This page is an archive and its contents should be preserved in their current form;
any comments regarding this page should be directed to Wikipedia talk:In the news. Thanks.
Flash flooding and landslides caused by torrential rains kill at least 19 people and leave hundreds more homeless in the Brazilian state of São Paulo. This brings the total death toll from flooding in the country to more than 50 people since the start of the wet season. (BBC News)
Russia reports a record for the 11th consecutive day of 124,070 new COVID-19 cases, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 11.86 million. (Interfax)
South Africa scraps the mandatory self-quarantine period for asymptomatic COVID-19 cases and cuts the mandatory self-quarantine period for symptomatic patients to seven days because 60% to 80% of its population now had COVID-19. (Bloomberg)
The Malianmilitary junta orders the Frenchambassador to leave the country within 72 hours in response to "outrageous comments" made by the French authorities about Mali's transitional government. (France 24)
Gregory and Travis McMichael, two of the three people convicted of murdering Ahmaud Arbery, have reached plea agreements with federal prosecutors on hate crimes charges. However, U.S. District Court Judge Lisa Godbey Wood rejects the plea deal. (NPR)(AP)
Article needs updating Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: French business executive. Obituaries should hopefully be appearing in English sources soon. Article needs some work and investment of time. Ktin (talk) 19:55, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
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.
Wait it's been all of 5 minutes since it was announced that the report had been released. No details of the report have yet been given. Unless there's a significant impact like it causes the PM to resign, then don't think this is ITN-worthy. Certainly too soon to be guessing the impact of this report. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:32, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wait. We don't know what it says yet, and it is not the complete report as the police requested some information be held back as to not affect their investigation. 331dot (talk) 14:40, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: The "report" is here. Am struggling to see one single fact that wasn't previously fully known in the public domain. And the startling "conclusion": "There is significant learning to be drawn from these events which must be addressed immediately across Government. This does not need to wait for the police investigations to be concluded." Wow, I bet Boris is busy packing his bags even as we speak. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:47, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
She is extremely limited in what I can say about those events and it is not possible at present to provide a meaningful report setting out and analysing the extensive factual information I have been able to gather. Wow what a political bombshell.-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 16:22, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose unless Johnson is forced from office over it. At the moment this is a minor political scandal and we don't usually do domestic politics. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:26, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This isn't the actual, full report and it hasn't actually led to any tangible changes (i.e. Boris resigning, which would be the event which merits a blurb).--Sunshineisles2 (talk) 15:57, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wait it's a rapidly developing story, and not as minor as some make it out to be. Would "Watergate" make it onto here? Yes. Would any major scandal involving the leader and most if not all of any country's cabinet make it? Yes. Pandemic restrictions and government handling a global issue? Certainly. Abcmaxx (talk) 15:58, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Watergate was a full on crime and coverup that resulted in the resignation of the president and the convictions and jail sentences of many of his top people, so apples and oranges aside from the -gate suffix. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:30, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I do not think we should be downplaying the importance and scale of corruption and severity of callousness just because that is what those accused are doing, waiting for ever more investigations. That is exactly what is happening and we should be impartial and not falling for this line of defence; "not a full report", "still police matter", "no-one resigned" are irrelevant to the issue at hand. Abcmaxx (talk) 16:23, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"not a full report", "still police matter", "no-one resigned" are irrelevant to the issue at hand. These are exactly the measures of importance that we use for ITN. The fact that a 12 page report has been published which tells people basically nothing, and the impact of which is currently low is exactly the reason why this shouldn't be posted now. If there is an important fallout/consequences from this, then and only then should this be posted. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:35, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for now. This is a big scandal, but the report says, in effect, 'I can't report anything because the police are investigating'. If/when Johnson resigns we should post a blurb, not yet. Modest Geniustalk16:52, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Article updated 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: With 98% votes counted counted, its been confirmed that PS will receive the most seats, PS has celebrated the results [4], Costa has been congratulated by several leaders such as the Spanish PM [5] and most importantly RS has declared it a victory for the Socialist Party which makes it a suitable nomination. [6], [7] So far the article has looked promising and in good shape. BastianMAT (talk) 00:10, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The tables need to be updated with results and there should be a Reactions or Aftermath section, otherwise this is ITNR. --Tone08:39, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Not ready. The results tables lists every party as 0%, there's no prose on the outcome, reactions to the unexpected majority etc. Needs work before it can be posted. Modest Geniustalk11:59, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I've added the reaction of every party leader to the aftermath section. Given as the Socialists have a majority, there won't be any coalition negotiations like in the German election, so that's about all unless there are any more resignations. Unknown Temptation (talk) 15:55, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose/pull on quality. There is actually no prose on the policies/campaigning/analysis. Only information on voting procedures and rewording voting stats Bumbubookworm (talk) 21:51, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support - I think the quality is OK. There could be a bit more on campaigning, certainly, but the basics are there and there is a prose summary of the results and reactions, which sometimes these things lack. — Amakuru (talk) 22:20, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Russia reports a record for the tenth consecutive day of 121,288 new COVID-19 cases, bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 11.37 million. (Euronews)
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Legendary Soviet and Russian actor. Lead roles in top-grossing films. Appeared in adaptations of classic works of Pushkin, Ilf and Petrov, Defoe. It seems he was in most, if not all, famous Soviet films. Kirill C1 (talk) 09:23, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Indian former Member of Parliament. Article requires some work before it is ready for homepage / RD. Edits done. Article is a reasonable C-class biography. Ktin (talk) 03:17, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I'm not too familiar with the subject, but is his work with the Aavin milk cooperative part of what he did as a member of the Third Lok Sabha? If not, article needs more info about what he did as a member of the Third Lok Sabha. SpencerT•C18:08, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Not ready. There is no prose on the actual sport - just a table of winners. The article spends more time talking about Djokovic's vaccination status than it does about the tennis. The individual articles on the men's and women's singles don't have any prose either. Modest Geniustalk12:02, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
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: One of the few women in that generation of British comedy, her "John and Mary" sketches with Cleese would always crack me up. There don't seem to be any mainstream obituaries yet but I expect that the BBC will wake up soon. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:40, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Russia reports a record for the ninth consecutive day of 113,122 new COVID-19 cases, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 1.61 million. (The Moscow Times)
South Korea reports a record for the fourth consecutive day of 17,542 new COVID-19 cases, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 811,122. (The Korea Herald)
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Indian horse trainer. Article require some work before it can be ready for homepage. I will work on it. If someone wants to lend a hand, jump right-in. Edits done. Article is a reasonable C-class biography. Meets hygiene expectations for homepage / RD. Ktin (talk) 20:43, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: "Later, his father, Rustomji Byramji, would take up training the horses" seems a little out of place as written; once sentence is re-written to clarify what this means (or removed), support. SpencerT•C04:26, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Obviously long enough with 1026 words of readable prose. Formatting looks fine. There seems to be enough footnotes across the prose. This wikibio is READY for RD. --PFHLai (talk) 04:34, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Not Ready Referencing is quite poor and will need some work before this can be posted. Not bothering with CN tags. There would be too many. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:14, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I had seriously considered nominating this myself. Fortunately, as the article itself shows, he was a prolific actor and performer. Unfortunately, lack of sourcing is a problem. I've been through this many times before at ITN; been there and done that. It is one of the perverse results at ITN. I expect there will be a lot of hits on this article, without Wikipedia main page exposure. In any event, a great source is the Barnes, Mike (January 30, 2022). "Howard Hesseman, Dr. Johnny Fever on 'WKRP in Cincinnati,' Dies at 81". The Hollywood Reporter. Retrieved January 30, 2022. ... “Howard Hesseman, who made a career out of portraying off-the-wall characters, none more popular than the disc jockey Johnny Fever on the sitcom WKRP in Cincinn...” That source can fill in at least some of the blanks. I missed that it had been updated at the article. I will fix the citation. 7&6=thirteen (☎)20:55, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Nominator's comments: I think this should be posted until after the storm has ran its course, but I think it's significant due the disruptions it caused. Interstellarity (talk) 21:40, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Barring any serious death toll, it is the middle of winter, blizzard in the NE are common place and losing power during them is a first-world problem. --Masem (t) 21:51, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The article has not been updated sufficiently; it is mostly written in anticipation of the storm. Also I got a few inches of snow but didn't lose power, so not much of an impact. Pawnkingthree (talk) 21:55, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for now Here we go again...Can't anyone take a look at what positions there are around here on nominations related to natural disasters before nominating them? If a storm doesn't cause a substantial number of fatalities, it's not ITN-worthy no matter where it happens. And no matter how many thousands don't have electricity...it's a blizzard and these things happen. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 22:02, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose More people died in a storm in the UK today. A different storm in the UK earlier this season cut the power to Scotland and northern England for days. Even the UK and they're not being nominated. Because winter storms be winter storms. Kingsif (talk) 22:34, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wait Article quality is not good enough to post. When we get more updates on damages, casualties, etc., and the article is updated appropriately, I'll reassess. – Muboshgu (talk) 23:52, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wait per Muboshgu but leaning oppose. This will have to turn into something a lot bigger than it is currently looking for me to support. Winter storms happen in winter. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:32, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – Quite the storm all right, with much photo & vid coverage, but now it's down to staying warm and digging out. Unaware of any reported fatalities yet. [13][14][15] – Sca (talk) 13:18, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
No official announcement has yet been made; nomination can be re-opened if confirmed (or renominated if occurs in the future). SpencerT•C03:47, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Nominator's comments: I am aware this will be controversial. However, we have posted the retirements of top sportspeople before, Alex Ferguson and Sachin Tendulkar, when they are generally considered to be the best in the sport. I think Brady qualifies. I haven't specifed his current team(Tampa Bay Buccaneers) as most of his career was with the New England Patriots, but have no problem with doing so, or other blurb changes. 331dot (talk) 20:19, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I'm aware this nomination thread will become a calamity due to it being a U.S.-centric item and the NFL to boot. But there are few sportsmen who can legitimately place themselves in the ranks of "greatest of all time", no matter what the sport, unlike Tom Brady.--WaltCip-(talk)20:21, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose At least with Ferguson and Tendulkar, we're talking international sport and play, so there's a bar of comparison across the globe. With gridiron football, its very limited, and many will argue if Brady is the best of all time there (compared to others like Joe Montana, etc.). --
There's no longer any real comparison between Brady and Montana or any other QB. Montana was the most important player on 4 Super Bowl-winning teams. Brady was the most important player on 7, with 3 other teams that went to the Super Bowl. Brady essentially had a second Hall of Fame career after the age of 38 when Montana retired. It could be argued that Montana faced more restrictive rules and defenses than Brady did, but Brady also accomplished his 7 titles in a league with a salary cap, free agency, and more overall parity than Montana dealt with. There really isn't any serious argument against Brady being the best ever to play the game. 65.24.244.191 (talk) 23:17, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"Please do not oppose an item 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 unproductive." 331dot (talk) 20:59, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I was referring to the lack of competition in the sport and therefore the lack of justification for posting a retirement, but thanks for admitting that this is a one-country sport. Your extreme parochialism is well-known Bumbubookworm (talk) 21:20, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Bumbubookworm What exactly does that mean? I make great effort to set aside my personal biases and support nominations irrespective of where they are from. Who exactly am I "well known" among? I take offense at your comment. 331dot (talk) 21:50, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If the level of competition is so high in cricket then why is the best player a batsman 67% better than anyone else? That doesn't usually happen in the most competitive sports. Why is it that some from countries of parochial population and acreage think sub-international always means "lack of competition"? It's the most popular sport in a country of a third of a billion people and $22 trillion GDP (almost as big as the Eurozone). The country is also the size of Europe. While full UN members can of course be the population and GDP of a small town, some are. Borders are just an accident of history. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 03:04, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ad Orientem That is demonstratably not correct, that we "do not do retirements". We have, and do. They are rare- and should be- but if retiring after winning seven Super Bowls over a 22 year career(Brady was the last active player drafted in 2000) doesn't merit posting, what does? 331dot (talk) 21:52, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support - (edit conflict) I've never only commented here once before :P, but it seems that the discussion is for Brady's retirement would be ITN, not how great he was. He is good enough to be news worthy on this point. Just my 2¢ - FlightTime (open channel)21:31, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The opposition to the inclusion of sporting news in ITN is rather bizarre; it's definitely in the news, and I don't see why sports are any less newsworthy than other sorts of news. The event would clearly be newsworthy and the article on Brady is good. I'm opposing because Brady hasn't actually announced his retirement, per USA Today <https://touchdownwire.usatoday.com/lists/tom-brady-retiring-adam-schefter-report/> and the Associated Press <https://chicago.suntimes.com/2022/1/29/22908080/tom-brady-retirement>. The frequent denials of the ESPN reporting seem to be indicative that this is premature. However, I would strongly support this when Brady actually announces his retirement (whether it be this year or next). — Mhawk10 (talk) 22:55, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
WaltCip, have you ever read Template:Trout? Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know you did something silly. And no, it was not reliable reporting, otherwise it would have been accurate. This ESPN piece that I'm surprised is still up says sources say and sources told ESPN. As discussed in the essay I linked, that's not corroboration. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:09, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
(Posted) Sergio Mattarella re-elected President of Italy
Nominator's comments: Election of a head of state. Also, the re-election of an Italian president is considered to be an exceptional event in Italian politics. Yakme (talk) 19:44, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support as election results were often posted in ITN. As Yakme pointed out, Mattarella got re-elected, with only Giorgio Napolitano achieving that feat before him, so it's quite an exceptional event. Also, this is of relevance both national and international, as Italy is a major power in Europe, but currently is in a political crisis. Therefore, the President, although in a mainly ceremonial role, has a lot of influence in serving as a mediator of unity in a politically divided country/society. - CDE34RFV (talk) 21:35, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per CDE34RFV. Re-election is rare in Italy, with the seven-year term usually being a lifetime achievement award for the most experienced judges and politicians. It is even more unusual as Mattarella was counting himself out until a few hours ago. Unknown Temptation (talk) 21:58, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I'm not opposing this but it seems less significant to me because the President of Italy is not chosen by popular vote, but from a meeting of parliament and regional officials. 331dot (talk) 22:00, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Point taken, although the US President is chosen by people specifically selected for that purpose and are bound by popular vote to choose a particular candidate; the US President is not chosen by Congress and state governors. 331dot (talk) 07:47, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. A country electing its head of state is noteworthy enough for this. The President has real power over the Italian armed forces and is not purely ceremonial. — Mhawk10 (talk) 22:58, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support As much RS coverage has remarked, the President of Italy is far more than just ceremonial in practice, particularly with the current state of Italian politics. Wizardoftheyear (talk) 03:11, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose powerless figurehead, elected by representatives from the national assembly not a popular vote. Utterly irrelevant. The Prime Minister of Italy wields actual authority. A country electing its "head of state" is not especailly noteworthy when that title is honorific and I don't understand how that argument keeps surfacing. If WP:ITNC is not a simple !vote count, there is no reason for this to be posted. --LaserLegs (talk) 03:13, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Posting. As indicated above, in this case, the president is not purely ceremonial, and the article is extensive. --Tone07:28, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Role is largely ceremonial, even if it does have a few vestigial powers. Doesn't reach reach the threshold for ITN/R, and could open the floodgates for two postings per country in other cases too, which would be excessive. — Amakuru (talk) 07:39, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
As a side note, the nomination has not been treated as ITNR, but as a regular nomination that saw sufficient support to post. --Tone10:13, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose except it didn't have sufficient support by any reasonable measure, especially to post so quickly and in contradiction to established precedent. GreatCaesarsGhost16:06, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Except that when it got posted it had 5 Supports to 2 Opposes (more than a 2 to 1 supermajority) after 11 hours 44 minutes, which seems fairly reasonable to me. But I strongly agree that it should be viewed as basically a ceremonial post. Most ceremonial heads of state are nominally heads of the armed forces and have some sort of role to play in a hung parliament, so treating this post as non-ceremonial, as arguably unnecessarily stated by the poster, may possibly risk undermining the hard-won recently established new consensus on ITNR in this area (a consensus with which I now strongly agree, even though I had little to do with it, apart perhaps from unexpectedly and arguably regrettably succeeding with an ITNR nom that should arguably have failed on quality grounds and that perhaps annoyed enough people to help bring about the ITNR change ). Of course being ceremonial need not bar it from being posted if it has enough support, but how ceremonial it is or isn't should arguably be a question solely for supporters and opponents and, at least in future, should arguably not be cited by the posting admin as a reason for posting. Tlhslobus (talk) 16:48, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Post-posting Support because I personally think we should usually (subject to quality, etc) have 2 postings for 'important' countries (provisionally defined as population of 50 million or more) that have separate heads of state and government. I am strongly opposed to the notion that we should, for instance, not post changes in the President of India or the Queen of England or the Emperor of Japan simply because some people fear that might also allow two postings for lots of small countries (including my own, Ireland). If we don't post the Italian ceremonial head of state, that risks lots of anti-British editors using that as justification for trying to block the new monarch of England/of the United Kingdom (perhaps especially if the Queen changes her mind and decides to retire rather than die in office), which might result in some undesirable editor and reader retention problems, etc. Similar editor and reader retention problems may arise if we fail to post a change in the President of India, etc... Of course if and when we do end up with too many postings this will tend to be self-fixing as long as these postings are not forced on us by ITNR (as they won't be, given our (fairly) new ITNR criteria). Tlhslobus (talk) 17:40, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
New Normal? Does this now open us up to posting Presidents and Prime Ministers of most countries? E.g. India. I am alright with that, but, we should codify it if that is the expectation. Thanks. Ktin (talk) 18:48, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It makes very little sense to me, and I'm not quite sure why this one was posted, given what we have and haven't posted in the past. We should at least have some sort of convention on this, rather than relying on whoever turns up and happens to WP:ILIKEIT or WP:IDONTLIKEIT on the night... — Amakuru (talk) 21:42, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The whole reason we setlled on the green shaded cell for List of current heads of state and government was to end the endless back and forth regarding ITN/R. It doesn't stop someone from nominating a powerless figurehead appointed outside the popular vote as was the case here. If you want to try to codify the practice WT:ITN is the place to do it. IMO there may be cases where these kinds of stories are noteworthy but this wasn't one of them. --LaserLegs (talk) 22:19, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
In practice any codification is probably going to have to include the British monarch, and the least harmful/'least racist' way to do that seems to be to say 'countries with population over 50 million'. Or does anybody have a less unacceptable criterion (although this is probably the wrong forum for this discussion)? Tlhslobus (talk) 12:02, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
South Korea reports a record for the third consecutive day of 16,096 new COVID-19 cases, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 793,582. (Yonhap News Agency)
Brazil reports a record for the third consecutive day of 228,954 new COVID-19 cases, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 24.7 million. (Business Standard)
Chile reports a record 26,727 new COVID-19 cases in the past 24 hours, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 2.075 million. (Xinhua News Agency)
Russia reports a record for the eighth consecutive day of 98,040 new COVID-19 cases, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 11.5 million. (ABC News)
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Long enough (500+ words of readable prose), with enough footnotes placed in expected spots, and the formatting looks fine. This wikibio is READY for RD. --PFHLai (talk) 19:15, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Not ready Still a stub with 776 characters of readable prose. Discography section still unreferenced. Please expand and add REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 00:09, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Jordanian troops kill 27 "armed smugglers" after they tried to cross the border from Syria with a large quantity of amphetamines. Several other smugglers, who were "supported by other armed groups", were wounded, according to a statement from the military. (Reuters)
Two civilians are killed while 21 more people are wounded near the border between Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan after troops from both countries engage in a battle. (Al Jazeera)
Germany reports a record for the second consecutive day of 203,136 new COVID-19 cases, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 9.2 million. (Anadolu Agency)
Russia reports a record for the seventh consecutive day of 88,816 new COVID-19 cases, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 11,404,617. (Azeri Press Agency)
Brazil reports a record for the second consecutive day of 228,954 new COVID-19 cases, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 24.7 million. (Business Standard)
South Korea reports a record for the third consecutive day of 14,518 new COVID-19 cases, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 777,497. (Asian News International)
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
I created the article for the 16th person in the position after Bach in 2010. Some refs were missing, dead or unreliable, but Grimes2 did a great job, including adding content. We recently added the article for the 18th successor. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:31, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
