully conveys. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 13:47, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    The other thing to take into consideration too is that if it ends up being cheaper to build these planes than any of the Boeing/Airbus equivalents, then that subsequently makes it cheaper to sell on to airline companies. No matter how much people hold their nose when it comes to doing business with China, especially under the current sanction-heavy environment, no one is going to say no to cheaper products in the long run. And yes, of course all of this is WP:CRYSTAL, but it's reflective of a common trend in the Chinese industry from top to bottom. Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 13:53, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Notable flight of the first Chinese domestically designed plane that competes on the same market as Boeing and Airbus. Yxuibs (talk) 20:26, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose. No evidence of long-term significance or potential to be competitor to Airbus/Boeing. Right now, no major airline outside of China has ordered this new model. StellarHalo (talk) 05:06, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Per BBC: Comac - which plans to produce 150 planes annually in five years' time - says it has already secured more than 1,200 orders for the C919. Take that with the disclaimer, however, of Some experts, however, say that most of these orders are believed to be letters of intent from domestic customers. Who to believe? Who konws? This is the post-information age. Cheers, ⛵ WaltClipper -(talk) 13:37, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support - a significant development in the aviation industry that's in the news. Shaheen of Iqbal (talk) 06:09, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support - Important news for aviation industry，a new challenger has emerged to challenge Boeing and Airbus. --Yzf99 10:06, 30 May 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yzf99 (talk • contribs)
  • Support – Appropriate feature for ITN. Article looks pretty solid and detailed; seems like a fine article to promote. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 13:43, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose China, the world's largest manufacturer, manufactures another product. There would be loads of opposes if for example Tuvalu produced their first ever motorbike for example, I don't see how this would be any different other than its much less surprising given China produces nearly every type of other engineering equipment known to man. Abcmaxx (talk) 14:05, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Posted) RD: Antonio Gala[edit]

Article: Antonio Gala (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): El País
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Spanish writer. Life and career section needs more citations. Alexcalamaro (talk) 20:48, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Support - I've cited much of the article and removed the statement regarding him being part of a Hispano-Soviet friendship group (cited to a now dead Wikispaces page in the past) and the sweeping statement that he was president of the ITI that was recently added without any sources (and has unfortunately already begun to be featured prominently in news coverage of his death, so more reason why we should pay extra care to our articles on Wikipedia as the ones carrying the burden of knowledge in the internet age). @Fakescientist8000 - Knightoftheswords281 (Talk · Contribs) 05:46, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Conditional support – I've placed a couple of {{cn}} tags that will have to be resolved before this can be posted. Schwede66 02:29, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Looks good now. --Vacant0 (talk) 12:45, 3 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Posted. DatGuyTalkContribs 13:07, 3 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

2023 IIHF World Championship[edit]

Article: 2023 IIHF World Championship (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In ice hockey, Canada won gold in the IIHF World Championship, while Latvia won bronze, their first ice hockey world championship medal. (Post)
News source(s): https://www.reuters.com/sports/ice-hockey-canada-defeat-germany-win-world-championship-gold-2023-05-28/
Credits:

 Gustamons (talk) 14:58, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As per the usual, a lot of trees are sad since there too many tables vs. prose. Also, the playoff bracket is wonky; Canada is on the lower half of the bracket from the semis onward, but is on the top-half of the bracket in the final? Howard the Duck (talk) 15:09, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose per the typical sports article reason: too little prose, too many tables. Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 22:57, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

May 27[edit]

May 27, 2023 (2023-05-27) (Saturday)

Armed conflicts and attacks

Disasters and accidents

Health and environment

Law and crime

Politics and elections

(Posted) RD: Mordechai Rechtman[edit]

Article: Mordechai Rechtman (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): slippedisc
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Legendary Israeli bassoonist, Israel Philharmonic Orchestra 1946 to 1991, which is from its foundation, and he played for the declaration of independence. Great also as arranger for his instrument, founder and conductor of wind ensembles, and professor internationally. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:28, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Support. Long enough, well cited, has been updated with death. There are a lot of subheadings relative to the small amount of content, but that's a minor issue. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 23:18, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support It’s long enough & it has enough references. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 05:40, 3 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Posted—Bagumba (talk) 11:47, 3 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

RD: George Maharis[edit]

Article: George Maharis (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Hollywood Reporter
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: American actor. Died on May 24, but his death was reported on May 27. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 12:01, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Sourcing needed in the Filmography and Discography sections, please. --PFHLai (talk) 12:45, 1 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Attention needed) RD: Odette Nilès[edit]