A little short but still long enough (>400 words), formatting looks fine and there are enough footnotes across the prose, this wikibio is READY for RD. AGF'd all non-English sources. --PFHLai (talk) 07:43, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Swedish American pathologist. Discovered tissues containing traces of the 1918 influenza virus from graves in Alaskan permafrost. Thriley (talk) 07:10, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Indian hockey captain. Article is currently a stub and needs to be expanded. Edits done. Article is a reasonable C-class biography and is good to go to the homepage / RD. Ktin (talk) 05:57, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
U.S. Secretary of StateAntony Blinken announces that the United States has given a written response to Russia, aimed at the de-escalation of tensions between Ukraine and Russia. The response, coordinated with European allies and Ukraine, addresses Russia's demands and actions. (CNN)
The Malian junta demands that Denmark withdraw its forces from the country, saying they were never given authorization to participate in the ongoing European-led peacekeeping operations. (AP)
Hungary reports a record 20,174 new COVID-19 cases in the past 24 hours, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 1,471,276. (Daily News Hungary)
Poland reports a record 53,420 new COVID-19 cases in the past 24 hours, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 4,637,776. (Polskie Radio)
Russia reports a record for the sixth consecutive day of 74,692 new COVID-19 cases, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 11.3 million. (The Moscow Times)
South Korea reports a record for the second consecutive day of 13,102 new COVID-19 cases, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 762,983. (The Korea Herald)
Brazil reports a record 224,567 new COVID-19 cases in the past 24 hours, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 24.5 million. (Reuters)
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
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: Inventor of Shabbat elevator, passed away at 100 years of age. 800+ words of readable prose, with at least 2 footnotes/paragraph. It would be great if someone familiar with Shabbat and engineering to review the contents of this wikibio, as I am clueless if the appropriate vocabulary is in use. Thanks. --PFHLai (talk) 16:26, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
PFHLai, I'm not an engineer, but I am Jewish and attended a synagogue with a Shabbat elevator. We're not allowed to "create a spark" on Shabbat, which is interpreted as a prohibition on using anything electronic, so the elevator is programmed in advance to go one floor at a time, one of our many loopholes we've carved out. Seems he worked on some other loopholes I didn't know about too. Jewish terminology is sensible to me. Any particular questions? – Muboshgu (talk) 17:19, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Muboshgu. I don't have any specific questions. I was concerned that there may be some religiously/culturally inappropriate materials that need to be dealt with before the link goes on ITN. I am glad that things are "sensible". Thanks, again. --PFHLai (talk) 17:41, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Seems to meet the criteria. The Shabbat elevator, which Bannet invented, really is a "thing" in the Jewish world, with special importance for hospitals and such.--Geewhiz (talk) 16:28, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Article needs updating Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Oppose on quality (support on notability tho) – Article needs at least some expansion over the two sentences in the lead and impact section at present. Met hist is also incomplete. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 00:51, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Like others, there is only one sentence about the impact. Would support this if expanded to give a more complete picture of the impact of the storm. --Jayron3218:25, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Millions of people are left without electricity after a major power outage affects Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan. Uzbekistan's energy ministry reports that the power outage had been triggered by an "energy imbalance" in Kazakhstan's power grid. (Al Jazeera)
South Korea reports a record 8,571 new COVID-19 cases in the past 24 hours, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 749,979. (Yonhap News Agency)
Bulgaria reports a record 12,399 new COVID-19 cases in the past 24 hours, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 903,676. (Bulgarian News Agency)
Russia reduces the mandatory isolation period for close-contact COVID-19 patients to seven days amid an unprecedented increase in SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant cases with the country reporting a record for the fifth consecutive day of 67,509 new COVID-19 cases. (AP)
Pfizer and its German partner BioNTech begin a clinical trial to test the safety and immune response of their Omicron-specific COVID-19 vaccine for adults under the age of 55 years. (NPR)
Four victims of a shooting are found dead inside a home in Richmond, British Columbia, Canada. The shooting is believed to have happened the night before, and the victims are believed to have known each other. (CTV News)
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: German church musician and professor, whose music was influenced by jazz, and whose key work premiered in Minneapolis. The article was begun in 2006 by Jerome Kohl, - long live his memory also. Sorry, I was on vacation, and missed a notice in the FAZ printed on 27 Jan. Hope it's not too late for him. - There's Biller open, 27 Jan, successor of JS Bach, - why? If something is missing, tell me. Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:02, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
With 2500 characters (385 words) of readable prose, it's a little short, but still long enough to qualify. Formatting looks fine. There seems to be enough footnotes, though I have to AGF all non-English sources. This wikibio is READY for RD. --PFHLai (talk) 04:16, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
sorry, my fault, it happened when I split the para to insert the pic. I now copied the following ref (Grove) and added another which is online without subscription. Spencer, what's missing for Biller (27 Jan)?? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:10, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Long enough (400+ words), formatting looks fine, and there are enough footnotes across the prose, this wikibio is READY for RD. AGF'd the non-English sources. --PFHLai (talk) 15:25, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Voice actor for Charlie Brown in the early Peanuts TV specials and the first movie. Death announced yesterday. Article is comprehensive and well referenced. –FlyingAce✈hello17:26, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Well sourced. An editor has recently added a statement at the end about Robbins not having married or had children. This may need to be sourced or removed before posting to RD, but it seems good to go once that is dealt with. GaryColemanFan (talk) 03:49, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Two whole sections are tagged for lacking references. That needs to be fixed before I can support posting this to the main page. --Jayron3218:26, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Oppose Entire decades of her biography are missing from the text. We have about 1 sentence of information from 1962, 1975, 1980, 1999, and 2001. That's MASSIVELY incomplete for a person notable enough for a Wikipedia article. Someone needs to expand this with solid references before it is ready for the main page. --Jayron3218:28, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Aye, Ozzy Osbourne has a surname to set him apart. This is Ozzie, the mononym. Don't treat him like a freak just because he wasn't human, I advise. InedibleHulk (talk) 10:48, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
In practice, we've almost never added disambigutors to RD displays, though there's occasional rumblings about doing so for non-primary topics.—Bagumba (talk) 07:30, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: artist in glass from Bavaria who used the material as a means of expression, internationally known - the article was written long ago by a user who left in 2011, many offline sources, the latest refs support the content but many details need to be be believed Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:21, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Question: Is the table of Club statistics complete? Looks a bit too empty. There should be some figures on each row in the totals column, no? --PFHLai (talk) 01:53, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Verifying that it is the total is hard to do as there seems to be little in recording appearances in the KNVB Cup. This website [19] shades its cells in red where the data is incomplete, which is every season except his very last one. Even this Dutch website doesn't track KNVB Cup stats on Jansen at all [20] I don't know if this is a blow against posting the recent death. 2A00:23C5:E187:5F00:AC0D:AEB:53CB:48D1 (talk) 16:53, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
These protests have been ongoing for almost two years now since WHO declared COVID-19 a pandemic in March 2020. There is no indication for any unwanted escalations in support of why this should be posted at this point of time, and these events should probably be discussed on an individual basis in case such indication comes to the surface. Finally, the COVID-19 pandemic, which has been on the main page from the very beginning, provides sufficient coverage of all related events.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:24, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Nominator's comments: There were huge protests in many cities in the world. This is not referenced on any of the main COVID-related Wikipedia pages, nor is there a separate page for this (though there should be). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.67.13.101 (talk) 06:54, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Technically, we already have the covid pandemic ongoing since early 2020. So the main link covers all topics, including vaccines and protests. --Tone08:49, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
A COVID-19 vaccine pass that requires people over the age of 16 years to be fully vaccinated or show proof of recovery in order to enter bars, restaurants, and other public spaces, and to use inter-regional transport takes effect in France. (Euronews)
Russia reports a record for the fourth consecutive day of 65,109 new COVID-19 cases, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 11,173,300. (The Moscow Times)
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 developer. Article needs to be updated. Edits done. Article is a good C-class biography for the homepage / RD. Ktin (talk) 05:35, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Long enough (>600 words), with enough footnotes in expected spots, and formatting looks fine, this wikibio is READY for RD to me. Does Joofjoof or Bagumba want another look? The career section has been slightly expanded in recent edits. --PFHLai (talk) 12:52, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Nominator's comments: Has been making headlines for the past few days, and should be added to the Current events portal, which is shorter than usual today. This seems to be one of the first school shootings in 2022.Dunutubble (talk) 14:34, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose because of the low death toll & because it wasn't motivated by an ideology. However, it's easily notable enough to justify its article & its place on CE. There have been other killings this month which have much higher death tolls & haven't been nominated, let alone posted (although I realise that's because the articles are too short), including Arauca, Dankade, Diyala & Sorong. Jim Michael (talk) 14:58, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
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 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: I am marking this ITNR, but this might be one of those exceptional cases. The probe has reached its destination which is ITNR, but 1) we had posted its launch in Dec, and 2) in 5 months we'd expect to start seeing images from it. So this could be a case of "let's wait those five months", but I'm throwing this out there as a possible ITN. Masem (t) 04:15, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's a spacecraft and it has arrived at its destination, I don't see why it shouldn't be posted now, or why it can't be posted when we get images. Too many postings is not our problem, usually. 331dot (talk) 08:32, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'd prefer posting once it starts collecting data but I don't oppose posting once more at this point, always good to have science stories on ITN. And the telescope is one of the biggest recent science stories. --Tone09:14, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wait This craft doesn't really have a destination as it's designed to keep moving. The complex unfurling and alignment is the real challenge and that's not complete yet. Better to wait until it's operational when we will presumably have its first image to show. See Timeline of the James Webb Space Telescope. Andrew🐉(talk) 09:35, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No, they don't want it to go to that point because it would then be in shadow and its solar panels wouldn't work. And there's literally nothing there. Andrew🐉(talk) 14:19, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It would be a permanent ring eclipse so the solar panels would work a little. Entering the quasi-orbit around L2 would be kind of a destination. Complex distant stuff tug-of-war causing quasi-orbits of nothing is pretty cool, L4 and L5 asteroids even need the Coriolis effect to orbit! Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 17:56, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Its final destination is an orbit. This happens to be true of every spacecraft not intended to land on/in something or sent on an escape trajectory. Though, since that something will inevitably be orbiting something else, if you wanted to be a real pedant you could say that counts too. For that matter, any trajectory can technically be considered an orbit, some just being hyperbolic orbits that never return to their origin point! --47.155.96.47 (talk) 00:14, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support add an image from the article. An orbit around the sun near L2 is a destination. Big news that it made it there in working condition. Article is solid. JehochmanTalk02:21, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This has been "in the news", with widespread coverage. I see no issue with posting. As a reminder, the idea of ITN is to help readers quickly access articles relevant to things that are getting covered "in the news". I don't see why it can't also be posted once the telescope sees first light. --47.155.96.47 (talk) 00:14, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wait. Yes technically it has reached its physical destination, but it's not yet in scientific operation, which requires months of calibration and commissioning first. It seems better to WP:IAR and post whenever the first light images are released (which is likely to be less than 5 months). Those will be far more interesting and get a more substantial update to the article. Modest Geniustalk13:42, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose As the nom itself notes, nothing tangible except 'destination' reached. The launch had already been posted, wait for now. ITN is not an update ticker. Gotitbro (talk) 16:54, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Support I've looked at the article and I believe it's ready. The article is well sourced and I do think it is balanced given the criminal biography aspect. He did die in prison, after all (well, seems he was transferred to a hospital, but he was still an inmate). I don't have POV concerns, and I am a native of New York who followed Silver's speakership and criminal proceedings somewhat. That said, another lead paragraph that doesn't mention his crimes could help. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:30, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Comment. On a very quick look, badly needs some copy edits as well as sourcing for the entire filmography. I suspect when the puffery/repetition is removed it will appear very stubby. I would also strongly prefer that it did not link to the Turkish 'pedia without using the interlanguage link formatting which indicates which language the target is in. Espresso Addict (talk) 23:25, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Not ready. The {{Interlanguage link}} template has been deployed, but the Filmography section has remained unreferenced. There is only one {{cn}} tag, but the prose (338 words) has not changed much during the past week. More work is needed, but eligibility is running out soon.--PFHLai (talk) 01:04, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Nominator's comments: A very major event, all RS reporting this, article needs updating and expanding before it is posted. Events might change in the coming hours, so the blurb may be updated accordingly. Honestly concerning like all previous coup d'etats. Update - Kabore deposed, government, parliament and constituion dissolved. [21] An ITNR tag has been added, as there is a ”Change in the holder of the office which administer the executive of their respective state/government.” BastianMAT (talk) 10:49, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I do agree that the article needs a lot of work. However the news itself is more than noteworthy, and if the coup succeds, it will fall under ITNR. ”Changes in the holder of the office which administer the executive of their respective state/government.” The article is not ready, we don’t know the clear outcome of the coup yet, however the situation and a government change should be more than noteworthy. We will have to wait and see what happens, and in the meantime improve the article. BastianMAT (talk) 11:51, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Look at 2015 Burkinabé coup d'état. In that case, the coup didn't stick and the president was reinstated a week later. We're an encyclopedia, not a breaking news service, and will look bad if we post flip-flops. We should allow plenty of time to let the dust settle. Andrew🐉(talk) 12:30, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support on significance, Oppose on quality. At the moment the article contains several sentences that don't make sense (e.g. "Although the government denied the ongoing coup in the country."), Unencyclopedic writing, what appears to be several unsourced statements (e.g. The Military are scheduled to make an announcement) and a couple of sections which are either blank or contain a single sentence. With a bit of expansion and copyediting this would be a good thing to post though. 163.1.15.238 (talk) 12:23, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support - In terms of notability, it's clearly a major geopolitical event. The quality of the article is currently lacking but most major media sources are covering it now (as of 8:00 AM EST), so it should improve rapidly over the next day or two. --Posted byPikamander2(Talk) at 13:24, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Update - Kabore deposed, government, parliament and constituion dissolved. [22] An ITNR tag has been added, as there is a ”Change in the holder of the office which administer the executive of their respective state/government.” BastianMAT (talk) 18:24, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There are two orange tags to expand, one in background and one in the coup section. Please fix this before we can post. --Tone08:53, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Tone: Fixed it, article seems to be pretty good now, should be ready for a front page.
Alright nice, @Tone: can you add the nom to my profile? Thinking of adding a display on my profile of all articles I have contributed and nominated to pretty soon. Cheers and have a great day mate! BastianMAT (talk) 09:56, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Presenting this as a done deal seems quite improper. Look at what happened last time – ITN rushed to post after just one day but then, a week later, the President was reinstated. The blurb says that the President has been "deposed" but the rebels themselves say that he has been "suspended". The reality seems to be that he's being held prisoner but now the challenge for the rebels is whether they can convince everyone that they are in charge. And can they then establish a functioning administration. A lot will depend on how foreign governments react, especially France.
Remember the march on the Capitol, when the result of the US election was being challenged? In such circumstances, it's a power struggle and the rebels don't always win. We should not rush to declare a winner in such confused and chaotic circumstances.
This is not about convincing "everyone that they are in charge". The classic goal of every coup seems to have been achieved - the president is no longer in power. So, as an accomplished coup, this has been duly posted. If things change, the blurb could be bumped higher to reflect those changes. Brandmeistertalk14:21, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Any reason why Burkina Faso isn't a wikilink in the posted blurb? As someone unfamiliar with the country I would have appreciated one, as I wasn't initially sure whether it was a country, a province or other territory. 82.15.196.46 (talk) 15:51, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There is a long-standing convention that nation states are not Wikilinked in ITN as part of the MOS:OVERLINK principle - the idea being that most people have heard of most countries. I guess Burkina Faso is probably close to the bottom of the recognizability stakes for most people, but we apply a level playing field for all. (I went there on holiday once, so I do know a bit more about it myself!) — Amakuru (talk) 23:47, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Nominator's comments: This issue seems to have been brewing for some time but has come to a head with flights being cancelled while the FAA and FCC scramble to get on the same page. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:20, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The main event was that C band was activated by the networks on 19 Jan but the aviation sector wasn't ready for this and so there's been some pushback. Andrew🐉(talk) 12:42, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
support Beside importance, we arguably have a duty to show people why this is being done so that they don't instead jump onto conspiracy theories about 5g spreading covid or whatever 5.44.170.26 (talk) 17:05, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
we arguably have a duty to show people why this is being done so that they don't instead jump onto conspiracy theories about 5g spreading covid or whatever Wikipedia has no such duty. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:08, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on quality whilst the section on Aviation and this event may be well sourced, the rest of that 5G is awful, orange-tagged in many places. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:08, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - I don't want to invoke the "local news" angle, which as we know is not accepted as valid, but even so I'm not sure this is really a major enough story to warrant posting on a global encyclopedia. I know the US is a global superpower and the biggest market for en-wiki, but even so, would we post similar stories relating to the rollout of 5G in other countries such as Brazil, India and Japan? Also, as noted, quality is a long-way off at present. — Amakuru (talk) 17:14, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as things stand. Notable, but not notable enough on a global or even national scale. Unless this eventually causes real issues for the average person then I don't think this is ITN level. DarkSide830 (talk) 19:58, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note that this is only for service using certain frequencies, specifically those in the C band. The blurb as-is is technically correct but prone to misleading the reader. 5G service using other frequencies has already been in use in the U.S. (*looks at phone with "5G" icon in status bar*) Unless it starts causing major disruptions this is kind of "inside baseball" regulatory stuff. Now, a number of these articles would be great for DYK if improved, and they could definitely use improvement. --47.155.96.47 (talk) 01:55, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Possibly? It's up to government regulators what frequencies get approved for use in different applications. In fact, cell phones in different markets often have different chips because of different cell standards in use. Notably, North America has deployment of CDMA networks that aren't really used elsewhere. --47.155.96.47 (talk) 23:59, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Comment – Almost all the cites in the article are to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights. As far as I've seen, this event has been absent from main RS news sights. More sources would be necessary before posting. – Sca (talk) 17:23, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I notice that our article on Middle East Eye states, "the governments of Saudi Arabia, UAE, Egypt and Bahrain accuse MEE of pro-Muslim Brotherhood bias." – ?? — Sca (talk) 19:27, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - For something as contentious as a war and alleged human rights abuses, a wide range of sources would be required, but there is a strong dominance to SOHR. The WP article on SOHR says is a one-man-band and supposedly biased. Bumbubookworm (talk) 20:35, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The U.S. State Department orders its diplomats' families to leave Ukraine, and authorizes voluntary departure of non-essential embassy staff in Kyiv. "Due to the continued threat" of a Russian invasion on Ukraine, American citizens are also urged to leave the country. (France 24)
Russia reports a record for the third consecutive day of 63,205 new COVID-19 cases, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 11.1 million. (Anadolu Agency)
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Comment Some items are mentioned in the lede but not the body, such as Timebanking and his academic positions other than Antioch. Joofjoof (talk) 00:04, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Lead mentions that he created TimeBanking and was "CEO of TimeBanks USA" but the body has no additional information about that. Another 2-4 sentences would be helpful (what does TimeBanks USA do?), and once resolved, would be willing to support. SpencerT•C05:35, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Article needs updating Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Indian archaeologist. Padma Bhushan awardee. Article requires some work to get to homepage levels of hygiene. Edits done. Article meets hygiene levels for homepage / RD. A good C-class biography. Ktin (talk) 06:41, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks @PFHLai:. This one was gnawing me as well, but I had held off on updating it. I have requested one other editor user:Pachu Kannan to help untie this one. But, in the meantime, I have removed the 'first' reference. It does seem like TNR was the director from 1964 to 1966. With that this one is good to go. Thanks. Ktin (talk) 17:17, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for looking into this, Ktin. I am not sure, but it seems to me that TNR was indeed the predecessor except that he had a different title. The table at the bottom of this webpage indicated that RN took over from TNR as "Special Officer" in charge of the operations in 1966, and his title was changed to 'Director' near the end of that year. So I am under the impression that "first Director" or "inaugural Director" would indeed be appropriate for RN, but not "founding Director". More sourcing would be helpful here. IMO, this is a small thing and should not stall this RD nom. There is no doubt that he led the operations for many years. However, the articles on Tamil Nadu Archaeology Department and T. N. Ramachandran may need some tweaking to keep things consistent in the wiki. --PFHLai (talk) 18:17, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Done. You were right. Added a footnote for TNR (who was really a special officer). Source is here.[1]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Noting that in Armenia the PM is more powerful than the president(and the president cited that as a reason for his resignation). 331dot (talk) 17:28, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Along with the aforementioned concerns of notability, the article itself doesn't provide more context than "He resigned on 23 January 2022." Ludicrous (talk) 18:30, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. She is one of the most recognisable and widely-covered individuals of the past century and would certainly warrant a blurb were she to die or leave office, despite not being ITN/R or having any real power. In fact, we even blurbed her husband's death.
The BritishForeign, Commonwealth and Development Office says that, according to the available information, the Russian government is planning to "install a pro-Russian leader in Kyiv as it considers whether to invade and occupy Ukraine." (CNN)
Japan reports a record for the fifth consecutive day of 54,576 new COVID-19 cases, including a record 11,227 new cases in Tokyo and a record 7,675 new cases in Osaka Prefecture. (Kyodo News)
Poland reports a record for the second consecutive day of 40,876 new COVID-19 cases, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 4,484,095. (Polskie Radio)
Russia reports a record for the second consecutive day of 57,212 new COVID-19 cases, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 11.04 million. (The Times of India)
Kiribati goes into lockdown for the first time during the pandemic after dozens of passengers onboard a January 14th charter flight from Fiji test positive for COVID-19. (CNN)
Samoa Prime Minister Fiamē Naomi Mataʻafa announces a three day lockdown in response to ten positive COVID-19 passengers from repatriation flight. (RNZ)
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Comment. Could do with a little pruning of promotion and improvement of the lead. I note a previous version was deleted as promotional and bits of this made me wonder if it had been written by someone connected with the subject, especially the primary sourcing for the degrees. Espresso Addict (talk) 01:26, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Reads mostly like a resume in prose format with not much depth IMO. Any additional details that can be added in for depth? SpencerT•C00:04, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support in principle but it's still a stub. Also, the governor of Saada said that the hospitals were collapsed by corpses and injured? – Muboshgu (talk) 17:47, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Article is not in its best shape. Seems a bit one-sided. Reports indicate at least 70 dead, but anything higher is not sufficiently established. PenangLion (talk) 18:10, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support on Principle, Oppose on Quality clearly notable enough for ITN, but the article is just as clearly not ready yet. While the article is improving, nothing in the body of the article talks about what happened during the airstrike. NorthernFalcon (talk) 21:53, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I am not sure what qualifies this for a blurb when the significantly more notable Houthi attack in UAE (with a relatively more in-depth article) directly preceding this was not. This blurb should in the least mention that and be expanded for broader consideration. Gotitbro (talk) 23:59, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Saudi Arabian attacks in Yemen during the ongoing war are not exactly uncommon. But Houthis striking beyond Yemen is, and what received broad coverage in the news including the lead to this retaliatory attack. Gotitbro (talk) 14:17, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Article hasn't been updated with any sources since the breaking news of 21-22 Jan, as there have been more concrete details released then Bumbubookworm (talk) 20:28, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Bangladesh closes schools, universities, and other educational institutions until February 6 and bans social, political, religious, and state events of more than 100 people amid the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant. (The Daily Star)
Pakistan reports a record 7,678 new COVID-19 cases in the past 24 hours, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 1.35 million. (Anadolu Agency)
Poland reports a record 36,665 new COVID-19 cases in the past 24 hours, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 4,443,217. (Polskie Radio)
Russia reports a record 49,513 new COVID-19 cases in the past 24 hours, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 10,987,774. (Barron's)
Australia reports a record 88 deaths from COVID-19 in the past 24 hours, including a record 46 deaths in New South Wales, thereby bringing the nationwide death toll to 2,976. (SBS News)
Argentina formally requests that Russia arrest Iranian ministerMohsen Rezai, who is on a trip to Russia, based on the accusation by Argentina of Rezai's involvement in the 1994 AMIA bombing. Russia did not immediately respond to the request. (Infobae)
The FrenchConstitutional Council conditionally approves a new COVID-19 vaccine pass law that would require adults over the age of 16 years to be fully vaccinated in order to enter public venues and use intra-regional public transport but rejects the mandatory use of the vaccine pass for political rallies. The new vaccine pass will take effect on January 24. (France 24)
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
This made the NYT push notifications despite being a non-American figure, so definitely a good candidate. Let's get it in shape (if not already there) quickly so it can be posted timely. {{u|Sdkb}}talk21:57, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Along the lines of Vietnamese Thiền Buddhist monk and peace activist Thích Nhất Hạnh dies at age 95. No "old man dies" objections, please, he was relevant up to a very late age. BD2412T05:01, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
On par how? Tutu was an Anglican, and credited with helping end apartheid. Speaking in vain against the war and for vegetarianism puts Hạnh closer to Jane Fonda, in my eyes. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:30, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
His impact is more on spreading his teachings to people's personal practices regarding meditation/psychological teachings, and certainly not vegetarianism. Buddhist monks in East Asian Mahayana countries and Vietnam are required to be vegetarian and there are also a large proportion of Theravada monks who are strongly advocate for vegetarianism even though Theravada doesn't require it. He isn't known mainly for raging against the machine in vain. Bumbubookworm (talk) 01:35, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb Major figure whose works have been widely translated and disseminated across the globe, especially in English-speaking countries. I strongly agree that he was relevant and remains to be relevant all the way up to and beyond the date of his death—he still has another book that has yet to be (now posthumously) published! --LumensPerSquareMeter (talk) 15:53, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No Blurb Every old man who dies is relevant to something. This one Buddhism. Still absolutely nothing to the blurb that isn't covered by his bio's opening line (unsourced chunks aside). InedibleHulk (talk) 17:46, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I never say that for good death blurbs. A good death blurb has an actual cause, like a helicopter crash, church stabbing or Afghan earthquake. Merely echoing awareness as tribute to big names beloved in Western progressive circles is the bad kind of cause-based voting. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:02, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
IH, This sounds a lot like ‘unless someone was worthy of being portrayed in an action adventure film, their death (and their life) was inconsequential.’ Surely the blurb criteria is not this narrow. Cedar777 (talk) 09:47, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see how you inferred that, but no. If Clint Eastwood or Sylvester Stallone dies tomorrow with nothing to blurb but job description and age, it'd be the same. Stories need hooks. RD is for simple recent deaths in the news. It has nothing to do with life beforehand. That part just determines article creation and content here. InedibleHulk (talk) 15:12, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Article does not really support a blurb with a lack of dedicated section to legacy/importance/influence, etc. We shouldn't ask the reader to hunt and peck for why a person was given a blurb over an RD. --Masem (t) 17:59, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Abstaining the vote as I'm undecided whether this figure deserves a blurb or not. Admittedly enough, I've never heard of him personally, but the article seems to hint at notability. (PenangLion (talk) 18:13, 22 January 2022 (UTC))[reply]
Support blurb Significant figure; (probably) just missed out on a Nobel Peace Prize over a technicality and not because he wasn’t deserving. Schwede6620:47, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb or RD. He's been called one of Buddhism's best known second only to the Dalai Lama. Thankfully that hyperbole has been removed from the lead. R.I.P. -SusanLesch (talk) 23:47, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Warning If this passes, it becomes precedent. Anybody for whom "one of the second-best in field" is hyperbolic, anyone who maybe deserved that award they never won and everyone with a Lowkey Supranational Impact rating of However is eligible to join the deluge. You want that? InedibleHulk (talk) 01:12, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This goes to the point I was in trying to make, in that the article does not give a clear reason - that is not buried in prose - of his importance and significance. The ideas for why we should blurb him are in the article but there should absolutely be a standalone section on Legacy or the like so that questions like the one IH is asking are clearly answered. I think this is reasonable for this person, and I don't think it is an issue that he was "second-best", just that it should be crystal clear why we are giving him a blurb. --Masem (t) 01:15, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Second-best wouldn't be so bad. But one of the second-best, and even a fan calls it a stretch? That's the sort of C-level mediocrity I mean. The Dalai Lama is way different. When that old man dies, a power vacuum opens and a child is reborn, with much ado about something.InedibleHulk (talk) 03:29, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The Dalai Lama is also the de-facto head of the exiled Tibetan govt. It is not simply the case of a religious personality, it would be an administrative change which while not exactly ITNR (non-member state) the impact is self-evident and need not be stated. Gotitbro (talk) 23:35, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note that Buddhism, according to WP has more than 500m followers and the subject is a type of cross-over religious leader so his meditation teachings were also adopted by people who still identify as other, eg Abrahamic religions. Where is the evidence that the subject is a third-level religious figure? Bumbubookworm (talk) 00:56, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I get it, bunch of new age posers. I never claimed to have evidence. Just a message from above strongly suggesting putting him amongst the second-best known is an overstatement ("hyperbole"), rather than a statement or understatement ("bole"/"hypobole"?). InedibleHulk (talk) 02:26, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have resolved half of them by removing the uncited statements, the first being a quote attributed to the subject's organization (not the subject himself), which I was unable to find in a reliable source, and the second being two highly problematic paragraphs purporting to identify notable followers, for which it is not clear that the people named are necessarily notable or followers; those paragraphs I moved to the talk page for discussion. BD2412T02:06, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb. Work on article appears ongoing to clarify (international, half-century+ of) significance for reader. As someone familiar with the subject, I’m already persuaded. Innisfree987 (talk) 05:22, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb One of the two main figures of the 20-21st century in bringing Buddhism to western countries, prolific scholar of Buddhism whether one agrees with his reinterpretations or not, notable activist. And whether one likes it or not, major religious figures and scientists have more impact on society at large than old movie stars and sportspeople Bumbubookworm (talk) 11:53, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support RD, oppose blurb article looks more than good enough to be posted on RD (not orange-tagged anymore). However, don't see why his death is important enough for the high standard we have to give someone a blurb. Joseph2302 (talk) 12:28, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Certainly Hanh was a major figure in Buddhism and to an extent the international peace movement but his preeminence therein has not been established here nor in the article. There has been push by specific users to get the death of certain personalities onto a blurb regardless of notability/relevance justification (White, Madden (nom) etc. come to mind recently). This should not be setting a precedent for votes=blurb=consensus. Gotitbro (talk) 13:47, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Oppose blurb Not sure what Wikipedia‘s obsession is with putting foreign politicians or leaders that no English speaking people have ever heard of in the blurb but not putting notable English speaking people on recent deaths. Put these foreign leaders on the foreign Wikipedia.TomChaplinPoodle (talk) 17:54, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wow! That was really in bad taste! You should really consider retracting the statement. I also see that this is your first comment / post at WP:ITNC so firstly, welcome to this project. Please engage with topics here in a constructive and open-minded manner. I wish you well. Ktin (talk) 19:44, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb Prolific author and teacher, Hanh was not only vital in spreading Buddhist ideology and philosophy to the West; much of the work of his life centered around pacifism and advocating for peaceful diplomacy around the globe. He is certainly notable enough for a blurb. Ludicrous (talk) 18:27, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose blurb. A Google News search did not come up with an awful lot in English and the subject's death isn't getting much ongoing coverage in the UK, as far as I can see; cf Tutu where his funeral & burial arrangements were covered in detail for much of the week after his death. Espresso Addict (talk) 22:26, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I can see full pieces in the BBC, Guardian, NYT, Washington Post, ABC America, CNN, ABC Australia, Sydney Morning Herald, 9 News Australia (a tabloid!), some in India, France24 about his life and times. Also with regards to funeral rites, note that as the article explains, the Vietnamese government does not exactly get along that well with him, and violently raided one of his monasteries a few years ago. So there is not going to be any official fanfare apart from for devotees. Secondly, as the nomination is not made on the grounds of the manner of his demise, but his life impact, having play by play reporting of his funeral is not a relevant consideration Bumbubookworm (talk) 00:56, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Bumbubookworm: Actually now found a few more; I think all the accents were confusing the search. As to funeral coverage, that has been a metric we have frequently used at ITN in the past. In terms of impact of work, I'd suggest that of all the people on this page, David Cox had the greatest real-world impact, but no-one has suggested his article for a blurb. Espresso Addict (talk) 01:11, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
For the record, I suggested that David Cox be considered for a blurb. I happened to check the Polish Wikipedia during this period and noticed that their ITN posted his picture. They now have Meat Loaf's picture and so seem to be doing better than the English ITN as our current news picture is now 9 days old. Adding RD pics would give us more choice. Andrew🐉(talk) 13:04, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Consensus implies discussion and compromise. It's not possible to compromise on a binary outcome. We always count votes, but the margin required is whatever the admin decides in the moment. GreatCaesarsGhost16:50, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Blurb [full disclosure - I am a 30 year+ student of Thich Nhat Hahn and I was ordained by him to be a Dharma Teacher in his tradition] In the Buddhist world Thich Nhat Hanh is of tremendous historical importance. Notwithstanding my personal bias as one of his students, I can guarantee that you can ask *any* scholar of Buddhism and you will get the same assessment. He is a major figure in Chan Buddhism - there is no doubt about that. And he has had a tremendous influence on a large number of westerners, including seminal figures in the mindfulness movement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vellino (talk • contribs) 04:29, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I’m not sure if I am allowed to vote as I am the nominator, but Ruth Bader Ginsburg, an American Supreme Court judge who had relatively little impact beyond the borders of the United States, got a blurb. Thích Nhất Hạnh had a global impact that lasted for many more decades than Ginsburg’s position at the United States Supreme Court and his global impact is arguably far greater and internationally notable than hers. Thriley (talk) 04:55, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Do I, as the nominator, give myself and those that improved the article credit, or does someone else do that? I am fairly new to this so I am a bit unsure. Thriley (talk) 23:46, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I tried, but the bot just gave you recognition. The sound of one hand clapping? In any case, I don't blame you for overcoming my "bad vibes", cheers! InedibleHulk (talk) 04:23, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Article needs updating Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Filmography remains unreferenced. Please add REFs there. --PFHLai (talk) 04:58, 23 January 2022 (UTC) And there are currently about 10 {cn} or {cspan} tags in the prose. --PFHLai (talk) 06:14, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Article:Meat Loaf (talk·history·tag) Recent deaths nomination (Post) News source(s):[24] 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.
Yeah, I don't he's in blurbable territory. A household name and popular, and the usually raft of awards, but didn't really affect or change the music industry (the standard I use being someone like Prince or David Bowie for that). --Masem (t) 14:48, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Stop right there, I gotta know right now, before we go any further...did you fix the maintenance tags? There are 9 {{cn}} tags remaining. Can we either cite those things or pull the statements if they are not necessary? JehochmanTalk13:34, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry to be Captain Buzzkill, but there's still tons of unsourced statements. The last three claims in the "The Rocky Horror Picture Show (1974/75)" paragraph, at least four or five I can see in the next section ("Bat Out of Hell (1977)"), and so on. LugnutsFire Walk with Me16:22, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support RD when ready—others took the words right out of my mouth. He was a hot patootie, and I think that clearing up two out three tags ain't bad. Once the article is ready, let's send him off to paradise (by the dashboard light). I'd lie for you, and that's the truth, and while we'd do anything for the Main Page, we won't do that. Imzadi 1979→18:32, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment 38 cn tags (and one could add another half a dozen easily, the Stoney and Meat Loaf (1971) section is 90% unsourced) plus two more completely unsourced sections. Long way to go here. Black Kite (talk)18:47, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Way, way, way, too many American -entric stories ITN. Just because English Wikipedia is English, it should still have an international focus. I propose it is listed under "recent deaths" instead. Harizotoh9 (talk) 01:11, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Echoing the previous comment - he was one of the biggest selling artists in music. This doesn't even warrant a debate, he should obviously be listed in the Recent Deaths - without question. It's an embarrassment for this community that this simple update has not been implemented yet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.76.121.148 (talk) 14:23, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That would be absolutely inappropriate for what would need to be trimmed - that's sweeping the mess under the rug, and thus not reflect a quality article. I could see if we did that for one or two unsourced statement, but not the chunk in the article presently. --Masem (t) 16:56, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Especially given that most of a whole decade currently needs cites. More importantly, I'd also point out that there are quite a lot of primary sources in the article, plus five references to IMDB and five references to YouTube as well, not to mention blogs, Twitter and Facebook. Black Kite (talk)17:39, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
When Norman Hunter was taken critically ill in 2020, his article looked like this, just 5 sources. Less than two days later it had 43 sources. If I and a few others can do this to a relatively obscure (in global terms) article in 36-odd hours (and see also Trevor Cherry which took even less time), it is somewhat surprising that no-one has stepped up to fix 38 sources on a supposedly high-profile one. Black Kite (talk)21:43, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
At one point there were 11 and I zapped 8. Then somebody tagged 60+ more. It's a revolving door. The article has 150+ citations, but that's not enough. JehochmanTalk21:46, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This community is pathetic. Just add the link and get this interminable debate over with. I'm not even a fan but he's obviously a notable enough figure to warrant inclusion in the RD summary.24.80.7.130 (talk) 17:21, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Rioters injure a police officer with live ammunition on the sidelines of unauthorized demonstrations. The administrative building of the Basse-Terre hospital is invaded by about forty people. (Le Figaro)
A truck carrying explosives to a gold mine explodes after crashing into a motorcycle in Apiate, Western Region, Ghana; the explosion destroyed nearby buildings and vehicles, killing 17 people and injuring 59 others. (Reuters)
FrenchPrime MinisterJean Castex announces that a new COVID-19 vaccine pass will go into effect on January 24 pending approval from the Constitutional Council. The new pass will ban unvaccinated people from entering most public venues and travelling on domestic flights and inter-regional trains. Additionally, the mandate to work from home for more than 3 days per week will be lifted on February 2 and children between the ages of 12 and 17 years will be eligible to receive a booster dose beginning on Monday. (ABC News)
Romania reports a record 19,105 new COVID-19 cases in the past 24 hours, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 1,964,021. (Agerpres)
Thailand decides to resume its quarantine-free travel for all vaccinated travellers beginning on February 1 due to low hospitalization and death rates despite the surging COVID-19 cases driven by the Omicron variant. (Nikkei Asia)
The Medicines Patent Pool signs an agreement with 27 pharmaceutical companies in 11 countries to produce both raw ingredients and finished products of Merck & Co.'s Molnupiravir COVID-19 drug, which will be used in 105 low- and middle-income developing countries. (France 24)
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.
A bit short but long enough (309 words) and with enough footnotes in expected spots, this wikibio is READY for RD. AGF'd all non-English sources. --PFHLai (talk) 15:49, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Explosion of mining explosives in Ghana kills at least 17 and injures at least 59. Article very short at present, but sure to expand as more sources cover this Dumelow (talk) 07:49, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"Seji Saji Amedonu, deputy director general of the National Disaster Management Organisation (NADMO), said 500 buildings had been destroyed. A regional emergency official told local media he had seen 10 dead bodies." - Al Jazeera. (PenangLion (talk) 08:54, 21 January 2022 (UTC)) PenangLion (talk) 08:54, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"He said about 500 houses were affected - some of which were completely destroyed - in Appiatse between Bogoso and the village of Bawdie." - BBC. InedibleHulk (talk) 09:01, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The death toll seems to be confirmed at 13, having been revised down from 17, according to the BBC, Rueters and Washington Post. The number of injuries is less clear, BBC say 45 "in hospital", Al Jazeera and CNN: 59 injured, Reuters: 180 injured, Washington Post: 177 injured. Only Al Jazeera are giving a number of buildings destroyed (500), BBC say "many houses flattened" and at least 380 people "without shelter". The BBC and Washington Post articles were updated most recently, then CNN. Al Jazeera is the oldest. Thryduulf (talk) 19:47, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The death toll seems to have stabilised at 13, the more recent sources state 500 buildings damaged so I have amended the article and blurb. There's a couple of good photographs which seem to have come from a drone flown by a local Open Street Map enthusiast - Dumelow (talk) 08:40, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The article is good enough & it's important enough because hundreds of houses were destroyed. Had this happened in the Western world, it'd have been posted within hours. Jim Michael (talk) 09:18, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
All thoroughbread horses in the northern hemisphere have birthday on 1 January (and 1 August for southern hemisphere) [25]. So his first birthday would have been 1 January 2006 (when he was 7 months old), and 17th birthday would have been 1 January 2022. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:12, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Support I took care of the two {{cn}}. The bibliography really doesn't need sourcing; that's just busywork which will duplicate the {{authority control}}. The real issue is whether he should get a blurb as being at the top of his field – statistics. Andrew🐉(talk) 22:11, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Quick qn - Does the bibliography not require sourcing? I have been working all my articles under the assumption that bibliography (as with other 'ography-ies) need to be sourced as well. The only distinction (I think) is that bibliographies can be cited based on the books' ISBN numbers. The only thing that doesn't require additional sourcing as explained to me once is plot sections of books (particularly fiction) where the book itself is considered the source. Thanks. Ktin (talk) 20:40, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Not checked in detail but at minimum... The lead needs writing; many readers do not progress any further. The first two bullet points in the Career section need independent sources and the book for bullet point 3 needs page nos. There are numerous apparently unsourced facts eg date of birth, list of students, several of the awards, and most of the bibliography section (including the leading sentences). Espresso Addict (talk) 01:53, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Are there any accessible obituaries? I'm happy to help improving this but it's a bit thin at the moment. I don't doubt his significance, but the current article does not make a good case for it. On a technical point, it's not clear whether his death is "in the news" given that all the announcements I've seen have been societies or colleges. Espresso Addict (talk) 01:32, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Resolved most, if not all, of comments above: updated lead, cited date of birth, cited doctoral students, cited two bullet points in Career section and page of book for bullet point 3, cited bibliography section (count of books he authored, names of books he authored, books he edited), cited awards. --Engineerchange (talk) 20:06, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Article needs updating The nominated event is listed on WP:ITN/R, so each occurrence is presumed to be important enough to post. Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article and update meet WP:ITNCRIT, not the significance.