Article: Odette Nilès (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): Le Monde, La Depeche (both in French)
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: French anti-fascist militant and communist. A bit short, but it covers the major details and it's well enough over the stub limit at 2kb readable prose. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 15:37, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Oppose Article is too short (and yes, I'm aware it's not a stub technically, but look at this and tell me it isn't a practical stub.) Cheers, atque supra! Fakescientist8000 22:58, 30 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support It seems like it’s long enough & it’s well-referenced. Blaylockjam10 (talk) 18:33, 3 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

2023 Astore avalanche[edit]

Consensus exists that this isn't worthy for ITN. Schwede66 19:19, 31 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

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


Article: 2023 Astore avalanche (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ At least 11 people were killed and 13 injured in an avalanche in Astore District of Gilgit-Baltistan, Pakistan. (Post)
News source(s): Al Jazeera, Reuters, BBC, Fox 9, Gulf News
Credits:
 Ainty Painty (talk) 09:08, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support Seems like a decently notable tragedy that should be featured. QuicoleJR (talk) 15:46, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Actually, the article looks pretty bad. Oppose on quality. QuicoleJR (talk) 15:48, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose as a non-notable event. Ainty Painty, I encourage to become more familiar with WP:GNG and WP:NEVENTS before creating further articles. Many of your run of the mill events articles have been deleted or draftified shortly after creation, and you've received (now-removed) warnings about this on your talk page. An event should not have an article unless it has encyclopedic significance. Simple WP:PRIMARYNEWS reporting does not meet GNG, and people dying does not meet NEVENTS. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 19:01, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose per Thebiguglyalien. The Kip (talk) 19:31, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose on article quality. Take out the reactions and it's a stub. -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:08, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose, Tragic, but not notable. Alex-h (talk) 15:53, 29 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

RD: James Hartle[edit]

Article: James Hartle (talk · history · tag)
Recent deaths nomination (Post)
News source(s): UCSB
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.

 Count Iblis (talk) 01:38, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Twitter is not a reliable source. – Muboshgu (talk) 02:36, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Uh, I think the article has been updated, because according to the article, he's apparently still alive. Also, like User:Muboshgu said, Twitter is not a reliable source. For more information regarding reliable & unreliable sources, see WP:USERG and WP:RS. TwistedAxe [contact] 10:40, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • I have reopened the nomination. His obituary has been published by UCSB: [12]. Thriley (talk) 01:08, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oppose Somebody will have to tidy up the article and provide decent referencing if this is supposed to go anywhere. Schwede66 02:25, 2 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Cannes/Palme d'Or[edit]

Articles: Palme d'Or (talk · history · tag) and 2023 Cannes Film Festival (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ Anatomy of a Fall, directed by Justine Triet, wins the Palme d'Or at the Cannes Film Festival. (Post)
News source(s): AP NEWS
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: The film's article could use expansion (longer plot summary, reviews in the "Reception" section, more details on production...) Mooonswimmer 19:34, 27 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

FC Bayern Munich wins Bundesliga[edit]

Article: 2022–23 Bundesliga (talk · history · tag)
Blurb: ​ In association football, FC Bayern Munich win the Bundesliga. (Post)
News source(s): Reuters, RTÉ
Credits:

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

Nominator's comments: Bayern win on the last match day after Dortmund let the title slip with a draw against Mainz.  Bait30  Talk 2 me pls? 18:08, 27 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Oppose Stub with only prose in the lead. Otherwise, all tables.—Bagumba (talk) 18:13, 27 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support once more prose regarding the course of the season is added. This year, it's never been so close in such a long time with the champion last being decided via goal difference over 20 years ago. Also, if we have blurbed the Prem, then this BL season is much more blurb-worthy as many decisions (Championship, Europe & relegation) fell on the last matchday. - CDE34RFV (talk) 19:05, 27 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @CDE34RFV: As this item is already a regular at WP:ITNR to be posted, the only relevant concern at this point is the page's quality. Regards. —Bagumba (talk) 19:27, 27 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Added season summary. Might need some citations, but at least we got some more text. - CDE34RFV (talk) 20:32, 27 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    We haven't even blurbed the Premier League yet. It seems it was decided to leave it until the whole season was finished, despite the fact that it was agreed in previous years that the time to blurb was when the title was won. It's old news now of course. Effy Midwinter (talk) 22:31, 28 May 2023 (UTC)<