Oppose for now The article doesn't meet the quality requirements to be on the Main Page: less than half of the article has prose, incomplete tables, the results section has no prose and there is no "Aftermath" or "Reactions" section. A lot of work to be done. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 21:42, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Article:Zara Rutherford (talk·history·tag) Blurb: Belgian-British pilot who is the youngest female pilot to fly solo around the world. (Post) Alternative blurb: Belgian-British pilot Zara Rutherford becomes the youngest woman to fly solo around the world. News source(s):BBC News Credits:
Support. A very impressive accomplishment and record in aviation. She is also the first women to complete a circumnavigation in a microflight. Yxuibs (talk) 04:45, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support alt blurb Impressive record for a young person, it's getting global coverage and article is in good shape. I mean flying around the world and making that into a record is pretty internationally notable and significant. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 06:10, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support ALT1 article looks good enough, and it is in the news. FYI, I removed a blocked sockpuppet from the updaters list, as we shouldn't be giving them ITN credits, as per WP:DENY. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:41, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Although is the image definitely free? I can't see anywhere on the Youtube video that it's taken from that says it's released under CC licence (maybe I'm just missing where it is)? Joseph2302 (talk) 11:53, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good morning, America! Let's see what was nom'ed and posted while you were asleep. Oh, look: a Brit set an incremental record with an insignificant gender qualifier! Those always get posted quick. GreatCaesarsGhost12:11, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Bias is not reserved for Americans. We don't rush to post American stories when the Brits are asleep, and the opposite should hold true. There are thousands of stories in the news everyday, but we try to be selective. A younger person did this six months ago but wasn't even nominated, probably because we don't generally post incremental records. GreatCaesarsGhost14:12, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Sad that this got posted while most of the Western Hemisphere was asleep. I thought we were going to do better about that. WaltCip-(talk)12:25, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
How do you know that Rutherford didn't use a timer? How do you know that the media person posting the image wasn't the photographer? I think this is a situation where we should accept the representation that's been made. JehochmanTalk14:58, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Greetings! Any chance we can use one of the images of Ms Rutherford and get the current satellite .gif animation replaced. Has been there for ~5 days and is of a very low quality. Ktin (talk) 21:08, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Bagumba: btw -- not sure where we should be reporting this -- but, the iOS Wikipedia app has had Ms Rutherford's image for three days now. So, if there is an issue, we should be letting them know asap. Ktin (talk) 21:57, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Do you see any concern with using Shark ULL this image? Seems like this one has permissions etc alright. This is day 10 of the current image (satellite animation) and that can do with a change. Thanks. Ktin (talk) 21:24, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The arguments here are irrational. Yes, it might have been problematic to post it without 'waiting' but what arguments would have been raised then is nowhere clearly stated. The second line of argument that a women-specific is not notable should ask themselves why such achievements still make news based on that. Even I am on the borderline about this, but better arguments for non-inclusion should be made. Gotitbro (talk) 23:49, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The story is plainly tabloid fodder. Women have done this before, and younger people have done it. If we are too invoke superlatives to make something sound impressive, those most account for some challenge to the accomplishment. Being a woman isn't a handicap in this field; indeed, she is only slightly older than the male record-holder. And she is not so young that her age is any handicap. This is Guinness Record level garbage, and we're better than this. GreatCaesarsGhost04:04, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Pull This should never have been posted. These kinds of 'adventures' eg sailing/flying/hot air balloons are not mainstream sports where there is more competition and you can say that a person has surpassed the previous technical standard by improving the world record (eg faster, higher, stronger), it is simply some doing something that has already been done at a younger age. Given that these pursuits are dependent on machinery, and to a large extent the main obstacle in these adventures is not making a mistake and having an accident. However, the equipment is much more automated now and with improved telecommunications it is easier to get external assistance/advice if required so less experienced/situationally aware younger people can pull this off. In no way can a teenager sailing or flying around the world at their own pace be compared to the Olympic/professional sailors or fighter pilots who have to read the conditions and change course every second. Bumbubookworm (talk) 20:43, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Post-posting Support - Definitely for ITN. Not everythinh have to be big profiled, this is exactly the kind of stories ITN needs from time to time.BabbaQ (talk) 20:48, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Employees of the STB, Bucharest's largest public transport company, go on strike demanding the resignation of its chairman, Adrian Criț. The city authorities, led by the Save Romania Union-backed mayor Nicușor Dan, condemn the strike, blaming it on the Social Democratic Party-backed trade unionist Vasile Petrariu as an attempt to undermine his authority. (Digi24)
Twenty-nine people are killed during a stampede at an open-air Pentecostal church in Monrovia, Liberia. The stampede was triggered by panic after gangsters entered the prayer ground after a collection. (BBC News)
The Philippines reports its first confirmed deaths related to the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant in two unvaccinated people in their 60s who had underlying health conditions. (ABS-CBN News)
Bulgaria reports a record for the second consecutive day of 11,181 new COVID-19 cases, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 841,785. (Bulgarian Press Agency)
The Czech government suspends plans to make COVID-19 vaccination mandatory for key workers and people over the age of 60, which was expected to come into effect in March. (ABC News)
Kiribati announces a curfew and mandatory face masks after 36 passengers on a charter flight from Fiji test positive for COVID-19 upon arrival. The plane was the first international commercial flight to land in the country since March 2020. Kiribati reopened its borders on January 10th. (Stuff.co.nz)
The Algeriangovernment announces that all elementary and high schools will be closed for 10 days due to an increase in the number of Omicron variant cases in the country. (Arab News)
Mexico reports a record for the second consecutive day of 60,552 new cases of COVID-19, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 4,495,310. (Bloomberg)
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 actress. 750+ words. Need help with refs for divorce and second marriage. --PFHLai (talk) 23:38, 22 January 2022 (UTC) The sentence with iffy materials on divorce and wedding details have been revised to avoid the need for more citations. No more {cn} tags left. --PFHLai (talk) 06:01, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Montreal actress and municipal politician. Should be long enough with 550+ words of readable prose. Need help with better refs for her acting career than IMDb. Thanks.[That line has been revised to avoid the use of IMDb as ref. --PFHLai (talk) 07:12, 25 January 2022 (UTC)] --PFHLai (talk) 21:24, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Looks good and meets hygiene expectations for homepage / RD. Agree with Muboshgu that an infobox would help. Also, can someone examine if the electoral record tables are fine? I have not seen that arrangement (of collapse / hide / show) recently. Let's get this one to homepage before it falls-off the page in ~6 hours. Ktin (talk) 16:58, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: French actor who was killed in a skiing accident. The article has been updated but the career section could be better sourced. Calidum16:54, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The article could bear some improvement, but I don'think it's so poor that it should be excluded from ITN — OwenBlacker (he/him; Talk; please {{ping}} me in replies)17:25, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Espresso Addict, initially I would have assumed the same, but WP:RSP lists it as acceptable, except for reliability of blog articles and critic opinion pages (no consensus) and user reviews (generally unreliable). As far as I can tell, this doesn't fall under either of those categories and should be okay for something like cast members. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 01:55, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's comments: I've been on the fence as to whether or not this should be on the main page for a while. But I think things have reached a point where it needs to be at least discussed. Ad Orientem (talk) 14:56, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support no singular event that stated this but let's of little fires that clearly indicate far higher tensions than we expect.--Masem (t) 15:33, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Though I will say, in addition to my above !vote, that the article feels unreadable. It's just a day-by-day timeline of events as they have progressed and doesn't really give an overall picture of what has precipitated the crisis and why it is persisting. I'm aware this is due to it being a developing story, but we really need to find a way to separate the meat and potatoes from the ice cream. --WaltCip-(talk)17:04, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on article quality. WP:PROSELINE issues, needs to be rewritten in a more narrative style more appropriate for an encyclopedia article. Agnostic on all other matters, but we can't post this to the main page in the current state. Also, there's only been 3 small sentences of updates in the past week; that's hardly enough to justify ongoing status. If and when the article is rewritten and expanded with more recent events, it will be appropriate for ongoing. It isn't there now. While it is quite likely that there is enough out there in the news so that this is really an ongoing story, the wikipedia article we are recommending people read is NOT reflective of that. That needs to be fixed before it is posted to the main page. --Jayron3217:24, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't particularly want it to be on the main page. If someone else wants it on the main page, I am willing to assess it for appropriateness, and will give my opinion of it belongs or not. Since it is not something I myself want, I don't have any impetus to spend time fixing it up. But if you want it on the main page, then you feel free to fix it yourself, and I will re-assess it. The difference between you and me in this case is you have a desire to see something happen. I'm not particularly interested one way or another. --Jayron3220:40, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for now. There has been a lot of sabre rattling, diplomatic posturing etc. but nothing concrete has happened, either on the ground or in the negotiations. If Russia invades, or some major diplomatic agreement is reached, then I'm willing to reconsider. For the moment it's just a lot of arguing about what might happen. I also agree with WaltCip and Jayron that the article is a mess of PROSELINE. Modest Geniustalk18:18, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Major wars, 10,000+ deaths in current or past calendar year
Wars, 1,000–9,999 deaths in current or past calendar year
Minor conflicts, 100–999 deaths in current or past calendar year
Skirmishes and clashes, 10–99 deaths in current or past calendar year
Oppose In the long list of ongoing armed conflicts(right), this one is deep down the list at #37, where it is classified as "minor". So, it's not clear why it should get priority over all the others. And, as the conflict dates back to 2014, it doesn't seem that it's going to finish any time soon. Perhaps we should just have a permanent link to the list? Andrew🐉(talk) 19:46, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Oppose Only because it's really overstated that this is something new. The Russo-Ukrainian War has been going on for over seven years now, and this is merely a flashpoint of it. I feel the current troop build-up would be less reported on if news sources acknowledged the war as they should have in the years prior. DarkSide830 (talk) 20:05, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support This now sees 100,000 mechanized troops assembled for an unprecedented offensive, mainstream warnings of WW3 (and sober articles saying it’s not that), and has prompted two Biden–Putin summits and a rare meeting of the Russia–NATO Council. —MichaelZ.21:47, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The article has been seeing some pretty heavy editing since this was posted. Those who had article quality concerns might want to take another look. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:24, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Very Strong Support per above. Constant major news item with huge coverage. Very real possibility of escalation (hopefully it would not)Nyanardsan (talk) 23:52, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support, there has been a major escalation of tensions already and we should not wait until the actual invasion to post this story. Nsk92 (talk) 00:53, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Background section needs cleanup/subsections, and recent events could use some additional expansion. Oppose until article quality is improved. SpencerT•C04:23, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support This is "in the news" for a reason, a major international ongoing diplomatic incident. If it escalates that will only warrant a blurb and further elongation of this on ongoing, escalation should not be a preclusion for this now. Gotitbro (talk) 08:33, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support: This has been in the world news for a while with plenty of articles. The significance of the conflict is great, as it could be the largest war in Europe since World War 2. The article certainly needs improvements, but it's bound to happen with a greater visibility on WP:ITN and hopefully more editors joining the effort. --Mindaur (talk) 11:00, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support - It's not looking good, and the context behind the event is terribly significant. Barring from the article quality it's a must-have. True, it is a continuation of Russo-Ukrainian tensions since 2014, but this escalation is distinct. I genuinely fear a war might happen. (PenangLion (talk) 11:13, 20 January 2022 (UTC))[reply]
Note Article is improving, especially with growing and eliminating the proseline issues, but it still needs a little work. Several of the new sections are lacking for want of proper references. That needs fixing before we can post this. It's getting better, but it's still not main page ready. --Jayron3213:31, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wait/Oppose Ongooing – There have been anticipatory stories about the likelihood of a Russian attack for weeks. (Thursday's examples: [26][27][28][29].) Let's not jump the gun. It's still a non-event. If there were a Russian attack on Ukraine, it certainly would engender myriad long-term follow-ups that eventually could be moved to Ongoing, which was devised for precisely that sort of news play. – Sca (talk) 13:45, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If you look at the header, you will see that this is an Ongoing nomination. If and when an actual invasion occurs, that will certainly be worthy of a blurb. Nsk92 (talk) 14:17, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I was aware of that, and was arguing against sticking it in Ongoing now, because as said above it's still a non-event at this point, no matter how much topical wordage is expended daily. – Sca (talk) 14:38, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
PS: Keep in mind that it's late afternoon in Ukraine. If the Russians were going to attack today they probably would have done so hours ago. – Sca (talk) 14:38, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sca: The article is currently about a "crisis" and that's what's ongoing. It is very notable and unprecedented event as it stands, with some significant implications already, regardless whether there will be an invasion. The fact that it can escalate further shouldn't be relevant (the Cuban Missile Crisis could have also escalated further). --Mindaur (talk) 11:40, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – Late-cycle coverage: "Biden issues new warning to Russia over invading Ukraine" (AP), "US accuses Russia of conspiring to take over Ukraine government" (Guardian). – Sca (talk) 22:47, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wait It still doesn't seem all that more than threats and warnings over recent months and, perhaps more importantly in this case, are there chances that American website Wikipedia saying there's something big happening in Ukraine could actually be seen as some American aggression ("Look, America says we already invaded, that's war of words, they're lying, making us look bad... let's invade")But really, with how angry Venezuela politicians got over Wikipedia I wouldn't be surprised. If/when Russia invade, post that. Kingsif (talk) 23:33, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I would support this seeing how this is an increasingly escalating military/diplomatic tension however the article is in a bad state for posting. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 23:55, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Andrew, Brigade Piron and Kingsif. There are 36 tenser ongoing tensions, with key points that aren't vague intangible posturing. If diplomacy fails and war breaks, post that (assuming the WWW is up). InedibleHulk (talk) 00:03, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Significant front page coverage in most English-language news, top-ish positions in non English language news. Kinda like the Persian Gulf crisis back in early 2020. Juxlos (talk) 02:59, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose International dick rattling that just happens to involve a country a lot of our editors love to hate. Much less significant than several other border conflicts that have been ignored for decades by Wikipedia. HiLo48 (talk) 03:30, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for now for now, as the actions are clear saber-rattling. As we saw in Crimea, Russia is not going to telegraph their plans for months ahead of time if they actually plan to invade. GreatCaesarsGhost14:18, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
In fairness, I have not nominated a potentiality. I have nominated an ongoing and rapidly evolving diplomatic/military security crisis that has been on the front page of most reputable newspapers and websites for weeks. This is not a hypothetical. It is very real, and it is ongoing. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:44, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It seems you might not understand how Google works. If YOU Google "Ukraine" you will see very different results from those I will see. HiLo48 (talk) 22:24, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Post if some sort of military offensive actually begins, but otherwise it's all speculation and politics, which might run for months. — Amakuru (talk) 08:04, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment -- Thanks to some proactive editors, I can make a note that the article had major improvements and now looks much better! --Mindaur (talk) 12:44, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Its an imminent threat to the point that UK and US embassies have been partially evacuated. It's already late for the main page. --Mhhosseintalk17:43, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Whatever the outcome, this already has significant consequences for the world security order and thus has is of interest here. Yakikaki (talk) 17:58, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose If Russia invades then this should be posted immediately, but this hasn't actually happened yet (and hopefully it won't). We should only post news after it happens, and not try to do it before. Also, why has a fairly reasonable comment above been hidden away? This appears to have been done solely based on the fact that the poster is Russian. Are Russians not allowed to edit English Wikipedia now? The comment was well within the bounds of this discussion and quite clearly didn't contain any 'disinformation' of any kind. Effy Midwinter (talk) 20:47, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Effy Midwinter. I added the collapse tag (I originally simply removed it, but hey, Wikipedia isn't censored), and I only note the origin of the IP address because the objectively false assertion that the Russian government didn't interfere in the 2016 US election is a common talking point among online Russian propagandists. Feel free to undo this if you feel this objectivedisinformation adds anything meaningful, let alone constructive, to the conversation. TheTechnician27(Talk page)03:42, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Fair point about the claims of collusion. I had been thinking more about the claims that the FSB had blackmailed Trump over a sex tape. My mistake. I still think 'disinformation' is a bit strong though. Never mind. Effy Midwinter (talk) 20:06, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Wikipedia is already months late for this. Article is reasonably well-written, and in the event that war isn't imminent (it clearly appears that way), it's at least all the news is talking about even compared to COVID-19, which we've had in 'Ongoing' for over two years now. TheTechnician27(Talk page)04:08, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Out of 38 !votes, around 63% of editors support this becoming an "Ongoing" event. That is a consensus, but it is up to an admin to bring this to "Ongoing" or not. Heythereimaguy (talk) 13:16, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Remember, Walt: Three bells is an URGENT, five bells is a BULLETIN, and 10 bells is a FLASH, though you and I are unlikely ever to hear the latter in this world. – Sca (talk) 14:50, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Not aware that anyone has "mobilized" his armed forces. This isn't 1914, when Czar Nicky ordered mobilization, making WWI inevitable due to interrelated alliances. – Sca (talk) 16:47, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This is true. Putin is not Hitler, and is not invading countries for purely ideological reasons. He's far more calculating than that. WaltCip-(talk)19:45, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Suggest Close Consensus to post will not develop absent a direct military attack. In such case it would likely be posted as a blurb. This discussion has run its useful course. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:39, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
By my count it's 25 support to 14 wait/oppose (+1 oppose if we want to count that Russian IP address) at this point - while we can continue to argue, I would think consensus is clearly in favour of posting. Canadianerk (talk) 02:32, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per above. This is a good article which likely wouldn't be posted in the case of an invasion (which would have a standalone article). In my view this is already notable enough without speculating what will happen next and has plenty of coverage by RS and attention by world leaders; undoubtedly one of the most important stories of the year. Davey2116 (talk) 07:10, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comments - 26 support, 14 wait/oppose. I think in the end the discussion is inconclusive for now, unless major military/diplomatic action occurs. (PenangLion (talk) 12:29, 26 January 2022 (UTC))[reply]
Support This is clearly important enough. Many countries are mobilizing, it may be the prelude to a very serious situation in Europe and it's clear that it has continued international coverage. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 20:25, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: From what I can tell, the last substantial update looks like it's from 22 January, 4 days ago. Already having issues meeting what would need to be "continually updated" to stay on Ongoing, unless there is a different target article. SpencerT•C20:27, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Argentine minister of economy Martín Guzmán warns that the International Monetary Fund will "lose legitimacy" if it fails in negotiations with the country, with Guzmán citing his country's growth of nearly 10 percent as an argument. (Ámbito)
Nepal reports a record 10,258 new COVID-19 cases in the past 24 hours, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 972,198. (La Prensa Latina)
Bulgaria reports a record 9,996 new COVID-19 cases in the past 24 hours, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 830,604. (Bulgarian Press Agency)
Brazil reports a record 137,102 new COVID-19 cases in the past 24 hours, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 23,211,894. (Reuters)
Article needs updating Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Indian Tabla player. Discography might be an undoing in the attempt to get to mainpage / RD. Let's see if we can work this one. Ktin (talk) 02:11, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Needs a few citations (particularly filmography) and overall could stand to be fleshed out but meets minimum length/breadth already. Innisfree987 (talk) 04:04, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Oppose article contains no information about her death, except an update to the date. I would expect well-referenced text in the body of the article explaining what is known about her death. Simply updating the date of death is not sufficient. If anyone thinks to fix this, then consider this opposition obviated. --Jayron32 13:35, 19 January 2022 (UTC)Support I added a bit to it as well based on the source material. --Jayron3213:43, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Nominator's comments: The bill to relocate the capital was reportedly passed by eight parliamentary fractions and only one fraction rejecting it. Update is needed (perhaps the country's infobox field should be changed when transition is completed). Brandmeistertalk15:16, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose at the moment, the capital is still Jakarta, and it will remain for a while. The news at the moment is that the future capital got its name, which is not the "ITN-level" story yet. It will take years before they move it. --Tone15:23, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wait. This plan has been advancing for several years now. Today they announced the name of the new city, but it still has to be built before the capital actually moves. That's currently expected to be 2024, which would be a better point for us to post this story. According to our article, the parliamentary bill was approved in September last year, so the blurb is also not news. Modest Geniustalk15:29, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This is another example of where the announcement gets far more attention than the actual event. Furthermore, Jakarta is overcrowded and sinking, the capital is not staying there. 331dot (talk) 15:38, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Disagree strongly that this event will get more attention than an actual move. Maybe the move will be spread out, such that there is less of pinpoint moment, but that's not the same thing. GreatCaesarsGhost15:56, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Also the bill for a new capital was approved in September 2021, it's only the name which was announced today, so far as I can see. And I would think this is similar to when Barbados became a republic (which we posted on the day it happened, not the day it was announced). A notable rare event, but today doesn't seem like the right time to post it (either last September or when it becomes the capital would be way more appropriate times). Joseph2302 (talk) 15:59, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
According to CNN, the new city won't be finished until 2045. So no, we're not waiting. If we don't post it now, we're not posting it. Mlb96 (talk) 17:34, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Agree with Joseph2302. We should post this once they actually build it and complete the ceremony of transferring the capital. Until then it's just a declaration of intent really, which on top of everything isn't new. I've been hearing about this intention for like a decade or so . --5.44.170.26 (talk) 17:39, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support This is a unique, interesting news story from a non-Anglosphere, non-European, non-Commonwealth country which doesn't involve an election, sports, or large amounts of death and destruction. ITN needs more of these kinds of stories, not fewer. The completion of the city won't be a discrete event with news coverage, and even if it is, it will be decades in the future. So if we're going to post this, it has to be now. Mlb96 (talk) 19:21, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's depressing to realize that it takes an unprecedented move of moving a capital city so that we can have a blurb from a non-Anglosphere, non-European, non-Commonwealth country that doesn't involve election, sports, or large amounts of death and destruction. Howard the Duck (talk) 21:59, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
God, the Philippines is too insignificant to be listed there, considering it moved the capital from Manila to Quezon City then back to Manila. There were fewer World Cup Finals than countries moving capitals in the past 100 years. I guess that's unprecedented too? Howard the Duck (talk) 22:58, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose because the blurb is inaccurate. We can either blurb the naming of the future capital city, or we can wait until the new city becomes the capital in 2024. NorthernFalcon (talk) 19:30, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose I think moving the capital will concluded in 2045 and starting in 2024 maybe, so why not posted two years later? Additionally, it is non-European story, but not significant impact for me. 180.254.169.24 (talk) 19:35, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support It's interesting enough, not a disaster or death, and helps reduce systemic bias to post. Lots of the content in the article is background from 2019, so not directly related to this announcement. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:57, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Oppose for now. The bill has not even been numbered yet, the construction has not been started and the actual capital is still de facto at Jakarta. Nyanardsan (talk) 23:14, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Alt News enough, timelier than Poitier, sexier than disaster. Waiting for constructon to end is tricky. Even London is still developing. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:19, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Oppose per Nyanardsan. we shouldn't even have an article on this before any legal product is published. There's currently none now. There could be significant changes behind the scene, or something else happening.
For those who support this in order to counter bias, I'm all for countering bias (I've spent hours creating RD articles for Indonesian figures from scratch). But since we apparently have only a single chance of posting a blurb on this topic, wasting it for the de jure approval seems a bit silly.--Regards, Jeromi Mikhael23:22, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Also comment, if this is approved, I suggest to use article Law on State Capitol instead of the "city" article (which doesnt exist yet), primarily because the event was about the law about the new city which was passed in plenary session yesterday, not the new city itself. Nyanardsan (talk) 23:39, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for now per WP:CRYSTAL. Giving that the bill was only approved by the parliament and the new capital will not commence its operation until 2024, so why not posted two years later? Additionally, the moving to the new capital only begins in 2024 and lasts until 2045. 114.125.252.202 (talk) 09:56, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Nominator's comments: Monumental deal in gaming. it does raise some antitrust questions but with Biden in charge it's pretty obvious this deals not getting blocked --5.44.170.26 (talk) 14:23, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Also, strong oppose on quality as there is only a small amount of content in the target article about the merger, and most of that is unsourced. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:49, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Also, the "legal disputes" section violates WP:CSECTION: Sections within an article dedicated to negative criticisms are normally also discouraged. And "is expected to do something in 2023" sounds a lot like WP:SPECULATION. Maybe people should try thinking about article quality rather than just mindlessly shouting support..... Joseph2302 (talk) 15:03, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Of course I'm concerned about quality. Rather than ascribing "mindlessness" to voters, which by the way is a near-violation of WP:NPA, why not let the process play out. This news literally just broke this morning. WaltCip-(talk)15:12, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support If we oppose this, we might as well never post mergers, period, and create an ITN/NR where we automatically blacklist certain items. This completely changes the video gaming and technological landscape not just in the West but internationally.--WaltCip-(talk)14:33, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Also, as a side note, I don't think Biden being in office as opposed to Trump would favor the companies in this instance. Trump's opposition to certain mergers and acquisitions was based on personal ideological quibbles with folks like Ted Turner and Jeff Bezos rather than any grounded antitrust precedence.--WaltCip-(talk)14:34, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
To add this now would make MS the third largest video game related company following Yencent and Sony. And given the VG market is estimated around $200B a year, this is a huge amount of money to achieve this --Masem (t) 14:42, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. This is a big deal for both business and gaming. A common objection to these postings is that this is just an announcement, but this is when it gets the attention, not when the deal is finalized. Any antitrust issues that derail it likely would also merit posting. 331dot (talk) 14:38, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per WaltCip. "We opposed mergers in the past" is not in itself a valid rationale unless you can point out opposition to a merger of comparable scale. Regards SoWhy14:45, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
We've had many mergers proposed, and none posted. Including Facebook/Meta incorporating WhatsApp, Instagram etc... Which are comparable. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:49, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well it's also not even on the front page of BBC News in the UK, so they don't consider it one of the biggest 20 stories at the moment. Just having articles doesn't make it groundbreaking... Joseph2302 (talk) 15:17, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that there is lack of logic to (not) posting mergers and acquisitions at times. I feel we ought to post them more often, because arbitrarily denying certain acquisitions creates dilemmas such as these. "Business" used to be considered a minority topic at ITN, when we still tracked that sort of thing. WaltCip-(talk)15:13, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Biggest deal in history of gaming. Now that gaming is the largest entertainment industry, I think it's hard to justify not posting about it. Melmann15:29, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support. The Guardian is reporting this is the "biggest deal in tech history" in terms of cash involved, although it's only about 2% more than the previous record. Certainly a big transaction which further consolidates the industry and sets up Microsoft as as big a games producer as Sony is, complementing their competition on hardware. But I doubt it makes much difference to end users, as games are all made by individual studios that are subsidiaries of the giants anyway, hence the weak support. Article content appears OK, there are now three referenced paragraphs on the deal. Modest Geniustalk15:43, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think thd metric to consider for m&a is not just size but impact on market. Eg while Facebook acquiring Instagram or Whatsapp may have involved more money, that fundamental shift (at the time) social media or IT industries. There is almost universal agreement this acquisition is a fundamental shift in the vg industry, though, from RSes. --Masem (t) 15:50, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
For what it's worth, Facebook's acquisition of Instagram in 2012 was only $1 billion, but it definitely had a major impact in that industry. Microsoft is valuing Activision Blizzard at about 70 Instagrams (remember well when that was a thing).rawmustard (talk) 16:11, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per WP:NERDBIAS, aka the Carrie Fisher rule. This would not have been the largest deal in any of the last nine calendar years. We don't post a lot of mergers, and it's not hard to see why this relatively small one is gaining momentum here. GreatCaesarsGhost15:51, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
also whether you like this nerd stuff or not, it's on the main pages of wall street journal, and really any business daily worldwide. And indeed as I've linked above on the main pages of most mainstream news websites in general. So your point is really mute, especially since I highly doubt Fisher was on the main page of WSJ or Le Monde the day she died 5.44.170.26 (talk) 16:52, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Here's your citation. I didn't say I don't like nerd stuff, rather I implied the crowd that spends all day editing WP is nerdier than the public at large. We do not, cannot, and never will post every story that appears on the MP of the WSJ. We must exercise discretion. We have actively declined larger, more impactful mergers in the past. Posting one now because it appeals to our personal interest is clear bias. GreatCaesarsGhost17:19, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Biased though it may be, ITN operates on consensus and participation. I don't think that our failure to post certain stories should be used to deny those other stories that readers would be interested in. Also, if it's discretion from the standpoint of appealing to readership that you are concerned about, we ought to have something to put on the ticker that isn't just deaths and disasters, for a change. I think that's a valid use of discretion. WaltCip-(talk)17:44, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with you 100%. But even if you are casting aside bad precedence, we should be cautious about doing so when it serves WP:ILIKEIT. See the United States' disparate handling of the crack & opioid epidemics. GreatCaesarsGhost18:45, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wait – Microsoft announced its intent to acquire Activision Blizzard (my emphasis). No need for breathless Main Page promotion. – Sca (talk) 16:57, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Both companies' boards have approved the plans. It is now mainly how much worldwide govts will scrutinize the deal. As noted in past merger itncs the time to post is when the news is announced, not at when it completes. --Masem (t) 17:29, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I fully expect to get overruled here (and wouldn't be that torn up about it), but I just can't support a merger without some concrete policy on what does and what doesn't merit posting. Personally, reasons like "Microsoft is spending a lot of money on this merger" or even more nebulous statements like "this will have a big impact on gaming" (especially with no indicator of why) don't stand as sufficient reasons to post. DarkSide830 (talk) 18:12, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support because a) business news is under-represented on ITN. I'd say that extremely large takeovers merit posting on ITN, and at nearly $69 billion this qualifies as "extremely large". b) The quality of the target article is fine for an article of that size. I'll do a quick pass in ten minutes and try to fix the one tag that I see. NorthernFalcon (talk) 19:00, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support It is in the news and a big business deal. It may not be the biggest, but it is big enough. If we only posted the biggest story in each field when the last story's scale was overtaken, ITN would be incredibly dry. No earthquakes if they are lower in magnitude and death toll than previous ones? Etc. Just because bigger business deals have not been posted, doesn't mean there were not good arguments for them to be posted. Has consensus changed. Kingsif (talk) 20:53, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, means nothing to anyone except gaming fans, who are a minority among gamers, who are a minority among Wikipedia readers. No actual indication of impact on anything at all except the flow of money. Abductive (reasoning)03:13, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's estimated 3 billion people in the world play video games [64] - about 40% of the world population - so calling this minority or niche is misleading. --Masem (t) 04:18, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
40% is a damn large minority when you consider that 44% of the world's population are association football fans[65], and even fewer are cricket and basketball fans. It's not all far-fetched to compare video games to sports in terms of popularity. WaltCip-(talk)13:35, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Mostly Support I am not a gamer but I recognize that this is major news, especially since this was headline news in many business publications. This is involving the third largest video game company purchasing the fifth largest, with each one generating billions of dollars in revenue annually. Not to mention that Disney's purchase of 21st Century Fox was slightly larger than this acquisition, and it got featured on ITN. The only real reservation that I have is that it might be more appropriate to post it when the acquisition does go through. Mount Patagonia (talk) 04:43, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support, should probably mention that its the biggest aquisition in Gaming (and Entertainment?) history, by a long shot. jonas (talk) 04:49, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Er… it is not the biggest entertainment acquisition, by a long shot (see: Disney) - but it is the biggest acquisition of anything by Microsoft, and as the second-biggest technology company in the world (behind Apple), it is that which is significant. Kingsif (talk) 05:41, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I see that Disney-Fox was posted, no reason to hold this back based on those grounds. But we should wait for it to actually go through than jump-in here. Gotitbro (talk) 07:09, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Gotitbro The announcement of a business deal always gets more attention than when the deal is actually completed. When that happens, the argument is typically that the deal is no longer sufficiently in the news. If the transaction is derailed for some reason, that would likely merit posting. 331dot (talk) 08:12, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I see, either way I think this should be posted. I was basing my comment on the WSJ report that has been included herein which says that the deal hasn't been finalized as of yet. Gotitbro (talk) 10:32, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think this has a sufficient support to post. The article is decently updated. Please check the blurb, I am not sure how to format the sum involved but most likely not the way it is written now. --Tone08:56, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support (This makes Support 11, to 5 Opposed, for reference) On Disney-Fox precedent. ITN posted the Disney-Fox deal twice, at announcement and at shareholder approval. Hence, I believe precedent indicates there's no need to wait. As currently written, I have no concern about the arguments re: quality, or impact. Sourcing looks fine, and the potential impacts are already implied and/or stated in Prose within the section of the article. Canadianerk (talk) 12:31, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm posting now, without the sum, which is probably not the key thing here (the acquisition is). Feel free to add the sum. --Tone12:38, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support A large number of Wikipedia readers go to articles about this game company and its games. Some of their games have sold tens of millions of copies. This is something significant that many readers will want to read about. DreamFocus12:51, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Can we not pull a story just hours after it goes up? I know the consensus is a narrow one, but it really makes ITN on the Main Page look downright manic when we get into this habit of posting and pulling stories due to vagaries in consensus. WaltCip-(talk)13:32, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - surprised this was posted, definitely feels like some bias here but not really complaining to see business news. However, note this is simply intent to buy, not the acquisition itself. Would think posting would be more appropriate when the deal actually closes. - Indefensible (talk) 19:24, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The announcement always gets more attention than when the deal is actually carried out and completed. Now was the right time to post. If we wait, the argument against will then be that it is not in the news. 331dot (talk) 19:31, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that now is the time to post. The key thing here in my view is both boards have approved of this acquisition. I would have suggested a wait if either of the boards were still pending an approval. Ktin (talk) 19:35, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The deal closing will definitely generate news coverage, I doubt that would be much of an issue for a business deal of this size. Posting an event prior to it occurring and only based on anticipation seems contrary to other entries which receive encyclopedic coverage once they have become historic fact. - Indefensible (talk) 03:48, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
We post convictions or acquittals in court cases despite the years of appeals that likely follow. We post the election results once asserted by press sources rather than waiting for the official count which can be a month or so later. --Masem (t) 03:54, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There is probably a decent argument that your 2 examples are notably different than a case like a business deal being announced. We don't post sports events like the Olympics being scheduled in advance I think. - Indefensible (talk) 04:01, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Actually it seems the announcement for 2032 was posted, but 2024 and 2028 were not. Still think it seems questionable, I would have no problem with this getting a blurb at deal closure but feels premature. NVIDIA buying Arm Holdings is another landmark deal I would point to which should get a blurb if closure happens. - Indefensible (talk) 04:09, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Post-posting support. Significant business news in line with previous ITN acquisition blurbs, and which is currently in the news. Also, I'll note that pulling it would restore the previous ITN blurb to maintain main page balance, which is Sidney Poitier's death nearly two weeks ago, which is very stale. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions02:03, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
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.
@Jayron32: Article seems to be in good shape now with the section expanded and most of it backed up by sources. Considering how big of a legend Gento was in football, getting it out on the page should be suitable now. BastianMAT (talk) 16:44, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I've added some cn tags, but generally the wikibio is in good condition. Honours sections should have more sources and I think the Legacy section is not very objective. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 21:48, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Canada deploys a small contingent of special forces to Ukraine as part of a NATO response to deter Russian aggression. The unit is also being tasked with evacuating diplomatic personnel from the Canadian embassy in Kyiv in the event of a full-scale invasion. (Reuters)
Greece begins to introduce monthly fines for people over the age of 60 who are unvaccinated against COVID-19 amid an increase in the number of new cases in the country. The monthly fine will initially be €50 this month and will be €100 per month thereafter. (NPR)
Health Canada approves the use of Pfizer's anti-COVID-19 viral drug Paxlovid for people over the age of 18 years who are at risk of severe disease and death. (CBC News)
The Philippines begins to ban people who are unvaccinated against COVID-19 from riding public transport and entering commercial planes despite protests from labour and human rights groups. (Al Jazeera)
Law and crime
A Parisian court fines far-right French television pundit and presidential candidateÉric Zemmour€10,000 for calling unaccompanied migrant children "rapists" and "murderers" during a September 2020 television broadcast. (BBC News)
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Indian environmentalist. Article requires some work. I will work on it unless someone wants to join-in and lend a hand. Edits done. Article is a reasonable C-class biography. Ktin (talk) 07:11, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
There are about 10 {cn} tags in the prose and dozens of unreferenced bullet-points under Filmography, Television work and Recordings. Please add more REFs. --PFHLai (talk) 20:18, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Weak oppose Article is mostly a resume in prose format for his legal career: what were major cases he oversaw as a judge? Would be ready with a couple sentences (5-6?) about important cases. SpencerT•C05:38, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Question/Request: Ref. #1 is used 7 times in this wikibio. Its link to Chicago Tribune is dead. Can it be updated, please? Is it the same as this, please? I don't have a subscription to verify. --PFHLai (talk) 16:15, 22 January 2022 (UTC) BTW, I should add that I have found no other concerns with this nom. This wikibio is READY for RD. It would be great if the deadlink in Ref. #1 can be updated or replaced before the link goes on MainPage. Thanks. --PFHLai (talk) 23:26, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
About half of the Selected publications section is unreferenced. Please add more footnotes or make the list more selected. --PFHLai (talk) 15:16, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I do agree with your other point below, but I doubt very much that the above is anything more that personal preference. Can you point me to the policy or MOS which requires this? —Brigade Piron (talk) 17:34, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Please see Wikipedia:In the news#Recent deaths section, point #3: "Of sufficient quality to be posted on the main page, as determined by a consensus of commenters." If just by eyeballing, half of the section looks unreferenced, you can't really convince me that the quality of sourcing is good enough, can you? Missing one or two bullet-points might be small enough an issue to disregard. We don't need FAs here. Just some decent articles with no glaring issues. The nominated wikibio is almost ready. I have no problems with the prose. --PFHLai (talk) 23:21, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. In addition to the points that PFHLai raises, the biographical material is very thin. Also a reliable independent source is needed for the pioneering nature of his exhibitions. Espresso Addict (talk) 00:51, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have thrown in as many footnotes or ISBN to the Selected publications section as I could find and commented out one unreferenced bullet-point (I can't find the ISBN). I have also removed the word "pioneering" and hopefully that sentence identified by Espresso Addict no longer needs a citation for that. I hope someone can find the refs for the awards in the infobox and write more to address the Espresso Addict's "biographical material is very thin" before this nom's eligibility runs out in less than one hour. --PFHLai (talk) 23:08, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Indian dancer. Article requires some work. Edits done. Article is a reasonable C-class biography. Good for homepage / RD. Ktin (talk) 04:31, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Late Reply The birthday alternated between 1938 and 1937 during the last 16 years of his life, no source. After he died and while the author of the current source likely Googled him, the article was on 1937. Citogenesis, I suspect. Randy Savage had the wrong name the same way for a spell. But the source for 83 likely just Googled him when WP said 1938, so it's a draw, weak support still. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:27, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support – 26 deaths and the extent of destruction is easily notable even if the magnitude is smaller than 6.0 Mw. Haven't had an earthquake ITN since that Oct 5.9 in Pakistan which also resulted in a similar extent of damage and casualties. --Dora the Axe-plorer (explore the morgue) 21:59, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Afghanistan has earthquakes like some places have rain. Not saying this death and destruction is insignificant. But by Afghan, earthquake and Afghan earthquake standards, it lacks oomph. It was also two earthquakes. Hard to know if the stronger was deadlier. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:06, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I remember. Read it a day or so too late to help, felt kinda bad for having "better" things to do, sorry for your loss. Don't delay, act today, eh? InedibleHulk (talk) 22:43, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It treats a pair of earthquakes as a single earthquake, before and after acknowledging the weaker one happened. Is that fundamentally encyclopedic? I think not. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:22, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Oppose not mentioned in article listed. Events that aren't notable enough for their own article won't be notable enough for ITN. And don't currently see lots of news coverage about it. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:46, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Still oppose on quality, as the article is basically a stub. It has 4 sentences on the attack, 4 sentences on actual aftermath, and is then just bloated with reactions. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:35, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose due to absence of article, neutral on significance the most significant thing here is that the UAE hasn't seen any terror attacks in years as it's a relatively peaceful country. Heck, I can't recall any terror attacks at this scale that happened there in the last 15 years. Tube·of·Light15:11, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Three deaths is tragic for those affected, but this is a minor footnote in the Yemeni Civil War (2014–present). It's unusual for the Houthis to attack across the border into the UAE, but it seems unlikely to make much difference to the outcome of the war, or anything else really. Also the blurbs make this sound like an accident, while the article makes it clear it was a deliberate attack. Modest Geniustalk12:20, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Authorities say that gunmen have killed more than 50 people, including two soldiers and a police officer, in a raid on a village in Kebbi State, northwesternNigeria. Security forces were forced to flee the area, leaving the militants to burn down shops and kidnap women and children. (Reuters)
Military personnel from the Swedish Armed Forces are deployed to the island of Gotland in response to fears that Russia may attempt an invasion of Swedish territory amidst tensions between NATO and Russia over their intention to invade Ukraine. (Euronews)
Denmark reopens cinemas, zoos, museums and theatres as well as allowing limited number of spectators in indoor and outdoor sports despite the rising number of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant cases in the country. (AP)
Thailand reports its first confirmed death related to the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant in a 86-year-old woman who died last month in Songkhla Province. (Bangkok Post)
The French National Assembly votes 215–58 to give a final approval of mandatory vaccine pass that will require people aged above 16 years to be fully vaccinated in order to enter public places and long-distance public transport. The new law regarding vaccine pass will take effect in coming days once the law gets approved from the Constitutional Council. (Voice of America)
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Former United Airlines CEO. Article seems to be new. Currently a stub. I will work on it. Someone might need to 'patrol' the article as appropriate. Edits done. Rater.js says article is a B-class bio, but, I think it is a solid C-class biography. Meets expectations for homepage / RD. Unrelated, can someone help me create a disambiguation page? There are three Richard Ferris bios and I think a nice disambiguation page will be good. Ktin (talk) 01:26, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
I would suggest that the title of the article is not consistent with how disambiguation should be made. It's POV-ish in that the more concise title is just "(pilot)". --Masem (t) 05:41, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
The Public service and philanthropy section has much unref'd materials. Much of the After government section looks like WP:proseline. This wikibio also have a handful of {cn} tags that should be addressed. --PFHLai (talk) 14:39, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The death toll from the civil unrest in Kazakhstan increases to 225, including 19 members of the security forces, according to a statement from the Prosecutor General's Office. (Reuters)
The Philippines reports a record for the third consecutive day of 39,004 new cases of COVID-19, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 3,168,379. (Rappler)
France restricts the validity of health pass for fully vaccinated people to seven months after received their second dose and require them to receive booster dose. (Deutsche Welle)
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: former bunny of the united states. announcement made on this date, though exact date of death appears unclear. article appears to be in decent shape. dying (talk) 07:58, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
People who read the English Wikipedia would likely be more interested in Mike Pence's pet rabbit (a topic which has remained in the English-speaking public's consciousness) than a former Japanese prime minister who served a little more than two years around the end of the Cold War. For that matter, the jawiki article for Marlon Bundo (ja:マーロン・ブンド) looks nice as well, a sign of Bundo's international impact. feminist (talk)12:39, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Wait, borderline oppose - Adding on to Ad Orientem's point, only four people were taken hostage, and one has already been released IIRC. Given the small number, unless it escalates into a major firefight or Siddiqui does get released because of this, I don't see anything particularly blurb worthy about this. Mount Patagonia (talk) 01:58, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The point is that, assuming no further escalation occurs, there isn't much about this that makes it important enough to get it reported as a blurb on the frontpage. Mount Patagonia (talk) 02:26, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - does not rise to the level of significance required. Can this be added to one of the current events pages? Do we even have “News in the United States”? Maybe Wikinews? Great work on the article. Thank you for it. JehochmanTalk13:57, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If it turns out Boris or the Queen were behind this, somebody ping me. Otherwise this was just a routine hostage situation with no wide ranging or long term significance. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:36, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
They'll be an investigation in regard to how a non-resident foreigner bought guns in the US. Other aspects of the investigation will be why Akram choose to target a synagogue, what connection he thought a synagogue in Texas had to Aafia Siddiqui & why he thought she should be released. Jim Michael (talk) 20:55, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Surprising as it all is, looks like this is not some new wave of cross-border Islamic antisemitic terrorism, just the synagogue was open and close to the prison. So, standard as far as hostage incidents go, and consensus suggests those are not unusual enough to go in the box. Are they? Kingsif (talk) 21:14, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I was initially opposed to it being posted, but I'm now undecided. If he was a lone wolf & his only connection to Siddiqui is that he was a supporter of her, it isn't important enough. Jim Michael (talk) 21:27, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
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.
In need of footnotes for the many championships and the statue. The table in the Head coaching record section looks incomplete; please add refs there, too. --PFHLai (talk) 14:33, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Ongoing I was posting a nomination too but Jonas got there first. The volcano has been erupting since 20 Dec so this is the latest in a series of events and there may be more to come. Ongoing may therefore be sensible as with the other recent volcanic eruptions which lasted for weeks. Andrew🐉(talk) 13:47, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support regardless of ultimate death count. Top news story currently, the entire Pacific Ocean is on red alert. Large amounts of damage is inevitable. Mlb96 (talk) 16:44, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wait! – AP dispatch of 16:30 relates "no immediate reports of injuries" in Tonga and "no reported damage and only minor flooding" in Hawaii. Also, wave height at Monterey, Calif., put at only 8 inches (20 cm). Prudence dictates reserving judgment until this apparently weak tsunami's effects known. – Sca (talk) 16:50, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
PS: Our own article, under subhead Impact, says: "No information is yet available on the extent of damage and casualties from Tonga due to communication issues." ITN promotion of such a sketchy article would be premature. – Sca (talk) 17:54, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Just for posterity, full quotation from the AP article: "There were no immediate reports of injuries or on the extent of the damage because all internet connectivity with Tonga was lost at about 6:40 p.m. local time, said Doug Madory, director of internet analysis for the network intelligence firm Kentik." Prism55 (talk) 18:25, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wait Volcanoes erupt all the time. If this one is substantially larger (it appears that we are giving in a VEI 5 without citation), or it causes death/destruction it could be posted. But I'm seeing nothing that specifically indicates this is significant. GreatCaesarsGhost16:59, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Though ITN is obsessed with WP:MINIMUMDEATHS, this is already unprecedented, even if (hopefully) the damage is minimal. She said the advisory was “fairly uncommon” because it was due to a volcanic eruption and not an underwater earthquake, and because it extended to the entire West Coast.[66].—Bagumba (talk) 17:05, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
So far, this (continuing?) geologic/marine event appears to lack general significance or major impact. Ergo, wait. – Sca (talk) 17:28, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wait I support on importance - this probably should be ITNR, but isn't. The issue is that I haven't seen a metric for how large the eruption was, or an assessment of the impact on the ground in Tonga. Most of the article is about the tsunami (and the tsunami was barely an event at all). Presumably satellite internet in Tonga will be working in the morning and we will get some sense of the situation on the ground. Also there will presumably be a better sense of the size of the eruption. User:力 (powera, π, ν)
Support - How much news do we end up posting from Tonga? And should we not concern ourselves with diversity of topics? A butcher's bill need not be an indication of newsworthiness.--WaltCip-(talk)19:13, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support [Ongoing] Compares well in impact and notability to most disasters posted on ITN. Lacking known deaths/damage doesn't help the case for such an event, but also doesn't disqualify it. EDIT: modified support for ongoing due to continued eruptions and impacts. DarkSide830 (talk) 19:26, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It can always be shifted to Ongoing once there's consensus for that. By the time it's cleared for an ongoing tab, it could be approaching stale - if not be completely stale. I don't see the point of sitting on a nomination if it meets criteria now, just in case it goes on longer than anticipated. Canadianerk (talk) 21:32, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Posted – Consensus in favor of posting, with some suggesting to wait. This is a significant geologic event with global news coverage and impact (even if it doesn't reach WP:MINIMUMDEATHS). It could be months before the full-scale of the eruption is seen, as major volcanic events can have an impact on global climate. The magnitude of the eruption (Volcanic Explosivity Index) is undetermined so a recurrence interval is not available as of yet. Pressure fluctuations are being observed halfway across the globe (with seismographsmeasuring the shockwave in the Cascade Volcanoes), which is not a frequent occurrence as far as I'm aware. A blurb is most appropriate over ongoing given the main event happened within the last day. Ongoing can be discussed down the road when this item rolls off the ticker. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 20:08, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Post-posting comment – Sunday coverage includes: "Tsunami threat over after huge Pacific volcano eruption" (BBC), "Pacific tsunami threat recedes as volcano ash cloud covers Tonga" (Guardian), "Surging waters sank at least one boat in Ventura (Calif.) Harbor" (AP). As of 13:00, no casualties had been reported. – Sca (talk) 13:37, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sweden announces that it will withdraw its troops from a French-led special forces mission in Mali later this year, in response to Mali's ruling military junta inviting private Russian military contractors to fight Islamist rebels. The deployment was originally expected to end in 2024. (Reuters)
The Philippines reports a record for the second consecutive day of 37,207 new cases of COVID-19, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 3,129,512. (Rappler)
Cambodia begins administering fourth doses of the COVID-19 vaccine for high-risk groups, including healthcare workers, government ministers, and members of the armed forces. (AP)
Uruguay opens its borders to citizens and residents who have been infected with COVID-19. People will need to travel in private vehicles across the border and be in a family "bubble". (Reuters)
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Oppose Insufficient depth of coverage. Lede starts "He wrote a gardening column in The Sun newspaper for over 40 years." but body of the article has no info about this. SpencerT•C05:57, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Indian author. Padma Shri awardee. Article requires good amount of work before it can be ready. Edits done. Article has shaped into a nice C-class biography. Meets hygiene expectations for homepage / RD. Ktin (talk) 02:36, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Not Ready For a change referencing is not the issue. The article is just really subpar for a former prime minister of one of the world's major countries and needs expansion. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:46, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The prose lacks info (and refs) on many of the subject's political office and honorary titles as shown in the infobox and the succession boxes on the wikipage. Please expand the coverage. --PFHLai (talk) 20:42, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's comments: Relatively well-documented and very recent attack with potential future ramifications. The article was fully up to date by the 17th. Toadspike (talk) 22:30, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Six people are missing and three others are hospitalized following an explosion and subsequent fire at a commercial building in Ottawa, Canada. (Reuters)
The Standing Committee on Vaccination recommends that children between the ages of 12 and 17 years should receive a booster dose of the COVID-19 vaccine at least three months after having received their second dose, becoming one of the first countries to authorize booster doses for this age group. (Deutsche Welle)
Britishhealth secretarySajid Javid announces that the self-isolation period for positive COVID-19 patients in England will be reduced to five days in order to reduce the impact of absences caused by the Omicron variant on businesses and the health sector. This change will take effect on January 17. (Financial Times)
Finland reduces the quarantine period for positive COVID-19 patients to five days because the duration of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant's virus cycle is shorter than other variants. (Yle News)
The Philippine Department of the Interior and Local Government issues an administrative order to all barangays in the Philippines to submit a list of unvaccinated residents in order to prevent their movement in response to the recent increase in cases of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant. (GMA News)
The Philippines reports a record of 34,021 new cases of COVID-19, thereby bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 3,092,409. This is the highest reported number of cases in a day since the start of the pandemic. (GMA News)
Bangladesh bans all public gatherings, restricts the capacity of public transportation to 50%, and mandates that face masks be worn in all public places in an attempt to reduce the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant. (The Business Standard)
Senegal authorizes the use of COVID-19 vaccines for children over the age of 12 years and also authorizes the use of booster doses for adults. (Reuters)
Tunisia reimposes a nighttime curfew between 10 p.m. and 5 a.m. for the next two weeks and also orders the suspension of all public gatherings due to an increase in the number of COVID-19 cases in the country. (France 24)
Italy imposes a six-month ban of hunting and other activities involving direct or indirect contact with infected boars in 114 rural areas in the north-western regions of Piedmont and Liguria, where the spread African swine fever has infected the animals. (Reuters)
The French Senate votes 249–63, with 26 abstentions, to approve a bill that would ban unvaccinated people from entering bars, restaurants, and other public places and also from using long-distance public transport. However, the modified bill would only apply to people over the age of 18 years and would only be in effect if the number of hospitalized patients exceeds 10,000 nationwide. (The Independent)
As part of the fallout from his ongoing civil sexual assault trial, Prince Andrew hands back all of his royal patronages and military titles to his mother, the Queen, and drops the use of the title "His Royal Highness" in an official capacity. (BBC News)
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: : Arguments in favour of the nomination: first court ruling worldwide explicitly ruling that the government of Syria commits torture and mass killings of civilians. The ruling has a high impact well beyond the case of the person convicted today. Arguments against the nomination: the defence lawyers can still appeal the conviction and the article on Anwar Raslan needs to be expanded. GerritCUTEDH22:46, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Article strikes me as being a little too "preachy", i.e. too eager to push a particular POV. Claims have been over-egged in furtherance of this. The Syrian government was not on trial and the "first" claims are either narrowly defined or seemingly in contradiction to the Al-Gharib case referred to in the references. 3142 (talk) 07:10, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose BLP issues- he has a right to appeal the verdict, and the article is question is wholly focused on this trial, and so is not NPOV. Also, numbers in article don't match the blurb, ALT1 is POV and not in the article, and the article needs more sources. Joseph2302 (talk) 09:32, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Leaving the other issues aside, we usually post convictions and do not wait for all appeals to be exhausted(which can take years and even decades). If a conviction is overturned, that can be posted. 331dot (talk) 09:34, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
To clarify, there are no BLP issues when RS's supply the information. The last sentence here is whistling in the wind: Bill Cosby's overturned conviction was not posted. I doubt any would be, unless ITN policy on this is locked in place. 96.5.122.4 (talk) 15:46, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There are however BLP violations on an article when it's written exclusively about this, with a massive focus on the conviction, and no other content. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:49, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support ... in principle, pending cleanup or separate article. A significant event and precedent. Very widely covered on Thursday; some follow-ups today. [67][68] – Sca (talk) 16:35, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The Nigerian government lifts its Twitter ban, which was implemented in June 2021, after Twitter agreed to pay an "applicable tax" and also establish a legal entity within the country sometime in the first quarter of the year. (The Guardian Nigeria)
Saudi Arabia reports a record 5,362 new cases of COVID-19 in the past 24 hours, bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 593,545. (Al Arabiya English)
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Also, the only criteria for a biographical article to be posted at RD is article quality. So, "support when issues resolved" is kinda redundant. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:56, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support – I just got rid of the last of the cn tags, and will continue to watch this article and provide sources as needed. It looks to me to be in pretty good shape right now. GA-RT-22 (talk) 02:19, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: While we wait for a spot to open up on the RD line, can we have a non-primary source for the solo singles, please. And preferably not on the subject header, please. The footnotes shows up in the table of contents and looks rather odd there. Thanks. --PFHLai (talk) 12:43, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Good point, although a quick check at discogs and 45Cat (as usual) reveals they are all genuine. I'm not sure why any of her official discography should really be doubted. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:50, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well, that was tagged. It's a minor thing that should not hold up this nom, but would be nice if it can be resolved before the link goes on MainPage. (Sorry, I have no clue what 45CAT means, but it's amusing to see it next to DiscOGs.) --PFHLai (talk) 16:12, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: Malaysian soccer player, coach, and sports broadcaster. Article requires some work. I will get to it later tonight if no one gets to it earlier. Ktin (talk) 18:45, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Long enough (600+ words), but needs more refs (4 {cn} tags). Would be nice if "He won every domestic honour, including the Malaysia Cup, Malaysian FA Cup and League Championship." can be expanded to include some details on what he did to earn all these honours. --PFHLai (talk) 13:21, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Quebec announces plans to impose a "significant" tax on those who are not vaccinated against COVID-19, with exemptions for those who have legitimate medical exemptions from taking the vaccine. However, few additional details were revealed on a policy which would be a first in Canada. (The Globe and Mail)
Italy reports a record 220,532 new cases of COVID-19 in the past 24 hours, bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 7.77 million. (Agenzia Italia)
Argentina reports a record 134,439 new cases of COVID-19 in the past 24 hours, bringing the nationwide total of confirmed cases to 6,533,635. (Infobae)
The IsraeliHealth ministry approves a reduction of the isolation period for asymptomatic positive COVID-19 patients from ten to seven days in order to keep the economy running despite an increase in the number of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant cases. The changes will be in effect on January 13. (The Times of Israel)
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.
Joofjoof, article is not proposed for a blurb so why are you asking here instead of on the article talk page? Flickr has two eligible images, but both are so poor as to be disfigurements. What is "etc."? Search was made of the Library of Congress photo library which has nothing. -SusanLesch (talk) 23:14, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Joofjoof, thank you for the nudge. When I pulled the crop back from his face to full length we got a pretty unmistakable talking (?) stick. Can't say I like the photo but it is free and beggars can't be choosers. Best wishes. -SusanLesch (talk) 15:38, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Nominator's comments: This was posted 2020, is always one of the biggest sporting events of the year in the nation with ~40% of en.wiki readers, the college football coach is by far the highest-paid government employee of many states with some (including this game's loser) having $9.5 to $10 million/yr guaranteed salary contracts and many other arguments that don't seem to convince non-North Americans. Also since the Supreme Court made the federal sports gambling ban unconstitutional in 2018.4 (also not posted) legal online betting has started in states exceeding 1 UK population by now including the biggest market for the foreseeable future — New York. The NY betting rate instantly increased tens of thousands of percent due to going from shops in the "wilderness" only to BetRivers, Caesars William Hill, DraftKings & FanDuel apps @ 9 a.m 3 days ago and more will come later. Thus the college game is becoming an even bigger source of U.S. economic activity over time (One dude even lost $6.15 million picking the wrong winner (to hedge a promotion where if Georgia loses anyone who bought $3,000 of Houston mattress shop stuff from him will get it for free) Would a single bookmaker accepting his bets of $1.5 million & $1.2 mil on a slight underdog without moving the odds much be a busy market by UK standards?) Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 21:28, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This is not an ITNR and should not be. The international impact and interest is very low and it doesn't seem to be the most notorious sporting event in the USA if we compare it with the Super Bowl or the NBA, which are ITNR and rightly so. As Masem said two years ago, "college footage is equivalent to minor league/amateur sports, which we should not post unless it is like the Boat Race, the most significant event in that sport". Nor do I think that the economic value of it is decisive, as it's something that interests only college football fans (and that's fine). _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 21:47, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nonsense. There's no limit to how many events can be posted. The NCAA college basketball tournament is on ITN/R even though it is (1) amateur, and (2) considered less than the NBA Finals or FIBA championship. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:04, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:ITN/C (above): Please do not ... oppose an item 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 unproductive.—Bagumba (talk) 23:08, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Major event, top annual event in college football, would increase us from one (1) American football item in a year to two (2), so not onerous or overbearing in this way. It's in the news, covered by all the top sources, and we have a quality article. A lot of people here just don't like it. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:04, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Alsoriano97, that was not addressed specifically at you. The college football national championship game has been nominated every year since 2011, and a lot of the opposition is IDONTLIKEIT. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:18, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support Given the precedent of posting this and related events in the past, including the INT/R status of the NCAA basketball tournament (per Muboshgu). I personally have questions about notability, but there seems to be enough reason to post. DarkSide830 (talk) 22:30, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The first hatnote in the college football article states "This article is about gridiron football played at an amateur level in the United States". Is the hatnote incorrect in stating that this is an amateur competition? Chrisclear (talk) 07:02, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Could be subtle trolling? It's only amateur cause the players would be banned for life if they took any money or free stuff for playing. The Supreme Court has now allowed 1 laptop, free tutors just for them and other things that can help their education. Some need tutoring cause colleges care little to nothing about your pre-college academics if you want to play football or basketball with them and your football skill would improve the team. They'll even give like 50 players an (almost) full football scholarship (free tuition+room and board) regardless of how much the player can afford to pay. It is a surviving relic from the time when amateurism in sport was more widely regarded and even the best Olympic champions could be and were banned for life for having the nerve to play after making money from sport. 15:31, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
There's 8 college football stadiums that are only exceeded in size by a soccer/track and field/mass games stadium in North Korea and 1 from Indian cricket. All 4 sports have bigger fields than gridiron too which means a 100K+ gridiron stadium has to be taller and thus harder to build for the same distance to the nosebleed section. And there's only ~half a dozen home games a year. The coaches only make a little less than the top league coaches, Georgia's coach makes $7 million a year and $7m isn't even in the top 3rd of his conference. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 00:32, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This year's game drew an estimated 22+ million TV viewers.[70] For context, the recent ITNR darts promotion claimed 2M viewers in the UK and Netherlands. Comments that this game is "limited status", much like The Boat Race, will often depend on whether the !voter likes it or not, which is likely dependent on their locale.—Bagumba (talk) 23:55, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support this is a good quality article on an event that gets a lot of atttention. With the Super Bowl the only other American football story likely to be posted, I don't think two per year is excessive. Pawnkingthree (talk) 00:01, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on quality the team list is unsourced, the match summary has one or two sources per paragraph which doesn't seem like enough. And the TV broadcast sections in the infobox are not verified anywhere. And the teams season summary is confusing to a regular reader because it's filled with unexplained specific terminology, and has peacock phrases like escaped an upset bid and suffered their first and only setback. All in all, not good enough article for a non-specialist reader to understand. Although I fully exprcr this to get posted during the European night time based mostly on American votes, and ignoring the quality issues.... Joseph2302 (talk) 00:04, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I highly doubt that. This is an annual timesink that (with the exception of 2020) usually gets closed after about three days of arguing as "no consensus." Pawnkingthree (talk) 00:08, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I will comment that on quality, the article is way overly detailed, particularly on the season for both teams, and the recap (its supposed to be a recap, not play by play; must of that seems ripe for a box score table). Thus will help eliminate some of the slang and peacock terms. --Masem (t) 00:28, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the recap looks like a live blog sourced to primary source play-by-play link. Should rely on secondary sources for highlights.—Bagumba (talk) 06:39, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose 2nd tier championship and therefore not sufficiently notable. The wall of text (with its poor grammar and syntax) describing the economic effects of the sport are interesting, but do not make the competition any more notable. They just reiterate that the sport is played in a high-income country with a high population. I am guessing that the use of three non-American sources is possibly an attempt to suggest that this is "news" outside the US. However a mere cursory glance shows that the "UK" article is copied from AP wire, and the "Australian" article was written by an American, for an American audience, and then syndicated across all country-specific versions of Yahoo Sports. The French article link does not work. Chrisclear (talk) 07:14, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Your simplistic application of the "IDONTLIKEIT" label is both incorrect and unfortunate. As for a "real discussion" - it's in the sentences I wrote. Chrisclear (talk) 07:47, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This is not a second-tier championship. Division II would be, this is little different from NFL football with larger audiences. 331dot (talk) 11:43, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
From the college football article: "Therefore, college football is generally considered to be the second tier of American football in the United States and Canadian football in Canada; one step ahead of high school competition, and one step below professional competition." (My emphasis added). The first hatnote in the college football article states "This article is about gridiron football played at an amateur level in the United States". Is the hatnote correct in stating that this is an amateur competition? Furthermore, is it correct to state that the competitors in a/this College Football Playoff are limited to those that are, as the name suggests, college students? If I am correct on either or both counts (college students only, amateur competition), then I would disagree with your assertion that it is "little different" from NFL football. Chrisclear (talk) 12:11, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That it is amateur(which has been litigated in the US courts and is actually debatable) and involves college students is immaterial. College football draws larger crowds, larger TV audiences, and has larger stadiums than the NFL(at Division I, which this is). In essence, this is merely a different league, not a lower level league. What matters is how reliable sources cover this. 331dot (talk) 12:19, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
To me, logic would dictate that if it is an amateur (or quasi amateur) competition, then the pool of possible players is almost certain to be of lower quality than a professional league. Likewise, if the pool of possible players is limited to college students, then again, the skill level will be lower than a league with no such restrictions. As for crowd size, TV audience and stadium size, these reflect popularity, as opposed to encyclopaedic notability. Chrisclear (talk) 12:32, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The NFL has voluntarily banned players who haven't played college a few years (to encourage kids to not put excessive effort and hope into training football to the point that they get kicked out of college sports semesters for learning at <80% the normal speed) If they didn't do this then some kids would likely stop going to school on their 16th birthday (the earliest you can without Child Protective Services getting involved) in the usually misguided hope of getting skilled enough at football to make a living from it or even become an NFL millionaire. Also almost everyone trains but doesn't play their first year because of the 80% rule (unlike England college is 4 years in the USA because it includes 13th grade). This is called redshirting and means the players are usually 19 to almost 23. There's even free private boarding schools for the best secondary school football players (like IMG) who's academics are almost phony and they'll even let you stay, train and learn so you can delay the college. So it is more like a continent-scale under-23 league. There is no age limit or education ceiling, if you haven't played 4 years you can still play. And having to be a college student isn't much of a talent pool reducer due to how much football players are babied academically in most of the US (at least after elementary school). Teachers and professors grade them leniently, if they need it tutors get thrown at them, the easiest classes are never oversubscribed for them and so on. If you go to some football boarding schools the education isn't even accredited cause they're in states where if you say your school is religious they can't touch you even if that's clearly a front. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 16:55, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Oppose lower-tier sports competition. Sports, music competitions/personalities should be judged on merit not on salaries etc, else any B/C-list pop musician will trump the best classical virtuosos and sports stars with celebrity value such as David Beckham will trump players with better competitive impact simply because the 'charismatic' players can sell more shirts/get more sponsors. Note also that the Arab and Chinese football leagues also pay similar or higher than European leagues, which does not make the quality the same or better. In fact, the Arab and Chinese leagues are worse than 2nd division European domestic leagues that are obviously not going to be posted. Bumbubookworm (talk) 07:57, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Don't put words into my mouth. I know that. Only insular morons wouldn't. I was responding to the arguments of your like-minded compatriots who were citing the coaches' salary and other non-sporting merit metrics as a reason to post Bumbubookworm (talk) 09:22, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This is not a low-tier competition when it draws larger audiences and has bigger stadiums than the top professional league. 331dot (talk) 11:42, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I am not familiar with the British tiering system but what you describe seems akin to the difference between Major League Baseball and Minor League Baseball in the US.(The NFL does not really have a minor league system.) This is not like that. College football is a different league, not a lower league. College football has tiers based on university size and other factors(Division I, Division II, and Division III). This game is part of Division I, the top level of college football. 331dot (talk) 14:19, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
US and Canadian sports are built like the ill-fated European Super League. Sports leagues are not connected to each other. You can argue college football is a totally different "code" of gridiron vs. professional American football (same can be argued to college basketball and professional basketball in the US, plus leagues that follow the FIBA set of rules almost everywhere else), so you can argue further that Division I FBS is the top competition of the gridiron code known as college football. Premier League and EFL have always been played in the same FIFA set of rules and are actually connected to each other via promotion and relegation. Gridiron does share that concept. Howard the Duck (talk) 15:56, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Much has been said in the past about why this shouldn't be posted (amateur sport, low-tier competition, low impact, lowering standard for similar sport events etc.) and, after ten years of debating, there are no signs that something has drastically changed. To those griping about why The Boat Race is an ITNR item, please go to the talk page and demand it be delisted if you think this is comparable to it. To those hanging on to the wide coverage, Novak Djokovic's entry to Australia is by far the main story (not only sport-related) in the world but we haven't even considered it, which clearly implies that news coverage doesn't always make a strong case for a story to be posted.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:23, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose for the same reasons as every other year. This is an amateur competition open only to students at a handful of universities, isn't the highest level of the sport, is partly decided by a selection panel rather than performance on the field etc. This has been discussed to death over the years. I understand that many Americans watch the event, but that isn't enough. I have consistently opposed any and all student sports items, in any sport or country, and will continue to do so. Modest Geniustalk12:49, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
We have broken down this barrier by adding the basketball tournament to ITNR. I don't see why being a student should matter. The US Supreme Court has found that student athletes are exploited and prevented from being compensated fairly. Universities use their sports programs to generate revenue just as any NFL Team does. 331dot (talk) 14:16, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have consistently opposed NCAA basketball on the same grounds, including in the ITNR discussion you link below. I don't see how the court ruling or profit motives are at all relevant to the discussion here. Modest Geniustalk15:05, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's relevant because it means these players are not simple amateurs who play for the love of the sport. They are as invested as any "professional" player. 331dot (talk) 15:34, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You're trying to wring water from a stone. The opposition to this item is primarily because its inclusion will pave the way for posting numerous other sport events with the qualities of being amateur and low-tier competitions. If we really have to increase the number of sport stories posted, then we should definitely go with a horizontal rather than a vertical expansion.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 15:03, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm trying to uphold our mission here. I don't think what you say is the case, but what if it was? What is wrong with that? We have already broken down the "amateur" barrier. 331dot (talk) 15:08, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Mistakes made in the past don't make a rule. Arguments can be drawn from virtually every successful ITNR nomination (not only ITN) to support the inclusion of zillion other stories which normally shouldn't be included. And truly upholding our mission is to identify stories from underrepresented countries with a large number of English speakers, such as India, Pakistan or Nigeria.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 17:47, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Mistakes made in the past don't make a rule. Arguments can be drawn from virtually every successful ITNR nomination (not only ITN) to support the inclusion of zillion other stories which
Andrew Davidson As you should be aware by now, ITN is not a most-viewed article list. If you would like to eliminate ITN and replace it with a most-read article list, please propose that. 331dot (talk) 15:47, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Every single argument used to oppose this equally applies to events that are on ITN/R. We post many events that are 2nd tier (Japan Series, La Liga), amateur (Olympics, NCAA Basketball), have restricted participants (The Ashes, The Boat Race) or are of local or limited interest (PDC, Gaelic Football). Obviously, it's not that big of a deal if any of these (or CFP) gets posted or not. The issue for me is that we have guidelines and precedent that should be respected. Every so often, we throw them out the window and decide on pure sui generis, and this always leads to discontent and fights. The Betty White situation and Carrie Fisher before her are examples of this. People decide how they will !vote and then cherry-pick the evidence that supports their argument. There's no fix for this; like death blurbs, CFP is a blind spot of this project. GreatCaesarsGhost15:49, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Weak oppose. It is my understanding that we tend to post sporting events at the top level of their field only. I don't believe "amateur" status matters (GAA fan here) but if we're making that comparison, there is a difference between posting the top level finals in football/hurling versus posting the Hogan Cup finals. I'm not a gridiron fan and may be missing some nuance as a result but this seems to be clearly a tier below the Super Bowl, no? I wouldn't be in favour of posting the Europa League, Rugby Europe International Championships, etc and this seems to fall under the same remit. ᵹʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇꭗ15:53, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
We can make the same comparison if GAA is also involved with organizing or sanctioning the Hogan Cup (I didn't bother to check, sorry). For what it's worth, the NCAA doesn't even sanction CFB, and the NFL more so isn't even connected in anyway with CFB. You can make the argument that NFL football and college football are different codes of gridiron, with CFB as the highest level of competition for the latter. Howard the Duck (talk) 16:00, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The Hogan Cup is a GAA competition, yes; it's a schools and colleges level competition as opposed to the senior county level one. I certainly don't know enough about gridiron to make or refute any argument about "different codes" but, earnestly, is this bigger than the Super Bowl? ᵹʀᴀᴘᴘʟᴇꭗ16:04, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No, but one could argue it's bigger than the other three US+Canada professional sports leagues (NBA, NHL, MLB) that's listed in ITNR. As argued above, college football stadiums are some of the largest stadiums on Earth. Howard the Duck (talk) 16:07, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There are many rule differences between college and NFL football and a single instance of rule difference can change who wins but they're still more alike than rugby league vs union. Probably, I don't know much about rugby. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 18:02, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Thank God that ITN isn't influenced simply by how much money gets thrown around this meat market of a sport that exploits amateur athletes.--WaltCip-(talk)16:36, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
Nominator's comments: A RD nom has been made however no ITN nom, I think an ITN nom of mentioning Roberta becoming the first Maltese president of the European parliament and the mention of David Sassoli is needed and is a suitable nomination. Both articles are suitable for a news nom. BastianMAT (talk) 09:21, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment target article needs to be updated for this change of leader. And lots of the article needs sourcing too e.g. none of the presidents actually have sources for them (despite the table having a column for references). Joseph2302 (talk) 09:53, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Should be better now for all articles, I def think this is a very suitable nomination as its an important role, important death and notable background being the first from Malta. BastianMAT (talk) 12:01, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support RD only not too significant as death of the Queen Elizabeth II (morbid?), but still much worthly to be posted giving she was the first EP president from Malta but her notability is not so significant as prominent head of government/state. 125.167.57.110 (talk) 12:52, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The comparison you make with Elizabeth II doesn't make much sense, to tell the truth. Sassoli's death is not the main subject of this nomination, and it shouldn't be. The debate here is whether the nomination of a new EP president should be on the Main Page. If it succeeds, it should obviously mention the death of the one who has been president until today, as it's the reason for the change in the leadership of this institution. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 13:05, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
As a side note, the main story here would be that Sassoli died in office. But it was posted as RD already. --Tone18:23, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose this doesn't seem like a very prominent role (even though it's inherently international); in fact it looks more ceremonial than anything. Banedon (talk) 03:06, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
None of the "three presidencies" of the European Union is ceremonial in nature. Perhaps in EP president’s international activities, but its function is the same as that of any Speaker of any legislative assembly. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 08:02, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose now people have cleared up for me that it's not the most important EU role. We wouldn't post the change of Speaker in the US or UK, so don't see why we should post this, as this EU role seem to be at a similar level to a speaker. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:35, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Article updated Recent deaths of any person, animal or organism with a Wikipedia article are always presumed to be important enough to post (see this RFC and further discussion). Comments should focus on whether the quality of the article meets WP:ITNRD.
With only 888 characters (154 words) of readable prose, this stub needs to be expanded quite a bit before it can qualify for RD. --PFHLai (talk) 05:40, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the submission. Which is the better target article? I don’t see either article being updated yet. We need a substantial update for this to be considered. The altblurb I supplied may be helpful if this progresses. JehochmanTalk08:35, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Only time will tell how significant this is, the first human-human heart transplants didn't exactly go well, to the point the ethics of continuing were questioned. If he lives for ten years I'm willing to overlook the criminal language redundancy (ground-breaking breakthrough), but not after a few days. This isn't a Louise Brown style moment with a natural point of success, nor the first xenotransplantation. 3142 (talk) 19:58, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support once tags are resolved; this is noteworthy, rare medical news. While it's unusual to post an event that does not have it's own target article, I think xenotransplantation works as a target article for this event. NorthernFalcon (talk) 19:27, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Orange-tagging his article. Many unsourced paragraphs and lines. And I think his two years as president of the European Parliament should have deeper coverage. Far from ready, IMO. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 09:30, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Covers what he was notable for. Any info for what Wright was up to after 1984? (Presume he withdrew from political life). SpencerT•C05:02, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Notability is not an issue at all. Long enough (544 words) and has enough footnotes in expected spots, this wikibio is READY for RD. Spencer, the info you asked about may be at the end of the "Early life and private sector" section. --PFHLai (talk) 20:12, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't think there was a real chance that the "likely water" would turn out not to be water, in which case this is a minor advance. Banedon (talk) 03:02, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Firstly, the blurb is factually incorrect, this detection was not in the samples brought back to Earth, but using a spectrometer on the lander. Water has been found in numerous lunar samples returned to Earth, but by the Apollo and Luna missions in the 1970s. There are also numerous spectroscopic observations of water in lunar craters taken from orbit e.g. by Chandrayaan-1. Detecting it using a similar instrument on a lander is both expected and unexciting. Modest Geniustalk13:08, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
With 1999 characters of readable prose, this wikibio is a bit short but its length is still passable (Start-class). There seems to be enough footnotes. AGF'd all non-English refs. This wikibio is READY for RD to me. --PFHLai (talk) 05:10, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Needs a couple more sentences about his poetry. I see from the article that he wrote poetry about romance, but that's about it. SpencerT•C19:08, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Article is in good shape. I've added information about the first three references, which were just titled "Archived copy" - something I think we should be looking out to fix before promoting to the main page. Thryduulf (talk) 23:03, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support There are two CN tags near the bottom, but neither are of sufficient importance to hold up posting. Overall article quality is solid. Marking as ready. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:51, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Adding new cn tags. The fact that it was posted in less than an hour without having solved the tags that were already there and with several lines without source was, without a doubt, reckless. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 20:38, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the extra diligence. At time of posting the only CN tags were in the "In popular culture" section, plus two "failed verification" tags elsewhere that I resolved. I'm fairly new to helping with ITN though, so won't object if any other admins think this needs to be pulled. the wub"?!"20:55, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Please remove me as an updater, all I did was fix the broken infobox and remove a low quality source, I was not involved with any of the content on the page. In terms of this RD candidate, I am currently Neutral, the page is nowhere near ready for RD, especially when it comes to references. Doc StrangeMailboxLogbook16:47, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Citations are missing (and so tagged) at a few spots in the prose. And there are dozens of footnote-free bullet-points from the Discography section and onwards. Please add more refs. --PFHLai (talk) 18:57, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"RD requirement" is a recent death in the news, which he meets, and an article of decent quality for the mainpage, which he currently does not. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:42, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – I'm just glad Betty White and Sidney Poitier's articles were in better shape than Bob Saget's. That is an important milestone for en.wiki. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 01:59, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – I originally came here for the express purpose of supporting this, but unfortunately, the article just doesn't look ready. The section '2001–2022' is entirely WP:PROSELINE, and the 'Personal life' section, while a good effort in such a short time, just feels somewhat empty, likely due to Saget's cultural relevance being at its strongest in the era of print newspaper. In addition to e.g. Newspapers.com, I feel like there has to be some uncontroversial stuff in his autobiography, 'Dirty Daddy'. I went ahead and moved 'Charity work' into 'Personal life', and even then it's just heavily overshadowed by the 'Death' section. TheTechnician27(Talk page)23:24, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There are a few {cn} tags in the prose. Multiple items in the tables in the Filmography section are unreferenced; perhaps some footnotes in the prose may be re-used in these tables. --PFHLai (talk) 04:56, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
CN tags you out for items that were already cited in either the prose or the tables. It’s disingenuous to call his HIMYM and Fuller House roles uncited. It feels like a deliberate attempt to make it look unready. Honestly I think the career section needs rebalancing. The post-AFV stuff covers 20 years while the section with AFV is considerably smaller covering 14 years--CreecregofLife (talk) 05:42, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"disingenuous"? It is not "a deliberate attempt to make it look unready," but a deliberate attempt to highlight missing items. It doesn't look ready without the footnotes in the right spots. --PFHLai (talk) 06:03, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support only if... - The article, especially the subsection of his career between 2001 until his death, is written like a very simplified summary rather than an article. Could be edited to make it much, much more readable. -PenangLion (talk) 14:43, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
support as of now, article has no maintenance tags, covers the subject adequately, and the concerns raised above have been resolved. —usernamekiran • sign the guestbook • (talk)18:16, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Bloom. Posted. Apart from those 2 listed above, there may be more wikipedians deserving ITN credits, but I don't have time to go through the long edit history to check today. Sorry. --PFHLai (talk) 17:06, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Bloom6132. Yes, Hcoder3104, that was what happened. It's not always 24h, though. Sometimes certain names get to stay on that RD line much longer when there are not enough new names ready to displace them. --PFHLai (talk) 18:42, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support on the merits. Oppose tying in a fire from four days ago in a completely different city that was not posted. Not sure The Bronx is recognized worldwide. 331dot (talk) 21:18, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Bronx, oppose Philadelphia The article for the Philadelphia fire remains a stub, and in any case I don't think we should combine two events into a single blurb if the only connection between them is timing. Ionmars10 (talk) 21:27, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wait/Oppose Article will improve when more details emerge. Would favor alt 2, as specifying borough seems unnecessary and potentially confusing. GreatCaesarsGhost22:55, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support NYC, Oppose Philadelphia the Philadelphia article is a stub and I’m not sure if coincidental timing merits including it if there isn’t sufficient coverage - but the NYC fire is a significant event which is all over the news. FlipandFlopped ツ00:22, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose incorporating Philly story It is a completely unconnected event and far less eventful than the Bronx one. --Masem (t) 01:45, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support for Bronx, oppose for Phila - It is severe (as told by the government 'as the worst in NYK for decades'), but I have my personal doubts about it being a 'significant disaster' in the country (in relative, the severity of the fire at Osaka last month killed 26, a similar figure, and was deemed ITN-worthy) Is the death toll expected to rise? (PenangLion (talk) 07:38, 10 January 2022 (UTC))[reply]
Comment We usually post fires with casualties but the article on this one is way too short and tells absolutely nothing about the investigation, reactions and immediate aftermath. I don't think that Grenfell Tower fire should be considered a standard, considering that it's really an excellent article, but there's definitely room for major improvement (note that even the 2017 Bronx apartment fire, which was not posted, has a much better article).--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:43, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – Monday coverage says 32 people hospitalized, 13 in critical. Article still seems thin, with only 120 out of 325 words devoted to the fire itself. – Sca (talk) 13:06, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support despite quality - It's unlikely we will know more about the disaster's causes and background until an investigation is launched, which could take weeks, and then months thereafter to reach a conclusion. That does not mitigate the disaster's scope and newsworthiness.--WaltCip-(talk)13:32, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The death toll has been revised down to 17 (nine adults, eight children) per updates issued by city medical examiners earlier today. rawmustard (talk) 19:25, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Rockfalls are commonplace. What's unusual about this one is that several tourists were killed by it. I don't think that makes it important enough. It's more suitable for DYK. Jim Michael (talk) 15:47, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Unusual. Tragic. And you just know that had this happened in America, it would have been posted within the hour of the nomaination 5.44.170.26 (talk) 16:39, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
With just seven fatals, that's probably so. I was reacting, maybe excessively, to a faint sniff of anti-American bias. – Sca (talk) 23:42, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment -- Thank you for working on this article. Usually we post tragedies with higher numbers of casualties. This one is very marginal, but maybe it could be a WP:DYK. My reservation is that DYKs often have humorous hooks, but this article obviously is not for comedy. JehochmanTalk02:55, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose - Unusual incident, but it doesn't feel ITN-worthy to me. The severity is limited (10 died), the disaster isn't a defining event in the country or region (a tragic disaster, but not an impactful one). It's more of a bizarre tragedy suited for DYK instead (like how previous contributors have noted). If the situation worsens however (like an increased death toll), I would give my support, though I still have my doubts. (PenangLion (talk) 07:44, 10 January 2022 (UTC))[reply]
Take it to DYK. We are likely not getting a consensus to post but the article meets all the requirements for DYK. --Tone08:19, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Periodic reminder that significance is not a binary. 10 people may not meet WP:MINIMUMDEATHS, but a mass casualty rock slide is unusual, and the article is of good quality. GreatCaesarsGhost18:27, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think this is fine. My vote was neutral but the casualty count increased since then, the article quality is good, and the photo is good quality. JehochmanTalk14:35, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, article is not a stub, neither by tagging nor by classification. That said, I agree, as noted by me above, it is a tad short and can benefit from expansion. It is a start-class biography. Ktin (talk) 20:21, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I understand Template:U. Unfortunately, I have hit a wall on what I can find online. I can work on reading a few of his papers and summarizing them, but, I am wondering if that is a good approach. Let me know of your thoughts. Ktin (talk) 18:48, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure if that would be considered WP:OR, as typically primary literature shouldn't be cited in articles, in favor of secondary or tertiary sources. SpencerT•C19:03, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Agree. Anyways, I think we might miss the boat on this one. Let me see what I can do. C'est la vie. Have a nice day. Ktin (talk) 19:18, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support - What makes this notable is the large number of people visiting Murree to see the snow, then many being stranded there when the snowfall increased, some dying as a result. It's not merely a run-of-the-mill weather event. Jim Michael (talk) 14:10, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
WAIT. Not counting the bullet-points under "Reactions", there are only 181 words of readable prose on this stubby wikipage. Obviously, still too short and not ready. Not to mention the orange tags for {missing information} and the need for more sourcing. --PFHLai (talk) 22:00, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - There are still reference errors. Significant and decently covered but it's a bit low on citations. Would give full support if more citations are added. -PenangLion (talk) 14:37, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Not ready Needs some referencing work. Once ready Support blurb, Poitier was a giant in the entertainment industry and arguably the first black actor to make the Hollywood A list. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:00, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is that the article does not give any indication he was a major force in Hollywood. I don't disagree with the assessment he was important, but the article lacks clear statements to this degree, and really should cover that if he was to get a blurb. --Masem (t) 16:03, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb when ready One of the most important actors who has ever lived, and his death is big news. If you want to talk "transformative in their field", that's Sidney Poitier. I do agree with Masem above who noted that the article isn't there yet and doesn't quite state his importance in a sufficient manner. -- Kicking222 (talk) 16:06, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on quality but support blurb in principle if fixed. The article is woefully undersourced, and fails to make clear his importance, which is not helped by the fact that all his awards and honours are listed in a separate page, with no summary on the article. Therefore, the awards and honours doesn't even mention that Template:Tq Which would be the basis for blurbing this. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:19, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Just being frequently awarded would not be sufficient for a blurb. Poitier has a lot more than just a distinguished acting career that makes him a reasonable blurb, but the fact he helped break the race barrier for Hollywood, which needs to be emphasized more. --Masem (t) 16:29, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb when the article is fully sourced; it currently contains several cn tags. He won many awards, including the top ones. This is the level of achievement that someone should be at in order to be blurbed - rather than beloved, popular, national treasure, very long career etc. which was used to post Betty White. About 99% of notable entertainers aren't blurb-worthy; Poitier is one of the few who is. Jim Michael (talk) 17:10, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose blurb, support RD Body of work and impact of career not especially notable. Framing of Oscar win by others here is more an achievement by Academy voters. Dr Fell (talk) 17:15, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting because it's true. A black actor can (and has been known to) work his or her dramatic ass off, and still easily be snubbed year after year. The dead white voters made that change, for one year, 58 years ago. InedibleHulk (talk) 19:48, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Still, it might have something to do with the fact that this particular performance was so undeniably worthy of the Oscar. BD2412T20:17, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, fair play to him. He met the annual Borgnine/Hackman standard someone always does. But how many here have seriously watched that 1963 movie this millenium? InedibleHulk (talk) 20:30, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb when ready; possibly worth mentioning in the blurb the fact that he was the first Black man to win the Best Actor Oscar. Vanamonde (Talk)17:18, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb based on "transformative in their field", which in my opinion describes him well and sets him apart from other popular actors who would fall short of a blurb. Rhino131 (talk) 17:29, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb in principle If we are going to do the "transformative in their field" thing, this is a perfect candidate. (I'm aware it's not ready quality-wise yet).-- Pawnkingthree (talk) 17:49, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb now that sourcing has been fixed with no more CN tags. I would also support mentioning his transformative effect on race in Hollywood within the blurb. Kafoxe (talk) 18:24, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment For a blurb (which agree here is a reasonable case for a blurb), we really should expand "enough" of the "Awards" section to talk of his legacy in addition to other accomplishments. This is more than just being the first black actor to win an Oscar, but the fact he continued to fight for better representation in Hollywood after the fact and several other black actors were influenced by his success. --Masem (t) 18:44, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think that the only remaining question is if the groundbreaking aspect is sufficiently covered. There is almost no opposition to a blurb(one oppose was for quality). 331dot (talk) 18:49, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Old Man Dies If this were 1964 and the blurb was about his Oscar, that'd be a story. Same as if this were 1983 and the blurb was about Atlas and Johnson's big step forward. But it's 2022, and the blurb is 100% about ripe old age. InedibleHulk (talk) 18:52, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I apologize, but it wasn't clear to me that an issue with the blurb was being raised. When I wrote it, I used the standard format that we typically do here as a starting point, at least.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 331dot (talk • contribs)
Post-posting oppose blurb I know my opposition is pretty useless but just wanted to point out that this is, yet again, sheer americano-centrism. With all due respect to the actor, the rest of the world couldn't care less.Varoon2542 (talk) 08:37, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Big picture of this great actor on the frontpage of a major Czech daily newspaper I bought this Saturday. He was well known (and admired) even behind the Iron Curtain.Pavlor (talk) 09:42, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
But it's the weight of American items. Similarly, RD is almost entirely people from the Anglosphere. We currently have 2 blurbs and 6 RD names, all from the English-speaking world (if you include India). If Mel Brooks and Dick Van Dyke go soon, the entire news section will be about geriatric American entertainers. The 5 main Anglosphere nations (US, UK, Can, NZ, Aus) are only 6% of the world's people, we should try and make it so that they only get say, maximum 20% of the news. I could submit Brazilian and Chinese news all day but that's unlikely to make any real difference. Surely discussing the matter on this page is the first step towards fixing it?Sheila1988 (talk) 20:04, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Re: "americano-centrism" and "American items", Poitier was raised in the Bahamas by Bahamian parents, and was for ten years the Bahamian ambassador to Japan. His acting awards include six British Academy Film Awards nominations, and two German film festival awards. BD2412T02:17, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If we had not posted Betty White (who is nowhere close to the same level of "major figure" as Poitier, I doubt we've people questioning this one. Hence why I think we need to be looking for higher bars to demonstrate "major figure" and avoid blurbs that are based on popularity or the like. --Masem (t) 02:27, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting because I have also seen it argued that the bar for a death blurb is too high, not too low.(I don't have it handy) 331dot (talk) 02:30, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Template:U (ec) Please do nominate articles about events from China and Brazil, if they are indeed in the news. We can only consider what is nominated. That's the way to fix it. Artificially suppressing stories from any particular country is just reverse bias. RD postings are easier than a regular ITN posting; to post to RD all that is required is that the subject have an article that is updated with information on their death. We can't control when people die(obviously). Sometimes it just happens that we get a spat of deaths from a particular area. It also happens that people choose to improve articles about people that they notice have passed in the news- this we can control, and I invite you to do so. 331dot (talk) 02:28, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – A blurb is preferable until it rolls off the page. Not sure an ongoing discussion is necessary now. Can an admin just update the blurb and close this discussion? Obviously, if this situation is ongoing in a couple of days and new ITN items have pushed it off the Main Page, it should be added to ongoing. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 16:32, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, this is the top blurb at the moment, with a picture, moreover! Leave it until it rolls of ITN, then consider ongoing (which should be easy if the story is still unfolding). On the other hand, if there is some major development, the blurb can be updated. (this is the standard process) --Tone16:40, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wait support ongoing once it moves off the blurbs, although as that'll be in a week or so, may need to re-nominate for ongoing then Joseph2302 (talk) 09:45, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think the blurb needs an udate. Some "protests against a sharp increase in fuel prices" are one thing, but at least 40 dead, a huge influx of Russian troops and a "shoot-to-kill" policy are another. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:17, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Do something. Clearly, the current blurb is not suitable, and if we can't work out one that is I believe we should pull it now and add it to ongoing. BilledMammal (talk) 13:26, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question: Should this go to "Ongoing" yet? --PFHLai (talk) 06:00, 13 January 2022 (UTC) I'm asking this because the wikipage's edit history seems less busy the past two days. So, I wonder if there is still interest in keeping it current, which is a requirement for staying on "Ongoing". --PFHLai (talk) 23:11, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Much of the Works section remains unsourced. Some older links used as refs need updating or replacement. More refs, please. --PFHLai (talk) 17:37, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Blurb Influential filmmaker. As a director, was "A leading voice of ’70s Hollywood"[1]. He is called "legendary"[2][3][4], iconic[5], "fearless genius of cinema"[6] and "champion of cinema"[7]. Also was known for his appearances as an actor. Numerous tributes accross film industry. He was also called legendary previously.[8]Kirill C1 (talk) 16:43, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose article is orange-tagged. Also, oppose blurb even if sourcing is fixed, as no evidence he's as transformative as the people who get blurbed on ITN. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:47, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Scorcese and Coppola elaborate on his influence [9]. He " inspired a new generation of filmmakers, from Wes Anderson to Noah Baumbach" [10]. "Influential director"(The Times)[11]. He was everyone in film industry, from director, auteur, writer, actor, to film critic and film scholar("has an equally storied legacy working as a film critic, historian and speaker", The Wrap)[12]. "He served as a surrogate film professor for a generation"(THR)[13] And he was nominated for Academy Awards. Kirill C1 (talk) 17:04, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Arguably this is all pointing to being influential (which numerous directors and actors tend to be), but not transformative in establishing new approaches or the like. Plus the article is lacking any detailed explanation that would help to convince on this point. --Masem (t) 17:10, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I am struggling to grasp the difference between "legendary", "influential" and transformative. He inspired filmmakers. Here[14] is written more: "Peter Bogdanovich set the table for the Coen Brothers and Quentin Tarantino by pioneering an intriguing new approach to cinema: making movies about other movies". He was also "Pioneer Of New Hollywood"[15], "a key figure in the New Hollywood Movement of 1970s".[16] I think "pioneering" indicates that he was transformative figure. Kirill C1 (talk) 17:28, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Considering that website is not reliable source and that lots of filmakers on the list died, I am not sure what this url brings to the discussion. "But the same would hold for other film makers." - not many filmmakers were nominated for Academy Award and were listed along with "Dennis Hopper, Arthur Penn, Robert Altman, Hal Ashby"[17](see Peter Bogdanovich there). Kirill C1 (talk) 18:31, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's a reliable and objective source, certainly more so than cherry-picked statements. On academy awards, yes, he was nominated once and only once. Like many other filmmakers. In fact, some of these other filmmakers even WON the academy award ;-) And btw, the article you cite emphasizes six filmmakers as key filmmakers. Guess what - Bogdanovich is not one of them, and is merely mentioned as being part of a broader wave of filmmakers. 2A02:8109:9C80:2054:DC76:45E9:14A5:FE83 (talk) 19:57, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
A website named theyshootpictures.com which has 14 urls in Wikipedian articles is more reliable than The Guardian, Wrap, THR, Variety. The director is called legendary. See the full quote"Legendary director Peter Bogdanovich, who came to prominence amid the Hollywood Renaissance of the '70s, has died at the age of 82. He leaves behind an astonishing film legacy, with the likes of Paper Moon, Daisy Miller, and his Oscar-nominated hit The Last Picture Show having an immeasurable imprint on Hollywood history." And more:"...there's no doubt that Bogdanovich will be remembered as one of New Hollywood's most prominent pioneers...The passing of Bogdanovich feels like an epochal moment: one of the greats of Hollywood's most shining era, gone at a time which has never been more uncertain."[18]"An icon of “New Hollywood” of the 1960s and 1970s".[19] He was nominated for two Oscars, won BAFTA, Grammy, won at Venice Film Festival and San Sebastián International Film Festival, and was nominated for Palme d'Or and Golden Berlin Bear. So he had an illustrious career. Kirill C1 (talk) 20:10, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose blurb. Come on, we seem to be dropping the ball a bit here. Blurbing is rare, not the norm, and is only reserved for truly transformative and unique figures. — Amakuru (talk) 18:18, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"the unique and extraordinary role Bogdanovich played"[20]. I would certainly describe writer-director who clearly had a reputation of auteur but also appeared on top-rated shows such as Sopranos, Simpsons and Good Wife and was also journalist and film scholar, inspiring many filmmakers[21] as unique. Kirill C1 (talk) 18:32, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Let's all forget about blurbing and focus the discussion here on article quality and readiness for use on MainPage. There are quite a few paragraphs with zero footnotes. There is an orange tag at the top of the wikipage asking for better sourcing. Can we have more refs, please? --PFHLai (talk) 14:17, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I added refs, there are 120 of them now. I do not know about scholarly commentaries section, maybe it should be deleted. If anyone would add refs, it would be great. Kirill C1 (talk) 21:20, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: There are still 2 {cn} tags. And, some of the more flowery language needs to be rewritten in a more encyclopedic tone. --PFHLai (talk) 23:46, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Template:ReTemplate:Cn tags have been filled. I have made edits across the article to improve the tone. Streamlined sections as well. Reasonable C-class biography. Please have a look and let me know if you want any additional edits. Thanks for checking. Ktin (talk) 00:26, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose article is too short, and violates fair image usage, as we shouldn't have two fair use images on the article (doing so violates fair use, thus the article's images are a copyright violation). Joseph2302 (talk) 09:59, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
very weak support. Everything is referenced (indeed overly so in a couple of cases), and there are no images so that seems resolved. However it is short and would significantly benefit from expansion. Thryduulf (talk) 00:26, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Events described in future tense (funeral) have already happened. Updating is needed. Expansion there may help make the article a bit longer. Currently with 1737 characters (294 words) of readable prose, not much additional text is needed to make it a passable non-stub. --PFHLai (talk) 13:40, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Though a bit short with 1919 characters (337 words) of readable prose, this non-stub has a passable length to qualify. Need more footnotes, though. Please add more refs. --PFHLai (talk) 07:39, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The timeline needs to be updated with the resignation of the government, otherwise this has grown to the ITN level story, support posting. --Tone08:33, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on quality needs information/decent source (i.e. not RT) on the resignation of the government. Consider this a supprt once that's done. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:14, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – Very widely covered by Eng.-lang. RS sites on Wednesday. Seems potentially significant, at least to the region. (Unsurprisingly, the Russians are warning everyone else to stay out of 'their' back yard.) However, the article is organized in an unusual day-by-day scheme, and many citations are to non-English sources. Some, such as cite No. 19 to Central Asia Media, do offer English versions. On English Wiki, more English refs would be better. – Sca (talk) 13:29, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Non-English language sources are acceptable, and the coverage may be better in the non-English version of a source compared to its English version. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:34, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comments, Kazakh president has requested CSTO intervention. Russian (and other CSTO) troops/MPs are likely to enter the country in the next few hours. We should update the blurb accordingly as it happens. 5.44.170.26 (talk) 19:45, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
With 600+ words, this wikibio is more than long enough to qualify. Coverage seems okay, but more descriptions on what happened at other competitions (apart from the 1980 Olympics) would be great. Refs are missing from a couple of spots, and there are some old refs that need to be updated or replaced. This is close to be ready for RD. --PFHLai (talk) 13:48, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the extra citations. This wikibio looks to be READY for RD now. Please note that the link in footnote #7 does not seem to lead to pertinent information. Perhaps this should be updated or replaced. I don't think this one defect should hold this RD nomination back, though. --PFHLai (talk) 21:34, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Conditionally Support We generally posting the victory of a person who awarding the tournament as ITNR, so why not posted as ITNR? Aside from that, the article looks in good shape.125.167.57.8 (talk) 00:24, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
We really should be trying to feature at most one top level routine event from any organized type of competition as long as we know that's regularly covered by news (so that speed underwater basketweaving competition sadly won't make it) so that we have a broad spectrum of these across a year. This seems like the top tier event in darts, and is covered, so this seems appropriate. --Masem (t) 13:24, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Clearly, the World Darts Championship is important to every man, woman and child, whether they are into darts or not. – Sca (talk) 14:24, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I'm not particularly interested in darts, but this is a decent article in terms of quality, including sourced prose of the final match. This topic is in the news and I think posting it fulfills our purpose. We've also posted it before. The oppose arguments given are not particularaly persuasive. 331dot (talk) 12:00, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support primarily because it is good original content, which is our primary purpose. The significance debate is fine, but we have established general consensus that one event per significant sport (minimum) is appropriate. GreatCaesarsGhost12:07, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good quality article, in the news, posted in the last 3 occurrences, Oppose rationales are generally WP:IVENEVERHEARDOFIT. We post a number of sporting events (indeed, many are ITNR) whose significance to much of the world is negligible. Black Kite (talk)12:25, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Conditional Support - It's the top event of a sport that's watched in multiple countries with contesters from all over the world (which is more than can be said of certain ITNR sporting events....), there should be no question on notability for ITN. There is a "[clarification needed]" buried in the article that need fixing first though. -- KTC (talk) 14:44, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Because this has been posted three of the last four years - last year being the exception because of the quality of the article - I see no reason not to do so again this year. If posted, I'd recommended this be considered for ITNR as well. Calidum17:48, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question could they be included in the same space as "Igor and Grichka Bogdanoff"? Or would they have to be separate? In any case, the tags that are there should be fixed. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 19:42, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support their article is fine considering their "storied" career, and with both dying so shortly after another there isnt gonna be another opportunity to post this. jonas (talk) 17:47, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have cleared most of the bad source tags. Lots of content in the Bogdanoff Affair section was based solely on poor sources such as Usenet posts and direct links to journal articles, which I have trimmed and replaced where possible. Kafoxe (talk) 21:50, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I gave this one a cursory read, but, it seems like his autobiography is sourced for non-contentious factual statements. Ktin (talk) 00:38, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per GCG. Using primary sources for the odd few things is OK, but when it's approaching 50% of the citations there are concerns about paraphrasing, excessive detail, independence, etc. When the next most used source is somebody else's autobiography I'm also wondering about the reliability overall. Thryduulf (talk) 00:34, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Citizen News of Hong Kong shut down after Stand News' closure
Noting the quality issue above, the Stand news is still in the box, so that can be updated to include this, rather than a new blurb. But the article quality needs to be there. --Masem (t) 13:31, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Reply - I'm also thinking that, but I can't think of a new blurb. Of course, the article can be expanded from zhwp though.--1233 ( T / C） 18:48, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This seems to be a step in the coup, as Hamdok had been detained when the coup started, and this appears to be admission he will not be the leader as the coup continues. --Masem (t) 01:41, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Except that in considering ongoing, there has been very little posted on a day-to-day basis to justify an ongoing topic. This seems like the most recent update in the last 2 weeks, for example. --Masem (t) 01:52, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support significant story, which is in the news. Fine to post now, and can update if there are further developments- waiting in case there are more developments seems like WP:SPECULATION to me. Joseph2302 (talk) 12:09, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There is one-sentence update in the article, though it is as factual as it can get. Still feels a bit short. --Tone16:23, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The coup d'état made him a lame duck Prime Minister. So his resignation is no longer at the level of importance of a blurb. Tradediatalk04:26, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I have also suggested a couple of blurbs as the first two comments under this nomination suggested that the subject might be notable enough for one. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 07:15, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb - Richard Leakey is a famous name in anthropology, wild-life conservation, and was a politician in Kenya. His father and mother are household names for their groundbreaking discoveries that effectively changed our narratives on human evolution. I don't see any reason on objecting a blurb for him, as the Leakeys are often used as topics for encyclopaedias. The article is decently covered and cited. My only concern is with the section regarding his death. There's only 5-6 words for it. (PenangLion (talk) 07:37, 3 January 2022 (UTC))[reply]
No. You are warping my words. If the requirements for Betty White and John Madden's inclusion for a blurb could give so much arguments why not Richard Leakey? (PenangLion (talk) 10:18, 3 January 2022 (UTC))[reply]
I'm not warping anything. You cite his parents in explaining why he should have a blurb. Did he have a 90 year groundbreaking career, or expand the reach of his field to millions of viewers? 331dot (talk) 10:44, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The bar for inclusion is meant to be transformative & top of their field. I can't see how he fit that description. White & Carrie Fisher weren't either & shouldn't have been blurbed. Madden wasn't & he wasn't blurbed. Jim Michael (talk) 11:04, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Where does it say we (should) blurb high-profile deaths of people who otherwise aren't blurb-worthy? If that were the case, we should have blurbed Gabby Petito, whose death received a great deal of media coverage. Jim Michael (talk) 11:55, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
At WP:ITNRD: "Death as the main story: For deaths where the cause of death itself is a major story (such as the unexpected death of a prominent figure by homicide, suicide, or accident)". This is why Fischer was posted, she unexpectedly died due to a health problem. 331dot (talk) 11:59, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There are four manners. Making a point of specifying only three clearly excludes the other one. Like when a text adventure game says available exits are north, west and east (the road to the south is impassable). InedibleHulk (talk) 17:35, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You are free to subscribe to that interpretation; I do not. It's easy enough to change "such as" to "such as and limited to" if desired. 331dot (talk) 17:38, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's not poetry, it's logic. If it wanted to allow for natural mundane deaths, which are almost never newsworthy on their own, it would have stopped after "figure". Take my advice or leave it, but it's not based in my opinion. InedibleHulk (talk) 17:52, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Cause of death being the main story is true of cases like Andrei Karlov, not Fisher. The story was famous actress dies. What she died of was only a small aspect of the reporting of her death. Jim Michael (talk) 13:49, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It was unexpected and sudden(not "old or sick person dies"). If her death was no big deal, then the media should not have reported on it as they did. But they did. In any event, I've already taken this too far off course. 331dot (talk) 15:47, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support RD, oppose blurb - article seems improved but not clear what impact the subject had for his field other than finding a few skeletons and promoting conservation, and threshold for blurbing should be higher in my opinion. - Indefensible (talk) 07:48, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support blurb. We now know that we originate from Africa thanks to the work of the Leaky family. The old idea was that some Neanderthal offshoot in Europe evolved into modern humans. Count Iblis (talk) 10:19, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose blurb. He was important to his field, but I don't think he was at or even near the top of it, or otherwise had a broad influence on the world. 331dot (talk) 10:48, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose blurb Important to his field, but not so important overall or getting news coverage that would suggest need for a blurb. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:40, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Post-posting comment. The sourcing when it was posted was not good. I found three cites to Geni.com and several to other WP:SPSes. A lot of the dubious sources were apparently added recently (judging from the access-date params). We should not be encouraging ITNRD participants to add dubious sources to apparently resolve cn tags. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 18:08, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose blurb Betty White and John Madden were household names for millions around the world, while I doubt the average Joe has ever heard the name "Richard Leakey", no matter how transformative or important his work was to his field. I, for one, had no idea who this man was until I saw this discussion. There are only so many scientists, anthropologists, philosophers, etc. who could be called "household names". People may know about the origin of man thanks to the work of the Leakey family, but they very much likely don't know or have never heard their name. It's a sad reality, but a reality nonetheless. 2806:109F:1:16E1:28B6:825:A0DD:7603 (talk) 09:08, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support - per good work by PCN02WPS; article seems a bit light still on coverage of his career relative to his personal life, but waiving opposition based on notability per consensus. - Indefensible (talk) 02:00, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Recent expansions have much improved the coverage. The Intro looks better, too. Obviously, the wikibio is long enough, and there are enough footnotes across the prose. This looks READY for RD to me. Do Joofjoof and Bagumba want to take another look, please? --PFHLai (talk) 01:01, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
2nd look: career section is longer, although the references may need a check: metro.co.uk is a deprecated source, and the Pride of Jersey award is cited to a Facebook post. The "illness and death" section is overly detailed - better to add Burgess' blog as an External Link. Joofjoof (talk) 04:41, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Agree that the illness section seems too long relative to the career section, granted this is not supposed to be a GA. The full text of his letter seems overkill (WP:MEMORIAL?)—Bagumba (talk)
I've removed the quote from the letter, per NOTMEMORIAL. I've also removed the Metro ref - that piece wasn't original Metro journalism but a widely syndicated article. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 12:19, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose and Comment Friendly reminder notability does not bear on RD, only article quality. That said, nearly the entire article is unsourced.The Kip (talk) 16:47, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Folks, I am sorry, I might have to let this one slide. I tried working this article, but, a combination of writers block (is that it?) and some real ad-ware infested sites (that consistently slow my computer) means that I just have not been able to work this one. Thanks for all your time. If anyone has cycles to work this article, you will have my gratitude, but, please do not feel compelled to. Ktin (talk) 19:28, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Less cognitive dissonance, but way lower resolution. It was never the thing holding me back from voting, though. Still just watching, thanks for the progression. InedibleHulk (talk) 13:02, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Not trying to be disrespectful to anyone, but Betty White is alive in the photo that is currently on the Main Page. What I mean is that just because "the photo doesn't show the building on fire" doesn't mean that it is better to not have a photo. Tube·of·Light13:21, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
In still photos, the difference between an old person and a recently dead person is slighter than between something severely damaged by fire (not necessarily on fire) and something idyllic. InedibleHulk (talk) 14:03, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think everyone would understand it must be a stock photo. More informative to add least tell what it looks like (I didn't know, I know what CAN, AUS, UK, US and a few other parliaments looks like but not South Africa) if you don't have a non-copyvio after photo. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 17:13, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose No indication of significance of fire in the article update currently. Also referencing issues in the general article.—Bagumba (talk) 12:47, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – Fairly widely covered on a slow post-holiday Sunday, but details remain sketchy, with no fatalities reported yet. – Sca (talk) 12:54, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as the BBC article points out this was the second fire in a year at the buildings. And while part of the building is 100+ years old, this doesn't seem to have a landmark status like the Notre Dame fire from a few years back. Add no injuries and this is a typical fire. --Masem (t) 14:07, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"It is the second fire at the parliament in under a year. In March there was a fire caused by an electrical fault." from the BBC article. --Masem (t) 14:17, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for now. Topic does not have its own article and is limited to a single paragraph in the bolded article. That's not even close to adequate coverage for an ITN blurb. We rarely post events that don't have their own page and the coverage in the linked article would be considered a micro-stub if it were its own article. Am open to reconsidering once the event has a standalone article of sufficient length. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:20, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose because the article gives no indication of there having been any casualties. We shouldn't post a fire just because it happened at an important building. Jim Michael (talk) 18:12, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
We did post the causality-lacking Notre Dame fire, but I think it should be clear the difference between the nature of these events. --Masem (t) 18:24, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support on principle successful arson attacks on a national legislature seem inherently notable to me. Article isn't ready yet, but it could get there. This incident probably deserves its own article. NorthernFalcon (talk) 20:34, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
They've arrest a person of interest but whether it was for arson or not, we don't know. So let's not jump the gun with a non-neutral stance yet. --Masem (t) 21:01, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support article may be short, but in a few words it explains the situation as clearly as is possible at this stage of the investigation. The article is well-cited, and meets the other quality requirements for ITN. NorthernFalcon (talk) 21:03, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support on notability / Wait per NorthernFalcon. A quality target article is needed. A quick search for "south africa" produces loads of secondary sources from reputable outlets that could be used to write a quality article, but we'll have to see if one can be written up while it's still in the news. Maybe it'd be best to revisit this conversation if/when the topic is covered adequately on the encyclopedia so the discussion won't be cluttered by "oppose for now" !votes? Vanilla Wizard 💙20:57, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment -- I think this is notable enough for ITN (if a fire broke out at the U.S. Capitol building, of course we'd post that), the problem is that there's not enough information on Wikipedia at the moment. -- RockstoneSend me a message!23:54, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support in principle That arson is suspected is a big point here. I think a regular fire falls just short notability wise, but given the belief that it was done intentionally (forget whether or not it is proven, unless we are of the mindset that an indictment of an individual for arson would be an auto-post) I think this is a worthy story. That said, the article does seem a bit short and disorganized at the moment. DarkSide830 (talk) 03:10, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support now there's a dedicated article which is short but well referenced. A suspect has been charged with arson, which I agree makes it more notable than an accidental fire would have been. There is an official report on the fire due on Friday, which will hopefully help with expanding the article further. the wub"?!"13:32, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Would like to see more depth of coverage (e.g. what he did in leadership roles) but what's there meets minimum standards. SpencerT•C05:37, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This wikibio is long enough and have enough footnotes. It's READY for RD. It would be nice if there is more to read about what he did as a "music program annotator". --PFHLai (talk) 06:02, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Multi-paragraph sections, clear photograph, no glaring style or sourcing errors; easily the best article from Deaths in 2022, should set the new standard of quality. InedibleHulk (talk) 10:00, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose As this has already been posted and this is a long-term work-in-progress, it doesn't seem that this milestone is making enough waves to be worth posting again. For example, the WSJ says "So far 10 of the 15 member nations have formally ratified the agreement ..." and so there are still plenty of formalities remaining. And the actual impact on regional and global trade remains to be seen. Andrew🐉(talk) 14:36, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
When was this previously posted? This is separate from the one mentioned in the nominator's comment, and that should be precedent for this even more significant agreement. - Indefensible (talk) 01:16, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Mea culpa but the names of these things seem easy to confuse. Reminds me of something. Anyway, it's still not making much impact in the news right now. Looking for coverage in mainstream media like the BBC, I find What is the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP)? and The meaning of RCEP, the world’s biggest trade agreement. But those items were published in November and so it's arguably stale. The matter seems analogous to Brexit, which dragged on interminably and still isn't fully resolved. I could be persuaded that this is the time to highlight it as we might otherwise never do so but would want to see more heavyweight coverage. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:39, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
We should also consider the state of the article. This was created in 2013 as there have been negotiations since 2011. It seems to be remarkably well cited and so the quality seems acceptable. But it's the sort of topic that might be prone to PR spin or commercial/nationalist bias. We should consult some of the editors who have been doing the work: Normchou and Khestwol, for example. Andrew🐉(talk) 11:04, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support - this should be included for encyclopedic coverage and (being the largest free trade bloc in history) is far more significant than a number of the other current blurbs; article seems in decent shape per the guidelines for posting. - Indefensible (talk) 01:13, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose If indeed this has been posted before than this is an easy oppose, but the article itself notes that the elimination of tariffs will be done over a period of 20 years, which seems a little glacial for being worth posting. It's probably less of a valid argument, but the fact that actual impacts have been called into question and that not all tariffs are being eliminated (calling into question the supposedly true "free trade" part of the agreement) suggests this could not be as monumental as billed. DarkSide830 (talk) 04:40, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Meets one of WP:ITNCRIT's objectives of showcasing timely, quality articles. Precedent with post of aforementioned agreement by nom, and added diversity of mostly non-English-speaking nations.—Bagumba (talk) 13:25, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on grounds of quality. The article might be long, but has almost nothing on the content of the agreement or on how it was negotiated. 95.91.246.26 (talk) 13:50, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Inquiry I'm too ill-informed to !vote on this one, but I'd like to know more about the rationale of some of the oppose !votes. For those who oppose on the grounds that it has only come into effect for 10 of the countries and its effects are not yet known, would you support blurbing once all countries sign onto it, or would it be too stale by then? To my understanding, the story here is that this is now the largest trading bloc in the world. Side note, I ask that those who stated "This has been posted before" strike their comments. This is untrue. Vanilla Wizard 💙20:48, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Maybe it will be newsworthy when every participant of the trade pact executes the deal. But there are also many reasons why it won't be newsworthy even then. Normchou💬19:49, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
.jpg)
Done: Should be ready now DobermanPincherDeirdre (talk) 18:41, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
.jpg)
). Of course being ceremonial need not bar it from being posted if it has enough support, but how ceremonial it is or isn't should arguably be a question solely for supporters and opponents and, at least in future, should arguably not be cited by the posting admin as a reason for posting. Tlhslobus (talk) 16:48, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
Posted. El_C 20:13, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
.jpg)
.jpg)
Done No more Qadis on MainPage. --PFHLai (talk) 00:36, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
